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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sailboat
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think this has already happened. Abortion is embarrassing and people won’t admit to it. Educate young people, show them what they’re doing, they’ll take care of the rest. Killing your baby is not cool and it’s embarrassing.
 
…Our society today is one based on personal rights and I just can’t see a massive change in mindset. I wish it would change, but I don’t think it’s being realistic. I heard on Catholic radio once someone said we would probably have more success changing hearts than changing laws. How to change hearts is the challenge though.
Do we need “massive” to make a real difference? If one changed heart = one baby saved, isn’t that worth the effort?
 
I think this has already happened. Abortion is embarrassing and people won’t admit to it. Educate young people, show them what they’re doing, they’ll take care of the rest. Killing your baby is not cool and it’s embarrassing.
I guess I misunderstood you. I may have jumped ahead to the first part…actually getting pregnant, and how peer pressure can affect that.
 
. Lets stop the killing and worry about changing hearts later.
Hate to say it, but that’s like a doctor saying we’ll cut out the tumor and worry about the patient bleeding to death later. You can’t do one and ignore the other. Neither can you change laws until you convince people they were poorly conceived at the outset.
 
Hate to say it, but that’s like a doctor saying we’ll cut out the tumor and worry about the patient bleeding to death later. You can’t do one and ignore the other. Neither can you change laws until you convince people they were poorly conceived at the outset.
Sorry but I have been involved in this fight for the better part of three decades. The old “we need to educate people” argument is just an excuse to do nothing. 40 plus million have died while pursuing this Chimera. Abortion has to stop and it has to stop NOW.
 
Sorry but I have been involved in this fight for the better part of three decades. The old “we need to educate people” argument is just an excuse to do nothing. 40 plus million have died while pursuing this Chimera. Abortion has to stop and it has to stop NOW.
You are not advocating violent means to do so are you? Like firebombing ‘empty’ buildings?

God bless,
Maria
 
Actually, there are two related problems here. One is that abortion is legal. That can be fought by getting more votes out for example. The second problem is that children are being killed.
Since my wife and myself are going to Poland next week on a pilgrimage, visiting Krakow then, Oskar Schindler and the program against the Jews of Krakow as seen in “Schildler’s List,” has been on our mind lately. Oskar Schindler couldn’t save all the Jews nor change the law, but he could save a few hundred lives. That is a worthwhile goal in itself if it can be done. While I don’t agree for example that it is all-right to kill an abortionist, I’m not so sure that we can say as a blanket thing that it is wrong to break the law to save one or two lives.
And now that I recall, Oskar Schindler broke the law to save lives, when for example he bribed German officials for their sake.
 
Along the lines of the OP I read this today at First Things:
…On the other hand, we have norms that require us to act to help others, including by preventing aggressors from killing them, whether in abortion or otherwise. Norms requiring positive action, however, are not absolute but are always qualified as to circumstances. The reason is that an action is positively required only if, in the circumstances, it is uniquely well-ordered to the final end, i.e., there is no action available to the agent better ordered to that end than the action in question. Hence, the question as to whether there is an obligation to act—and if so, what that obligation is an obligation to do—always depends on the circumstances, for only by examining the circumstances can we determine which actions are available and how well-ordered to the final end various actions are…
The norm about rescuing the innocent from a violent death, however, is different. Pro-life politicians, and indeed Catholic voters, are required to do what they can to prevent the deaths of innocents, whether in abortion or otherwise, given existing circumstances, which circumstances include political realities and our independent moral obligation to respect the rule of law…
 
No-and i dont know of anyone in the movement who does,
You may not know anyone personally, yet there are those who are misguided and have shot abortion doctors and firebombed clinics so I wanted to make sure you made your position clear.

It is important for people to realize that one can be passionately against abortion without resorting to immoral acts and defining exactly what is immoral.

Clearly in this thread, firebombing an “empty” abortion clinic is/was not seen in the same light by all.

God Bless,
Maria
 
To destroy property or do other illegal things to people who support abortion in the name of God would be a violation of the third commandment. You would be attaching God’s name to your actions. It is one of the worse sins one can do. (this is based on the actual interpertation of “Thou shall not carry the Lord’s name in vain”)
 
You may not know anyone personally, yet there are those who are misguided and have shot abortion doctors and firebombed clinics so I wanted to make sure you made your position clear.

It is important for people to realize that one can be passionately against abortion without resorting to immoral acts and defining exactly what is immoral.

Clearly in this thread, firebombing an “empty” abortion clinic is/was not seen in the same light by all.

God Bless,
Maria
There have been a miniscule number of people who have done these things and most of them were done well over a decade ago. None of those who did these things were representative of the pro-life movement and in each and every of these incident the pro-life movemnt quiclky and loudly condemned them.

I think the scorebaord is 3 abortion doctors dead and 40 million children dead. 3 killed by kooks-40 million killed with the full support of the Law. That is what is so sad about all this.
 
There have been a miniscule number of people who have done these things and most of them were done well over a decade ago. None of those who did these things were representative of the pro-life movement and in each and every of these incident the pro-life movemnt quiclky and loudly condemned them.

I think the scorebaord is 3 abortion doctors dead and 40 million children dead. 3 killed by kooks-40 million killed with the full support of the Law. That is what is so sad about all this.
Yes, but even in this thread there was one who could not see the evil in firebombing an empty abortion clinic because of the good it would be doing in stopping abortions. It needs to VERY clear to all that these actions cannont be condoned in anyway, “for the greater good”.

I did not mean to imply in anyway that the responsible and passionate people, like you, involved in this fight in anyway endorse this, which is one of the reasons I asked you to clarify your position lest a few here think that you were endorsing any means possible in this fight for the lives of children.

God Bless,
Maria
 
I think Maria, that it is totally against the forums rules to advocate a lawless act, especially a destructive one that could endanger lives. I just want to say that that wasn’t the intent of this thread. I hope no one thinks it’s okay to firebomb a clinic because it’s not!
 
Yes, but even in this thread there was one who could not see the evil in firebombing an empty abortion clinic because of the good it would be doing in stopping abortions. It needs to VERY clear to all that these actions cannont be condoned in anyway, “for the greater good”.

I did not mean to imply in anyway that the responsible and passionate people, like you, involved in this fight in anyway endorse this, which is one of the reasons I asked you to clarify your position lest a few here think that you were endorsing any means possible in this fight for the lives of children.

God Bless,
Maria
Any LEGAL means possible. After all i am pro-life.
 
My take on it is a little different…

Personally I wouldn’t see anything wrong with say, burning an abortion clinic to the ground, so long as no one is in it at the time. I’m not saying “Do it!” or anything. I just don’t see how this would be an evil act in any sense of the term. I mean if you look at it from a certain prespective you might even be Preventing the abortion provider from sinning… I, personally, just don’t see how this is evil.

Catholig
I think Maria, that it is totally against the forums rules to advocate a lawless act, especially a destructive one that could endanger lives. I just want to say that that wasn’t the intent of this thread. I hope no one thinks it’s okay to firebomb a clinic because it’s not!
Any LEGAL means possible. After all i am pro-life.
Yes, most here have denounced evil acts like firebombing. But as you can see above, (and I think you also spoke out against earlier?) at least one person does not have a well defined sense of what is morally permissible and what is not.

And if one posted it, there are others who may be thinking it.

Not only does the fight need to be waged and attitudes changed to the importance of this fight, but what is morally acceptable in winning this fight also needs to be discussed. We cannot assume that people “know” because they support the pro-life movement. Clearly not all people can tell what is right and what is wrong in this fight.

God Bless,
Maria
 
Sorry but I have been involved in this fight for the better part of three decades. The old “we need to educate people” argument is just an excuse to do nothing. 40 plus million have died while pursuing this Chimera. Abortion has to stop and it has to stop NOW.
You’re making no sense…unless you plan to declare yourself King and making a royal pronouncement. Being stuck in a democracy, how do you propose to change a law if you aren’t interested in first convincing people that the law you want changed is bad/wrong/evil?
 
That’s a good point about convincing people, but consider that Roe v. Wade was NOT something that people considered or debated, but was put into place “against” the majority of the people and even against the majority of the state government laws of the time.

Then for the last 30 years we have had people trying to convince others that the law was ‘good or bad’, ‘moral or immoral’, ‘relatively moral/immoral’ and worst of all a “right” to choose (death).

So I do think that it WOULD be better to get the LAW into place in order to STOP THE KILLING, and let the ‘convincing’ come afterward.

It’s interesting to note that even after 30 years of propaganda, the majority of the people in the U.S. do NOT feel that abortion itself is a good thing. Even the pro aborts call it a ‘last resort’ now.
 
You’re making no sense…unless you plan to declare yourself King and making a royal pronouncement. Being stuck in a democracy, how do you propose to change a law if you aren’t interested in first convincing people that the law you want changed is bad/wrong/evil?
No one voted in Roe V wade-it was imposed on us by judical fiat. And it is specious to say we need to educate people that killing their children is wrong. we need to continue vote for those who will put pro-life judges on the bench and we need to NEVER< NEVER< NEVER buy into the myth that we can end abotion by “ecducating people”
 
No one voted in Roe V wade-it was imposed on us by judical fiat. And it is specious to say we need to educate people that killing their children is wrong. we need to continue vote for those who will put pro-life judges on the bench and we need to NEVER< NEVER< NEVER buy into the myth that we can end abotion by “ecducating people”
Your argument contradicts itself. If the answer to undoing a decision that was imposed judicially is 1) voting into office officials who will nominate pro-life judges and/or sponsor pro-life legislation, or 2) directly electing pro-life judges to the bench, then, by necessity, don’t you need to educate and persuade people to vote along with you?! Last I checked you needed to win elections by a *majority *of the vote.

And if you think the need to educate people about the exact nature of abortion is “specious,” then you’ve obviously forgotten that every year a new crop of kids mature into new voters who have NEVER been taught that sex outside of marriage is at all problematic, much less immoral; have never been introduced to the moral issues surrounding abortifacient birth control or abortion; are being raised by parents who believe birth control for minors and abortion-on-demand are civil liberties; have never been educated about fetal development; don’t grasp the moral concept of life beginning at conception or the sacred nature of human life. There are serious hazards of assuming everyone is on the same page–in terms of education, morals, values and priorities–a fact that is born out year after year, in election after election, and polling which indicates that a (slim) majority of Americans still support a woman’s right to chose.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top