Please help me comprehend

[Freddy]

Agreed. Unfortunately, practical steps must be taken to first reduce abortions. Even outlawing some but not all is a step in the right direction, just as Lincoln freed some slaves in the Emancipation Proclamation, but not all.

Exactly right. And what’s the second best way not to get pregnant? Efficient contraception. And we could reduce abortion by 99% if someone devised a contraception that was foolproof.

Consider this: If someone came up with a on-off, once-taken pill that men and/or women could take that would render them infertile and you actually had to take another pill if you wanted to get pregnant then how many abortions would we have from then on in?

Except that the church wouldn’t allow it. Next to no abortions or contraception? It’s a non starter.

Freddy:

Whereas a few cells in the first few days of pregnancy are yet to attain that status.

According, of course, to one’s subjective opinion.

And there’s your problem. It’s a subjective matter however anyone tries to suggest otherwise.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

And there’s your problem. It’s a subjective matter however anyone tries to suggest otherwise.

Subjective in as far as it’s not immediately apparent the degree of human value the unborn possess. However, I and many others would postulate that, with a certain degree of logical and scientific thinking, one can conclude that the pro-life stance is the only consistent one. You may, of course, think differently, but since it makes sense to me and no sense to think differently, I feel justified in seeking its abolition.

 

[o_mlly]

We are absolutely positive that what a woman is carrying when she is pregnant is human. …

They consider, and rightly so in my view, that there is a categorical difference between that which a woman is carrying a day after she conceives and a day before she gives birth. And this is entirely a subjective matter.

I disagree. … (?)
.
We agree the category of species for the living being a day after conception is a human being. What species does that human being change to a day before birth?

 

[1ke]

I do not get it.

Why would anyone, not just Catholics, be for this? Because the human mind has a powerful ability to rationalize.

Same way people owned, beat, raped, and murdered slaves, killed Jews, Albanians, and their own political opposition— dehumanize and “other” them.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

We are absolutely positive that what a woman is carrying when she is pregnant is human. …

They consider, and rightly so in my view, that there is a categorical difference between that which a woman is carrying a day after she conceives and a day before she gives birth. And this is entirely a subjective matter.

I disagree. … (?)
.
We agree the category of species for the living being a day after conception is a human being. What species does that human being change to a day before birth?

There’s no change. There’s no argument about that fact. It’s not debatable. It"s a given.

 

[Freddy]

JohnStrachan:

I do not get it.

Why would anyone, not just Catholics, be for this? Because the human mind has a powerful ability to rationalize.

Same way people owned, beat, raped, and murdered slaves, killed Jews, Albanians, and their own political opposition— dehumanize and “other” them.

That’s right. They essentially removed that which they already had.

 

[Montrose]

how a Catholic can be anything but opposed to the killing of pre-born children. I know this topic is pervasive on this site, but if you support the killing of pre-born children how do you reconcile that with your faith? I do not get it.

I don’t know any Catholics who are pro-abortion.

 

[JohnStrachan]

I don’t know any Catholics who are pro-abortion.

Is this because you view the two as synonymous? You can’t have one without the other? If one says they are Catholic but are obstinately pro-choice you would argue that they are not authentic Catholics. Is this correct?

 

[Montrose]

Is this because you view the two as synonymous? You can’t have one without the other? If one says they are Catholic but are obstinately pro-choice you would argue that they are not authentic Catholics. Is this correct?

If a Catholic is pro-abortion they would put themselves in a state of mortal sin.

 

[JohnStrachan]

If a Catholic is pro-abortion they would put themselves in a state of mortal sin.

Excellent point. Do you think Joe Biden knows this?

 

[ProdglArchitect]

Do you think Joe Biden knows this?

I have no doubt he does. He’s been admonished by more than one priest and bishop.

 

[JohnStrachan]

I have no doubt he does. He’s been admonished by more than one priest and bishop.

What I find so sad is that this guy is lauded as a man of faith - as he was during the DNC. Yet on the one seminal and decisive moral position of faith, he fails. How refreshing if Biden could boldly proclaim that he is a true man of faith and not a weasel.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

How refreshing if Biden could boldly proclaim that he is a true man of faith and not a weasel.

I don’t expect it, I just pray for his repentance. Him, Pelosi, and their whole ilk. Only God can judge their hearts, but from all outward appearances the prognosis isn’t great. May God have mercy on them and on all of us.

 

[Zaccheus]

how a Catholic can be anything but opposed to the killing of pre-born children. I know this topic is pervasive on this site, but if you support the killing of pre-born children how do you reconcile that with your faith? I do not get it.

The killing of pre-born children is murder. Clear and simple. It is not possible to justify it under Catholic doctrine.
Any Catholic who says it is, is just wrong and probably in danger of excommunication.

 

[Cor_ad_Cor]

if you support the killing of pre-born children how do you reconcile that with your faith?

I have yet to meet a Catholic that fits this description. I have met plenty who like to label others as being in this position. Perhaps those you describe really exist and are out there, but I haven’t crossed paths with them.