Reasons for Abortion

[simpleas]

Not sure if I should have put this here or in family life, so please move if I’m wrong.

I wondered if anyone knew what the church said and did when abortion was being made legal. Here in UK I believe it was 1967 when it was made legal, but what was being said about the process? When I was on a prolife march a few years ago, a older lady told me she heard about it, but she didn’t understand the whole process, so this got me thinking, were people really informed about abortion? Enough to want to take to the streets like it is being done now? I know we are in a very different time, there was no internet, maybe information was limited, or perhaps most Catholics just didn’t think about it, because they wouldn’t at that time believe in the “right” of a woman to abort?

Another thought/question, would be on the reason. There are many sites on the net that give different reasons for women choosing abortion, and in some cases being forced into abortion. I was thinking about the shame aspect of having sex outside of marriage, or indeed an affair or possible drunken one night stand. Of course it’s right and proper to inform children of a reasonable age about intercourse which may lead to pregnacy, but if for whatever reason a young woman concieves outside of marriage, isn’t it best to have encouraged the woman to tell their parent, rather than they believe that what they did is sinful, and feeling ashamed go to a doctor, who will most likely I believe offer the morning after pill?
I know situations in life can be very complicated, and most people I know are not religious and consider abortion to be right if you are not ready for a child, or not in a comitted relationship, rather than it being shameful to have sex outside of marriage. But would the stigma attached to shame for having sex outside of marriage be one of the reasons women would have an abortion? Maybe back in the 1960’s for example?

 

[thistle]

Not sure if I should have put this here or in family life, so please move if I’m wrong.

I wondered if anyone knew what the church said and did when abortion was being made legal. Here in UK I believe it was 1967 when it was made legal, but what was being said about the process? When I was on a prolife march a few years ago, a older lady told me she heard about it, but she didn’t understand the whole process, so this got me thinking, were people really informed about abortion? Enough to want to take to the streets like it is being done now? I know we are in a very different time, there was no internet, maybe information was limited, or perhaps most Catholics just didn’t think about it, because they wouldn’t at that time believe in the “right” of a woman to abort?

Another thought/question, would be on the reason. There are many sites on the net that give different reasons for women choosing abortion, and in some cases being forced into abortion. I was thinking about the shame aspect of having sex outside of marriage, or indeed an affair or possible drunken one night stand. Of course it’s right and proper to inform children of a reasonable age about intercourse which may lead to pregnacy, but if for whatever reason a young woman concieves outside of marriage, isn’t it best to have encouraged the woman to tell their parent, rather than they believe that what they did is sinful, and feeling ashamed go to a doctor, who will most likely I believe offer the morning after pill?
I know situations in life can be very complicated, and most people I know are not religious and consider abortion to be right if you are not ready for a child, or not in a comitted relationship, rather than it being shameful to have sex outside of marriage. But would the stigma attached to shame for having sex outside of marriage be one of the reasons women would have an abortion? Maybe back in the 1960’s for example?

There are NO reasons to justify a direct abortion. It is not permitted under any circumstances.

 

[AnnArbor]

There are NO reasons to justify a direct abortion. It is not permitted under any circumstances.

I don’t believe the OP was suggesting there were. I think the point was that the stigmatization of extra-marital sex may have contributed to the social acceptance of abortion.

To the OP: there were protests, phone campaigns, etc. in the early '70s in the US, when abortion was legalized here.

 

[simpleas]

I don’t believe the OP was suggesting there were. I think the point was that the stigmatization of extra-marital sex may have contributed to the social acceptance of abortion.

To the OP: there were protests, phone campaigns, etc. in the early '70s in the US, when abortion was legalized here.

Thanks.

I think my OP was abit long winded. Yes, I was thinking on how it became a social norm among many societies. I know from some history that people did use methods of contraception to avoid conception, and methods to end a pregnancy. There are many reasons for this (not saying it is right) But I wanted to know what the church did to make it’s voice heard.

