Pro-choice Catholics

[catharina]

Catholic Answers is wise in its use of “Trial Memberships.”

 

[Toomey1979]

The site is Catholic Answers.
The idea that one would post to mock
the Faith, to mock the Church, to mock others is chilling.

Attention-seeking is an addictive behavior for some, esp for the young.
To imagine that one can excuse one’w own insults by claiming “boredom” is low.

How bout pontificating? Guess nobody listens to yours in real life.

 

[guanophore]

Truthfully I’m just bored

That is ok. YOu have provided a good muse for those who are reading the thread. You have done a good job of demonstrating the attitudes and expressions of a dissident
Catholic who reasons emotionally and is not interested in learning. I am sure you have represented many who were not brave enough to post.

. Honestly, i know that you think you are doing good. But in your zeal innocent people are going to be hurt.

Really? who might that be?

I am not going to try to convince you that abortion can save the lives of some women because we both know that you really don’t care if it can or can’t.

You are right. We care so much about women that we know abortion causes much more harm than it cures. We know that there are ways to deal with all the complications of pregancy without abortion.

So what’s the point?

I am not sure. What was your point?

Did you think you could pursuade us that the taking of innocent human life for “medical” reasons was going to work? You might as well champion the harvesting of organs before people don’t need them anymore.

 

[CMatt25]

Of course you are welcomed by Catholics, Matt!

We just want you to conform your views to Christ’s, not make Christ conform to your views.

This is a curious reason to find a church.

It would seem that the reason to “find a church” would be to find one that teaches the Truth, not one that makes you feel good about your beliefs.

If I am not welcomed to call myself a Catholic PR then I question your “of course”. To me what appears is wanted is for me to conform my beliefs to your views of what are Christ’s views. Jesus called Himself the Truth. I don’t find it curious to seek Him where He welcomes all. Regardless of any imperfections.

 

[lil_flower_luv]

Truthfully I’m just bored not really trying to win anybody over especially folks who have views as extreme some here. Honestly, i know that you think you are doing good. But in your zeal innocent people are going to be hurt. I am not going to try to convince you that abortion can save the lives of some women because we both know that you really don’t care if it can or can’t. So what’s the point?

Emphasis mine

You keep saying we don’t care about the women. But why don’t you care about the unborn?

 

[Toomey1979]

That is ok. YOu have provided a good muse for those who are reading the thread. You have done a good job of demonstrating the attitudes and expressions of a dissident
Catholic who reasons emotionally and is not interested in learning. I am sure you have represented many who were not brave enough to post.

Really? who might that be?

You are right. We care so much about women that we know abortion causes much more harm than it cures. We know that there are ways to deal with all the complications of pregancy without abortion.

I am not sure. What was your point?

Did you think you could pursuade us that the taking of innocent human life for “medical” reasons was going to work? You might as well champion the harvesting of organs before people don’t need them anymore.

I don’t think I could persuade you that the sky was blue if the pope told you it was green.

 

[Rence]

I understand your objection. But it is not the law that “forces” a woman to be pregnant in the case of rape, but the rapist.

You’re right, the law doesn’t force a woman to be pregnant in the case of rape. The law allows her to make many choices.

The fact that women’s lives may be endangered by a pregnancy is not caused by law either. Iti s a natural function of the fallen world in which we live.

Right again. The law doesn’t cause a woman to be endangered by a pregnancy, but the law does give her the opportunity to be diagnosed by a physician and prescribed treatment to help her, and she has the right to choose which treatments to consent to, and which treatments to refuse. The law does a lot to help women in medical crisis now.

Women are not harmed by living within the limitations of natural consequences. Women are saved from this harm not by law, but by God’s grace.

The law helps too

Women are not saved from harm by taking innocent life to preserve their own. Instead, they are robbed of the opporunity to experience a love that can be no greater in human experience, to lay theirs down for another.

Yes, but whether or not they experience this love that can be no greater is their choice to make, not someone else’s choice to impose on them.

 

[Toomey1979]

Emphasis mine

You keep saying we don’t care about the women. But why don’t you care about the unborn?

