Pro-Life Catholics, how do you respond to this?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RCIAGraduate
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Erikaspirit16 said:
But only for a certain definition of “abortion” at that time. As I pointed out earlier, the Church as a whole, and numerous theologians (Jerome, Augustine, Aquinas, et al.) made a distinction between terminating a pregnancy before a certain point and after a certain point. After a certain point was murder. Before, it was not. Just as most people in the world see it today.
Click to expand...
After a certain point an abortion was considered murder because there was sufficient evidence that a human being had in fact been destroyed. Before that point an abortion was not defined as a murder because there was doubt as to what the entity was that was being terminated. That doubt no longer exists. Human life begins at conception. As to whether that human life is designated a human being is a political choice, not a scientific question.
 
I shall never vote for a Party that believes, supports, and funds murdering the unborn…period! I’d rather not vote at all if that’s my only option!
 
Last edited:
You might want to read that passage in context:


The Church teaching on the death penalty is very clear

https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2018/08/02/180802a.html

The death penalty

2267. Recourse to the death penalty on the part of legitimate authority, following a fair trial, was long considered an appropriate response to the gravity of certain crimes and an acceptable, albeit extreme, means of safeguarding the common good.

Today, however, there is an increasing awareness that the dignity of the person is not lost even after the commission of very serious crimes. In addition, a new understanding has emerged of the significance of penal sanctions imposed by the state. Lastly, more effective systems of detention have been developed, which ensure the due protection of citizens but, at the same time, do not definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption.

Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”,[1] and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.
 
I would agree that, objectively, there is good and evil. The problem is, how do we humans determine what is good and evil? The answer “The Church tells us” is not adequate–we are not robots. We have consciences and free will. Certainly we should listen to the Church’s position, but ultimately our conscience decides.

Not sure why you are connecting the two things. They have nothing to do with each other.

An act may be objectively evil, but it is not a sin if you don’t recognize that. Having recourse to “natural law” is meaningless if people interpret it differently.

You seem to be assuming that each individual has the ability to determine the absolute goodness or evilness of every action. We certainly try, but we often disagree as to what is “good” and what is “evil.” Once again, you are certainly entitled to your belief, but I don’t believe that. It has nothing to do with situation ethics, which you seem to be implying (“application in subjective circumstances”).
 
Last edited:
vz71 said:
In accepting abortion as a valid choice, abortion is approved of. And pro-abortion is the proper vocabulary to define that.
Click to expand...
Pro-choice is NOT pro-abortion. It is simply recognizing the fact that every individual has the right to decide what is right and wrong. If a position has enough popular support, you can make something illegal (polygamy, for example). So yes, you can impose your version of morality on others. But only if there is general consensus in society. In the case of abortion, there is absolutely no consensus in the US. [And of course–as I’ve said about a million times–this does not mean we vote on morality, etc. etc. It means that as a matter of political reality, a small minority–19% in the US approving making all abortions illegal–has no practical chance of imposing their will on the majority. It has nothing to do with morality, it has to do with political power.]
 
But my point is that the distinction between murder and self-defense (for example) is NOT always clear. And in the US there are a host of court cases about this.
 
Erikaspirit16 said:
Pro-choice is NOT pro-abortion. It is simply recognizing the fact that every individual has the right to decide what is right and wrong.
Click to expand...
That is God’s place. Not ours.
God has already specified abortion to be a grave evil.
One cannot be accepting of the choice of abortion without accepting the abortion.
 
Ender said:
After a certain point an abortion was considered murder because there was sufficient evidence that a human being had in fact been destroyed. Before that point an abortion was not defined as a murder because there was doubt as to what the entity was that was being terminated. That doubt no longer exists. Human life begins at conception. As to whether that human life is designated a human being is a political choice, not a scientific question.
Click to expand...
Of course this is the pro-life position. But it is not the scientific position. Nor is it related to my earlier post responding to someone who was talking about the Papal States–before 1867 church law was quite clear: terminating a pregnancy before movement was detected in the womb was NOT murder. That doesn’t mean that some individuals throughout history considered it murder. They did. But that wasn’t the official Church position, nor was it the position of the most prominent theologians.
 
vz71 said:
God has already specified abortion to be a grave evil.
Click to expand...
And once again the issue is: What do you mean by abortion? Abortion = always the murder of a human being is simply not believed by most people in the world. OK, let’s assume God says “abortion is evil.” And people say, “What do you mean by that?” And that’s the issue. It’s not that people are all evil and believe that they are doing evil acts. They just aren’t convinced of the same definitions that you are.
 