 

[simpleas]

There are NO reasons to justify a direct abortion. It is not permitted under any circumstances.

I was not suggesting it was. If as I see it now, abortion is sometimes used because a child is inconvient, before this excuse, why were women choosing abortion, that it needed to become legal? I believe it was made legal for medical safety reasons for the women, instead of back street clinics.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I was not suggesting it was. If as I see it now, abortion is sometimes used because a child is inconvient, before this excuse, why were women choosing abortion, that it needed to become legal? I believe it was made legal for medical safety reasons for the women, instead of back street clinics.

Well that’s what Planned Parenthood would LIKE you to believe, but there was no mass demonstration of women demanding ‘safe’ abortion because of hundreds of thousands of ‘back alley’ deaths.

It was all a part of the sexual revolution. Do you realize that at the same time that abortions were being made legal, in the 1960s and 1970s, the contraceptive pill was already on the market and widely available? That natural family planning had always been available? Condoms, foams, etc?

As we still see today, emotionalism and ‘sad sad stories’ were used in order to push through morally repugnant actions, or to present the actions as being not evil, but good.

Look at society today. “FEELINGS” are hurt, and people scream for RIGHTS.

What about the right of the unborn child? Notice how that conveniently was swept away (first we were told the child was simply ‘cells’ or a ‘blob of tissue, not sentient’; then we were told that oh well, yeah it was a baby BUT having the child born to a parent who hated or resented not being able to ‘terminate’ would be so much WORSE wah wah wah. )And look at the words, "abort’, ‘therapeutic’, ‘termination’, ‘products of conception’, embryo, fetus . . cold, clinical. . . And you don’t hear the woman being called ‘mother’, oh heck no. It’s the poor young woman. . .the VICTIMIZED woman, the good woman stretched already too much to be able to ‘adequately care’ for ‘further offspring’ etc.

And as I’m sure many have pointed out, the majority of Planned Parenthood’s TARGETS were people of color. The middle class whites who now make up a rather substantial number of clients weren’t the original targets, but hey, these procedures make money. (they really do). And hey, we don’t need too many more affluent whites, right? Have fewer people and there’s more money to go around for THEM.

There was, I repeat, never a NEED for abortion to become legal.

.

 

[Convert1]

Great Britain actually preceded the US in passing it’s abortion laws.

“In Britain, the Abortion Law Reform Association continued its campaigning after the War, and this, combined with broad social changes brought the issue of abortion back into the political arena in the 1960s. President of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists John Peel chaired the committee advising the British Government on what became the 1967 Abortion Act. On the grounds of reducing the amount of disease and death associated with illegal abortion, the Abortion Act allowed for legal abortion on a number of grounds, including to prevent grave permanent injury to the woman’s physical or mental health, to avoid injury to the physical or mental health of the woman or her existing child(ren) if the pregnancy was still under 28 weeks, or if the child was likely to be severely physically or mentally handicapped. The free provision of abortions was provided through the National Health Service.[99]”

The US passed similar laws in 1969. Christians as early as St. Augustine have spoken out against abortion. His position was “killing an unborn child is murder”. It still is, despite whatever law one wishes to quote to attempt to justify the act.

 

[powerofk]

The US passed similar laws in 1969. Christians as early as St. Augustine have spoken out against abortion. His position was “killing an unborn child is murder”. It still is, despite whatever law one wishes to quote to attempt to justify the act.

Actually, Christians have been speaking out against abortion since the first century. The Didache, a first-century Christian text which may have actually preceded the gospels (though not included in the Bible, more than likely due to it being considered extraneous), specifically banned abortion. Abortion (or at least attempts at abortion) - along with infanticide - were rampant in the Roman empire, and Christians would often rescue infants left to die by exposure and starvation.

 

[CthgeDelendaEst]

Thanks.

