Problem with the Catholic Church's teaching on abortion in cases of rape

[JoyfulTune]

That doesn’t make killing an innocent child a rational or proportional response to such an evil.

Bathsheba’s Child Dies​

2Samuel 12:13-18
13 David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.” Nathan said to David, “Now the Lord has put away your sin; you shall not die .
14 Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the Lord, the child that is born to you shall die. ”
15 Then Nathan went to his house.
The Lord struck the child that Uriah’s wife bore to David, and it became very ill.
16 David therefore pleaded with God for the child; David fasted , and went in and lay all night on the ground.
17 The elders of his house stood beside him, urging him to rise from the ground; but he would not, nor did he eat food with them.
18 On the seventh day the child died .

What slippery slope you present by making it okay to murder someone based on feelings ?

Your opinion is based on assumptions that consulting God in prayers, makes no difference, therefore her decision is based on merely feelings according to you. This shows that there is no faith in God in your argument. You think it is a matter of enforcing a human rule on the victim, and problem solved. Not true. It is the slippery slope to force a victim of rape to carry the child of the rapist.

 

[Sarcelle]

It’s difficult to accept this teaching. On the surface it is a hard teaching but if you think it through, it makes sense.

Killing the child will result in the death of an innocent party.

Piling another tragedy on top of another tragedy doesn’t undo the first tragedy.

The mother doesn’t have to raise the child. The child can be adopted into a loving family.

 

[JoyfulTune]

It’s difficult to accept this teaching. On the surface it is a hard teaching but if you think it through, it makes sense.

Killing the child will result in the death of an innocent party.

Piling another tragedy on top of another tragedy doesn’t undo the first tragedy.

The mother doesn’t have to raise the child. The child can be adopted into a loving family.

The question is whether it is by her free choice she does it, or, she is forced to do so.

 

[Sarcelle]

We all are forced by law to respect the right to life of others.

Her situation wouldn’t be any different. The baby is also her child and not just the child of the rapist.

The child did not cause the rape. The father did and he deserves to be punished.

 

[JoyfulTune]

We all are forced by law to respect the right to life of others.

Her situation wouldn’t be any different. The baby is also her child and not just the child of the rapist.

This is only your logic. You ignore God’s law & scriptures, by creating human rule that is unjust for the victim.

You disregard the fact that God may reject the child, as in King David case, he pleaded for the child. He fasted. God rejected the child anyway.

Thus you play God if you think you know God’s mind. You only assume God will forgive the incident. What if the child grow and become a rapist or serial killer? How do you know that injustice for the woman will not beget something as rotten as the rapist father’s will?

 

[Sarcelle]

We don’t know the mind of God, but this much is certain, nobody should be punished for the crime of another.

As for the child growing up to be just as rotten as the father, how would you know? Do you know what God knows?

If God himself rejects the child, the child will die of natural means. No need now for an abortion.

 

[JoyfulTune]

nobody should be punished from the crime of another.

God’s Law disagrees with your opinion. The child inherit the father’s punishment, up to 3rd & 4th generation.

As for the child growing up to be just as rotten as the father, how would you know? Do you know what God knows?

I do not know God’s mind. Therefore, pray for God’s grace. If you think God will listen to the moms prayer, you will believe that He will give her strength to carry the child too. You do not need to force her to do so. She will do it as according to God’s will.

Injustice towards the woman will not bear good fruit. Evil cannot bear good fruit.

 

[Sarcelle]

God’s Law disagrees with your opinion. The child inherit the father’s punishment, up to 3rd & 4th generation.

My grandmother was born due to rape.

What should my punishment be?

 

[Psalm30]

You ignore God’s law & scriptures, by creating human rule that is unjust for the victim.

You disregard the fact that God may reject the child, as in King David case, he pleaded for the child. He fasted. God rejected the child anyway.

This has nothing to do with anything we are talking about. God is perfectly entitled to give and take life. That it the point. It is up to HIM, not other humans, to end the lives of human beings. That’s why abortion is wrong, even in the case of rape.

That’s not to say it isn’t an extremely difficult scenario to be in. It is certainly a horrific situation and must be addressed with utmost compassion. I am simply saying that you cannot compare God striking down people in the Bible to abortion. It’s not the same because God has the authority to take life away—even innocent life—and humans do not.

 

[Psalm30]

God’s Law disagrees with your opinion. The child inherit the father’s punishment, up to 3rd & 4th generation.

This isn’t what the Catholic Church believes. What religion are you?

 

[Rau]

It comes up with ectopic pregnancies; and the Church’s position is that if the purpose and intent of the operation is to save the mother’s life and is not to abort the child, then the operation is morally acceptable.

In the case of ectopic pregnancy, the debate revolves around which procedure is acceptable treatment of the mother and which is a deadly attack on the child.

A good purpose is not sufficient to make the act good - what one does matters. This is why we also hold that the “ends do not justify the means”.

The difficulty is that most people who struggle with this issue cannot separate act from intent. The result may be the same, but the intent is radically different.

The wrong act, quite apart from intent, can condemn our course of action.

 

[Aulef]

Yesterday I read two essays that really opened my eyes regarding this topic. We should be arguing against abortion (any kind) in light of Church Tradition instead of the modern view of a human being (which was adopted by the Church post Vatican II)…

Both essays pointed out that using this modern view always lead to endless discussion because there is subjectivity involved.

 

[Rau]

I agree that life begins at conception in married couples. I do not think life begins at conception in rape cases. It begins whenever God’s forgiveness enters the victim’s heart.

A novel invention, but still a fiction. There must be zombies walking around, the children of mothers who never forgave…

 

[runningdude]

This is not a valid comparison.

God killed that child. A women who is raped is not God.

 

[Anicette]

God’s Law disagrees with your opinion. The child inherit the father’s punishment, up to 3rd & 4th generation.

All this, and many others of yours arguments come from Old Testament’s law.
The Catholic Church believes that the New Covenant have overspass the Mozaic law, and that we are not bound by many of what the Old Testament claim.

The logic you expose makes no sense for Catholics. Some Protestants, who are more free to interpret the Bible may hold some of your views. But to be fair, they must be few people. I have never heard of any important denomination who said the same thing as you, and never heard even a fundamentalist Evangelical claim the same thing.

 

[otjm]

In the case of ectopic pregnancy, the debate revolves around which procedure is acceptable treatment of the mother and which is a deadly attack on the child.

I have no idea what debate you are referring to.

From the National Catholic Bioethics Center, under FAQ is the document Ethical And Religious Directives For Catholic Health Services, Part 4: “47. Operations, treatments, and medications that have as their direct purpose the cure of a
proportionately serious pathological condition of a pregnant woman are permitted when
they cannot be safely postponed until the unborn child is viable, even if they will result in
the death of the unborn child.”

As in, if the intent of the surgery to correct an ectopic pregnancy is to save the mother’s life, then the death of the child, which is not the intent of the surgery, is not an abortion.

There may be debates among people who do not know the Church’s stance on the matter, and/or cannot understand the issue of intent and separate it from the facts.

In other words, you are wrong about the following statement:

The wrong act, quite apart from intent, can condemn our course of action.

 

[jeannetherese]

This is only your logic. You ignore God’s law & scriptures, by creating human rule that is unjust for the victim.

You disregard the fact that God may reject the child, as in King David case, he pleaded for the child. He fasted. God rejected the child anyway.

Thus you play God if you think you know God’s mind. You only assume God will forgive the incident. What if the child grow and become a rapist or serial killer? How do you know that injustice for the woman will not beget something as rotten as the rapist father’s will?

Are you now arguing that we should kill the children of sinners to avoid the risk of them becoming sinners as well?
This is not a Catholic argument.

 

[stpurl]

Before this person hid her or his profile it stated, “Raised Catholic but now chooses a more ecumenical approach.’

As I stated earlier, Ecumenical apparently equated to the Moloch approach.

 

[Rau]

Clearly you have not examined the subject widely. If I recall that document, you’ll read elsewhere that directly killing the child is never permitted, no matter circumstance or intention. The part you’ve quoted addresses treatments that may indirectly cause death.

The “means” adopted always matter. We can’t steal to give to charity. We can’t murder one innocent to save 100 others.

Have you studied moral theology? Are you aware that a direct abortion is just that, regardless of the motivation (intention) for it?

For example, many decades ago in cases where a baby’s head was too large to be born naturally, and cesarean was not within the ability of medical practice, some would advocate to crush the baby’s skull. Was this licit?

Treatments for ectopic pregnancy which by their nature directly attack the child are not licit. The licit treatment is to remove the section of tube involved. The child surely dies, but the object of the act (& “object” is not a reference to intention) is not the death of the child, though death is an inevitable consequence.

 

[JoyfulTune]

JoyfulTune:

God’s Law disagrees with your opinion. The child inherit the father’s punishment, up to 3rd & 4th generation.

My grandmother was born due to rape.

What should my punishment be?

I do not know to this answer.

I only know that human life is not merely biological. It is the light of God, the light that darkness cannot overcome.

I am sure, the grace of God has touched your family. And that explains why many people who are born of rape turns out to be good people. I am not denying this.

What I am denying is to make it compulsory for a rape victim to carry it, as if it is her responsibility, when actually it is not her reaponsibility to do so, according to the Law of God.

By nature alone, no bad tree can bear good fruit. It is only by God’s Grace, apart from the Law, that something evil can become good.