Unjust war vs abortion

[cathoichelp]

What credentials do you have that would lead me to accept this interpretation of the Bible?

Murder, not killing, is a offense against the commandments.
Abortion is murder of the most offensive kind. The victim could not be less innocent nor more defenseless.

the bible does not condone taking the life of ANY innocent person!
Therefore- the innocent people that die in a “just war” are as grave a sin as the abortion of an unborn child.

 

[davidv]

the bible does not condone taking the life of ANY innocent person!
Therefore- the innocent people that die in a “just war” are as grave a sin as the abortion of an unborn child.

I don’t think you understand the problem. Sorry.

 

[cathoichelp]

I don’t think you understand the problem. Sorry.

innocent lives taken in war is said to be just if the war itself is protecting the greater good … or freeing people from being hurt - like WW II - Hitler -
however - by saying that it is just to take innocent lives in order to protect people -
You would have to conclude that an abortion that would protect a women or a women and her family - is also just
The ACT of murder is no different … you can either justify murder or you can not justify murder -
If human beings are capable of deciding when murder is justified than that is not situational …
unless I missed the part of the bible that says bombing a country to stop a dictator is fine but taking the life of an unborn child is NEVER find -

As a matter of fact the kind of wars we NOW have could not have even been predicted in biblical times so saying the bible supports just war is a stretch when you put it in terms of the what ANY war today actually means - in terms of loss of innocent life.

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

I know that a majority in agreement doesn’t necessarily make the thing so, nor does authority, but does anyone have any church authorities who say that abortion is worse than murder or does anyone know if this is the common opinion amongst catholics? Because I don’t recall hearing this from many people or clergy at all.

St. John Chrysostom:

Wherefore I beseech you flee fornication, and the mother of it, drunkenness. Why sow where reaping is impossible, or rather even if you dost reap, the fruit brings you great shame? For even if a child be born, it at once disgraces yourself, and has itself had injustice done it in being born through you illegitimate and base. And if you leave it never so much money, both the son of an harlot, and that of a servant-maid, is disreputable at home, disreputable in the city, disreputable in a court of law: disreputable too will you be also, both in your lifetime, and when dead. For if you have departed even, the memorials of your unseemliness abide. Why then bring disgrace upon all these? Why sow where the ground makes it its care to destroy the fruit? Where there are many efforts at abortion? Where there is murder before the birth? For even the harlot thou dost not let continue a mere harlot, but makest her a murderess also. You see how drunkenness leads to whoredom, whoredom to adultery, adultery to murder; or rather to a something even worse than murder. For I have no name to give it, since it does not take off the thing born, but prevent its being born. Why then do you abuse the gift of God, and fight with His laws, and follow after what is a curse as if a blessing, and make the chamber of procreation a chamber for murder, and arm the woman that was given for childbearing unto slaughter?

When the mother is complicit in the abortion (i.e. when we’re not talking about forced abortions in China), then it is easy to see how disordered an act it is because it is killing your own children. A couple months ago, it was in the papers that a woman murdered her two teenage children for being “mouthy” and people were justifiably horrified. Murdering your own children is something more disordered than murdering another adult or even, in a sense, murdering someone else’s children because it is directly contrary to the natural affection that one is supposed to have for their own children – it attacks the family bond in a similar way that incest is a greater crime than fornication, because it is contrary to the right way family members are to love each other. Mothers are supposed to love their children and protect them, not kill them.

 

[cathoichelp]

When the mother is complicit in the abortion (i.e. when we’re not talking about forced abortions in China), then it is easy to see how disordered an act it is because it is killing your own children. A couple months ago, it was in the papers that a woman murdered her two teenage children for being “mouthy” and people were justifiably horrified. Murdering your own children is something more disordered than murdering another adult or even, in a sense, murdering someone else’s children because it is directly contrary to the natural affection that one is supposed to have for their own children – it attacks the family bond in a similar way that incest is a greater crime than fornication, because it is contrary to the right way family members are to love each other. Mothers are supposed to love their children and protect them, not kill them.

Yea i get that
so show me where it’s ok according to the bible to drop a bomb that takes out a school and kills innocent children in a “just” war

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

the bible does not condone taking the life of ANY innocent person!
Therefore- the innocent people that die in a “just war” are as grave a sin as the abortion of an unborn child.

But the innocent people who die in a just war are not intentionally killed. In order for killing to be murder it has to be intentional and it has to be without a justifiable cause. A just war is an act of charity because it seeks the common good and to protect the innocent. But individual acts of murder can indeed occur within the context of a just war. Right now there are a group of US soldiers on trial for intentionally murdering civilians, there is a clear difference of motive between a justifiable killing (as a soldier must necessarily do in war) and murder (which a soldier must not do in war).

There is such a thing as a just war. It would have been uncharitable to allow Hitler, Mussolini and Hirohito to continue to conquer and slaughter half the world. It is good to have self-defense, it is good to defend our allies, it is good to defend innocent people. This is charity. The death of enemy combatants is necessary in order to achieve this goal, this good thing. It is not murder because it is not the end purpose, but an unfortunate side-effect. Abortion is not a side-effect of something good but evil in and of itself even if that evil is supposed to lead to something good (such as to save the life of the mother), it is still a grave evil because we cannot do evil such that good may follow.

If a man attacks me with a knife, it is okay to pull out my gun and shoot him. If a state attacks a state, it is okay for that state to defend itself against the attack. This is a good act, an act of charity, it is one of the primary purposes of having a State – to protect its citizens against attack by foreign powers. During this course of action, there may be crimes committed, such as the intentional killing of civilians (or unarmed enemy soldiers) or rape or pillaging which are gravely sinful in themselves but do not serve to make the war as a whole not a good thing. These are considered “war crimes” and are indeed taken seriously by the US and most other governments.

But still, the murder of one’s own child – whether born or unborn – is a greater crime than the murder of someone outside of one’s family because the responsibility that we have as parents is greater than the responsibility we have to people who are not related to us. Both are mortal sins, of course, but murdering your child will send you to a deeper part of hell than murdering someone else.

 

[nodito]

Yea i get that
so show me where it’s ok according to the bible to drop a bomb that takes out a school and kills innocent children in a “just” war

It’s not okay to drop a bomb on a school and kill innocent children. To deliberately do so would indeed be gravely evil. Evil can never be done in order that good may come of it. This is why is still wrong for a woman to kill her child, even if she does so to help her family save money, and why it is also gravely wrong for an airforce to target school children as a means of fighting a just war.

However, to equate abortion (the deliberate killing of a child by his own mother) with civilian casualties in a just war is not at all accurate. Setting aside for a moment that a person has a much greater responsibility for his or her own family than to anyone else, civilian casualties in a just war should never be a means or an end, but rather, when they do occur, as the unforunate consequences of justified violence. In moral theology, you could equate it with a woman who has her diseased fallopian tubes removed because her ectopic pregnancy is about to rupture. Even though her child will perish as a result, it is not an abortion, and is not celebrated as such. If, on the other hand, the woman chooses to kill her child, for whatever reason, no good end in sight could make that a licit action.

 

[cathoichelp]

But the innocent people who die in a just war are not intentionally killed. In order for killing to be murder it has to be intentional and it has to be without a justifiable cause. A just war is an act of charity because it seeks the common good and to protect the innocent. But individual acts of murder can indeed occur within the context of a just war. Right now there are a group of US soldiers on trial for intentionally murdering civilians, there is a clear difference of motive between a justifiable killing (as a soldier must necessarily do in war) and murder (which a soldier must not do in war).

There is such a thing as a just war. It would have been uncharitable to allow Hitler, Mussolini and Hirohito to continue to conquer and slaughter half the world. It is good to have self-defense, it is good to defend our allies, it is good to defend innocent people. This is charity. The death of enemy combatants is necessary in order to achieve this goal, this good thing. It is not murder because it is not the end purpose, but an unfortunate side-effect. Abortion is not a side-effect of something good but evil in and of itself even if that evil is supposed to lead to something good (such as to save the life of the mother), it is still a grave evil because we cannot do evil such that good may follow.

If a man attacks me with a knife, it is okay to pull out my gun and shoot him. If a state attacks a state, it is okay for that state to defend itself against the attack. This is a good act, an act of charity, it is one of the primary purposes of having a State – to protect its citizens against attack by foreign powers. During this course of action, there may be crimes committed, such as the intentional killing of civilians (or unarmed enemy soldiers) or rape or pillaging which are gravely sinful in themselves but do not serve to make the war as a whole not a good thing. These are considered “war crimes” and are indeed taken seriously by the US and most other governments.

But still, the murder of one’s own child – whether born or unborn – is a greater crime than the murder of someone outside of one’s family because the responsibility that we have as parents is greater than the responsibility we have to people who are not related to us. Both are mortal sins, of course, but murdering your child will send you to a deeper part of hell than murdering someone else.

