Pro-choice Catholics

[guanophore]

Currently, the legal right to consent or refuse treatment lies with the woman.

Exactly

We are in agreement, are we not, that just because something is legal, that does not make it morally correct, right?

In addition to that, a pregnancy is not some sort of disease that needs treatment. The baby is not some sort of cancerous growth that needs to be removed for the health of the woman.

Abortion is not “treatment”, it is the removal of a fetus from the womb for the sole purpose of terminating the pregnancy.

 

[PRmerger]

There is a point in fetal development that you clearly have a viable baby but it aint at conception.

And what point would that be?

 

[Toomey1979]

Forty years ago, you believed slavery was acceptable.
Where do you live?

Guessing that unbaptized babies went to limbo,
that is asserting that they were unlikely to go to hell …
is light years removed from giving an OK to killing babies.

Why do you say you’re Catholic?
Were you baptized, confirmed, educated as a Catholic?
If so, why do you act so surprised regarding the laws of the church?
The Church has always, will always condemn abortion as an intrinsic evil.
Are you pretending this is “news” to you?

WHY?

The catholic church has always taught slavery was acceptable. It was the whole Vatican II rights of man phenomenom that changed all that. The point is that the Church changes its attitude toward things. I’m not surprised at what the church teaches. Just hope that change it in some respects…yet again.

 

[Toomey1979]

And what point would that be?

I don’t know exactly and because of that I wouldn’t force a woman to remain pregnant at the expense of her own life.

 

[Newbie2]

Indeed.

Though I question and wrangle and struggle with many a Catholic teaching (and have started quite a few threads in my early days here expressing these questions), I still will vigorously defend the Church’s teachings.

For I know that if there’s a disconnect between my understanding and what Christ is proclaiming, most assuredly the problem lies with me.

Well said.

Ditto. See you at judgement day.

 

[CMatt25]

That is a mistake, Rence. Encouraging a Catholic to commit a grave evil is a grave evil in itself.

Guan, Rence can correct me if I misinterpret her. But I see her saying a Catholic woman has the right to choose not to have an abortion She is not doing what you accuse her of. But Catholic teaching can not be forced upon other women.

 

[PRmerger]

Are you seriously suggesting that women and children don’t die in pregnancy. Does that have to be proved?

This is an evasion.

Do you have any sources in which abortion was offered as a choice, the parents (is it ok to use the term “parents”, BTW, if it’s not a baby?) declined, and then the “mom” (is she a mom if it’s not a baby??) and “baby” died?

The reason I ask is, as a health care professional, I know how often we get it wrong in predicting, well, anything.

 

[guanophore]

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.

I find it curious that, when the woman wants the pregnacy, it IS a baby.

So, you define “baby” as one that can survive outside the womb?

By that definition, legal rights should be assigned at the point of viability.

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**.

That may be true for you, CMatt, but Catholics have Christ to grasp and live by. His Truth always supercedes the law of the land.

 

[PRmerger]

I don’t know exactly.

This is quite telling.

And, since you “don’t know exactly”, the moral thing to do is err on the side of caution, no?

That is, you wouldn’t shoot into a woods knowing that the shadow you saw might be a person, right? I mean, if you didn’t “know exactly” if it was a person or a clump of trees, the right thing to do would be to say, “Hmmm…it might be a human, or it might be a clump of trees, but I really, really wouldn’t want to be mistaken about it not being human.”

Right?

 

[guanophore]

He was judging a person was going to hell if they voted a certain way?

It is a sin to support other people’ s sins. Supporting people in office who will propagate sin is also a sin.

Sin separates people from God.

Hell is where those who have chosen to separate themselves from God live eternally.

 

[Toomey1979]

This is an evasion.

Do you have any sources in which abortion was offered as a choice, the parents (is it ok to use the term “parents”, BTW, if it’s not a baby?) declined, and then the “mom” (is she a mom if it’s not a baby??) and “baby” died?

The reason I ask is, as a health care professional, I know how often we get it wrong in predicting, well, anything.

