E
estesbob
Guest
I’ll translate it for you: “I vote Democrat”
- Status
R
Rence
Guest
Ok, I’ll bite, but I won’t be dragged into an arguement
I’ll simply answer your question as best I can.Yes, I’m a practicing Catholic. And my mom and I are among the most practicing Catholic that I know IRL…I don’t know anyone as conservative as the Catholics on this forum though. So yes, I am pro-choice, particularly in 2 cases:
- of of those cases is rape. The US bishops have sanctioned the use of the morning after pill in the emergency room right after a rape, and I believe offering it to every single rape victim should be required of every single hospital (Catholic or not) and should be in legislation to make it so. The guidelines given for its usage is outlined here: catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0566.html
No arguements, the US Bishops allow it’s usage in the case of rape, and the guidelines are documented and published. And while some conservatives equate it to abortion, I do not. And that’s one of the reasons why I think it should remain legal, because the care of a rape victim in the emergency room should be standard and across the board regardless of scrupulosity, just like blood transfusion therapy is offered as indicated, despite the religiosity of the nurse ordered to give it.
and 2) The other is when the mother’s life is in danger. No arguments, as a nurse I know full well the ramifications that pregnancy can have on a woman, especially one that is chronically ill. Yes, pregnancy is not a disease, however the physiological changes that pregnancy bring to a woman’s body can very well cause or exaserbate pathological processes. It’s very rare, but it happens. And it should be the woman’s choice. I know there are those out there that would call this the “ultimate sacrifice” for a woman to just die, but as God has given us free will, some may consider other factors in their lives, such as others who depend on her. Whether the patient declines prescribed treatment or consents, it should be their choice, and I undestand both.
and 3) related to the above:
I don’t believe laws should be made to be molded to any one religion’s rules and laws, any religion. And we can argue until the moon turns blue about abortion being a secular issue, and not a Catholic issue, but in the cases of rape and when the woman’s life is in danger, it is ONLY a Catholic issue. The most devout of Jewish even allow it for the life of the mother. The most devout of other religions will consider exceptions in the case of rape and danger to the mother. And yes, the Catholic religion is the True religion and everyone should be following it and everyone should be forced to follow it by law, but being Catholic is a choice, and not something can be forced. And just like I wouldn’t want the laws of Islam or Judaism to be forced on me, I will not try to force my religion on another person.
That said, I never thought I was “pro-choice” until I came to this forum, but if it makes me pro-choice because of my understanding of why those who would want an abortion due to being raped, or who are in danger of losing their lives from the changes a pregnancy brings on, then so be it
Mind you, I’d never counsel anyone to get an abortion in these circumstances. And I’d do all I could to present the options as acceptable by the Church, but in the end it’s their choice, but I won’t try to hold them hostage as some conservatives suggest we do…
As a nurse, I keep myself out of these senarios. I will probably never work in OB because of these guidelines that the Church imposes. And I will not work anywhere where they do abortions, not on purpose anyway. And I have no desire to work in surgery anymore, so that “not on purpose” will probably never happen. But I do understand these women, on both sides.
C
CMatt25
Guest
Perhaps because they have not joined up with other churches and the Catholic Church still counts them Catholic.
C
CMatt25
Guest
Why would you be villified? Isn’t it your right as an American citizen participating in a democracy to weigh all issues when contemplating your vote? And make your judgment as to who is the better candidate? Or has that right been taken away?How are you doing Century?
OK, hmmmm, my answer is hard to give. I guess I would say that I am Pro-Life. I know people possibly will say that there is a big butt.
I do attend church regular along with a Bible Study every week. I help give the CRHP weekends.
OK, here is the biggie!! I voted for Obama!!!
I felt he was the better candidate than McCain.
I am glad I got that off my chest. Now for 2012, I do not know.
I think that Abortion should not be done except for in a very extreme measure. That is my only issue. Something has to be happening, that is extremely sensitive and will not hurt both the Baby and the Mother.
I know I will be vilified later and I am sorry but that is How I feel.
