Pew: 77% of Catholics who are Democrats say abortion should be legal

  • Thread starter Thread starter mercyalways
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
lwest said:
“They”: people who support abortion, who want it legalized, as mentioned in the OP.
Click to expand...
Maybe I can clarify the difference with an example. I do not think premarital sex is okay. I do think it should be legal. I do not think divorce and remarriage is okay. I think it should remain legal.

“Support”, “want it legalized,” and “think it’s okay” are three separate issues when it comes to divorce and remarriage, or any other legal issue.

From a standpoint of Catholic teaching, abortion is a mortal sin, as was taught by St. John Paul explicitly in Evangelium Vitae, where he taught life begins at conception. Based on this doctrine, the Church also teaches that at this time, abortion must also be opposed legally. I say “at this time” because the Church also once taught that legal divorce and remarriage should be opposed, and not too long ago, the issue of no-fault divorce was a moral and political issue.

Furthermore, the Church teaches that the legalization of abortion is the pre-eminent issue in the United States at this time. The Church does not teach that it is the only issue. So, while dissent from the Church teaching that abortion should not be legal is still dissent, it is not on the level of dissent that abortion is not sinful. It is more on par with the teaching that the death penalty is not permissible at this time, though of a magnitude greater of importance.

This is how one “they” sees it.
 
Last edited:
Randolph said:
You are using economic rationale to justify abortion
Click to expand...
Knowing the rationale others use is not justification. In fact, if one is serious about stopping abortions, one must first know how others think. All the posturing and condemning in the world will not save one baby, or one soul. But if you can save the soul, you can save the baby.
 
Last edited:
Erikaspirit16 said:
To simply say … “human life exists from the moment of conception” is a statement of belief–Your belief and my belief. It’s a minority (a SMALL minority) belief. It is not “science”
Click to expand...
Really? What does science say about the unborn, if not that our offspring are human too?
Erikaspirit16 said:
But so far the anti-abortion forces are losing the argument–more people (as measured in several recent polls) are against making all abortions illegal now than there were in the mid-70s. It’s about 16-17%. A very small minority. If, after 45 years of futility, the exact same tactics are used for the next 45 years, do you expect a different outcome? If so, why?
Click to expand...
A very reasonable question you pose. That few want abortion illegal may have nothing to do with what society believes is the nature of the unborn child (human life or something different). I suggest society’s belief is connected with the self-centredness of modern society. Opposition to making abortion illegal is probably due to combination of factors: including that self-centredness of society and a view that making it illegal may not have the hoped for consequences given it does not change the other factors that motivate abortion in the first place.
 
Randolph said:
40.png
Erikaspirit16:
You don’t have to speculate about why women get abortions. There are several surveys of women who have gotten abortions, and you can see what THEY say. And of course it’s generally complicated–there’s more than one reason. But overwhelmingly, the reasons are economic. Solve those issues, you reduce the number of abortions. It’s that simple.
Click to expand...
You are using economic rationale to justify abortion—where millions of innocent babies are killed in the world each year.
Click to expand...
Nonsense. What you read is not a justification. Merely the exposition of other people’s motivation. You have shockingly misrepresented the other post.
 
Your opinion. Thanks for sharing. I will continue to stand by Church Teaching and I’m never going to believe that ‘abortion should remain legal so people can continue to kill their unborn babies". I don’t want it to be illegal. I want it to be unthinkable. But thanks again for sharing y our opinion. In the bigger scheme of things, our personal opinions dont’ matter. What matters is what God thinks. I hope someday you see THAT difference.
 
FiveLinden . . . .
It could be possible to affirm Catholic identity and at the same time disagree with some of its teachings.
Click to expand...
Not total Catholic identity they can’t. At least in regards to the true Catholic teachings. (Admitedly searching for those true teachings is more nuanced. But the point remains, we are not free to know the Church has taught something on faith and morals for 2000 years, and reject it. The “why” to this is below.)

.

FiveLinden . . . .
Identity in most human organisations does not mean ‘complete acceptance’.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church is not a mere “human organization.”

.

FiveLinden . . . .
So why does ‘Catholic’ have, in the opinion of many CAFers, imply agreement with all Church teachings?
Click to expand...
Because the teachings come from and are protected against error by God almighty.

Think about it FiveLinden. Even from your atheistic or “unbelieving” point of view.

If you are sitting down with an ALL Powerful, etc. God, . . .
. . . it is irrational to “disagree” with God.

Do you see the problem with disagreeing with God?

If yes, you see that is irrational, then that gets you to the next step.

