I don’t see how this is possible to do unless you change the nature and meaning of an “honorary degree” from a Catholic university. It’s easier to just change the name of the school to “Northwestern Indiana Humanist University” as Bishop Doran has suggested.
That’s kind of disingenuous. Since Roe vs. Wade, there have been a grand total of three Democratic presidents: Carter, Clinton, and Obama. All have been pro-choice, although Carter was somewhat less so than more recent politicians. But how can you really say Obama is “more extreme” than Clinton? Do you have anything to back that up? I actually read that article you linked, and it’s kind of dishonest. Lots of out-of-context quotes and the like. It even mentions a bill that it claims Biden voted for and Obama didn’t, but doesn’t mention that Obama wasn’t a senator when that bill came up.
Well, that’s the standard Democratic position, and to me it’s a problem. I wouldn’t view slavery as just one of many crucial issues, and abortion is in the same category. While it is one issue, it speaks to the widespread disregard for life in our country. I do believe that most European countries are more restrictive of abortion that here in the U.S., where we allow abortion throughout nine months of pregnancy. A million deaths by abortion every year is no small matter, and it results in devaluing human life at all stages.
How about he supports FOCA?
And he, almost alone, opposed the Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act.
The chance that everyone in the human race will die is 100%. We do not use this as justification to hasten the process and commit murder.
This is not true. Also, treatment based on speculation that the mother may die somewhere down the road is nothing more than preventative surgery.
To clarify further, many things are possible with current medical technology. However, possibility is not equivalent with morally permissible.
Killing an innocent human being is always and everywhere evil.
An example of the Church killing innocent human beings please.
I clearly stated that rank of the crime is irrelevant to whether something is intrinsically evil and therefore never permissible. Neither of your examples are things which are ever permissible. Abominable relations are not made acceptable on the basis of the argument that someone committed worse acts.
What constitutes murder is a direct action against the life of an innocent person.
It is possible to make scientific arguments that zygotes should not be given full legal protection as humans. I’m not saying I agree, but it is possible to make arguments that early-stage embryos can’t think, can’t feel pain, etc. You can’t make any scientific arguments for slavery. My point isn’t to excuse this position, only to show that the distinction is a lot less clear in the case of abortion, and being on the wrong side is understandable, if not excusable.
The partial-birth abortion ban is still in effect in the US. Obama hasn’t proposed to overturn it, unless you count adding a provision for if the mother’s life is at risk. Spain, Great Britain, and Ireland all have more restrictive abortion laws than the US. For the rest of the countries, they’re pretty much the same, even countries that are predominantly Catholic like Italy and Portugal.
None of this justifies voting for a pro-abortion candidate. Pollution does not justify voting for a pro-abortion candidate. Neither does war, poverty, torture, nor international cooperation.
It is an evil bearing the weight of a mortal sin for a Catholic to knowingly vote for a pro-abortion candidate against Church teaching.
But could you at least concede that a mother should make that decision? That she should be allowed to choose whether to die with her unborn child or to hasten its inevitable death so as to live and be able to care for her other children?
Yes it is. Well, ectopic pregnancies may exist which can be brought to term, but in many if not most cases, ectopic pregnancies exist in parts of the mother’s body where there is literally no way they can survive. None whatsoever. Zero. Even the Catholic Church has recognized this, and has allowed doctors to perform an abortion in this scenario, since curing the illness would be the purpose of the operation.
Even though it was a millennium ago, I would imagine it’s pretty hard to wage nine crusades without killing a bunch of children. Plus, how do you define “innocent”? Most people executed by the Church were found guilty of something, but that’s not to say they all were. Anyway, that’s beside the point.
Even if abortion is intrinsically evil and therefore never permissible, it doesn’t follow that supporting a pro-choice politician is intrinsically evil and therefore never permissible. And besides, unjust wars of aggression are also intrinsically evil and therefore never permissible.
(sigh) Pro-slavery folks did make scientific arguments for slavery:
Just like pro-aborts make similar arguments about baby humans. Biology says that humans are the same species, regardless of race. Biology also says that human life begins at conception. Human life (or any life) has not been defined by the capacity to feel pain, etc., etc.
This is just not true! (Just like your science/slavery comment). Here’s a story from Italy (from a pro-abort site no less) that says Italy only allows abortions to 24 weeks. Last I checked, there* was a difference* between 24 weeks and 40 weeks. Well at least to the child there is a difference… Please get your facts straight.
This may be your belief, but it is not mine. So you say you would vote for a politician who supported any number of evils as long as he claimed to be against abortion?
The USCCB doesn’t agree with you. Many if not most priests and bishops don’t agree with you.
Somehow you missed the part about Catholics are not permitted to support such things that the Vatican has defined as non-negotiable which no Catholic can support under pain of mortal sin. In fact the Vatican lists nine broad categories:
There are priests who sadly do not agree with the teachings of the Church. Please indicate where I am at odds with the USCCB. The USCCB does not state it is permissible to vote for a pro-abortion politician and I challenge you to show where it does.
This is the same as murder is okay so long as it is the mother’s choice to hasten its death. If the mother wants to hasten her child’s death, she can then commit murder. Sorry. Cannot concede such a thing.
No it isn’t. In fact many ectopic pregnancies resolve themselves. No murder committed.
An ectopic pregnancy is not an illness. Such operations are preventative surgery.
When during the crusades did the Catholic Church specifically and directly kill a bunch of children? I can point you to a quote from the CCC in which the Church condemns the direct targeting of innocent civilians even during war time. Such is never permissible. Show where the Church says it is.
Are you still talking about the crusades? Sounds more like the Inquisition here. Let me guess, your going to say the Catholic Church executed heretics?
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20021124_politica_en.html
Science.
Maybe they don’t. The point is, however, that the USCCB does not state that it is impermissible to vote for a pro-abortion politician.
I read the whole thing, and there were a number of passages that could be interpreted either way, regarding whether any one issue is so important that Catholics must vote explicitly on this issue.
So we must do everything in our power to modify the law to conform with Catholic teaching, even when it would result in unnecessary deaths? That sounds more like Islam than Catholicism.
They “resolve themselves” through natural abortions. And you’re right, many do. But many don’t. And for the many that don’t, only an abortion, whether direct or indirect, can save the mother’s life. Even with modern technology, the fetus’s life cannot be saved.
I said it was beside the point. So let’s not digress any more on that topic, since my point is not to criticize the Church.
Science says nothing about what does and does not contain a soul.
In order to know whether something is against the will of God, we have to know the will of God. We can understand it better by reading scripture and the work of theologians, but we can’t ever be so arrogant as to claim to know God’s will for certain. If I am wrong, then I pray that Jesus will guide me toward what is right. I hope you can say the same.
Would it have been appropriate to give Hitler an honorary degree for his Autobon ideas and to thank him for Volkswagon as long as the Church had let him know that the laurels being placed on his head could not be construded, by him, as an atta boy for Mein Kamph?
1957, 8th grade Cathecism class…abortion is not allowed. If there was a choice between the mother and the baby dying, the choice would be the mother.