E
Elf01
Guest
What about the children of murderers? Should they be killed?
Problem with the Catholic Church's teaching on abortion in cases of rape
- Status
J
JoyfulTune
Guest
Last edited:
E
Elf01
Guest
Why not? And why not the rapists born children?
J
JoyfulTune
Guest
The child of a rapist is the direct fruit of the crime act. The victim has no responsibility to give her womb to the person who rape her so that it becomes his heir. She has freewill to do. But if she choose not to, she is not a murderer.
Jehu was not condemned/ punished as murderer having killed all Ahab’s male descendants, God rewarded him.
Jehu was not condemned/ punished as murderer having killed all Ahab’s male descendants, God rewarded him.
Last edited:
E
Elf01
Guest
Ahabs crime wasn’t rape.
Right, what about if she decides the child looks like their father and kills them after they were born?
Or killing the actual criminal i.e. the man who raped her? I notice you haven’t answered that despite me having asked you before.
J
JoyfulTune
Guest
All I wanted to say is this:
By GRACE, Jesus teaches us: “if somebody slap you on your cheek, give him the other cheek”. But if then you change that teaching and say “if you don’t give the other cheek, then you are a bad person”, then that is perversion of what Jesus say.
That perversion happens because you use the teaching of Grace to condemn the victim
By GRACE, Jesus teaches us: “if somebody slap you on your cheek, give him the other cheek”. But if then you change that teaching and say “if you don’t give the other cheek, then you are a bad person”, then that is perversion of what Jesus say.
That perversion happens because you use the teaching of Grace to condemn the victim
Last edited:
E
Elf01
Guest
No answers to my questions I note. And I know why, you know it’s wrong to kill a born child for their parents crime, but admitting it breaks your logic.
R
Rau
Guest
Would it be ok for her to kill the child after birth?
S
stpurl
Guest
Really? The law of GOD? You know, the one who created those and all other children in the womb???
You dare to claim that God does not see an innocent child as innocent? You dare to misinterpret Scripture and claim your misinterpretation as “God’s law?”
You dare to sit in judgment on an innocent child while claiming you are only ‘supporting’ the poor mother, yet your support leads to her committing a crime (murder) greater than that which was forced upon her?
You dare to claim that God’s law is ‘two wrongs make a right’ and that He creates beings whom He supposedly ‘hates’ from their conception, not for any wrong which they have personally done, but because of the action of their fathers which somehow calls for their ‘extinction’, whereas children conceived out of wedlock, through fornication and adultery which are equally mortal sins along with rape, are somehow not to be considered as suffering the sins of their fathers and who may NOT be killed with impunity?
. . . .
Still no one is beyond God’s reach and now all I can do is pray that you will open your mind and heart to TRUTH.
You dare to claim that God does not see an innocent child as innocent? You dare to misinterpret Scripture and claim your misinterpretation as “God’s law?”
You dare to sit in judgment on an innocent child while claiming you are only ‘supporting’ the poor mother, yet your support leads to her committing a crime (murder) greater than that which was forced upon her?
You dare to claim that God’s law is ‘two wrongs make a right’ and that He creates beings whom He supposedly ‘hates’ from their conception, not for any wrong which they have personally done, but because of the action of their fathers which somehow calls for their ‘extinction’, whereas children conceived out of wedlock, through fornication and adultery which are equally mortal sins along with rape, are somehow not to be considered as suffering the sins of their fathers and who may NOT be killed with impunity?
. . . .
Still no one is beyond God’s reach and now all I can do is pray that you will open your mind and heart to TRUTH.
Last edited:
J
JoyfulTune
Guest
No.JoyfulTune:
Would it be ok for her to kill the child after birth?
She had to decide before the fetus has nostrils, and she shall not change her mind after it has its nostrils.
But abortion should not be allowed for couples who are legally married (child conceived within legally/ sacramentally/ any promise of faithfulness vow between one man and one woman in the context of love), life begins at conception is true for the fetus conceived within faithful love of the parents.
Life does not begin at conception, if the woman is raped. There is graceful time for the victim to decide. And she is not a murderer if she decide within this time not to continue the pregnancy.
Genesis 2:7
7 then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being.
Genesis 1:27-28
27 So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.
28 God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it…
The rapist father does not represent the image of God when he raped the woman. The woman is the image of God for the fetus, whenever she decide to keep it. The Church should pray and teach the image of God for all humanity.