I think my OP was abit long winded. Yes, I was thinking on how it became a social norm among many societies. I know from some history that people did use methods of contraception to avoid conception, and methods to end a pregnancy. There are many reasons for this (not saying it is right) But I wanted to know what the church did to make it’s voice heard.

The Church could do a lot more, like excommunicating pro-abortion politicians. Joe Biden should be a pariah in the church until he publicly repents and renounces his stance, yet he is still being given Holy Communion. There are lots of other examples.

I think one of the reasons the Church (in the U.S. anyway) doesn’t do much beyond the occasional rosary outside the clinic is because of their tax exempt status. The U.S. government bought the compliance of the great majority of Christian churches with the 501(c)(3) exemption. In exchange for silence on abortion (and that’s not all) the churches get to keep some filthy lucre. Ditch the exemption, taxes or no taxes, and tell the truth.

 

[JerryZ]

I would also like to point out that back in the 60’s the Catholic Church had zero (0) impact on British society.

So whatever point they (the Church) might have it would have not been considered as relevant or worthy of consideration.
Mind you many people even “catholics” still persist in this attitude. uch:

---

 

[friardchips]

The Church could do a lot more, like excommunicating pro-abortion politicians.

In exchange for silence on abortion (and that’s not all) the churches get to keep some filthy lucre.

Hardly. :dts:

• stick to politicians.

 

[friardchips]

Well that’s what Planned Parenthood would LIKE you to believe, but there was no mass demonstration of women demanding ‘safe’ abortion because of hundreds of thousands of ‘back alley’ deaths.

You’ve read the same book!

It was all a part of the sexual revolution. Do you realize that at the same time that abortions were being made legal, in the 1960s and 1970s, the contraceptive pill was already on the market and widely available? That natural family planning had always been available? Condoms, foams, etc?

Abortions can be traced as far back as 2500 bc, in the Far East. Sexual Rev. may have increased the numbers in the West.

As we still see today, emotionalism and ‘sad sad stories’ were used in order to push through morally repugnant actions, or to present the actions as being not evil, but good.

The sad thing is that not only is it the unborn who suffer but the women. They are fed lies and not given support. Apart from support-to-abort, all the way to the operating table.

Not enough pressure is put on doctors. They get away with it because they’re doctors.

Look at society today. “FEELINGS” are hurt, and people scream for RIGHTS.

What about the right of the unborn child? Notice how that conveniently was swept away (first we were told the child was simply ‘cells’ or a ‘blob of tissue, not sentient’; then we were told that oh well, yeah it was a baby BUT having the child born to a parent who hated or resented not being able to ‘terminate’ would be so much WORSE wah wah wah. )And look at the words, "abort’, ‘therapeutic’, ‘termination’, ‘products of conception’, embryo, fetus . . cold, clinical. . . And you don’t hear the woman being called ‘mother’, oh heck no. It’s the poor young woman. . .the VICTIMIZED woman, the good woman stretched already too much to be able to ‘adequately care’ for ‘further offspring’ etc.

They didn’t have ultra-sound (I think) until the 1970s and this was enough for many doctors to rethink what they were doing. Just not enough of them did.

And as I’m sure many have pointed out, the majority of Planned Parenthood’s TARGETS were people of color. The middle class whites who now make up a rather substantial number of clients weren’t the original targets, but hey, these procedures make money. (they really do). And hey, we don’t need too many more affluent whites, right? Have fewer people and there’s more money to go around for THEM.

I don’t think there was any conspiracy or racial hatred at the core of all this. We were and are living in a culture of death.

The people who are at the fore-front of all this are megalomaniac doctors who let their positions go to their heads, and were enticed easily by MONEY. MONEY. MONEY.

There was, I repeat, never a NEED for abortion to become legal.

Before abortion was illegal there were many, as you said, backstreet abortions, and apparently they were not pretty sites when viewed, after the women would come in bleeding and many dying, from botch home-jobs.

However, not that this was an excuse or the reason it was made legal. It was made legal because of money. And evil.

