Pro-abortion arguments...those who are pro-choice, what do/did you really believe?

[rayne89]

in your vast experience of what exactly? you haven’t looked very far, as this happens routinely in ectopic pregnancy

Jack removing the removal of the fallopian tube is allowed if an eptopic pregnancy occurs.

 

[jack_hawkins]

Do you bury other human beings before the bodies are available for burial?

the body is available tho isn’t it?
shouldn’t it be treated with the same dignity that any other human being would be treated with?
not left without a Christian burial?
should the fetus in feto be baptised?
should it be given a name?

 

[vern_humphrey]

when you apologise for what you posted, I will do likewise

How childish.

 

[jack_hawkins]

Jack removing the removal of the fallopian tube is allowed if an ectopic pregnancy occurs.

it is of course allowed - but it is not always necessary
the point is that the aim of treatment is to destroy the pregnancy, even though it suits some to employ self-deception

 

[jack_hawkins]

How childish.

if you can’t acknowledge your actions vern…
normally I ignore all your posts as I find they don’t contribute anything - I will return to that policy
being peeved that someone can trade low blows as good as you doesn’t get any sympathy from anyone I suspect vern

 

[vern_humphrey]

the body is available tho isn’t it?

When removed, it should be buried.

shouldn’t it be treated with the same dignity that any other human being would be treated with?

Of course!

I gather you think it shouldn’t. Can you explain why?

not left without a Christian burial?

Of course.

should the fetus in feto be baptised?

Of course. If there is doubt about whether the child is living, the proper form is, “I baptize you if you can be baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.” In Catholic hospitals nurses are trained to perform baptisms this way on still-born infants.

should it be given a name?

Of course. My children had names long before they were born. Didn’t yours?

 

[rayne89]

cuf.org/faithfacts/details_view.asp?ffID=57

This principle applies in other pregnancy complications as well. With severe hemorrhaging, for example, if nothing is done, both will die. In respecting the life of the mother, the physician must act directly on the uterus. At that time the uterus loses its ability to support the life of the embryo. The mother’s life is preserved and there has been no intentional attack on the child. The mother and the uterus have been directly treated; a secondary effect is the death of the child.
Another example arises in the treatment of uterine (endometrial) cancer during a pregnancy. The common treatments of uterine cancer are primarily hysterectomy (surgical removal of the uterus) and sometimes chemotherapy or radiation therapy. Again, taking the life of the baby is not intended, but a hysterectomy does mean the removal of the womb and the death of the child. Yet, if a hysterectomy must be performed to save the life of the mother, the Church would deem the procedure morally licit.
Thus, a moral distinction must be made between directly and intentionally treating a pathology (a condition or abnormality that causes a disease) and indirectly and unintentionally causing the death of the baby in the process.

The majority of Catholic moralists reject MTX and salpingostomy on the basis that these two amount to no less than a direct abortion. In both cases, the embryo is directly attacked, so the death of the embryo is not the unintended evil effect, but rather the very means used to bring about the intended good effect. Yet, for an act to be morally licit, not only must the intended effect be good, but also the act itself must be good. For this reason, most moralists agree that MTX and salpingostomy do not withstand the application of the principle of double effect.

A partial salpingectomy is performed by cutting out the compromised area of the tube (the tissue to which the embryo is attached). The tube is then closed in the hope that it will function properly again. A full salpingectomy is performed when implantation and growth has damaged the tube too greatly or if the tube has ruptured. These moralists maintain that, unlike the first two treatments, when a salpingectomy is performed, the embryo is not directly attacked. Instead, they see the tissue of the tube where the embryo is attached as compromised or infected. The infected tube is the object of the treatment and the death of the child is indirect. Since the child’s death is not intended, but an unavoidable secondary effect of a necessary procedure, the principle of double effect applies.

 

[jack_hawkins]

well I don’t accept the arguments put forward there, for the reasons I have expounded previously in the thread
it is ludicrous to perform unnecessary surgery to try and pretend that the embryo isn’t being attacked
this is where faith denies science and we get a Galileo situation all over again
“infected tube”? medically that is nonsense

 

[estesbob]

well I don’t accept the arguments put forward there, for the reasons I have expounded previously in the thread
it is ludicrous to perform unnecessary surgery to try and pretend that the embryo isn’t being attacked
this is where faith denies science and we get a Galileo situation all over again
“infected tube”? medically that is nonsense

Not to get off topic but Faith vs Science had very littte to do with the Gallelio "situation’ You might start with checking out the occupaption of Copernicus . You can go here to see what really happened law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/galileo/galileo.html

 

[vern_humphrey]

Not to get off topic but Faith vs Science had very littte to do with the Gallelio "situation’ You might start with checking out the occupaption of Copernicus . You can go here to see what really happened law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/galileo/galileo.html

Most anti-Catholic positions are based on “what everybody knows” and no fact-checking required.

 

[guanophore]

(salpingectomy in the case of ectopic pregnancy)

A huge difference though, this type of preventative surgery does not result in the death of an embryo. Not relevent to the discussion.

I am confused. If an embryo is implanted in the fallopian tube, and that portion of the tube is removed to prevent the embryo from damaging the organs, how does it not result in the death of the embryo?

Appropriateness however includes consideration of moral discernment in any decisive action taken.

With regard to whether the embryo is “human” (has a soul) it is true that we do not know when this occurs, but since we do not, it is safer to assume that life exists at the moment of conception. In fact, there are some scriptures that state God knows us before that! ?!

Ps 139:13-16

13 For thou didst form my inward parts,
thou didst knit me together in my mother’s womb.
14 I praise thee, for thou art fearful and wonderful.
Wonderful are thy works!
Thou knowest me right well;
15 my frame was not hidden from thee,
when I was being made in secret,
intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.
16 Thy eyes beheld my unformed substance;
in thy book were written, every one of them,
the days that were formed for me,
when as yet there was none of them. "

 

[jack_hawkins]

actually guanophore the issue with ectopic pregnancy is NOT damaging the organs, but abrupt haemorrhage
there are two main conditions that cause catastrophic haemorrhage without warning - abdominal aortic anuerysm and ectopic pregnancy
with both of these, someone can be dead within minutes

 

[guanophore]

If I am so feeble, and so unwanted… then I would not want to be a burden on anyone, family or friends. Put me out of my misery.

This is sure an interesting way to join in the sufferings of Christ!

Yes I could. But I won’t, that would be damaging to her emotionally.

Let me get this straight. You do not want to damage your daughter emotionally by looking her in the eye, and telling her that you thougth about aborting her…but you would not have regrets if you had aborted her?

I’m not going to purposely injure anyone unless I strongly feel they deserve it.

This phrase really grabbed me…
You have the right to purposefully injur others when you strongly feel they deserve it!?

If you treat it like a disease, then don’t be shocked when parents put an end to it like they would an infection.

I think this is a very salient point. Pregancy is considered a disease, nuisance, and intrusion in many situation, and therefore, it is natural to treat it as such.

Thank you Blessed Virgin Mother, for receiving your Son!

 

[guanophore]

For the most part. I am basically 100% pro-life in that I don’t agree w/abortion in any circumstances. That being said I certainly can see why people would feel compelled to do so in the event where that is the only option to save the mother’s life. I just fear the slippery slope of rationalizing abortion for other circumstances, e.g. the mother’s “health,” which can be a big umbrella which can cover many meanings.

Absolutely! Financial health was just cited in a post above, mental health, emotional health, health of the mother’s relationship with the baby’s father, or someone else…very slippery slope.

 

[jack_hawkins]

a good analogy to the fallacious differentiation of salpingectomy versus tubal preservation is someone trying to say they haven’t killed someone because they bombed the house he was living in, as opposed to shooting him

 

[vern_humphrey]

Originally Posted by Imryl
I’m not going to purposely injure anyone unless I strongly feel they deserve it.

This phrase really grabbed me…
You have the right to purposefully injur others when you strongly feel they deserve it!?

That’s not quite right – people who support abortion by definition believe they have the right to kill people who are totally innocent.

 

[guanophore]

A cluster of cells may be ‘living’ in the organic sense, but that does not constitute a living breathing, thinking, feeling thing.

I think this is the kind of argument the OP was asking for! I am curious, at what point does that cell cluster become “human”. Also, according to this logic, does a person in a vegetative state cease to have “life” because they may not be thinking and feeling in the sense that you and I are?

You better go turn yourself into the justice department, all those trees you’ve killed, bacteria you’ve decimated with your cleaners, all the insects that you have plastered on your windshield.

It is interesting that you place an unborn child into this category…

(THE RIGHT TO LIFE LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS) But in the spirit of being specific… it’s not just crime, but it certainly isn’t referring to abortion.

The founders of our country thought abortion was reprehensible.

I was willing to have an abortion which would have prevented her from having a life, yes. But kill would indicate I thought she was alive at that point.

This goes back to your previous statement that the unborn baby is “a cluster of cells” and not a person. Again, at what point does “life” begin? Do you agree with Roe V Wade, not until birth?

I have suggested abortion to people who have asked my advice, and I also told them to consider how they might feel afterward.

I used to do that too. It was only recently that I realized it was a mortal sin. Participating or encouraging abortion is an automatic ex-communication, and persons involved in it should not be taking communion, nor can they call themselves Catholic.

 

[guanophore]

(every person has the right to life)

Opinions.

No, that is the Teaching of Jesus

It’s still just a moral opinion.

Do you have so little respect for the teaching of Jesus?

(the embryo) She was neither dead or alive, otherwise I kill someone every month, when I ovulate.

Fortunately perhaps some of what seems like hardness of heart is really just ignorance. You may be unaware that human life starts at the moment of conception. A fertilized egg (zygote) is not the same as an unfertilized egg, which is discarded every month. A fertilized egg will implant, usually in the uterus, and become a pregnancy, where the ovum by itself will not.

It’s not living yet. It has the potential to be a living human being.

I wonder upon what basis you make this assertion. The moment the sperm penetrates the egg, changes begin to happen that, if not interfered with, produce a human being. At what point do you think the baby becomes “human”?

So what are animals? Chopped liver? I know you’re not suggesting that. But that’s a fairly general statement. You’re not ‘alive’ until you can live outside your mothers womb. (Which is strickly just my opinion by the way)

OH! Ok, this answers my previousl question. I wonder if you have ever observed an abortion? But better, watch the movie “miracle of life” or go to the “priests for life” website. If you can watch the prenatal surgeries that are being done now days and still assert that the baby inside is not a “life” I will be very surprised.

If the baby is not “alive” until it is born, then how did John the Baptist become “filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb”? When Jesus came near to him, he “leapt for joy” inside Elizabeth!

There’s no misconception. There’s a difference in opinion.

At this point, I would prefer to think that you do have misconceptions, and that your statements are based on a lack of knowledge of the biology of life, and the teaching of Jesus.

(have you helped someone get an abortion?) I would have if I had been asked.

If they asked you to smother the baby after it came out, because it was a bad time for them to become a parent, would you do that also?

 

[tamccrackine]

At one point, I was very pro-choice. I never understood why, but over the past 10 years, I’ve learned that it’s due to the silent influences of my mother and father. They never talked to us about how abortion is wrong. Heck, I really didn’t know what abortion was until I was in highschool! And by then, I was of the mindset that a woman should be the one to say what goes on with her body.

Fast forward a few years… I had my first abortion. I was still pro-choice, but even when I found out I was pregnant, I felt joy of the new baby. I was torn when my mother told me to abort. I was threatened that I would no longer receive help for college, I would be disowned and everyone would hate the child. In essence, I wasn’t given a “choice.” and I started to doubt the pro-choice view. I went through with my abortion due to others pressing me to do it.

Fast foward two years later… I had my second abortion. I did it without telling anyone but the father of the child because I already knew the answer of anyone else, so why bother listening to them again? I still felt it was wrong, but I believed it was the right thing to do because I got it into my head that we weren’t ready yet. The doubts about the pro-choice stance continue to mount.

Fast foward three years later and I’m now married and pregnant. My past starts to creep up on me and how funny I find it telling my mother of an intense burning desire to go to Confession. She tells me “That’s the old school Catholic coming through!” Yet how much hatred I felt for her because she basically MADE me get an abortion!

After a few years of inner conflict, I finally attend a Rachel’s Vineyard retreat and I was finally able to connect some dots as to why I behaved in the way I did after my abortions. Total self destruction and the attempts to destroy everyone around me. I was so angry at everyone and this retreat gave me a chance to let go.

By this time, I realized I have to be pro-life. I can’t allow other women/girls to feel like I did and NOT have a “choice” when their heart believed to do the right thing. So it was a 10 year process of changing my heart but I had to basically burn in hell to figure it out.

And now, I just pray for my mother all the time as she’s a very devout Catholic, is an EME in her parish but is very pro-abortion. She believes that there are some cases where the child just isn’t supposed to be born. Heck, she’s even telling me now that I’m pregnant with baby #4 (pregnancy #7 though), that it’s time for me to stop. Which is doing nothing for me but making me relive those rage feelings that I had when she told me that I have to abort. I feel as if she’s trying to control my reproductive life, ya know? And I just don’t know what to do with this rage I feel.

 

[Goth_Catholic]

well I don’t accept the arguments put forward there, for the reasons I have expounded previously in the thread
it is ludicrous to perform unnecessary surgery to try and pretend that the embryo isn’t being attacked
this is where faith denies science and we get a Galileo situation all over again
“infected tube”? medically that is nonsense

Oh God. This is why I’m going to a Catholic College for Pre-Med. I don’t wannna come out like you. God help me if I become a “baby doc” just to belive it’s not a baby till it’s born.