Single mothers should not be shamed. Motherhood is based on DNA.
Fatherhood shall be based on faithfulness to the woman, just as Jesus faithfulness to the church. Fatherhood is not DNA based. To give faithful men their heirs, pleases God. To give rapists heirs, didpleases God.
Last edited:
R
Rau
Guest
So you must hold no child is alive until the nostrils can take in breath?
You are very inventive!!
E
Elf01
Guest
Even if the husband rapes his wife?
So life knows if a woman has been raped and waits to begin?
J
JoyfulTune
Guest
How do you explain this verse:
Yahweh said to Hosea::
Hosea 2:6
How could I love her children? They are children of adultery.
If all lives begins at conception, why God said to Hosea the above verse?
Yahweh said to Hosea::
Hosea 2:6
How could I love her children? They are children of adultery.
If all lives begins at conception, why God said to Hosea the above verse?
S
StudentMI
Guest
I’ll admit that’s a troubling verse.
S
stpurl
Guest
Surely you must possess a commentary on this verse and others —though I have it as verse 4 not 6.
God does not ‘have mercy’ on those who, after birth, act in the way of evil. They are called children of adultery not because their personal individual mother was an adulteress but because, in knowing the faith (Jewish in the OT, Christian in the NT) they deliberately rejected it, and thus chose as their father Satan, the “Father of lies”.
Again, this does not make the mother of a person who rejects God an adulteress. It makes the person who rejects God a person who chooses to reject God’s fatherhood in favor of Satan’s fatherhood. Since humanity belongs to God, those who reject Him and choose Satan are thus making their original choice of faith —the righteous marriage fruit—into an adulterous one themselves.
This passage in no way was ever interpreted by any Christian in the way you have interpreted it. (Same BTW with your incredibly weird ‘nostrils’ passage).
You, madam, are a lapsed Catholic who has, unfortunately, chosen to be fruit of an adulterous relationship yourself by rejecting God in favor of Satan who is drawing you from Truth and feeding you lies which you mistake as truth and attempt to pass on to others.
The Good News is that even now you can turn away from your errors, reject adultery, and rejoice in God’s saving grace. I pray you do so.
God does not ‘have mercy’ on those who, after birth, act in the way of evil. They are called children of adultery not because their personal individual mother was an adulteress but because, in knowing the faith (Jewish in the OT, Christian in the NT) they deliberately rejected it, and thus chose as their father Satan, the “Father of lies”.
Again, this does not make the mother of a person who rejects God an adulteress. It makes the person who rejects God a person who chooses to reject God’s fatherhood in favor of Satan’s fatherhood. Since humanity belongs to God, those who reject Him and choose Satan are thus making their original choice of faith —the righteous marriage fruit—into an adulterous one themselves.
This passage in no way was ever interpreted by any Christian in the way you have interpreted it. (Same BTW with your incredibly weird ‘nostrils’ passage).
You, madam, are a lapsed Catholic who has, unfortunately, chosen to be fruit of an adulterous relationship yourself by rejecting God in favor of Satan who is drawing you from Truth and feeding you lies which you mistake as truth and attempt to pass on to others.
The Good News is that even now you can turn away from your errors, reject adultery, and rejoice in God’s saving grace. I pray you do so.
E
Elf01
Guest
The children were born at that point, so if a man finds out that one of the children he thought was his, was actually from adultery can he kill the child after birth?
J
JoyfulTune
Guest
I think my position I have stated quite clear: once a fetus have nostrils (at around 6weeks of pregnancy), it should not be killed. Reason: Genesis 2:7.
Please don’t mix the above with hosea 2:6 which is my argument against all lives begin at conception.
Last edited:
S
sealabeag
Guest
This verse is God speaking to Hosea about Israel and their infidelity, and their “adultery” with pagan Gods. The children are the people of Israel who have insulted God with their behaviour and deserve his punishment. And yet he is always merciful beyond what we deserve.
A
AlNg
Guest
I think that the poster is talking about original sin which is the sin of our “parents” or distant parents which is passed down to each person and removed by baptism. We did not do anything wrong at birth but still we are stained with the original sin of our ancient parents.
A
AlNg
Guest
I am too, as i like the pacifist position of the JW to refuse to fight in a war. I see a lot of injustice in just about every war, but there is the Catholic teaching on “just war” in which presumably it would be OK to defend your country against an unjust aggressor and killing an enemy in self defense would be allowed?
- Status