Religion and the Discomfort of Biology?

[ricmat]

A gift may not be wanted - is that a gift to be celebrated?

In this case, yes. All humans are made in the image and likeness of God. All human children are his children. All are to be respected and loved. All are to be celebrated.

What about the infamous white elephant?

A child is not a white elephant. At least for Catholics.

When a 7 year old conceives after being raped by her step-father, will she consider that a gift?

Probably not. But you might want to wait a few years and ask the child-now-teen whether his/her life is a gift.

.

 

[StAnastasia]

When and how will the children be told? If they are not told then what about the deception involved?

The children will be told when they are old enough, just like adopted children are told. There need be no deception.

 

[StAnastasia]

Yes and no.

No?

 

[Doc_Keele]

In this case, yes. All humans are made in the image and likeness of God. All human children are his children. All are to be respected and loved. All are to be celebrated

That’s begging the question. That’s denying someone the autonomy to decide whether or not they want their “gift”.

A child is not a white elephant. At least for Catholics

The same point applies. There’s certainly some people who would not want to have an anencephalic child.

Probably not. But you might want to wait a few years and ask the child-now-teen whether his/her life is a gift.

right…
that child would not be born, since the 7 year old although able to conceive wouldn’t have the uterine development to carry the child to viability
so not having an abortion would be to give her a death sentence

 

[Doc_Keele]

No?

Well it depends on how you define “gift” and whether or not you believe in occasionalism

 

[Betterave]

You’re wrong – the marital embrace was very much present, even though God had biologically denied the woman the opportunity to become pregnant. They were a married couple who had 'embraced" for a number of years. And so what if a surrogate was involved? The surrogate was the woman’s own sister, for heaven’s sake, setting aside for nine months her needs and her time to bring babies to term for her own twin sister. It was a selfless act.

I can’t imagine many actions more loving and self-sacrificing that this. A theology that would deny a woman the opportunity to have her own biological children, and would deny her sister the opportunity to volunteer in this self-sacrificing manner is not a theology worth entertaining for one second. In fact such a “theology” is hateful, life denying, and despicable.

StAnastasia

OUCH! So I see you have an open mind about this issue…

 

[StAnastasia]

OUCH! So I see you have an open mind about this issue…

Yes – minds are like parachutes – they work better when open!

 

[ricmat]

There’s certainly some people who would not want to have an anencephalic child.

And there are many people in India and China who don’t want a female child. So what’s your point?

right…
that child would not be born, since the 7 year old although able to conceive wouldn’t have the uterine development to carry the child to viability
so not having an abortion would be to give her a death sentence

If the uterine development isn’t there, neither are viable eggs.

So what you’re leading up to with your series of posts is a justification of abortion?

But you’ll find the answer to your question about half way down this page. If you wish to discuss, you should probably start another thread.

.

 

[StAnastasia]

Well it depends on how you define “gift” and whether or not you believe in occasionalism

No, of course I accept secondary causation. But the existence of the universe itself is a gift from God (I’m not a Dawkinsian or a Weinberger).

 

[Doc_Keele]

No, of course I accept secondary causation. But the existence of the universe itself is a gift from God (I’m not a Dawkinsian or a Weinberger).

Agreed, for sure.

 

[StAnastasia]

IThe theology I describe is Church teaching. If you truly believe it is hateful and despicable, then perhaps you should leave the Church and not advertise yourself as Catholic.

And some people wonder why so many others abandon the Catholic Church…

 

[Doc_Keele]

And there are many people in India and China who don’t want a female child. So what’s your point?

and what’s yours?

If the uterine development isn’t there, neither are viable eggs

I used a real-life example from recent news - the girl in Brazil I think it was? So you’re wrong.

So what you’re leading up to with your series of posts is a justification of abortion?

But you’ll find the answer to your question about half way down this page. If you wish to discuss, you should probably start another thread

Yes, best not to presume. I am baffled as to why certain people will automatically assume because you don’t agree with them 100% you must support the opposite position? It’s a variety of argumentum ad hominem and therefore a logical fallacy.

 

[Betterave]

Betterave, what is not clear to me is what is meant by the “insertion” of the soul. Since it is not clear how one inserts an immaterial principle into a material zygote, I’m wondering if there might be theologically or philosophically different language for expressing the way in which sperm and egg become a living, self-organizing being.

StAnastasia

“Insertion” indeed sounds like an unclear term to use. Where did you come up with it? I think less prejudicial terms that are more commonly used are “infusion” of the soul or “information” of the body by the soul. Other than that, I’m still not sure what you’re after. You imply that ‘insertion of the soul’ is supposed to express ‘the way in which sperm and egg become a living, self-organizing being,’ and that certainly sounds rather strange. Why would you suggest such a thing? If that’s the theological/philosophical language you’re currently using, certainly, I think, you would do well to find a better way to express yourself.

 

[Doc_Keele]

And some people wonder why so many others abandon the Catholic Church…

Yep
and actually even the Church says we must follow our conscience

 

[ricmat]

And some people wonder why so many others abandon the Catholic Church…

I don’t wonder about it at all.

Some sit on the fence, but most eventually pick sides. You’ve been on the fence for a while leaning away from the CC (IMO). As with most people, it boils down to a matter of authority. You seem unwilling to accept Church authority on many subjects.

As I said earlier, I wish you’d stay, but please don’t oppose church teaching while touting yourself as a Catholic theologian.

.

 

[ricmat]

and what’s yours?

You obviously don’t keep up with current affairs. You’re wrong.

Yes, best not to presume. I am baffled as to why certain people will automatically assume because you don’t agree with them 100% you must support the opposite position? It’s a variety of argumentum ad hominem and therefore a logical fallacy.

OK - Let’s start over. Sometimes things get rather convoluted with so many posters intertwined.

Hi Doc Keele. I’m ricmat. Nice to meet you.

Did you have a question or a comment?

 

[Betterave]

Yep
and actually even the Church says we must follow our well-formed conscience

…we must have reason to believe that our conscience has been well-formed before it can properly be said to command us. Otherwise, ‘follow your conscience’ is tantamount to ‘do whatever you feel like.’

 

[Doc_Keele]

For sure, let’s keep it Christian and fraternal
Hi ricmat.


I am anti-abortion as it happens, but with certain exceptions on principled grounds - I find the proportionalist/virtue ethics approach more appealing than the Thomist deontological approach the Church has adopted.

 

[ricmat]

Yep
and actually even the Church says we must follow our conscience

Yes, we’ve all heard Nancy Pelosi say that as well. Apparently that concept needed to be explained to her by her Bishop a few times. And I’m not sure that she gets it yet.

We must follow a “well informed” conscience. That means (very briefly) that we must exhaustively and prayerfully try to understand Church teaching before going a different way “because we’re following our consciences.”

This would be a good subject for a different thread as well.

 

[Doc_Keele]

…we must have reason to believe that our conscience has been well-formed before it can properly be said to command us. Otherwise, ‘follow your conscience’ is tantamount to ‘do whatever you feel like.’

Yes of course. I had assumed that but best to make it an explicit assumption