Paul
C
catharina
Guest
Being in dissent re abortion, being pro-choice, makes youOk, I’ll bite, but I won’t be dragged into an arguement
Yes, I’m a practicing Catholic. And my mom and I are among the most practicing Catholic that I know IRL…I don’t know anyone as conservative as the Catholics on this forum though. So yes, I am pro-choice, particularly in 2 cases:
And while I don’t agree at all with having an abortion after that time period (as in beyond the emergency stange in the emergency room), I can completely understand why a rape victim who finds herself pregnant would want one. And I can completely understand why a rape victim who finds herself pregnant would NOT want one as well. I just acknowledge that everyone is different and may not be able to go through with a pregnancy resulting from a rape, any more that some may not be able to go through with an abortion, despite a rape.
- of of those cases is rape. The US bishops have sanctioned the use of the morning after pill in the emergency room right after a rape, and I believe offering it to every single rape victim should be required of every single hospital (Catholic or not) and should be in legislation to make it so. The guidelines given for its usage is outlined here: catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0566.html
No arguements, the US Bishops allow it’s usage in the case of rape, and the guidelines are documented and published. And while some conservatives equate it to abortion, I do not. And that’s one of the reasons why I think it should remain legal, because the care of a rape victim in the emergency room should be standard and across the board regardless of scrupulosity, just like blood transfusion therapy is offered as indicated, despite the religiosity of the nurse ordered to give it.
and 2) The other is when the mother’s life is in danger. No arguments, as a nurse I know full well the ramifications that pregnancy can have on a woman, especially one that is chronically ill. Yes, pregnancy is not a disease, however the physiological changes that pregnancy bring to a woman’s body can very well cause or exaserbate pathological processes. It’s very rare, but it happens. And it should be the woman’s choice. I know there are those out there that would call this the “ultimate sacrifice” for a woman to just die, but as God has given us free will, some may consider other factors in their lives, such as others who depend on her. Whether the patient declines prescribed treatment or consents, it should be their choice, and I undestand both.
and 3) related to the above:
I don’t believe laws should be made to be molded to any one religion’s rules and laws, any religion. And we can argue until the moon turns blue about abortion being a secular issue, and not a Catholic issue, but in the cases of rape and when the woman’s life is in danger, it is ONLY a Catholic issue. The most devout of Jewish even allow it for the life of the mother. The most devout of other religions will consider exceptions in the case of rape and danger to the mother. And yes, the Catholic religion is the True religion and everyone should be following it and everyone should be forced to follow it by law, but being Catholic is a choice, and not something can be forced. And just like I wouldn’t want the laws of Islam or Judaism to be forced on me, I will not try to force my religion on another person.
That said, I never thought I was “pro-choice” until I came to this forum, but if it makes me pro-choice because of my understanding of why those who would want an abortion due to being raped, or who are in danger of losing their lives from the changes a pregnancy brings on, then so be it
Mind you, I’d never counsel anyone to get an abortion in these circumstances. And I’d do all I could to present the options as acceptable by the Church, but in the end it’s their choice, but I won’t try to hold them hostage as some conservatives suggest we do…
As a nurse, I keep myself out of these senarios. I will probably never work in OB because of these guidelines that the Church imposes. And I will not work anywhere where they do abortions, not on purpose anyway. And I have no desire to work in surgery anymore, so that “not on purpose” will probably never happen. But I do understand these women, on both sides.
a dissenting Catholic - as you know - so why say you’re a practicing Catholic?
L
LemonAndLime
Guest
I think I would just like to point out that she is not being a dissenting Catholic by the views she expressed - which part exactly was against teaching?
And I also want to say I agree with her. She already stated that the use of the morning-after pill is sanctioned as okay by US Bishops so how is she dissenting there?
C
CMatt25
Guest
Wow Rence. I don’t know how many conservatives here will understand. But I think you answered well. God bless you and peace.Ok, I’ll bite, but I won’t be dragged into an arguement
Yes, I’m a practicing Catholic. And my mom and I are among the most practicing Catholic that I know IRL…I don’t know anyone as conservative as the Catholics on this forum though. So yes, I am pro-choice, particularly in 2 cases:
And while I don’t agree at all with having an abortion after that time period (as in beyond the emergency stange in the emergency room), I can completely understand why a rape victim who finds herself pregnant would want one. And I can completely understand why a rape victim who finds herself pregnant would NOT want one as well. I just acknowledge that everyone is different and may not be able to go through with a pregnancy resulting from a rape, any more that some may not be able to go through with an abortion, despite a rape.