I had no idea there were levels of hell… huh

Given the nature of modern war its impossible to deny intend in mass murder. We know full well that innocent lives will be taken -
When we drop a bomb anywhere the “intend” is large scale destruction … the intent is large scale murder -
Suppose a recently windowed mother of 4 has an abortion because she has a life threatening condition that developed in her pregnancy her INTENT is to protect her other children from being motherless … or parentless considering her husband died … her INTENT is not murder her INTENT is protection of her life and her other children - This is no different than going to war with the intent to protect a group of people and killing other people in the process…

 

[cathoichelp]

There is never the possibility of war without casualties - it’s not possible.
Especially given the nature of modern war -
So saying it’s ok to kill them because we didn’t target them out for murder they just accidently got killed when we were doing something else … is not making it anymore just.
We know if we go to war and fight a war other people who are innocent will be killed.
Since we know the nature of war … and we know the result of war - the murder of innocent people is not an accident
its a direct result of the action we knowingly took -

 

[davidv]

There is never the possibility of war without casualties - it’s not possible.
Especially given the nature of modern war -
So saying it’s ok to kill them because we didn’t target them out for murder they just accidently got killed when we were doing something else … is not making it anymore just.
We know if we go to war and fight a war other people who are innocent will be killed.
Since we know the nature of war … and we know the result of war - the murder of innocent people is not an accident
its a direct result of the action we knowingly took -

Please study the Catholic Catechism beginning at article 2807. After that, maybe you won’t be so prone to propose such poor strawmen of Church teaching. I don’t think you know what a “just” war is, nor that even in a just war the Church teaching does not permit “anything goes” as you so wrongly suggest.

 

[Janet_S]

usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sect2chpt2art5.shtml

The above link is the section of the Catechism on the 5th Commandment which explains the Church’s position on war and abortion.

The Church has always taken a hard-lined position against both abortion and euthanasia because these are crimes against the weakest, most vulnerable members of society. These are actions which are never permissable and have no benefit to society. Actually they serve only to society’s detriment.

On the other hand, the Church recognizes that war, though not desirable, is sometimes necessary for the legitimate defense of people and societies. After all, if a country adopted a strictly pacifist stance, it wouldn’t exist for very long.

Unfortunately, we live in an imperfect world where evil regimes rise to power, and many examples of that exist even to the present day. War is hell, yet still, some things are worth fighting for.

 

[cathoichelp]

Please study the Catholic Catechism beginning at article 2807. After that, maybe you won’t be so prone to propose such poor strawmen of Church teaching. I don’t think you know what a “just” war is, nor that even in a just war the Church teaching does not permit “anything goes” as you so wrongly suggest.

I realize not anything goes
but by going to any war at all people who are innocent will be killed …
this is not complicated. Its a simple concept.
War will have casulities and even though their are strict conditions on when it is just and strict rules about arms … the simple fact that you are going to war gives you the knowledge that innocent people will die.
there is no way around that
sure you can find a good reason to do it.
but its still allowing and supporting murder under “certain” conditions

According to church the use of arms must not produce more disorder than the what you are already facing

• the benefit must outweigh the loss of life …
  more good than evil…

In the example i gave you of the woman saving herself to be able to take care of her kids who would be parent-less if she continued a pregnancy that was threatening her life… well there is benefit outweighing harm -
that can be justified

so either you can justify murder or you can’t -

 

[Janet_S]

You are justifying a hypothetical case, not abortion as it exists in the real world. Unless you are a person who believes that a women should get an abortion only if her life is in danger, I don’t see the the point of making up an example that is rarely or never the case. Every day women risk their lives for their children–that’s a fact of life. And most women who have abortions are not facing life-threatening illness. At this time, abortions necessary to save the life of a mother are maybe 0.004%

If you’re looking for reasons to justify abortion, it would be a good idea to develop an argument based on how abortion is found in the real world. Women are not having abortions because their lives are in danger. They are having them because they want to have sex, do not want to have babies, are not in stable relationships, and their birth control methods have failed. Those are the events leading up to the typical abortion. So if you want to justify abortion, justify that. What is the point of building an argument on the hypothetical 0.004% of life-threatening cases that may or may not exist?

 

[Bunker_Man]

You can’t compare a literal yet vague occurrence with an abstract thing you give no details for. It’s like literally saying “Is X of greater value than Y?” without specifying more about either one. It would depend on the size of the war, the conditions of “abortion” specified, etc…

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

Yea i get that
so show me where it’s ok according to the bible to drop a bomb that takes out a school and kills innocent children in a “just” war

Um… who said that it was? If someone has an intention to drop a bomb on a school and kill children, then yes, that would be a sin. But is that how we usually conduct our wars? By bombing each others’ elementary schools? No… we kill enemy soldiers – the guys who are shooting at us. If innocent people unfortunately get caught in the crossfire, it is a sad thing, but it is not an intentional thing and therefore not sinful.

But an abortion is murder because it is the intentional and direct killing of an innocent person. Unintentional killing is not murder (this is the difference between murder and manslaughter in the US legal system). Indirect killing is not murder (that is, when the death of an innocent person is a unintended side-effect of a good act). Killing someone who is guilty of a capital crime (if you have authority from the State to do so) is also not murder (as occurs in just wars and just executions).

