Pro Choice/Abortion “Catholics”

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sbee0
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
QwertyGirl said:
And if 96% of the population have no problem with birth control, I find it pretty outrageous for some Catholics to thinks they should be setting a different policy for everyone. Fine to preach to fellow Catholics what you believe. But then leave it alone. It’s really none of your business with respect to the general population.
Click to expand...
Post reminds me of Sheen’s words, " a lie is a lie if everyone believes it, and the truth is the truth even if no one believes it." I don’t think we (Catholics)" are setting a different policy" so much as we are stating a truth taught by the church. That sex is a sacred act, a sharing in that great attribute of God as Creator." It is a little more than rover and fifi on the front lawn, and it should be stated as such. Whether in a free society you choose to either believe or ignore it, is, of course, up to you.
 
Last edited:
Meaning you think I am uneducated or uninformed? You’re pretty arrogant for someone who claims to be educated and informed. In my experience, people who are don’t assume things they can’t possibly know. Like how educated or informed someone they barely know is :roll_eyes:
 
Last edited:
deMontfort said:
The arguments he’s been making in this thread indicate that he’s pretty much an atheist who’s completely apostate from any orthodox form of Christianity.
Click to expand...
From the statement, “I would never have an abortion” I think the poster is a woman. I agree with the rest of your statement.
In fact, the poster describes herself as a “limited Catholic”. I wonder, is that anything like “partially pregnant?”
 
LateCatholic said:
The position of pro-choice is that YOU cannot force YOUR opinion on someone else.
Click to expand...
Yet we force people to pay taxes, we force people to show ID and go through security checks to fly. We force people to get background checks to buy guns. We force people to get licenses to drive, pilot an airplane, sell insurance, work in health care, start a business. We force people to stifle their religious beliefs if they work for a government agency. I could go on and on.
Our society believes in the rule of law which allows us to keep more freedoms than most other countries. A completely free society is anarchy. Allowing people to kill unborn children is sadly not keeping those children very free.
 
Pattylt said:
May I ask for one small clarification? Conception occurs in the Fallopian tubes. Implantation occurs hours to days later. 1 to 2% of conceptions implant in the Fallopian tubes and the fetus is non viable if it implants there. It can also be life threatening to the mother. Should you change your definition to implantation rather than conception or must the mother needlessly risk her life and future fertility by banning abortion at conception. I’m just trying to clarify the Catholic position. Thank you.
Click to expand...
Patty … I think you are referring to an “ectopic” pregnancy. The Catholic Church teaches that it is morally licit (allowable) to perform a medical procedure to save the life of the mother, even if it causes the death of the fetus. How this would be done in an ectopic pregnancy, you’d have to ask a doctor. (and a Catholic bioethicist) I may be wrong (and if I am, someone please correct) but an ectopic pregnancy will not result in a viable child. As to the removal of the product of conception here, that is probably out of the purview of most of the posters on this forum to answer. I know what you are asking, I just don’t know if there is someone steeped enough in Catholic bioethics that can answer your question beyond some layman’s personal opinion.
 
I’ve just finished watching this movie on Netflix called “The Cider House Rules” & it’s far more intense than Revolutionary Road movie.
 
Yes, it is an ectopic pregnancy. If anyone can clarify how this would be handled I would appreciate it as the moment of conception is different from the moment of implantation in the uterus. Banning abortion at the moment of conception would “technically” ban the treatment of an ectopic pregnancy.
 
Pattylt said:
Yes, it is an ectopic pregnancy. If anyone can clarify how this would be handled I would appreciate it as the moment of conception is different from the moment of implantation in the uterus. Banning abortion at the moment of conception would “technically” ban the treatment of an ectopic pregnancy.
Click to expand...
Congratulations, you’ve managed to ask a question that would get you a whole lot of different answers. There are those who would say that one must accept the pregnancy and put the outcome in God’s hands, there are those who would agree that it would be permissible to remove the “product of conception”, and there are those who would say it has no concrete answer.
I know Jewish tradition comes down on the side of the mother. Catholic thinking again sides with the mother in that a procedure necessary to save her life even if the fetus dies is not morally sinful. However, the difference is that Catholic teaching says you can not simply intentionally kill the fetus to obtain that result. Like I said, you’ve asked a question that there are any number of clear cut answers, depending on the belief of the Catholic in question. And if you asked priests, I’d bet you’d get several different answers too.
 
The ectopic pregnancy is a classic example of double effect.

To directly kill the child would be impermissible. But to remove the fallopian tube with the intent of saving the life of the mother (a good action) is permitted despite the unwanted effect of the child’s death. If you look on catholic.com, you can find a netter and more detailed explanation.
 
Thank you! I can see that this is a complex question with multiple possible answers. Do you think (chime in anyone) that it may be required to wait until the Fallopian tube actually ruptures before it would be permissible (not a mortal sin) to remove the fetus? Once implantation in the tube occurs it isn’t going to detach and reimplant in the uterus but there is a time lapse before rupture occurs.