- of of those cases is rape. The US bishops have sanctioned the use of the morning after pill in the emergency room right after a rape, and I believe offering it to every single rape victim should be required of every single hospital (Catholic or not) and should be in legislation to make it so. The guidelines given for its usage is outlined here: catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0566.html
No arguements, the US Bishops allow it’s usage in the case of rape, and the guidelines are documented and published. And while some conservatives equate it to abortion, I do not. And that’s one of the reasons why I think it should remain legal, because the care of a rape victim in the emergency room should be standard and across the board regardless of scrupulosity, just like blood transfusion therapy is offered as indicated, despite the religiosity of the nurse ordered to give it.
and 2) The other is when the mother’s life is in danger. No arguments, as a nurse I know full well the ramifications that pregnancy can have on a woman, especially one that is chronically ill. Yes, pregnancy is not a disease, however the physiological changes that pregnancy bring to a woman’s body can very well cause or exaserbate pathological processes. It’s very rare, but it happens. And it should be the woman’s choice. I know there are those out there that would call this the “ultimate sacrifice” for a woman to just die, but as God has given us free will, some may consider other factors in their lives, such as others who depend on her. Whether the patient declines prescribed treatment or consents, it should be their choice, and I undestand both.
and 3) related to the above:
I don’t believe laws should be made to be molded to any one religion’s rules and laws, any religion. And we can argue until the moon turns blue about abortion being a secular issue, and not a Catholic issue, but in the cases of rape and when the woman’s life is in danger, it is ONLY a Catholic issue. The most devout of Jewish even allow it for the life of the mother. The most devout of other religions will consider exceptions in the case of rape and danger to the mother. And yes, the Catholic religion is the True religion and everyone should be following it and everyone should be forced to follow it by law, but being Catholic is a choice, and not something can be forced. And just like I wouldn’t want the laws of Islam or Judaism to be forced on me, I will not try to force my religion on another person.
That said, I never thought I was “pro-choice” until I came to this forum, but if it makes me pro-choice because of my understanding of why those who would want an abortion due to being raped, or who are in danger of losing their lives from the changes a pregnancy brings on, then so be it
Mind you, I’d never counsel anyone to get an abortion in these circumstances. And I’d do all I could to present the options as acceptable by the Church, but in the end it’s their choice, but I won’t try to hold them hostage as some conservatives suggest we do…
As a nurse, I keep myself out of these senarios. I will probably never work in OB because of these guidelines that the Church imposes. And I will not work anywhere where they do abortions, not on purpose anyway. And I have no desire to work in surgery anymore, so that “not on purpose” will probably never happen. But I do understand these women, on both sides.
Mary_Gail_36
New member
Posted by RenceE
Or the baby being allowed to die naturally, instead of through a D and C better hope for a practicing Catholic parent.
We don’t want to force the religion on the parent…but what about the innocent child.
There are Muslims that insist on female mutilation on babies. We do not allow that in the US. How come those Muslims cannot practice their faith? By not circumcising their daughters, are you not imposing your religion in them?
So is it possible to argue freedom of religion for abortion…but not for female circumcision?
So the poor little baby fathered by rape better hope that it has a Catholic parent…or they are out of luck. They get snuffed out.
Or the baby being allowed to die naturally, instead of through a D and C better hope for a practicing Catholic parent.
We don’t want to force the religion on the parent…but what about the innocent child.
There are Muslims that insist on female mutilation on babies. We do not allow that in the US. How come those Muslims cannot practice their faith? By not circumcising their daughters, are you not imposing your religion in them?
So is it possible to argue freedom of religion for abortion…but not for female circumcision?
R
Rence
Guest
Thank you LemonAndLime, that’s what two priests said and that’s good enough for me.
C
catharina
Guest
In this statement of Full Dissent, she stands opposed to Church Teaching.
"The other is when the mother’s life is in danger. No arguments, as a nurse I know full well the ramifications that pregnancy can have on a woman, especially one that is chronically ill. Yes, pregnancy is not a disease, however the physiological changes that pregnancy bring to a woman’s body can very well cause or exaserbate pathological processes. It’s very rare, but it happens. And it should be the woman’s choice. I know there are those out there that would call this the “ultimate sacrifice” for a woman to just die, but as God has given us free will, some may consider other factors in their lives, such as others who depend on her. Whether the patient declines prescribed treatment or consents, it should be their choice, and I undestand both."
