OK to Break the Law to fight Abortion, or not?

[mvinca]

This section highlights our differing views. All statistics I see indicate that abortions took a big jump right after Roe v Wade. (Of course a big jump from what remains a question) But that the rates of abortion have slowly but steadily declined virtually every year since then. This decline has happened while abortion has been legalized. It seems that making laws against abortion is not the only way to deal with it.

Also, you dismiss education rather freely. I believe the most fundamental priority of the church is to educate all in the world about God’s kingdom. This is done by teaching through word and example. It is not accomplished primarily by passing laws or by coercion of any kind.
Jim

There could be many reasons for the slight decline though. The one that makes the most sense to me is that those who are aborting their babies don’t have any babies to pass on such a mindset onto. Yet the fact that the country doesn’t condemn such activities allows the perversion of the minds of even the best raised children. (So the problem continues) Education is key, but our laws educate to a degree as well. They tell us what the bare minimum is expected of us to be a useful part of society. Not killing our children should be part of that bare minimum.

 

[estesbob]

There could be many reasons for the slight decline though. The one that makes the most sense to me is that those who are aborting their babies don’t have any babies to pass on such a mindset onto. Yet the fact that the country doesn’t condemn such activities allows the perversion of the minds of even the best raised children. (So the problem continues) Education is key, but our laws educate to a degree as well. They tell us what the bare minimum is expected of us to be a useful part of society. Not killing our children should be part of that bare minimum.

The decline started in the 90s when the pro-life advocates moved their focus from sidewalk counseling to opening CPCs and pushing for an incremental approach(parental consent , informed consent, born alive act, etc) and working hard to elect pro-life politicians who would appoint pro-life judges. Because of this we are very close to having Roe V Wade overturned and the battle moved back to the States -where will will win. that anyone can rationalize the need for abortion is beyond me -their arguments are eerily similar to the ones we heard in the early to mid 1800s as to why slavery would never be overturned. 50 years from now, after the battle is won, society will look back at the generations that tolerated the abomination is the same way we now view the Nazi’s.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Another poster brought up a good point earlier.

The original title for this thread is “is it okay to break the law to fight abortion”?

To my mind, “breaking the law” is wrong, UNLESS the law itself is wrong.

There are literally thousands of “laws”; there is only ONE “LAW” meaning God’s law. Of the thousands, some are just, some are not, some are neutral or circumstantial, etc.

Although I had thought this had been adequately covered not just by me but by many other capable posters, the ‘sorts’ of laws that had been mentioned (and which we addressed) were not “wrong laws”. Laws against the destruction of property and laws against arson etc. are good laws.

The sort of law which ‘permits’ abortion is NOT a good law. However, again, one may not do evil even to achieve good.

I am justified in peaceful protest, in education, etc. to fight the unjust laws which permit abortion. And of course if I wish to pay the civil penalty for going further–such as attempting physically to keep a woman from having an abortion, without any harm to her, certainly I could do so. However, I would inevitably incur quite a penalty, AND I would most probably not be successful, AND my example might have a backlash of making the abortionists look like ‘the good guy’. All definitely things to ponder.

Definitely attempts to ‘stop abortion’ which include physical harm to abortionists or any person, or harm to buildings, cars, other property, might be done from the best of intentions but would hardly be moral in that they go against “THE law”. As I said, property rights are protected for all–the just and the unjust alike.

I think it would be most helpful, since this post has developed some serious flaws, to start another one and make it very specific.

"Is it morally permissible to break civil law in regard to property or life in order to fight abortion?

That way no one would misunderstand whether “law” refers to civil, criminal, natural, yadda yadda. Because from what Sailboat has posted, it is ‘civil/criminal/state/federal/U.S.’ law to which s/he refers, not “God’s law” or “natural law.”

 

[TimOliv]

its almost 9:00 here…not a good idea this late. Rain check on that. Tim…I love ya…but you’re breakin my heart over here…

I break a lot of hearts, I’m afraid. Its a nasty side affect to having to parade around this delightful, chess playing, classical music listening to, man-candy but telling girls that I’m already taken…well, so to speak.

 

[Flopfoot]

Abortion will never be made illegal. It will never be banned.

I believe education in this matter is critical on all sides.

Don’t give up that easy! Abortion will one day be banned. Even if it doesn’t happen by people gradually opening their eyes to the fact that it is wrong, it can happen another way. Pro-life families have more children on average than ‘pro-choice’ families, which means that as time goes on, the ratio of pro-lifers to ‘pro-choice’ people increases (to infinity in fact). Eventually we will just outnumber them so much that we can and will pass laws making abortion illegal.

 

[mdgspencer]

I’m not saying that you are right or wrong about what you say while you maintain that breaking the law when it comes to abortion providers is a violation of God’s law and in regards to your other statements about right and wrong. But I wonder if you could justify what you say from the sources of Catholic teaching, such as Scripture, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Papal encyclicals, or Catholic manuals of moral theology. Perhaps you are well basing what you say on such things, but I am rather uneasy about general statements that are presented as Caltholic belief that have not been justified, so far, on such grounds. This is to say that while you may be right in some of the things you say, I wonder if you could justify what you say through the sources of Catholic convictions when it comes to morality.

 The previous poster said:

Although I had thought this had been adequately covered not just by me but by many other capable posters, the ‘sorts’ of laws that had been mentioned (and which we addressed) were not “wrong laws”. Laws against the destruction of property and laws against arson etc. are good laws.

The sort of law which ‘permits’ abortion is NOT a good law. However, again, one may not do evil even to achieve good.

I am justified in peaceful protest, in education, etc. to fight the unjust laws which permit abortion. And of course if I wish to pay the civil penalty for going further–such as attempting physically to keep a woman from having an abortion, without any harm to her, certainly I could do so. However, I would inevitably incur quite a penalty, AND I would most probably not be successful, AND my example might have a backlash of making the abortionists look like ‘the good guy’. All definitely things to ponder.

Definitely attempts to ‘stop abortion’ which include physical harm to abortionists or any person, or harm to buildings, cars, other property, might be done from the best of intentions but would hardly be moral in that they go against “THE law”. As I said, property rights are protected for all–the just and the unjust alike.

I think it would be most helpful, since this post has developed some serious flaws, to start another one and make it very specific.

"Is it morally permissible to break civil law in regard to property or life in order to fight abortion?

That way no one would misunderstand whether “law” refers to civil, criminal, natural, yadda yadda. Because from what Sailboat has posted, it is ‘civil/criminal/state/federal/U.S.’ law to which s/he refers, not “God’s law” or “natural law.”

 

[TimOliv]

Let’s go with a scenario in which one would be breaking the law but not through any violent means…

What if you were a mayor of a small town and someone wanted to open an abortion clinic in your town. Refusing on moral grounds would be illegal, since the law permits such clinics. But would you take a stand?

I’d have to say that I would, to me this would fall under the same umbrella as that judge who repeatedly tried to block the removal of the ten commandments from the courthouse.

 

[corvidae]

Now here is something to think on, Someone said this is a war, but it is not a war that is faught with conventional means.

Is it possible to apply “just war” theory to this situation.

just wondering

A lone Raven

 

[Sailboat]

I haven’t heard of the just war thing being applied to abortion. It sounds as if it’s okay to break the law as long as your actions don’t violate moral law. But some people feel justified in doing more.

 

[corvidae]

I would just like to point out that it can’t be a just war before anyone goes out and declares war on abortion

The reason is because all other avenues of peace have not been exhausted, there is progress being made in the legal system.

But about the other components, does abortion fit the criteria?

 

[Damascus]

I would not break any laws to “fight” Abortion.

I would focus my time or money to help prevent Abortion through education or counselling centers that need help -I would never break a law or picket in front of the places that do it. I dont have a problem with those that do picket and pray in front of the clinics, I just dont do it.

 

[T1Catholic]

Don’t give up that easy! Abortion will one day be banned. Even if it doesn’t happen by people gradually opening their eyes to the fact that it is wrong, it can happen another way. Pro-life families have more children on average than ‘pro-choice’ families, which means that as time goes on, the ratio of pro-lifers to ‘pro-choice’ people increases (to infinity in fact). Eventually we will just outnumber them so much that we can and will pass laws making abortion illegal.

Don’t be so sure. Abortion is seen as a human right even though that is totally wrong and that thinking is spreading across the world to places where abortion is still for now illegal. There are more people out there, maybe the silent majority, who don’t like abortion but would never dare say “take away a woman’s right”.

