One Pro life argument - does miscarriage mean the greatest abortionist is God?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Even_Keal
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Even_Keal

Guest
I hear this statement “God is the Greatest Abortionist” used as a rebuttal to various pro-life arguments. The usually follow it up with 50% of all pregnancies are spontaneously terminated (Same Harris, Neil deGrasse Tyson, etc).

The often use bible verses to push back on Christians (Exodus 21:22-25, Numbers 31:17-18, Psalms 137:8)

I know these are weak, arrogant, straw man responses from the pro-abortion side, but what are graceful, factual and Catholic responses to this line of argument?

Thanks in advance!
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the response Jamie5 …I don’t think I’m called to take a pacifist approach to this.
 
God did not abort these children, that is a statement intended to unsettle the person of faith.
I dont find my iPad is versatile when I wish to link to sites to post, but anyone may look up
“what causes spontaneous abortions ( miscarriages)” can find the physical causes of miscarriage/ spontaneous abortion
…and it isn’t God.
 
Last edited:
The reply that I would give to this argument is to demonstrate how unreasonable the argument is by applying the same logic to prove that murder of adults is OK. Since many adults get sick and die of disease - so called “natural causes” - that must mean God is the greatest murderer for allowing sickness and disease to kill adults. Therefore it should be OK to kill a few more adults by stabbing or shooting. Someone would have to be crazy to accept that argument. But it is the same argument those pro-choice people are giving for God being the greatest abortionist.
 
People who make these statements, as Trishie said, are trying to unsettle you. They have no intention of having a reasonable debate. I wouldn’t recommend trying to reason with them, since these statements are usually a good reflection of their character.

However, if you feel inclined to try and get through to them anyways, I’d simply ask what proof they have for their assertion. Ask them why the fact that the body often spontaneously rejects the pregnancy points to “God did it”. Is there some “God particle” left behind after He supposedly does this? Then they should be held accountable to answer “why” God would supposedly do this. Of course, they can’t do any of these things.

The argument is so ridiculous that it would be just as “right” to claim that God wants everyone who gets sick to die, so we should ban the use of medicine and ban all cleaning products so we don’t interfere.
 
This brings to mind something I read in Cardinal Sarah’s book, The Power Of Silence:
  1. At the moment of his supreme sacrifice, the silence of Jesus is extremely poignant. He speaks only once to respond to Pilate, who says to him: “Are you the King of the Jews? What have you done?” Jesus answers: “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36). He includes in his kingdom Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, John the Baptist, all the saints in heaven, but also the community of his disciples who make up the Church. Although the latter are in the world, they are not of the world. Jesus tells Pilate three times that his kingdom is not of this world (Jn 18:36), because he notices that the latter desires to know the truth and to defend it. Pilate is convinced of the innocence of Jesus, but he is assaulted by the howls of hatred and the accusations that are pouring in. On learning that Jesus is a Galilean, he decides to entrust him to Herod Antipas, tetrarch of the province of Galilee. The chief priests and the scribes are present, and they raise the stakes to elicit a sentence from Herod. Jesus is baselessly accused of all sorts of crimes. Among the grievances, there is the sacrilegious assertion that Jesus claims to destroy the Temple and to be the Son of God. In order to incite Herod against Jesus, they also protest loudly, claiming that Christ and John the Baptist have agreed to slander him because of his adulterous relationship with Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip. In fact, Herod has taken Philip’s wife as his bride. In order to make the situation worse, they recall that Jesus has praised John the Baptist, defending him in a public speech (Mt 11:9-11). Moreover, Jesus has no respect for the tetrarch and has even insulted him, calling him a “fox” (Lk 13:32). The chief priests and the scribes are there; they accuse Jesus spitefully and relentlessly (Lk 23:10). Herod and his courtiers treat him with contempt and mock him (Lk 23:11). “But he made no answer” (Lk 23:9). Jesus is unwilling to respond to Herod because he sees him as a vicious, dissolute, cruel man who hates the truth, to the point of beheading John the Baptist, who was the voice of Jesus Christ, because he made the truth known to him. How then would the Lord not have kept silence before the one who has taken the life of his voice? Herod sends Jesus back to Pilate; the latter again summons the high priests, the rulers, and the people (Lk 23:13), and says to them: “You brought me this man as one who was perverting the people; and after examining him before you, behold, I did not find this man guilty of any of your charges against him; neither did Herod, for he sent him back to us. Behold, nothing deserving death has been done by him; I will therefore chastise him and release him” (Lk 23:14-16).
Continued…
 
