Reconciling Catholic Church teaching and "pro choice" Catholics

  • Thread starter Thread starter gakroeger
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
zamboni said:
Your question shows understanding of something that is close to what I’ve been trying to say. Thank you. I don’t see where changing the law either way would solve anything, but doesn’t Fix wonder why the pro-life movement proposes no conception laws at all be applied to men?
Click to expand...
What do you mean by conception Law?

If the man is part of the abortion act then he should be held accountable just as in any other type of law.
I have previously asked the question on this thread of what responsibilities are supposed to belong to men before, during and after conception according to 2270 and 2271 or anywhere else in Church teaching? I think Fix can do that question.
Click to expand...
The responsibilities are to support the mother and child. Are there not laws now that call for that? The civil law can make the man support the child, right?

Again, how is this related to anti abortion laws? We all agree the man needs to take responsibility, but if the woman decides to abort your answer is no legal protection for the child because the father was not prosecuted for conceiving the baby? Sorry, but not seeing how you reason that?
 
zamboni said:
I call this traction. Now I have an outline of post-conception responsibilities for men, which you gave in your last post, and a list of pre-conception responsibilities for men that looks like it is probably in line with Church teaching. Thank you.

Now may I ask if you would be willing to consider proposing equal legal constraints of some kind on men like those proposed for women by pro-lifers, following the same methodology and Church teaching sources that the pro-life movement uses to validate proposing laws to restrict women’s choice?
Click to expand...
Just so we can follow your reasoning here what do you say about the situation where a married woman wants an abortion and the husband is the father? By your understanding the father acted immorally by conceiving the child?

See, conception is not a moral evil.
 
gakroeger said:
…I am hoping that a few “pro choice” Catholics will face these questions head on and help me to understand how they can claim to be both “pro choice” and Catholic at the same time…
Click to expand...
“Pro Choice Catholic” is an oxymoron. It makes about as much sense as “Atheist Catholic”.

The idea that any Catholic - or any other Christian for that matter - could accept the idea that it is okay to murder the infant in the womb is abhorrent and scandelous
 
LittleSoldier said:
If I may, I would like to add that, according to Church teaching, even if a couple conceives a child while they are using Natural Family Planning, they must still protect and nurture that child. It goes against Church teaching to abort a child that has been conceived while using Natural Family Planning.
Click to expand...
Right, and while I would have hoped that that information would be “a given” you are right to point it out. Who was it that said, “You can never overestimate the stupidity of the people.”
 
fix said:
…
Click to expand...
You are still on post-conception issues. I don’t want to cut fix out but I wonder if the few members like yourself who do not seem afraid of engaging in a meaningful dialogue would work together so that I don’t have so many responses to write in limited time. I recommend that jmmcrae, SteveGC and yourself, plus whoever may wish to chime in from a safe and anonymous distance in the background. Meanwhile I have to be careful not to become involved in more conversations than I can handle.
 
zamboni said:
I call this traction. Now I have an outline of post-conception responsibilities for men, which you gave in your last post, and a list of pre-conception responsibilities for men that looks like it is probably in line with Church teaching. Thank you.

Now may I ask if you would be willing to consider proposing equal legal constraints of some kind on men like those proposed for women by pro-lifers, following the same methodology and Church teaching sources that the pro-life movement uses to validate proposing laws to restrict women’s choice?
Click to expand...
Making it illegal to perform an abortion would - uh - make it illegal to perform an abortion. Insofar as men (male doctors) perform abortions, they’d go to jail. Women doctors who perform them would go to jail, too. It would be illegal to manufacture drugs that purposely cause miscarriages, so pharmacies wouldn’t be able to sell them (since they wouldn’t exist). Manufacturers of such drugs would have their business licenses revoked, and their CEOs would go to jail.

Thus, abortion clinics would not exist, and hospitals wouldn’t offer them. Problem solved. 🙂
 
zamboni said:
You are still on post-conception issues. I don’t want to cut fix out but I wonder if the few members like yourself who do not seem afraid of engaging in a meaningful dialogue would work together so that I don’t have so many responses to write in limited time. I recommend that jmmcrae, SteveGC and yourself, plus whoever may wish to chime in from a safe and anonymous distance in the background. Meanwhile I have to be careful not to become involved in more conversations than I can handle.
Click to expand...
Do you really not get it? The “pre conception” issues could be immoral, depending on factors, they do not reach the moral gravity of murder. Please see the links I posted to Church teaching.
 
jmcrae said:
Making it illegal to perform an abortion would - uh - make it illegal to perform an abortion. Insofar as men (male doctors) perform abortions, they’d go to jail. Women doctors who perform them would go to jail, too. It would be illegal to manufacture drugs that purposely cause miscarriages, so pharmacies wouldn’t be able to sell them (since they wouldn’t exist). Manufacturers of such drugs would have their business licenses revoked, and their CEOs would go to jail.

Thus, abortion clinics would not exist, and hospitals wouldn’t offer them. Problem solved. 🙂
Click to expand...
I lost you jmmcrae, or you lost me, not sure. I asked whether there would be any possibility in your mind of placing equal legal constraints of some kind on men based on your outline of their pre and post conception responsibilities and according to Church teaching, while following the same methodology that is used by the pro-life movement to demand limits on the freedom of a woman to choose to have an abortion?
 