If you agree with that statement, then you are dissenting also.
C
catharina
Guest
If you found a hundred priests who said the same,Thank you LemonAndLime, that’s what two priests said and that’s good enough for me.
that would not make them faithful. On the contrary.
It would mean they are in dissent.
C
CMatt25
Guest
Personally I myself probably wouldn’t allow a private website’s guide to be the sole determination of my vote. But that’s just me. Others are free to do so. But I take it CA Voting Guide defines issues affecting lives as just relating to the abortion issue?
R
Rence
Guest
At the time of a rape or a pregnancy, the patient with consent is the woman. Until that changes, that’s the way it is. Whether that’s fortunate or unfortunate, that’s the law.Posted by RenceE
So the poor little baby fathered by rape better hope that it has a Catholic parent…or they are out of luck. They get snuffed out.
Or the baby being allowed to die naturally, instead of through a D and C better hope for a practicing Catholic parent.
We don’t want to force the religion on the parent…but what about the innocent child.
There are Muslims that insist on female mutilation on babies. We do not allow that in the US. How come those Muslims cannot practice their faith? By not circumcising their daughters, are you not imposing your religion in them?
So is it possible to argue freedom of religion for abortion…but not for female circumcision?
And, yes, it is possible to argue for freedom of religion in both cases. In both cases, one’s religion is not upheld by law when it is imposed on someone else, and it shouldn’t be. Because if Muslim laws were carved into US laws, then should all females regardless of creed be circumstized as children? Radical muslims would think so. So, In the case of the illegality of female circumcision, that baby girl is not being forced to comply with a reigious dictated procedure that she cannot consent to. It’s not me imposing my religion on them, it’s the law protecting the child from an illegal procedure. It’s also illegal to cut off the hand of a thief in the US, though that is a common practice in Islam countries…and worse. When in Rome…
R
Rence
Guest
Hey Matt
I prefer the voting guide put out by the US Bishops, it’s complete and it’s reasonable and defines issues other than abortion as being important considerations. Of course, each individual has the right to vote how they believe it’s best. That’s the point. You’re going to always find many in a bunch of people who are single-issue voters, but that single issue will vary from individual to individual. The US Bishops state that Catholics are not to be single issue voters though…as a guideline
E
estesbob
Guest
The morning after pill is only sanctioned after it has been determined the egg has not been fertilized ie the woman is not pregnant.
Her support of abortion in case of rape is a rejection of the teachings of the Church. In fact we can go as far back as Deuteronomy where Moses says that children should not be punished for the sins of their father to see that this teaching is nothing new.
R
Rence
Guest
I always try to understand people, especially those in desperate situations. Isn’t that part of being Christian as well? Their choices may not be choices I would make, but I understand them.
E
estesbob
Guest
And the voting guide makes it very clear that one cannot support a pro-abortion candidate unless thr opponet is more pro-abortion than they are. This was reiterated by statement from the Pope and 62 American bishops priorthe 2008 election. Of course every individual has the right to vote anyway they want but they should not try to mislead fellow Catholics into believing such dissent is acceptable for those who wish to adhere to their faith.Hey Matt
R
Rence
Guest
Not to derail the thread from the OP’s topic, but:
The voting guide doesn’t say that you cannot support a pro-abortion candidate unless there is another more pro-abortion candidate on the roster. It says that being pro-abortion “may disqualify a candidate”, which is most definitely not the same thing. They then have a very well written and detailed list of all the factors one should consider. The fact is, of course the Church doesn’t want you to vote for a pro-choice candidiate, but they do not dictate how you vote or for whom you should vote. They printed guidelines that every Catholic would be smart to read for themselves and follow to the best of their ability with the counsel of their priest if need be.
R
Rence
Guest
As the website I cited says, yes, you need a pregancy test (to make sure you are not already pregnant before the rape incident) and you need a leutinizing hormone test to make sure you have not already ovulated…and as the article says, if the LH test isn’t available and the woman thinks she has not ovulated, you can administer the morning after pill as prescribed.
I understand the choice to abort in the case of rape just as well as I understand the choice to not aborn in the case of rape, regardless of the choice I would make myself. However, whatever choice I make, I want it to be my choice and not someone else’s choice imposed on me.
C
CMatt25
Guest
Rence, I thought the bishops had a separate guide from CA but I wasn’t sure.Hey Matt
- Status