You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
U
upant
Guest
let the wiggling begin
the US Bishops are clear, for the United States,
the US Bishops are clear, for the United States,
this is not to say Pope Francis is wrong, he is correct on the world stage. the US does not know abject poverty the way the world does, if we did our outlook may be different.“Saying that it (abortion) is preeminent is contrary to the teaching of the pope sets up an artificial battle between the bishops’ conference of the United States and the Holy Father,” said Chaput. “We do support the Holy Father completely. What he said is true. But it has been very clearly the articulated opinion of the bishops’ conference for many years that pro-life is still the preeminent issue. It doesn’t mean that the others are not equal in dignity. It’s just time in this certain circumstances of our church in the United States.”**
“We cannot uphold an ideal of holiness that would ignore injustice in a world where some revel, spend with abandon and live only for the latest consumer goods, even as others look on from afar, living their entire lives in abject poverty,” Pope Francis concluded.
C
Cathoholic
Guest
Thank you Bishop Stickland, Archbishop Chaput, and the 143 others of the Bishops.
There is an obvious paradigm to the message of the Gospel they are teaching here.
To people who oppose the preeminence of life in the womb . . .
What difference do good social programs make (whatever THEY are) if you were murdered as a pre-born baby?
If you are dead, some “program” can’t help you!
Is this not common sense?
The scaredness of humans after being born
versus BEFORE being born is artificial.
Why?
Because they are ALL “sacred”.
NOBODY is pretending a degree or two of “sacredness” is lost as you traverse the birth canal.
But those same sacred POST-born lives are never even a consideration,
if those same sacred lives
were destroyed in their PRE-BORN phase!
Which is WHY they MUST BE PREEMINENT.
(Yes they ALL have equal “dignity” and “sacredness” etc. Nobody is saying they become LESS sacred after they are born. Nobody.)
That is just common sense.
Pre-born life MUST BE PREEMINENT if you are REALLY interested in
even getting to the post-born phase of life.
I am disappointed that some people attempt to set up
a false dichotomy
between the need for preeminence of the sacred pre-born,
with the “sacredness” of all pre and post born (para. 101).
But you can’t even HAVE sacred POST-born . . .
if the Sacred PRE-born are murdered.
And in THERE, resides this preeminence.
There is an obvious paradigm to the message of the Gospel they are teaching here.
To people who oppose the preeminence of life in the womb . . .
What difference do good social programs make (whatever THEY are) if you were murdered as a pre-born baby?
If you are dead, some “program” can’t help you!
Is this not common sense?
The scaredness of humans after being born
versus BEFORE being born is artificial.
Why?
Because they are ALL “sacred”.
NOBODY is pretending a degree or two of “sacredness” is lost as you traverse the birth canal.
But those same sacred POST-born lives are never even a consideration,
if those same sacred lives
were destroyed in their PRE-BORN phase!
Which is WHY they MUST BE PREEMINENT.
(Yes they ALL have equal “dignity” and “sacredness” etc. Nobody is saying they become LESS sacred after they are born. Nobody.)
That is just common sense.
Pre-born life MUST BE PREEMINENT if you are REALLY interested in
even getting to the post-born phase of life.
I am disappointed that some people attempt to set up
a false dichotomy
between the need for preeminence of the sacred pre-born,
with the “sacredness” of all pre and post born (para. 101).
But you can’t even HAVE sacred POST-born . . .
if the Sacred PRE-born are murdered.
And in THERE, resides this preeminence.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.