C
cathoichelp
Guest
War is doing something evil in hopes that something good will come out of it -
Which is how you described abortion …
Which is how you described abortion …
- Status
C
cathoichelp
Guest
we know if we go to war people will be killed … that would not pass for manslaughter in court lol …
if you PLAN on doing something and just don’;t know the names of the people you end up killing that makes it ok?
No - its murder just the same
Where were you when we leveled baghdad after 9/11… or when we are shooting missels at targets in Libya
You are right if we get out of our planes … and go physically shoot someone than the death toll will be an accident to some degree
But as i said given MODERN war - we are staying far away and just blowing things up - and we do that knowing we will kill people other than soldiers
no matter how just the reason … we KNOW we are going to kill people who did nothing wrong and we do it anyway for the greater good
and that is simply justifying murder -
In the same way you can justify an abortion … Based on INTENT
B
benidict
Guest
Interesting point. And you are correct that war is evil. I know that for a fact.
C
cathoichelp
Guest
A medical abortion is a case where the baby would die with the mother anyway -
if the baby is farther along then the baby is delivered to save the mother - even the baby does not survive that is NOT abortion … that is delivering a child early due to the medical condition of the mother -
an early medical abortion is done early in pregnancy when there is not way to delivered a human that early …
And the mother would not survive … therefore they would both die
so much like fighting a war … where you know people will die in the process it is done to save the lives of others …
it is no different.
that does not make every abortion ok anymore than every war is just …
but there are cases of both
if you can commit acts of murder to protect a greater good … you can justify having an abortion - to protect the greater good.
Both mother and child would die… or the pregnancy is ended and the mother survives for her other children.
This is not a evil murdering mother who forsakes her children. This is a tortured women in a horrible situation who losses a child due to medical issues.
if the baby is farther along then the baby is delivered to save the mother - even the baby does not survive that is NOT abortion … that is delivering a child early due to the medical condition of the mother -
an early medical abortion is done early in pregnancy when there is not way to delivered a human that early …
And the mother would not survive … therefore they would both die
so much like fighting a war … where you know people will die in the process it is done to save the lives of others …
it is no different.
that does not make every abortion ok anymore than every war is just …
but there are cases of both
if you can commit acts of murder to protect a greater good … you can justify having an abortion - to protect the greater good.
Both mother and child would die… or the pregnancy is ended and the mother survives for her other children.
This is not a evil murdering mother who forsakes her children. This is a tortured women in a horrible situation who losses a child due to medical issues.
B
benidict
Guest
Do any of my Catholic sisters want to admit to having a DNC here, after a misscarriage? What does this procedure entail? 
My then wife had this done, And done of an annex of a Catholic hospital. The doctor admitted to me this was a type of abortion procedure. I dont believe the issue is as black and white as many would have us believe. 
My then wife had this done, And done of an annex of a Catholic hospital. The doctor admitted to me this was a type of abortion procedure. I dont believe the issue is as black and white as many would have us believe.
C
cathoichelp
Guest
a D&C IS an abortion - you can also have a D&C after the baby is already lost though because you did not have a full miscarriage - normally the baby is already lost so I don’t think its actually considered abortion by the church -
But dilation and curettage is dilating the cervix and than curettage is either scraping or suctioning the uterus to remove its contains -
This is how an abortion is done - its also done when a pregnancy is lost and all the tissue is not expelled in order to prevent infection
But dilation and curettage is dilating the cervix and than curettage is either scraping or suctioning the uterus to remove its contains -
This is how an abortion is done - its also done when a pregnancy is lost and all the tissue is not expelled in order to prevent infection
C
cathoichelp
Guest
I find it interesting that intent only matters in certain cases.
When in fact if intent matters its matters with abortion as well you can’t say someone’s intent is ALWAYS murder -
just like any other issue … from war to birth control a persons intent varies by person and situation
abortion may always be wrong … but the intent is not always murder
war is the same way … we are murdering people … the intent varies but its still murder!
When in fact if intent matters its matters with abortion as well you can’t say someone’s intent is ALWAYS murder -
just like any other issue … from war to birth control a persons intent varies by person and situation
abortion may always be wrong … but the intent is not always murder
war is the same way … we are murdering people … the intent varies but its still murder!
B
benidict
Guest
Thank you for the helpful info Cathoichelp. I do however think The Church does acknowledge it is an abortion procedure, since they will not do it in the main hospital, but in an ajacent building. Interesting to say the least. Peace :hug1:
C
cathoichelp
Guest
oh yes absolutely it is an abortion procedure … quite honestly that IS an abortion that is how it is done -
In your ex wives case though it sounds like the baby was already lost (I am very sorry hon) and this was not an abortion -
B
benidict
Guest
Thank you very much my friend. So my question is, If this procedure is to remove the misscarried fetus for the heath of the mother, then what would be the difference in having an abortion to protect the life of the mother. Maybe Im not wording this correctly.
Before anyone goes crazy on me, Im not siding on the side of prochoice. Im just trying to get some things figured out. Peace
C
cathoichelp
Guest
In this case the fetus died on its own so that is out of your ex wife’s control.Thank you very much my friend. So my question is, If this procedure is to remove the misscarried fetus for the heath of the mother, then what would be the difference in having an abortion to protect the life of the mother. Maybe Im not wording this correctly.
If she had a D&C say because she had very early serve hypertension … than the fetus would be alive when the procedure was done this (according to the church) would be murder.