 

[friardchips]

Not sure if I should have put this here or in family life, so please move if I’m wrong.

I wondered if anyone knew what the church said and did when abortion was being made legal. Here in UK I believe it was 1967 when it was made legal, but what was being said about the process? When I was on a prolife march a few years ago, a older lady told me she heard about it, but she didn’t understand the whole process, so this got me thinking, were people really informed about abortion? Enough to want to take to the streets like it is being done now? I know we are in a very different time, there was no internet, maybe information was limited, or perhaps most Catholics just didn’t think about it, because they wouldn’t at that time believe in the “right” of a woman to abort?

I think you’ve made a good point. It might be that people didn’t have the internet, to help learn that there were people who could support them, during difficult times. Maybe the internet will slowly change people’s views.

Another thought/question, would be on the reason. There are many sites on the net that give different reasons for women choosing abortion, and in some cases being forced into abortion. I was thinking about the shame aspect of having sex outside of marriage, or indeed an affair or possible drunken one night stand. Of course it’s right and proper to inform children of a reasonable age about intercourse which may lead to pregnacy, but if for whatever reason a young woman concieves outside of marriage, isn’t it best to have encouraged the woman to tell their parent, rather than they believe that what they did is sinful, and feeling ashamed go to a doctor, who will most likely I believe offer the morning after pill?

I don’t know if doctors would have made them feel ashamed but they definitely had their tactics. Certainly, right advice would be to tell parents, if the parents appreciated the sanctity of life themselves. In a closed-in society where the emphasis was on shame rather than love, it is more understandable how women felt pressured into these things. I think it all started with male chauvanism (and this is coming from a male). I don’t believe the Catholic Church would have ever favoured abortion which is maybe why they had orphanages. Thank goodness for the Second Vatican Council, which deepened our understanding of our belief, taking us away from the blame-game, guilt trip. And now we can be open rather than pent up with a “fortress mentality” (as someone put it).

I know situations in life can be very complicated, and most people I know are not religious and consider abortion to be right if you are not ready for a child, or not in a comitted relationship, rather than it being shameful to have sex outside of marriage. But would the stigma attached to shame for having sex outside of marriage be one of the reasons women would have an abortion? Maybe back in the 1960’s for example?

Yes. It probably would not have helped the situation but these things are rarely down to one thing. The problem is that if we relax the rules on ‘relations’ outside of marriage this lowers the bar for all manner of nonsense to creep in and then basically devalues in people’s minds, the meaning of the gift, of the conjugal act.

This would be an argument that liberal extremists would argue to make the Church out to be intolerant but their arguments are in vain as this line of argument just leads to more and more promiscuity and less and less security in marriage, family and love.

 

[friardchips]

Tantum ergo - typo - I meant: “Before abortion was legal there were many, as you said, backstreet abortions…”

 

[triumphguy]

I don’t believe the OP was suggesting there were. I think the point was that the stigmatization of extra-marital sex may have contributed to the social acceptance of abortion.

To the OP: there were protests, phone campaigns, etc. in the early '70s in the US, when abortion was legalized here.

I remember going on a huge march in Liverpool in 1967 and my mum with us 5 kids in tow being screamed at and called a whore by a group wimmins libbers.

We also had the right honourable Cyril Smith MP*, whose mother had considered abortion, but who gave him up for adoption instead, as one of the main speakers.

The church at the time did a lot to mobilize people against abortion. But I think even those who drafted the initial legislation didn;t realize the slippery slope they were on.

*and yes I know about the recent allegations.

 

[triumphguy]

I would also like to point out that back in the 60’s the Catholic Church had zero (0) impact on British society.

So whatever point they (the Church) might have it would have not been considered as relevant or worthy of consideration.
Mind you many people even “catholics” still persist in this attitude. uch:

---

I beg to differ.

 

[friardchips]

I beg to differ.

Ditto.