I do. But sometimes some situations will cause the woman’s life to be in danger. If it came down to saving the woman by abortion or letting both child and woman die I choose to save the mother. I know you deny that that ever happens. But if it did, you would still rather both die than save one by abortion, right? At least answer that.

 

[guanophore]

If I am not welcomed to call myself a Catholic PR then I question your “of course”. To me what appears is wanted is for me to conform my beliefs to your views of what are Christ’s views. Jesus called Himself the Truth. I don’t find it curious to seek Him where He welcomes all. Regardless of any imperfections.

Of course you can call yourself what ever you want! We would just prefer you not do it here at CAF.

 

[CMatt25]

So if you had a child at risk, your own flesh and blood,
you’d be comfortable leavings its life, its fate in the hands
of a mother who seeks abortion?

If so: astonishing.

Astonishing or not, it’s the law.

 

[guanophore]

You’re such a phony. You wouldn’t care if abortion could save a woman’s life. You said it yourself. So why keep going back to whether it can or not?

I am not “going back” Toomey. I am trying to get you to understand that treatment for a complicated pregnancy is not abortive in nature. The goal is not to end the pregnancy.

I don’t think I could persuade you that the sky was blue if the pope told you it was green.

It is true that I do have some skewed perceptions, and I dont’ always perceive things in the fullness of Truth.

However, the Pope is not the source of the pro-life stance of the Church. Even if he said it was ok to have an abortion, I would still prefer the Church’s position over that of any individual that has departed from it.

You seem to have a deficient understanding of the nature of the Church, as well.

 

[lil_flower_luv]

Yes, but whether or not they experience this love that can be no greater is their choice to make, not someone else’s choice to impose on them.

Those poor unborn baby girls who‘s rights were infringed upon—and now will never live.

See where this is going?

See how empty the pro-choice argument is?

 

[CMatt25]

Actually the Bible gives more value to the woman life over the fetus. Somewhere in Exodus. Makes sense really. I don’t think that all abortion (whether or not they are immoral) are tantamount to murder. There is a point in fetal development that you clearly have a viable baby but it aint at conception. A clump of dividing cells is hardly a baby.

Exodus 21:22-23 may be what you refer to… But the Magesterium doesn’t see it that way.

 

[guanophore]

Right again. The law doesn’t cause a woman to be endangered by a pregnancy, but the law does give her the opportunity to be diagnosed by a physician and prescribed treatment to help her, and she has the right to choose which treatments to consent to, and which treatments to refuse. The law does a lot to help women in medical crisis now.

Did you think it was inconsistent with the pro-life position that a woman should see a physician and be prescribed treatment to help her?

Yes, but whether or not they experience this love that can be no greater is their choice to make, not someone else's choice to impose on them.

I agree. Yet, we must encourage everyone to reach for the highest good.

 

[Rence]

What used to be the law is irrelevant. We used to have legal slavery too.

So forcing a women to die in a pregnacy(regardless if the baby lives[besides the point I guess]) is the pro-life position. Tha sounds like an evil campaign to me. In fact I’m pretty sure that most “humanity of faith” (whoever that is) is not with you on that one either.

You know Toomey, sometimes I feel like you do about this whole thing. It’s terrifying to think about another person’s rights stripped from them, and the callous way some people talk about women and their expendibility. But the fortunate part about all of this is that being Catholic is a choice. And yes, those are the rules of the Church, and if one wants to be in conformity with the Church, they choose death instead of a life-saving procedure. But it is their choice and I have absolutely no problem with it whatsoever. However, I do have a problem when people try to force someone who is in no way interested in these rules and regulations, and have no interest in following them, and instead are being forced (almost physically) into conformity. That’s what I have a problem with. No where ever in the Bible or CCC or encyclicals does the Church ever say that people should be forced to be Catholic or forced to follow Catholic rules. The Church itself is big on consent. So really, as long as people are consenting, you really can’t blame the Church. And I think that’s a big reason why people, even when they totally are against abortion, won’t vote to make it illegal. It’s one thing to say what you would do with you, but quite another when we’re talking about what people will do to others, especially if that means denying them medications or care prescribed by a doctor. People want their autonomy and they want their freedom to make choices for themselves. They know that if the girl next door can be made to do this or that, eventually so will thye. No one feels more helpless than a patient in an emergency room, and they need to know they are being cared for without bias. And the laws provide this.