Are you saying that, as a health care professional, there is no such complication in a pregnancy that can result in the death of the mother and child? Really?

 

[Toomey1979]

This is quite telling.

And, since you “don’t know exactly”, the moral thing to do is err on the side of caution, no?

That is, you wouldn’t shoot into a woods knowing that the shadow you saw might be a person, right? I mean, if you didn’t “know exactly” if it was a person or a clump of trees, the right thing to do would be to say, “Hmmm…it might be a human, or it might be a clump of trees, but I really, really wouldn’t want to be mistaken about it not being human.”

Right?

The side of caution would be allowing the woman to save her own life which you would oppose I presume.

 

[PRmerger]

I would consider a mother who did such a thing a murderer. Do you consider women have have abortions because pregnacies that will kill them murderers? Do you consider rape victims who get abortions murderers also?

Anyone who intentionally kills a human being is considered a murderer. That goes for the abortionist, as well as the woman.

Incidentally, it used to be an argument was proferred by the pro-aborts that it wasn’t a baby, just a clump of cells.

Now, I’m hearing a very, very chilling argument: some pro-aborts will acknowledge quite frankly (as science cannot be denied) that this is indeed a human life in the mom’s womb, but—

and here’s the chilling part that was sown in the depths of hell…

they argue that it doesn’t really matter that it’s a human being; the woman’s right to abort supercedes all.

 

[PRmerger]

The side of caution would be allowing the woman to save her own life which you would oppose I presume.

If you will provide me with some documentation (requested for the 3rd time I believe?) that there is an incident in which the woman must abort in order to save her life, we can then discuss.

 

[Toomey1979]

I find it curious that, when the woman wants the pregnacy, it IS a baby.

So, you define “baby” as one that can survive outside the womb?

By that definition, legal rights should be assigned at the point of viability.

.

I think different stages of development merits a different assesment of the situation. I don’t think aborting a 9 month fetus is any different than killing a newborn. But do I believe the same thing about a zygote that hasn’t been implanted…no. There are extremists on both sides of the issue. Sadly our church has taken the opposite extreme.

 

[century153]

Guan, Rence can correct me if I misinterpret her. But I see her saying a Catholic woman has the right to choose not to have an abortion She is not doing what you accuse her of. **But Catholic teaching can not be forced upon **other women.

As God never uses force and gives us a choice to serve Him or ourselves. Yes, I agree we cannot force our beliefs on anyone. If we walked in the love of God we would conquer the world for Christ – this is our challenge. The less I say, the better it will be.

 

[CMatt25]

Well hopefully the OP will have a better understanding of where I am coming from. I’ve done my best to relate that in this thread. The problem with asking for peoples views, thoughts, or opinions is that you will get them, whether you like them or not. Hopefully people will try and might come to understand each other along the way.

Amen

 

[Toomey1979]

If you will provide me with some documentation (requested for the 3rd time I believe?) that there is an incident in which the woman must abort in order to save her life, we can then discuss.

Okay, lets not discuss. If you don’t know that complications from pregnancies can kill both mother and child, I can’t help you. Go ask one of the doctors at your job.

 

[guanophore]

That is such a cop-out. There are circumstances (rare may they be) when a pregnancy will kill child and mother. Your position is to stand back, watch child and mother die, and then throw up your hands and say “Not my fault”. That’s not very pro-life is it? Pro-religion at the expense of a woman’s life maybe, but not pro-life.

No, Toomey, you are mistaken.

Unlike an abortion, which is not a “treatment” in any way, shape, or form, treatment is recommended for complicated pregnancies.

My point is that valuing life does not “force” anyone to do anything. The woman is not “forced” to carry the child by a pro-life postion. She has the opportunity to lay down her life for another who is also innocent.

 

[PRmerger]

Actually the Bible gives more value to the woman life over the fetus. Somewhere in Exodus.

This is a very good argument as to why Catholics do not use the Bible alone.

The Bible also says that tattoos are immoral. Thankfully, the Church has provided us with guidance as to how to interpret this.