Last edited:
In the face of all the false accusations of the chief priests and the elders, Jesus makes no answer, because they are nothing but clamor, confusion, jealousy, and uncontrolled hatred (Mt 27:14). Jesus, in being silent, intends to show his contempt for the lies, for he is the truth, the light, and the only way that leads to Life. His cause does not need to be defended. We do not defend the truth and the light: their splendor is their own defense. This prompted Saint Ambrose (in his Commentary on the Gospel of Luke 10, 97) to say: “The Lord is accused and keeps silent. And it is with good reason that he keeps silent; it is because he has no need of defense. Those who try to defend themselves are those who fear being defeated. His silence meant not, as the saying goes, that he was giving consent, but rather that he thought too little of those accusations to dignify them with a response.” Pilate, surprised at the silence and serenity of Jesus, says to him: “Do you not hear how many things they testify against you?” (Mt 27:13). Jesus is so imperturbable, so calm, and so peaceful that one might think he does not hear the howling of the crowd, which is drunk with hatred. But recall that it is written: “Yes, I am like a man who does not hear, and in whose mouth are no rebukes. But for you, O Lord, do I wait; it is you, O Lord my God, who will answer. For I pray, ‘Only let them not rejoice over me, who boast against me when my foot slips!’ For I am ready to fall, and my pain is ever with me” (Ps 38:14-17). And so Pilate adds: “Have you no answer to make? See how many charges they bring against you” (Mk 15:4). And the Lord answers nothing, so that the governor is even more surprised (Mt 27:14). He does not understand the cause of such an extraordinary silence.
He is confronted with God’s silence, in the midst of the howling of men who are drunk with irrational hatred! The priests, at least, ought to have remembered what was written by the prophet Isaiah:
He was oppressed, and he was afflicted,
yet he opened not his mouth;
like a lamb that is led to the slaughter,
and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent,
so he opened not his mouth.
By oppression and judgment he was taken away;
and as for his generation, who considered
that he was cut off out of the land of the living,
stricken for the transgression of my people?
And they made his grave with the wicked
and with a rich man in his death,
although he had done no violence,
and there was no deceit in his mouth. (Is 53:7-9)
We have just experienced with Jesus before Pilate and Herod the excitement of the high priests, the elders, and the crowd. This event may seem to us surprising and scandalous, but it contains for us a doctrine and a teaching: in the school of Jesus, with our heart, understanding, and will wide open, let us allow God to introduce us into his silence and diligently learn to love and to live in this same silence.
 
How would that pertain to pro-life atheists? Perhaps nature and the environment are the greatest abortionists?

But in any case, I take this means they believe in God by default?
 
What you say is God can do what he wants because he is God, and we are only man, we can’t do abortions because we are in a way taking God’s place in the matter and we are playing God.
 
Death is the greatest mystery of life, especially what comes after if anything.

The fact remains that every living thing does eventually die, and whether some people think God controls or is “to blame” for it will remain a constant debate. The one thing I really don’t like is the “Everything happens for a reason” argument. Sometimes there are no reasons you can explain from horrible accidents to random tragedy, this is the mystery of life. Kind of like that Van Halen song right now. “Right now God is killing Moms and Dogs because he has to.”
 
Thank you. I very much needed to read this…not so much for the context of this topic, but for something I experienced this past weekend where I felt extremely guilty about remaining quite when I had the chance to correct a huge misunderstanding someone had of a specific Catholic teaching.

God works in mysterious ways! 🙂
 
This brings to mind something I read in Cardinal Sarah’s book, The Power Of Silence:
This is a wonderful observation, but I have a problem applying it to the OP’s problem.

Jesus spoke to Pilate because he knew Pilate was open to hearing the truth. Jesus was silent before Herod because he knew Herod’s heart and knew that he was not open to hearing the truth. While this observation makes perfect sense for Jesus, who does know what is in a person’s heart, it is not good guidance for us who only see dimly what is in a person’s heart. It would be an incorrect takeaway to conclude that we should be silent before someone who challenges our faith just because we think they cannot be saved.

In the second reading coming up on October 29th, Paul praises the Church of Thessalonica for accepting the Word of God "with great affliction." If those same believers in Thessalonica were challenged by a would-be debater, I don’t think their love of the Word would be contained. If offering up counter arguments opens us to laughter and ridicule, that was predicted by our Lord. We should embrace it “with great affliction.” We should not write off anyone and walk away smugly thinking “Well, I’m right but it’s not worth it to try to convince them.” We have few enough opportunities to spread the Gospel in today’s world. We shouldn’t let a good one like this go by without giving it a try.
 
A pro-life atheist might see nature as something that happens, neither good nor ill but directly attempting to kill another potential adult human to be bad. Whether that be bad for the survival of the tribe, bad for attacking a member of the same species who could say.

The core difference is though an Atheist can chalk a miscarriage up to bad luck, a a freak accident with no mind or decision making process behind it. A Theist faces the problem of a deity who constructs a universe in which things like miscarriages are possible, happen frequently and does nothing about it…
 
The thing that really interests me is whether Catholics truely believe that very young zygotes and embryos are human beings with the same rights as born humans. Behaviour, as distinct from dogma, suggests no, not really. If Catholics believed that a day-old fertilised egg was a full human being they would be devoting massive efforts to find ways of reducing spontaneous abortion. They don’t. And the closer a foetus gets to full term, the stronger the campaign to prevent abortion. On the basis of Catholic teaching each life should be of equal value. And while we are talking about it why do Catholics keep saying that ‘life begins at conception’. It doesn’t. Both sperm and egg are alive.
 
The core difference is though an Atheist can chalk a miscarriage up to bad luck, a a freak accident with no mind or decision making process behind it. A Theist faces the problem of a deity who constructs a universe in which things like miscarriages are possible, happen frequently and does nothing about it…
It’s not a problem.

Some just need to understand the world was not meant to be paradise.
 
I think your post paints a generalization with a broad brush. You cannot assume to know the hearts and minds of other people, nor the efforts that they have undertaken to try to protect the unborn.

My wife has had several miscarriages. Each of these have been equally heartwrenching for us. My wife has worked with her doctor and has been able to reduce the miscarriages by using progesterone as soon as possible after finding out she is pregnant. This allowed us to welcome our first son after 3 miscarriages, followed by 3 more children until we lost another before birth, and since then 2 more children.

Catholic teaching is that life begins at conception, and the campaign to prevent abortion focuses equally on all the unborn, not just those closer to full term.

While the sperm and egg are alive and contain the elements necessary to bring forth human life, neither on their own is a human being. The church teaches that human life begins at conception.

And apparently, so does HHS now:

 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top