 

[PRmerger]

I wear the badge of a liberal proudly and I believe my Lord and Savior was a liberal. Letters? To me I see letters in the Catholic faith.

Yes. Jesus was a liberal. In the same way that the CC is liberal. She is socially liberal and morally conservative, just like Christ.

As if she, His Body, could be anything but what He, the Head is.

 

[Tigg]

With abortion, of course, consent means permission for the destruction of the child in utero.

But I’m just wondering at what point this ‘right of consent’ ends, or should end. Can it validly be given when the child is about to be, but is not yet, born? Can the child be held from exiting the womb in order to be killed first? It is after all, still in the womb. Even after birth, the child is still temporarily attached to the woman by the umbilical cord. Does she still have a right to consent to its destruction at that point? Or, since the child will be no less dependent in the first few months after birth, should her ability to consent to its termination not be extended to cover those first months ex-utero, as Professor Peter Singer suggests?

At what point, in order words, is the child safe from another’s legal ability to consent to its destruction?

Excellent!

Not if one does not believe all truth is found where you believe it is.

Do you honestly believe that Christ would establish Christianity and then leave us orphans, floundering with all manner of unanswered moral questions and beset by evil, without establishing the TRUTH regarding His Kingdom which would enable us to gain eternal life? Again, without question - moral relativism.

You don’t know that. You know I do not identify myself as a Catholic here. Elsewhere I am having second thoughts as well. Because if I as I am, warts and all, am no longer welcome by Catholics, I’m considering whether I should find myself a church home where I am welcomed.

Christ invites you to embrace the fullness of life which is truth. It is in **not **being able to conform our own understanding and will to truth that makes us feel unwelcomed.

Not saying anyone is not smart enough. Just that this is all the more reason society arrives at a law for the land because different people think and believe differently about many things including about who gets rights in this case. The woman or the unborn embryo or fetus. And differences as to at what point full civil rights are given. So we have the law to grasp and live by.

Too bad you place civil law above divine law. But a natural consequence following the first two statements.

 

[Iowa_Mike]

Mike when we throw around words like heresy the end result is you end up derailing the thread and alienating those people that support your position. Yesterday we had a lady writing that she was Catholic and a Planned Parenthood escort. That barely caused a ripple in this thread as there was an intense argument going on as to what the definition of heresy was, an argument totally irrelevant to this thread , an argument I fear is about to break out again.

In my 25 plus years of debating abortion on Internet I have learned that the primary tool of the abortion apologists is to change of subject.Therefore I never use words like murder, heretic, hypocrite ,etc as those trying to defend the indefensible would like nothing more than to have the the discussion degenerate into a semantics argument over the meaning of words.

Not for my part…but facts are facts.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

 

[PRmerger]

Mike when we throw around words like heresy the end result is you end up derailing the thread and alienating those people that support your position. Yesterday we had a lady writing that she was Catholic and a Planned Parenthood escort. That barely caused a ripple in this thread as there was an intense argument going on as to what the definition of heresy was, an argument totally irrelevant to this thread , an argument I fear is about to break out again.

In my 25 plus years of debating abortion on Internet I have learned that the primary tool of the abortion apologists is to change of subject**.Therefore I never use words like murder, heretic, hypocrite ,etc as those trying to defend the indefensible would like nothing more than to have the the discussion degenerate into a semantics argument **over the meaning of words.

Wow. I missed this post.

Truer words were never spoken here, bob.

:bowdown:

 

[Iowa_Mike]

Don’t be silly, Mike. People all over the world are making choice to commit murder on a daily basis. Sin can be a choice too.

Say what…my post dealt with the complaint you registered about the use of graphic language and depictions. I encourage all to stop using pro-abortion lingo to describe abortion. Abortion is a horrible act and using clincal language just panders to pro-abortion forces who want to keep the language and images clinical in order mask the reality of what they support. My comment that it is ‘murder not choice’ is intended to shed light on obfuscating language used by pro-abortion people. Sorry you misunderstood.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike