Pro-choice Catholics

[PRmerger]

If you’re refering to who compiled the Bible PR, I’ve had Protestant friends tell me God could use whoever He wanted for whatever purpose He deemed.

Indeed.

But it seems rather curious that you seem to feel the CC made no errors in compiling the Bible.

Doesn’t that seem strange to you, Matt?

The Church got it right when it proclaims that God is love, and that your sins are forgiven, that Jesus and 2 natures, human and divine, and that Jesus is “the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

But the Church got it wrong when it proclaims that “whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery” or that women cannot be priests, or whatever other areas you’ve dissented.

Where the teachings of Christ are palatable to you, it seems you can assent. When it requires a little bit more, and requires you to change and conform your views, the *Church *gets it wrong?

:coffeeread:

 

[ishii]

If you are missing something it’s that I would support a very active govt social justice role even if I did not find Christ’s words about social justice in the Bible. And He did not say He would refuse a govt role if govt offered to help. I believe Christ would welcome any help for the poor and the sick He could get. I also don’t find the word abortion among the words of Jesus or anywhere in Scripture so unlike you I couldn’t tie it to theocratic reasoning even if I wanted to. What I do find in Scripture related to the fetus compared to a human born person I find in Ex 21:22, 23 which tells they are not on equal footing. But those are my beliefs and I don’t think I am alone in these beliefs among more liberal Christians. You are welcome to have yours too. Peace.

But I can find secular people who are also against abortion rights. The point is, of course, that you do support all of those active govt. programs because of the bible. Yet, you don’t call that theocratic. Then when a pro-lifer uses religious reasons for their opposition to abortion you call that theocratic. You say the word “abortion” is not in the bible - neither is the word “trinity” but I assume you believe in the trinity? The reason I keep coming back to this, CMatt is because the whole house of cards that you base your pro-choice position on is a lie. One would hope that those who espouse such a position would have the intellectual honesty to admit it. How about it, Cmatt?

Ishii

 

[PRmerger]

If a Catholic persistently supports abortion or rejects other doctrines of the Church they have
entered heresy. What do you want to call them?

I call them what the Church calls them:

my brothers and sisters in Christ.

Nothing more and certainly nothing less.

That they have divorced themselves from the heart of Christ is wretched and pitiful, nevertheless, I continue to call them by the same words my Church calls them.

 

[ishii]

The woman is the one with the right to consent or refuse treatment.

Ok, Rence. How about this: its 1845 and Frederick Douglas comes to you and asks you to help change the laws allowing slavery. Is your answer: “the slaveowner has the right to keep slaves by law” ??

Or its the 1930’s and the Nazis are herding up Jews to be taken to concentration camps: Is your answer: “the Nazi has the right to kill the Jew by law” ???

Or its 1980 in South Africa and Nelson Mandela writes to you and asks you to disinvest in South African investments that support Apartheid. Is you answer, “sorry Nelson, Apartheid is the law” ???

I would much appreciate an answer to these questions…

Ishii

 

[estesbob]

I don’t set myself up of anything of the sort. I do not proclaim infallibilty. Only that I inform, reason and pray. Opening my heart to God’s Spirit trying to discern what He is speaking to my conscience.

If your conscience is telling you you can support abortion it is not God who is speaking to it.

 

[lil_flower_luv]

Well said.

 

[PRmerger]

Oh my.

Are you saying that the author of the first quote you gave regarding following one’s conscience was fro the KKK?

 

[PRmerger]

Oh! <wishing there were a smilie icon of a person fanning herself in recovery!>

That is certainly reassuring!

The second quote is Margaret Sanger. Martin Luther King was the recipitent of a Margaret Sanger award, named after her. I wonder how he as a particular champion of the most famous civil rights struggle in America might have felt her quotes reflected on inclusiveness in a society where social justice is to be strived for. I also wonder how many people are actual aware of this aspect of Sanger’s thinking.

Ah. I see now.

The irony is striking indeed.