 

[Rau]

…Of course it’s right and proper to inform children of a reasonable age about intercourse which may lead to pregnacy, but if for whatever reason a young woman concieves outside of marriage, isn’t it best to have encouraged the woman to tell their parent, rather than they believe that what they did is sinful, and feeling ashamed…

One hopes the parent/child relationship is one of trust, and that knowledge of the wrongness of their act does not dissuade them from the proper course.

I know situations in life can be very complicated, and most people I know are not religious and consider abortion to be right if you are not ready for a child, or not in a comitted relationship, rather than it being shameful to have sex outside of marriage. But would the stigma attached to shame for having sex outside of marriage be one of the reasons women would have an abortion? Maybe back in the 1960’s for example?

50+ years ago, there was likely a greater sense of shame about unmarried sex. Nowadays, there is very little shame in that. The embarrassment of becoming pregnant is not nowadays founded on the embarrassment of being caught out having sex but rather the carelessness of getting pregnant, the impact of having a child in unplanned and inappropriate circumstances, or the embarrassment and shame felt about one’s decision to abort.

Stats I have seen in the past reveal that the vast bulk of abortions are for reasons of personal convenience and not connected to weightier issues such as maternal health and the like.

 

[simpleas]

One hopes the parent/child relationship is one of trust, and that knowledge of the wrongness of their act does not dissuade them from the proper course.

50+ years ago, there was likely a greater sense of shame about unmarried sex. Nowadays, there is very little shame in that. The embarrassment of becoming pregnant is not nowadays founded on the embarrassment of being caught out having sex but rather the carelessness of getting pregnant, the impact of having a child in unplanned and inappropriate circumstances, or the embarrassment and shame felt about one’s decision to abort.

Stats I have seen in the past reveal that the vast bulk of abortions are for reasons of personal convenience and not connected to weightier issues such as maternal health and the like.

Thanks, yes if families are strong it would be more likely that they may ask for help rather than go to a doctor first.
I read a write up on facebook this morning about rights and wrongs of abortion, and someone commented that there are many abortions in the USA (not pointing at the us it was just that the poster was from there) because of incest.

I’m not sure about the woman has a right or no right over her body concerning a baby. If she is raped, obviously she did not consent to sex, and did not consent to a baby. Must she be forced almost against her will to keep the child? I’m not clear on the morning after pill, it’s function, I believe it stops fertilisation, but only after the sperm has penetrated the egg? I’m thinking of the very early stage, not as far as weeks. I do think that in some cases it’s a hard decision for certain people (child rape), I know the baby could be placed in care etc, but what about the womans “right”.
How do we understand that while a rape is wrong, the possibilty of conception is high, but the woman should not seek the morning after pill and should carry a baby as the out come of a crime?

Please I do not intend to offend anyone, I’m just trying to get my head around this world and why so many problems drag us down…

 

[davidv]

Thanks, yes if families are strong it would be more likely that they may ask for help rather than go to a doctor first.
I read a write up on facebook this morning about rights and wrongs of abortion, and someone commented that there are many abortions in the USA (not pointing at the us it was just that the poster was from there) because of incest.

I’m not sure about the woman has a right or no right over her body concerning a baby. If she is raped, obviously she did not consent to sex, and did not consent to a baby. Must she be forced almost against her will to keep the child? I’m not clear on the morning after pill, it’s function, I believe it stops fertilisation, but only after the sperm has penetrated the egg? I’m thinking of the very early stage, not as far as weeks. I do think that in some cases it’s a hard decision for certain people (child rape), I know the baby could be placed in care etc, but what about the womans “right”.
How do we understand that while a rape is wrong, the possibilty of conception is high, but the woman should not seek the morning after pill and should carry a baby as the out come of a crime?

Please I do not intend to offend anyone,** I’m just trying to get my head around this world and why so many problems drag us down…**

Sin binds us and enslaves us. Many justify their own sin (abortion) by the sins of others (rape).