Thus there is a big difference between killing your own child and killing a guy who is trying to kill you or rape you.

Preserving your own life against aggressors (self-defense) = good.
Murdering your own children = bad.

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

I had no idea there were levels of hell… huh

God is just. Those in Hell are punished for the sins they have committed (demerits). Those in Heaven are rewarded for the good deed they have done (merits).
Apoc 20:12:

And I saw the dead, great and small, standing in the presence of the throne, and the books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged by those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

Given the nature of modern war its impossible to deny intend in mass murder. We know full well that innocent lives will be taken -
When we drop a bomb anywhere the “intend” is large scale destruction … the intent is large scale murder -

No, the intent in a just war is to stop the aggressor. Someone who intends destruction is a madman. We intend to stop whoever is attacking us. It is the same as if someone attacks you with a knife, you can defend yourself even if, in order to defend yourself, you must kill your attacker. You don’t intend for your attacker to die, you intend to stop him from attacking you, to preserve your life and well-being, if he has to die for him to stop then so be it.

We take out enemy targets, whether personnel or buildings, in order to do one thing – to stop the enemy from attacking us.

Suppose a recently windowed mother of 4 has an abortion because she has a life threatening condition that developed in her pregnancy her INTENT is to protect her other children from being motherless … or parentless considering her husband died … her INTENT is not murder her INTENT is protection of her life and her other children - This is no different than going to war with the intent to protect a group of people and killing other people in the process…

No, you are wrong. Her intent is murder. By murdering her children, she hopes that her remaining children will be better off. This is doing something evil (murder) in hopes that some good may come of it (she will preserve her life). This is a grave sin.
Rom 3:8:

And not rather (as we are slandered, and as some affirm that we say) let us do evil, that there may come good? whose damnation is just.

 

[benidict]

the bible does not condone taking the life of ANY innocent person!
Therefore- the innocent people that die in a “just war” are as grave a sin as the abortion of an unborn child.

I completely agree. The innocent civilians that are killed, have no defence either. They are at the mercy of the combatants.

 

[benidict]

PilgrimtoChrist-No, you are wrong. Her intent is murder. By murdering her children, she hopes that her remaining children will be better off. This is doing something evil (murder) in hopes that some good may come of it (she will preserve her life). This is a grave sin.
ME- What if her intent is not murder? what if she was a minor, and her parents forced her into this descision? Is she still guilty of a sin? or are the parents?

 

[cathoichelp]

You are justifying a hypothetical case, not abortion as it exists in the real world. Unless you are a person who believes that a women should get an abortion only if her life is in danger, I don’t see the the point of making up an example that is rarely or never the case. Every day women risk their lives for their children–that’s a fact of life. And most women who have abortions are not facing life-threatening illness. At this time, abortions necessary to save the life of a mother are maybe 0.004%

If you’re looking for reasons to justify abortion, it would be a good idea to develop an argument based on how abortion is found in the real world. Women are not having abortions because their lives are in danger. They are having them because they want to have sex, do not want to have babies, are not in stable relationships, and their birth control methods have failed. Those are the events leading up to the typical abortion. So if you want to justify abortion, justify that. What is the point of building an argument on the hypothetical 0.004% of life-threatening cases that may or may not exist?

True … but than again the wars we are currently fighting don’t fall under just war … just war would be very very rare by Catholic definition
YET - you are urged to vote against pro choice - in favor of the other side … which is pro war -
so pro murder …
either way-

Most abortions are not to save the mother’s life I agree and most wars are not at all just …
but there are exceptions in both war and abortion
that is the point… there ARE exceptions -

 

[cathoichelp]

God is just. Those in Hell are punished for the sins they have committed (demerits). Those in Heaven are rewarded for the good deed they have done (merits).

No, the intent in a just war is to stop the aggressor. Someone who intends destruction is a madman. We intend to stop whoever is attacking us. It is the same as if someone attacks you with a knife, you can defend yourself even if, in order to defend yourself, you must kill your attacker. You don’t intend for your attacker to die, you intend to stop him from attacking you, to preserve your life and well-being, if he has to die for him to stop then so be it.

We take out enemy targets, whether personnel or buildings, in order to do one thing – to stop the enemy from attacking us.

First of all - no it is not you don
t get to decide someone’s intent because it involves abortion HER intent is no different than anything else its ONLY truly known by her and God -
In these kind of cases I have seen her intent is to stave her own life and protect her other children -
She would die without an abortion … so the INTENT is saving A LIFE … in the process a life is lost -

In war our intent is mass destruction … and in the same way - we know that innocent people will die -
you want to tell me people drop bombs intending to only hit one target and kill no one? we are blind to the nature of bombs and missels ???
no - we kknowingly kill people …
For the sake of someone else.
Murder-
plan and simple.