 

[Tigg]

If your conscience is telling you you can support abortion it is not God who is speaking to it.

AMEN to that!

 

[catharina]

Not quite Tigg. I believe it is from God from Whom ultimately we shall know the truth. Until then we walk by faith. Not by sight.

You seem to saying (repeatedly) that you expect
**to know all at the second coming of Christ ** - and that’s sufficient.

Well, in that case, you lose as do all self-defined Christians who
are expected to know and follow and TEACH truth right here and now.

What excuse is there for one who has received truth and turned away from it?
Not much excuse and very little hope in the future.

As Jesus teaches us (Luke 9:62):

(To him) Jesus said, **“No one who sets a hand to the plow
and looks to what was left behind is fit for the kingdom of God.” **
As for the grand fantasies so often paraded here:
those who imagine a face-to-face explanatory session with Jesus?
I can’t see that happening for anyone. EVER.

 

[catharina]

There are Christian denominations which do not subscribe to your faith in the interpretations of the Catholic Church about the Author of life or who do not subscribe to your faith in what the Catholic Church interprets Herself to be or in ECFs. There are Christian denominations that are pro choice. So then if you are suggesting these are not Christians, you must disagree with your CCC that these baptized Christians in fact are.

All Christians follow Christ - or abandon Him.
It has always been that way.

To pretend that an individual’s questions allow
for free dissent is to hold to huge error.

In the end - faithful Christians prevail -
and the Christians who abandoned Him are banished.

As St. Paul teaches:

“All depends on faith.
Everything is grace.”

IOW, **as we are faithful, so grace does provide **both answers and peace.
Those who abandon faith will receive no truth-filled answers.

 

[catharina]

No apologies needed.
We are within our rights to defend our faith.
At times, the discussion can become passionate.

 

[Tigg]

Now you’ve gone and done it! Indeed, the ties between Planned Parenthood and Sanger’s hatred of blacks with their disproportionate number of abortions cannot be denied.

 

[Rence]

Originally Posted by Rence
You’re right, a pregnancy is not some sort of disease that needs treatment. However, it makes physiological changes in a woman’s body that can sometimes cause problems for her, such as hypertension and diabetes. And can sometimes exaserbate underlying problems such as pulmonary hypertension or heart disease. These are realities. And the reality is, there are many ways to treat these problems, and it’s just as much a reality that sometimes they cannot be treated and the woman is at dire risk if the pregnancy is continued. One can say that it’s the “sacrifice of lifetime” for a woman to risk her life to continue that pregnancy, and of course it is, but it is also her choice.

There are simply no medical circumstances in which an abortion would be required to save the life of a woman.

Sorry, untrue. There is no way to make the claim that “no medical circumstances etc”. There is no way a person can make that determination in each individual case unless one studies the woman’s chart and has medical knowledge related to that case.

Quote:
A Catholic may not feel like they have a choice…and they don’t if they want to remain in communion with the Church . However, it’s still their choice as it is when the patient is not Catholic at all.

Please afford me the curtesy of not changing my words. Write your own words please Mine are correct as my own words. I typed “communion with the Church” and that’s exactly what I meant.

Quote:
Abortion, like it or not, is a sanctioned medical-surgical procedure, and sometimes is prescribed for the cases above.

This is the most irrelevant of arguments.
.

Irrelevant for you, and that’s okay. Not irrelevent at all legally. And that’s all that matters.

 

[Rence]

Ok, Rence. How about this: its 1845 and Frederick Douglas comes to you and asks you to help change the laws allowing slavery. Is your answer: “the slaveowner has the right to keep slaves by law” ??

Or its the 1930’s and the Nazis are herding up Jews to be taken to concentration camps: Is your answer: “the Nazi has the right to kill the Jew by law” ???

Or its 1980 in South Africa and Nelson Mandela writes to you and asks you to disinvest in South African investments that support Apartheid. Is you answer, “sorry Nelson, Apartheid is the law” ???

