The pro-life Church and attitudes to dangerous things like motorcycle riding, mountain climbing and smoking

  • Thread starter Thread starter FiveLinden
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
That’s usually where these discussions end up…

Dare I add alcohol and cannabis to the mix 😒
 
Which happens to be what pro-life means.

You don’t get to squirm around and redefine terms.
[/quote]
No, you are working with an extremely narrow definition. I hope you actually have a broader understanding of Catholic teachings about human life.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
So are we now claiming the Church should make it a sin to smoke rather than leaving that up to prudential judgment?
Click to expand...
Not sure if you are responding to my post of lung cancer deaths.

The Church does not teach that smoking per se is a sin. It teaches that excess use of tobacco is a sin but does not qualify how much is excess. That is left to prudential judgement.

I would certainly advocate that smokers stop smoking because it is bad for their health.
 
I wasn’t referring to you specifically, I just don’t have any idea what’s going on in this thread now.

It was started by some atheist looking to pick holes in the Church’s stance on abortion by questioning how a pro-life Church could allow Catholics to ride motorcycles because motorcycle riding has a higher risk of an accident than cars or other things.

I tune out for a while, tune back in and everybody is going on about smoking.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
So are we now claiming the Church should make it a sin to smoke rather than leaving that up to prudential judgment?
Click to expand...
Why wait for the Church to issue a rule? Christians can and should protect their health and safety, and encourage others to do so.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
I wasn’t referring to you specifically, I just don’t have any idea what’s going on in this thread now.

It was started by some atheist looking to pick holes in the Church’s stance on abortion by questioning how a pro-life Church could allow Catholics to ride motorcycles because motorcycle riding has a higher risk of an accident than cars or other things.

I tune out for a while, tune back in and everybody is going on about smoking.
Click to expand...
My impression is that the OP seems to be suggesting that the Church should ban Catholics from doing anything that can get them killed.
I guess I can’t leave my house then in case I get hit by a car or trip and fall crossing a road.
 
If Christians want to encourage or police the health of other Christians, they can do so if they wish.

This thread was originally about the Catholic Church prohibiting abortion and not other risky behaviors. It wasn’t about whether we should encourage some habits and discourage others.

I personally don’t smoke, never did, don’t drug, don’t use cannabis, and rarely drink, but as long as nobody is blowing smoke at me or pouring alcohol down my throat I’m not in the business of being people’s nanny and I don’t need or want them to be mine. I do eat french fries and some Catholics would and do object strenously to that, to them I would say I do the best I can given the circumstances and also, MYOB.
 
I think you are using the political-campaign definition of pro-life, which is like tunnel vision, well-focused but missing a lot.
 
Beryllos said:
I think you are using the political-campaign definition of pro-life, which is like tunnel vision, well-focused but missing a lot.
Click to expand...
Actually (name removed by moderator) is correct. Pro-Life means to oppose abortion and oppose euthanasia.
As you said that is “missing a lot” tell us the lot which is being missed.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
This thread was originally about the Catholic Church prohibiting abortion and not other risky behaviors.
Click to expand...
That must be another thread. This one begins with a title and post which do not mention abortion.
 
Last edited:
Beryllos said:
That must be another thread. This one begins with a title and post which do not mention abortion.
Click to expand...
The thread title says Pro-Life Church. That includes abortion and euthanasia.
Please respond to my question in my earlier which was in response to your comment about abortion and euthanasia.
 
Beryllos said:
This one begins with a title and post which do not mention abortion.
Click to expand...
“Pro-Life Church” clearly is a reference to abortion and euthanasia teachings .

Here is a link to the thread where the OP began the discussion and I asked him to please start a new thread because he was in a thread where someone else was seeking members of Catholic motorcycle clubs. It is obvious what “preserving human life” refers to.

https://forums.catholic-questions.org/t/catholic-motorcyle-groups/622912/5?u=tis_bearself
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
Furthermore, I don’t think the OP is asking these questions because he’s really concerned about the people experiencing the risks and thinks the Church should be more protective of their lives. He’s trying to undermine the Church’s viewpoint on abortion and attack the Church.
Click to expand...
If I were trying to undermine the Church’s viewpoint on abortion I would be raising issues that I already understand very well. As I’ve said before, I generally raise issues to understand belief. This includes understanding what appear to me to be contradictions. This thought was a new one to me, so I asked about it. You will notice I have accepted some points people have made as sensible. And does it matter ‘why’ I raise issues?
 
Montrose said:
Please respond to my question in my earlier
Click to expand...
Oh! I didn’t parse that sentence at all, because you left off the question mark.

I see abortion and euthanasia as elements, undeniably large and significant, but not exclusive elements, of a complex of disorders which tend to cheapen human life and dignity. I mention human dignity because we are more likely to kill a person, or fail to protect a person, when we do not recognize the value and dignity of that person.

So, for example, when adversaries in war are described as maniacs, the citizens will feel better about disproportionate warfare. When we characterize homeless people as lazy, or welfare recipients as cheats, we feel justified in ignoring the poor. We similarly justify our neglect of prisoners and drug addicts; they got themselves into this, right? TV shows and movies normalize gang violence and police brutality by depicting proud and powerful protagonists inflicting violence against contemptible villains.

But most of all, our culture of self-absorption and self-determination lies at the root of many evils. My body, my choice. So have a beer, cigarette, reefer, joyride, sex (whatever kind you like, even a sex change), abortion, suicide. Get a tattoo or piercing while you’re at it; I assure you, those at least are not sins. Ironically, this fixation on the self devalues the self.
 
Last edited:
FiveLinden said:
But it gives no clear guidance on what ‘abuse’ and ‘endanger’ means. This is very vague compared to other pro-life statements by the Church such as on abortion and euthanasia. There is, for the individual, a lot of wriggle room
Click to expand...
The difference is that abortion and euthanasia directly kill an individual on purpose.

Extreme or dangerous sports don’t have the purpose of dying.

TBF, all human activities entail some risk.
 
Whether you believe in the “personhood” of the embryo or not, you still wind up with a dead embryo.
 
If I understand your OP however, you were questioning the amount of risk Which is acceptable within Catholic theology and still be in “pro life boundaries?”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top