I also have a “what if” question: pretend that abortion is outlawed. Do you think the mother should be charged with a crime? I’m sure you all feel the doctor performing the procedure should but what of the mother? Or do you feel that that should be between the mother and her religion? What type of sentencing for the MD? The mother? Thanks for discussing this with me!
 
joeybaggz said:
Post reminds me of Sheen’s words, " a lie is a lie if everyone believes it, and the truth is the truth even if no one believes it." I don’t think we (Catholics)" are setting a different policy" so much as we are stating a truth taught by the church. That sex is a sacred act, a sharing in that great attribute of God as Creator." It is a little more than rover and fifi on the front lawn, and it should be stated as such. Whether in a free society you choose to either believe or ignore it, is, of course, up to you
Click to expand...
No problem with anything you stated. The issue I have is when Catholics believe government should make laws against birth control, or not mandate that it should not be required to be included in coverage for women’s health. I have actually read that here at CAF before.
 
I’m not a doctor. But I once knew someone with an ectopic pregnancy. She was told that if the Fallopian tubes ruptured it potentially could cost the mother her life.
 
QwertyGirl said:
The issue I have is when Catholics believe government should make laws against birth control, or not mandate that it should not be required to be included in coverage for women’s health. I have actually read that here at CAF before.
Click to expand...
I think it is an age old question that often rears its head in modern society. Where should a religious “law” be positioned in relation to civil law. Thou shalt not kill is a religious law, a commandment of God. It is also a civil law as are laws against theft, libel, slander, and lust when it is manifested in behavior that is now considered sexual battery. Where does one, with religious convictions, draw the line. The problem with abortion is clear cut, it is the intentional taking of a life in its most helpless and dependent state. Birth control, I’ll give you that it is a horse of a different color. There are those who believe it should be civil law, then there are those who believe that it should only be an ecclesial law. Truthfully, I can see your point. The question is, how does God see it, and what is my responsibility to speak a truth promulgated by His church.
 
Free contraception? Heretic alert! Contraception will condemn one to Hell just the same as murdering their baby. And what good is all the welfare you worship if you’re dead because you got aborted? Absurd. I recommend you go to confession for attempting to convince other Catholics that free contraception is a good thing and moral.
 
He already said that he wasn’t Catholic or something like that.
 
We sleep knowing we did not support a Party that: Promotes Child Murder, Promotes Promiscuity, Promotes contraception, removes Ten Commandments monuments from public areas, removes crosses from public areas even at memorials, hates it when anybody mentions God, supports sodomite marriages, supports transgenderism, supports indocrinating our children to be pro sodomite, is in favour of rampant divorce, supports Euthanasia, wants to force Catholics to provide contraception and participate in same sex weddings, brainwashes children in public school, etc.
 
QwertyGirl said:
not mandate that it should not be required to be included in coverage for women’s health.
Click to expand...
Catholics do not have a problem with birth control used proportionately for women’s health, where certain conditions women have are helped by hormonal medication.

However, Catholics do (or ought to) have a problem paying for birth control as birth control.

First, this is not a health issue.

Second, why should employers pay for something they consider gravely immoral? Have they no choice?

And third, why should others pay so people can have consequence-free sex lives?
 
LateCatholic said:
Saying a woman MUST carry a baby to term from the moment of conception is not compatible with a free society. A fascist or communist society, sure. But not a free one.
Click to expand...
Depends how the “society” spins the MUST and the FREE.

There are only four countries in the world where a woman can abort up to birth:
Canada, United States, China and North Korea.

Two of those are totalitarian communist regimes and two are purportedly “free” societies.

In China and Korea, carrying a child to birth without sanction of the State will garner you at least a jail sentence or a forced abortion.

In the United States and Canada, claiming that every child has a right to life could get you tossed off Twitter and Facebook, kicked out of the Liberal party in Canada, and probably have your life and children threatened in the US.

What is your definition of a “free society?”

One where everyone can say and do as they please?

No society is THAT free and no society ought to be. You will always enforce some version of social standards and impose some rule or other, even while reaching for the appeal of “freedom.”

Freedom for whom, exactly? Clearly not the fetus, unless you are gnostic or a Cathar.

A “free society” is a chimera, and in no way an ideal. A moral society, a good society, a civil society, perhaps. A FREE society, not without heavy qualification.

The question – RE: abortion – is whether the fetus is a human being.

If it is, then no other human being, not even a mother, has a right to take that life away from that individual human being.

If it is not, then be prepared to defend some notion of human being where not every human being counts as human on whatever pretext, and many will be willing to change the boundaries of what constitutes a “human” on very little notice, just as they are willing to change the boundaries on sex or gender. The history of that notion (redefining who counts as “human”) is pretty dark. You are willing to venture very close to the abyss on that. Me, not so much.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top