I would much appreciate an answer to these questions…
Ishii

I’m sorry I have no way to answer those questions…do you have any questions related to the topic of this thread?

 

[catharina]

Rence[/B]

;7512576]Sorry, untrue. There is no way to make the claim that “no medical circumstances etc”. There is no way a person can make that determination in each individual case unless one studies the woman’s chart and has medical knowledge related to that case.

Please afford me the curtesy of not changing my words. Write your own words please Mine are correct as my own words. I typed “communion with the Church” and that’s exactly what I meant.

Irrelevant for you, and that’s okay. **Not irrelevent at all legally. And that’s all that matters./**QUOTE]

rence, Your support of something (due to its legality) is horrifying.

“Ah, Miss Rence … Welcome to China.
You’re pregnant again? This is your second child?
We MUST kill this baby - but it’s legal to do so.
Feel better now???”

 

[Tigg]

“We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”
(Margaret Sanger’s December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in Linda Gordon’s Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America. New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976)

**“The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”**Margaret Sanger (editor).
(The Woman Rebel, Volume I, Number 1. Reprinted in Woman and the New Race. New York: Brentanos Publishers, 1922.)

“The undeniably feeble-minded should, indeed, not only be discouraged but prevented from propagating their kind.”
(Margaret Sanger, quoted in Charles Valenza. “Was Margaret Sanger a Racist?” Family Planning Perspectives, January-February 1985, page 44.)

 

[PRmerger]

Sorry, untrue. There is no way to make the claim that “no medical circumstances etc”.

Ah, the irony!

[SIGN1]There is simply NO WAY that any medical professional can say, “You will die unless you have an abortion.”[/SIGN1]

There is no way a person can make that determination in each individual case unless one studies the woman’s chart and has medical knowledge related to that case.

Even better than that, studying the woman herself will not be able to predict that she will die without an abortion.

That is simply ga-ga la-la medicine one is practicing.

Please afford me the curtesy of not changing my words. Write your own words please Mine are correct as my own words. I typed “communion with the Church” and that’s exactly what I meant.

Actually, I used a BB code that is available to forum members.

Clearly, anyone who mis-read that quote to think it was actually YOU saying it is not paying attention.

And the BB code is quite trenchant, is it not?

[SIGN1]A Catholic may not feel like they have a choice…and they don’t if they want to remain in communion with the-] Church/-] Christ.
[/SIGN1]

Irrelevant for you, and that’s okay. Not irrelevent at all legally. And that’s all that matters.

What relevance does “legal” have in a discussion about Pro-choice Catholics? Not much.

As was quite pointedly referenced by ishii, “legal” is often irrelevant to “moral”.

To wit:

Ok, Rence. How about this: its 1845 and Frederick Douglas comes to you and asks you to help change the laws allowing slavery. Is your answer: “the slaveowner has the right to keep slaves by law” ??

Or its the 1930’s and the Nazis are herding up Jews to be taken to concentration camps: Is your answer: “the Nazi has the right to kill the Jew by law” ???

Or its 1980 in South Africa and Nelson Mandela writes to you and asks you to disinvest in South African investments that support Apartheid. Is you answer, “sorry Nelson, Apartheid is the law” ???

I would much appreciate an answer to these questions…
Ishii

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Please afford me the curtesy of not changing my words. Write your own words please Mine are correct as my own words. I typed “communion with the Church” and that’s exactly what I meant.

QUOTE]

I think (correct me if I am wrong) she means sinning against the Church is no different than sinning against Christ. By consenting to abortion, one severs their relationship with Christ.

 

[Rence]

Rence;7512576:

Please afford me the curtesy of not changing my words. Write your own words please Mine are correct as my own words. I typed “communion with the Church” and that’s exactly what I meant.

I think (correct me if I am wrong) she means sinning against the Church is no different than sinning against Christ. By consenting to abortion, one severs their relationship with Christ.

Yes, I know, thank you Mary Gail. The point though, is that I meant what I typed and meant it the way I typed it. And the person who changed what I wrote, while quoting me, knew that