However, if it was a pregnancy outside the uterus I believe the church allows for a termination … in cases of an ectopic pregnancy - correct me if i am wrong - i believe the church views that as the loss of the fetus being a secondary effect of a procedure … the procedure itself has the intent of saving the mother -
you see the church acknowledges that there are exceptions to a degree and the church admits that the persons intent and culpability depends on the person\ and the situation -
there is no difference in this thinking than in just war …
D
davidv
Guest
There is a world of difference.Thank you very much my friend. So my question is, If this procedure is to remove the misscarried fetus for the heath of the mother, then what would be the difference in having an abortion to protect the life of the mother. Maybe Im not wording this correctly.
In the first case the baby has died of natural causes.
In the second case the life of the baby is deliberately killed. This is murder.
The health of the mother does not factor into the question of morality.
P
puzzleannie
Guest
an adult theoretically has defenses. The adult in war is attacked by strangers.
the infant in its mother’s womb is attacked in its most defenseless state by its own mother. If you don’t see a difference I am afraid you are not amenable to reason.
a procedure to remove a dead infant from the mother’s body has no relationship to abortion whatever so introducing such side issues is a deliberate means to deflect discussion from OP’s question.
C
cathoichelp
Guest
So the health of a mother - or the good of her family is not considered in abortion … but it is considered in war?
where many people will die …
interesting that this doesn’t seem inconsistent in the least …
C
Corki
Guest
If the child was already confirmed to be no longer living, a D&C may be done to assure that there is nothing left that might cause an infection or other problem. I was scheduled for one when I had been told that I had what the doctors called an “incomplete miscarriage”. The procedure itself is not an abortion but another term for a miscarriage is a natural abortion.Do any of my Catholic sisters want to admit to having a DNC here, after a misscarriage? What does this procedure entail?
The location of the procedure is not relevant. Since most D&Cs are outpatient procedures, it would be usual to have them done in an outpatient surgical clinic rather than in the hospital proper. (not always, but not uncommon) The annex to a Catholic hospital as well as the doctors working there would be subject to the same rules regarding abortions as the main hospital.
B
benidict
Guest
Thank you for the info. But I know for a fact other procedures are allowed there that are not allowed in the main hospital. The rules in fact are somewhat different. since it does not have to do with the debate, I can let you know in a p.m. what those procedures are, and what hospital it is also. Peace
D
davidv
Guest
What is the difference between war and an abortion? How are they the same? How are they different? The answer to your question is embedded in your answers to my questions here.
P
PilgrimToChrist
Guest
For every sin, you are guilty to the degree that you are complicit in the act. This is up to a priest to judge in the Confessional as to individual cases as to the gravity of a sin. This also would include whether the mother (or others involved who confess to him) has incurred excommunication or not (although, in many places, bishops have granted parish priests the faculties to lift excommunications arising from the sin of abortion) and what the penance should be.PilgrimtoChrist:
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?
Obviously, the parents are guilty of mortal sin if they demand that their daughter obtain an abortion but, much more subtly and common, they are also guilty of mortal sin if they say, “We love you and accept you no matter what you choose.” Others may also be guilty of formal cooperation if they help pay for it or drive the mother to the abortuary. We are also guilty of formal cooperation if we vote for politicians who support and defend abortion.
P
PilgrimToChrist
Guest
There are just wars, yes. Whether or not the military actions the United States is involved in currently (which I assume you are referring to) are just or not is a debatable issue.
However, I do want to point out a problem with your statement. There are no exceptions to abortion. Abortion is always illicit even if it is “to save the mother’s life”. There are times in which the child may unfortunately die while trying to save the mother. For instance, if the mother is in a car accident and is badly injured and requires surgery, it may be that the child may die during surgery but this is not the intent of the surgeons. There are also cases of acute cancers in which in order to save the life of the mother, the mother has to undergo chemotherapy or other treatments which are likely to kill the child. But in no case can someone do something evil (murder a child) in order to achieve some good end (to preserve the mother’s health or life).
P
PilgrimToChrist
Guest
Courts decide intent all the time. If I point a loaded gun at someone at pull the trigger, it is clearly my intent to severely injure or kill the individual – even if I miss. When someone intentionally takes an abortifacient drug or pays someone to slice her baby up into bits or throws herself down a flight of stairs in order to miscarry, the intent is clear – the intent is to kill the child. Now, a child may actually survive some forms of abortion and be born alive (hence, the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act in the US, which states that if an abortion fails and the child is born alive, you cannot then kill the child after it is outside of the mother) but the intent is still to kill the child, just as I could fire a gun at someone and miss or only give them a flesh wound.
You are talking about people’s justifications for an act, not the act itself. If I murder my husband in order to cash out his life insurance policy, you could say that I am just trying to provide a better life for myself and my children. But the courts won’t be terribly sympathetic. Certain acts, such as the directly intended killing of an person known to be innocent, have no justifiable cause.
The purpose of bombs is to take out military targets. To target civilians is a war crime. Civilians may unfortunately be collateral damage but that doesn’t mean that their death is intended. The intention is to take out military targets and this must be done in a way that is proportionate. For instance, nuclear bombs should only be used in very rare circumstances or never, since the likelihood of massive numbers of civilian deaths is very high. But if we are only talking about conventional bombs, they are used quite necessarily, to take out military bases, tanks, trains, airports, etc. – military targets. Your assertion that nations routinely bomb elementary schools because pilots and their commanders just love blowing up little children is contrary to reality and quite offensive. That’s what terrorists do. What we do is kill terrorists.
- Status