Understanding and trusting WHY the Church is . . .
. . . who She says She is.
 
Last edited:
Cathoholic said:
Think about it FiveLinden. Even from your atheistic or “unbelieving” point of view.

If you are sitting down with an ALL Powerful, etc. God, it is irrational to “disagree” with God.
Click to expand...
A very interesting point. But for me, ‘all-powerful’ does not mean ‘right’. And there are certainly things attributed by Christians to God with which I would disagree were I to learn that there is indeed such a God. An example (not wanting to sidetrack the thread by happy to engage in another if you start one) is the creation of a world in which that huge majority of living creatures die in pain and distress.
 
Erikaspirit16 said:
The Church also says “Thou shalt not kill.” And yet there are volumes of gray areas in that commandment. Probably libraries worth. But abortion…surely that is 100%, right? Really? Does EVERYONE share your belief that a fetus at, say two weeks is a person? There’s no debate about that? Everyone agrees? EVERYONE on earth subscribes and is bound by the teachings of the Catholic Church? What about a society where abortion is considered no big thing? Are they all going to Hell? I could go on, but you can make up a long, long list of exceptions–problems if you like–just like you can about ANY issue. It’s simply not black and white. It just isn’t–although I freely admit it might be for some people. But all people? Demonstrably untrue.
Click to expand...
I was speaking about catholic people, mainly folks here, discussing it and having resources being provided to them on Church teaching and other areas of faith. I was not referencing someone on some island that never heard of Christ or Catholicism. Regardless what those folks may believe, abortion is still murder. They just may not be held accountable for as much for being ignorant in that truth, but abortion is always murder.
 
Rau said:
That’s not what I’m suggesting. I’m suggesting social changes that lessen demand.
Click to expand...
Specifically, what social changes are you suggesting? Can they realistically be implemented?
 
pnewton said:
Knowing the rationale others use is not justification. In fact, if one is serious about stopping abortions, one must first know how others think. All the posturing and condemning in the world will not save one baby, or one soul. But if you can save the soul, you can save the baby.
Click to expand...
No posturing here. The economic argument runs along the line. Unless we have a Utopian society—where everything is provided for, abortion can not be fought or be won.
 
Randolph said:
No posturing here. The economic argument runs along the line. Unless we have a Utopian society—where everything is provided for, abortion can not be fought or be won.
Click to expand...
That is only the most extreme version, one I have never seen, and a straw man. No one here has said this.

No one can be reached morally by misrepresenting a position like this.
 
It doesn’t matter what God thinks? And I shouldn’t try to steer you in that direction for your own good? That’s the definition of charity…concern for your soul. You are not your own highest authority. None of us are.
 
lwest said:
And I shouldn’t try to steer you in that direction for your own good?
Click to expand...
No. You should not. Like I said, I follow the Church. Why should you try to take the place of the Holy Spirit, or the pope, or whatever gives you the idea that you have such a role?

You know too little about me.
Your technique is confrontational.
If you think I am mistaken, then you also go beyond Church teaching, something that is okay for formation of your conscience only.

I thought I was responding to you in good faith, honest dialogue. I did not realize it would be an occasion for attack and judgementalism. I will try to remember this in the future to avoid be a source of temptation.
 
Last edited:
I’m not trying to take the place of the Holy Spirit, pope or the Church. All I said is that it matters what God thinks, not you. I’m trying to point you to God and not your own intellect, pride or whatever. That is not uncharitable. I said nothing untrue and I said nothing I need to apologize for. Nor was what I said ‘confrontational’. I said it matters what God thinks, not you. That is all. If that offends you, maybe that’s your conscious nagging you and maybe you’d do well to examine that. And, no, calling out people who are mistaken does not go beyond Church teaching. Where in the Catechism does it say we should never correct people? Are you not familiar with the spiritual works of mercy?
 
Last edited:
Where is the line between being intrusive and doing work of mercy?
 
Last edited:
pnewton said:
That is only the most extreme version, one I have never seen, and a straw man. No one here has said this.
Click to expand...
No straw man here either. Nice try though.

The economic rationale requires that if people are taken care of economically and other things then they would not choose abortion. You know so well that it can never be possible nor sustainable in any society at any point in history. The only place possible for that kind of wishful thinking is in Utopia.
 
Last edited:
Following you around town and nitpicking everything you do would be intrusive. Calling your boss or spouse and telling them all your sins would be intrusive. Reminding you that what’s important is what God thinks, not you, is a work of mercy. Do you honestly think we are our own highest authority and anyone who dares to question that is uncharitable? That seems to be what you’re saying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top