LittleSoldier said:
If I may, I would like to add that, according to Church teaching, even if a couple conceives a child while they are using Natural Family Planning, they must still protect and nurture that child. It goes against Church teaching to abort a child that has been conceived while using Natural Family Planning.
Click to expand...
Having read the various arguments presented regarding this topic leads me to conclude that most likely 90% of all of this could be prevented if people just avoid having pre-marital sex in the first place.

I’m aware that the church teaches that engaging in pre-marital sex is a sin and while I think most of us recognize that certain situations such as rape, incest, etc will continue to happen, the teachings of the church must be followed by all its members. The solution is so simple in most cases. Could it be that further reinforcement to those members is needed? Any thoughts on what the church can do to reitterate its position regarding pre-marital sex to its members?
 
LittleSoldier said:
If I may, I would like to add that, according to Church teaching, even if a couple conceives a child while they are using Natural Family Planning, they must still protect and nurture that child. It goes against Church teaching to abort a child that has been conceived while using Natural Family Planning.
Click to expand...
In fact, the Church teaches tha abortion is ALWAYS wrong, in all cases
 
zamboni said:
I lost you jmmcrae, or you lost me, not sure. I asked whether there would be any possibility in your mind of placing equal legal constraints of some kind on men based on your outline of their pre and post conception responsibilities and according to Church teaching, while following the same methodology that is used by the pro-life movement to demand limits on the freedom of a woman to choose to have an abortion?
Click to expand...
We could make premarital sex and contracepted sex illegal for everyone. That would solve a great many problems. 🙂
 
fix said:
Do you really not get it? The “pre conception” issues could be immoral, depending on factors, they do not reach the moral gravity of murder. Please see the links I posted to Church teaching.
Click to expand...
Even the good guys are falling like dominoes now. Please see jmmcrae’s responses and rejoin the debate if it progresses passed this latest standstill you see in comparing mere immorality(?) to murder. Of course I see a big difference myself, but how much difference do you suppose your distinction between murder and the immorality that would have precluded the murder from happening in the first place? How much difference do you suppose God sees? You like to split hairs fix, I like save life.
 
jmcrae said:
We could make premarital sex and contracepted sex illegal for everyone. That would solve a great many problems. 🙂
Click to expand...
It sounds like you stopped taking the question seriously, which is what I am finding can happen when the subject turns to men taking equal responsibility or accept some kind of equal legal restraint just so that it does not all fall to the woman in the end, who you want to deprive of choice.
 
jmcrae said:
We could make premarital sex and contracepted sex illegal for everyone. That would solve a great many problems. 🙂
Click to expand...
If there were clinics which facilitated such things, I would say: Yes, make those clinics illegal.

But you are comparing things done in the privacy of bedrroms with things that are openly done in clinics built specifically for that purpose. Thats weak
 
zamboni said:
Even the good guys are falling like dominoes now. Please see jmmcrae’s responses and rejoin the debate if it progresses passed this latest standstill you see in comparing mere immorality(?) to murder. Of course I see a big difference myself, but how much difference do you suppose your distinction between murder and the immorality that would have precluded the murder from happening in the first place? How much difference do you suppose God sees? You like to split hairs fix, I like save life.
Click to expand...
If you read my link to the papal encyclical you would see your question is addressed by the Church. Abortion that is murder, needs to be illegal, not all immoral acts need to be illegal but murder is one such act that must be illegal.

Conception is not immoral. The acts that lead up to that may be immoral. Again, what specifically do you have in mind? Keep in mind that not all abortions stem from fornication. Plenty of married couples have abortions.

Basically, you want some perceived “equality” where none exists.
 
zamboni said:
It sounds like you stopped taking the question seriously, which is what I am finding can happen when the subject turns to men taking equal responsibility or accept some kind of equal legal restraint just so that it does not all fall to the woman in the end, who you want to deprive of choice.
Click to expand...
They are not equal acts.
 
zamboni said:
It sounds like you stopped taking the question seriously, which is what I am finding can happen when the subject turns to men taking equal responsibility or accept some kind of equal legal restraint just so that it does not all fall to the woman in the end, who you want to deprive of choice.
Click to expand...
She always has a choice. She can choose to retain her virginity until she is married and ready to get pregnant. 🙂

But we should never be allowed to “choose” to kill another human being - even if he or she is living inside of our body for a short while. Human beings are the image and likeness of God - to kill or even to harm a human being is to give the worst possible insult to God.
 
jmcrae said:
She always has a choice. She can choose to retain her virginity until she is married and ready to get pregnant. 🙂

But we should never be allowed to “choose” to kill another human being - even if he or she is living inside of our body for a short while. Human beings are the image and likeness of God - to kill or even to harm a human being is to give the worst possible insult to God.
Click to expand...
Men can choose to stay virgins too, but since you only propose consequences for women who do not stay virgins, how is that fair unless they can choose to abort? Do you have any serious suggestions as to how the playing field could be made level for women?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top