In past years, I had a squeamishness and contempt for the Slavic, Russophile world, , even to a painful level of contempt.
I set myself the task of emigrating to the West, no matter what it cost.
I went through a difficult road, I was in the shoes of an illegal immigrant, a despicable emigrant in Western Europe, but over time I understood a very important truth - one should not run where it is good, but create life better at home.
Maybe in Mexico or Honduras life is hard, but instead of emigration - try to change thе life there for the better.
The same applies to the inhabitants of Syria, Iraq, Sudan. Be the transformer of your country and you will become a MAN with a capital letter.
Even if you die a martyr, but you courageously accomplished your mission.
Do not compare emigration with abortion.
In the pro-life movement, I am pleasantly surprised by what is beginning to happen in the American States at the legislative level.
The transformations taking place in the USA are echoed and reflected in other countries of the world.
These revolutionary legislative changes will certainly affect many other countries in the world.
 
Last edited:
I would like to add that my thoughts do not relate to the context of any of the fascist methods of deportations to the wolf’s mouth.
If Pakistani or Libyan Christians are threatened with death in their homeland after being deported from the United States, then of course this cannot be tolerated.
 
Last edited:
Erikaspirit16 said:
They just aren’t convinced of the same definitions that you are.
Click to expand...
People can hide from truth for only so long before if catches up with them.
Whether that occurs in the here or in the hereafter will determine how much of a problem that is for them.
God has provided his church to help guide us. This church has told us God’s view of abortion.
Hide from it if you wish. I pray you do not.
 
Emigration and abortion are always associated with poverty. Recently, I watched a video report about how many young women have abortions.
But in these countries / regions the most hardworking and economic people. (every third / fourth woman has an abortion. and tge people from these states are the most diligent foreign workers who work abroad)
Then what is the problem?
The problem is in a dissolute way of life, - in parties, in drunkenness, in feasts.
And what? do they think that when they come to America they will be given everything, well, you just need to work hard, and you can manage every thing.
Vulgar contentment of life and hedonism, often the true causes of all problems.
 
Last edited:
vz71 said:
People can hide from truth for only so long before if catches up with them.
Whether that occurs in the here or in the hereafter will determine how much of a problem that is for them.
God has provided his church to help guide us. This church has told us God’s view of abortion.
Hide from it if you wish. I pray you do not.
Click to expand...
Using God as an argument against people who don’t believe will not bear any fruit. In this case, it’s hypothetical people, but nonetheless it won’t work.
 
Erikaspirit16 said:
An act may be objectively evil, but it is not a sin if you don’t recognize that. Having recourse to “natural law” is meaningless if people interpret it differently.
Click to expand...
It is still a sin when if you don’t know. One may be more or less culpable for committing said sin, but it is still a sin. In the case of abortion it is a grave sin.
Erikaspirit16 said:
Certainly we should listen to the Church’s position, but ultimately our conscience decides.
Click to expand...
The Church is the supreme authority on matters of faith and conscience, not the laity. The Church has declared abortion to be a grave sin. Your conscience doesn’t override that, unless you deny the faith.
 
Erikaspirit16 said:
Of course this is the pro-life position. But it is not the scientific position.
Click to expand...
Science is unambiguous on this point: life begins at conception. Science has nothing to say on whether neonatal human life is a human being. As I said, that is a political distinction.
…church law was quite clear: terminating a pregnancy before movement was detected in the womb was NOT murder.
Click to expand...
Yes, I acknowledged that. What I was explaining was why it was not considered murder: because at the time it was not in fact known exactly what embryonic life was. That doubt has now been resolved.
 
Ender said:
Science has nothing to say on whether neonatal human life is a human being.
Click to expand...
Mm, I might make the point— science agrees that the neonatal human life == a human being, because it has human DNA. So it’s a human being, even if it’s a human being at its earliest stages of development, because there’s no chance that it will ever magically develop into anything that isn’t human, like a chair or an elephant or a rock or a hamster.

But it doesn’t say anything about at what point that human life is worthy of the legal protections that go along with “personhood”, which is a moral/political/legal issue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top