Education is critical. I have personal experiences with abortion and I know that many women are uneducated on the state of development that a baby is in. I had one young woman cry when she saw a picture of a 9wk old baby in utero because that was around the time she was going to abort. She honestly thought the baby was just a clump of cells- she couldn’t believe how developed the baby was. I have relatives who have had abortions because they were scared of what the family was going to say. We have to acknowledge the emotional pain that a woman without faith and in an undesirable situation faces with an unplanned pregnancy. Bombing abortion clinics does nothing to address the root cause.

 

[Sailboat]

I would not break any laws to “fight” Abortion.

I would focus my time or money to help prevent Abortion through education or counselling centers that need help -I would never break a law or picket in front of the places that do it. I dont have a problem with those that do picket and pray in front of the clinics, I just dont do it.

Also, restoring a sense of shame and bringing peer pressure can help.

 

[mlchance]

It is never permissible to do evil, even in order to bring about a good. (IOW, the ends don’t justify the means.)

True, but we must also remember that an unjust law is not a law. This too is a principle of Catholic moral theology. That said, civil disobedience aimed at challenging abortion laws must do so by breaking abortion laws, not by breaking other laws, such as those against vandalism of private property. For example, say a law states a person cannot pray within a certain number of feet of an abortion clinic. One could be justified in breaking that law.

Of course, one must also remember one of the cardinal rules about civil disobedience: You must be publicly willing to suffer the consequences for breaking the law. For example, sneaking into a clinic late at night and vandalizing equipment before running off to hide is not civil disobedience. It is breaking and entering and vandalism.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[mlchance]

What if you were a mayor of a small town and someone wanted to open an abortion clinic in your town. Refusing on moral grounds would be illegal, since the law permits such clinics.

Refusing on moral grounds would not be illegal. The law permits abortion, but it does not require public officials to provide access to the means of procuring one. Abortion laws in the U.S. are permissive, not compulsory (although, in truth, most abortions are forced on women by a variety of means).

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Island_Oak]

…Abortion laws in the U.S. are permissive, not compulsory (although, in truth, most abortions are forced on women by a variety of means).
– Mark L. Chance.

Sorry…can’t let this one lie. In our society, where there are so many options, resources and information available to avoid pregnancy and abortion–and absent mental impairment–abortion is a CHOICE. While I can certainly empathize with the circumstances that lead women to feel so desperate that the quick fix of abortion seem reasonable, it is never the only option.

 

[mlchance]

Sorry…can’t let this one lie.

Every person I’ve ever spoken to who’ve counseled women who’ve gotten abortion has emphasized repeatedly that most women are made to feel as if they have no choice. They are pressured, lied to, bullied, and, yes, sometimes even forced into getting the abortion. This in no way mitigates the evil of what they’ve done, but it certainly puts the whole “pro-choice” mantra in its proper light.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Island_Oak]

While I’m certain this has occured, it is by no means the prevalent experience out there. I’ve worked in a PP clinic–and that was far from my experience–especially the younger the patients were. Don’t discount expediency, selfishness, convenience, poor decision making, rationalization, immaturity and weak value systems. How else to you explain 30 million+ legal abortions since Roe and women who have repeated abortions? Think that many women were so easily tricked…or did they decide to fix the embarassing/inconvenient predicament they were in by the quickest, cheapest and most private means available?

 

[estesbob]

Don’t be so sure. Abortion is seen as a human right even though that is totally wrong and that thinking is spreading across the world to places where abortion is still for now illegal. There are more people out there, maybe the silent majority, who don’t like abortion but would never dare say “take away a woman’s right”.

.

The same was said about slavery the firts 350 years of our country’s existence.

 

[estesbob]

Every person I’ve ever spoken to who’ve counseled women who’ve gotten abortion has emphasized repeatedly that most women are made to feel as if they have no choice. They are pressured, lied to, bullied, and, yes, sometimes even forced into getting the abortion. This in no way mitigates the evil of what they’ve done, but it certainly puts the whole “pro-choice” mantra in its proper light.

– Mark L. Chance.

In all my time of counseling womn who were thinkng about or had had an abortion i only ran across one who did it by her choice alone-and she was profoundly sad about it.