Vatican: Catholics Who Back Abortion Shouldn't Take Communion

[SueG]

Pete2:

I have no idea what you are talking about. Having a wallet stolen? Litter? Punched in the nose?

I’m talking about families who don’t have enough to eat or who have been pushed into poverty because of economic policies that are friendly to industry and the rich. That is anti-poor.

Allowing the logging industry to plow through national parks, or manufacturers to pollute our earth, under the ironically named “Clear Skies Act” all in the name of revenue. That is anti-environment.

And the thousands upon thousands of soliders and innocent civilians who have been killed as a direct result of this administration’s military policies. That is a culture of death if I’ve ever heard of one, and is anti-peace.

Abortion is horrible. But it’s not the only issue that I’m concerned about.

Pete

Ok, let me rephrase my position.
Which is worse: a hungry child, a coughing child (as a result of pollution), a child living in a war-torn country, or a child having its brains sucked out? I’m not saying you need to choose only one issue, but you MUST prioritize.

I TRULY appreciate your passion for wanting to cure the world’s ills, but LIFE has got to take 1st place in your concerns.

What kind of world would this be if all the starvation, pollution and war was ended, but children were still mercilessly slaughtered because they were “unwanted”?

QUESTION: If you had the power to eliminate only ONE of these four evils, which would it be: ABORTION, HUNGER, POLLUTION OR WAR?

 

[Bella3502]

Lisa4Catholics:

You know what:nope: You just took this too far Catholics, want abortion illegal for rich and poor Do you want to know why? Because it is murder plain and simple:nope: Whether it is a rich mother or a poor mother,the result is a dead baby and it is wrong!Whatever gave you the idea that Catholics only want to “take abortion away from the poor?”

Let me try and say this one more time.

I do not believe that Roe v. Wade will ever be overturned. But if it were overturned, the decision would affect poor, mostly minority women. Women with money, from affluent backgrounds will still be able to secure safe abortions in safe, sterile surroundings, from doctors who will keep their “dirty little secrets.”

I never said that Catholics only want “take abortion away from the poor?”. (YOU SAID THAT, Lisa.)

But by criminalizing it, that is exactly what will happen.

Think back to the days of prohibition. If you had money, you could get booze without going to jail.

 

[Mom_of_one]

Bella3502:

I applaud you… and your efforts.

I never said that it didn’t happen. It just doesn’t happen enough. :clapping:

**Thank you, but please don’t applaud me. I’m no one special, just someone who loves kids. I haven’t done it yet–it’s a desire, but I’ll see where God leads. **

---

**You’re right, it doesn’t happen enough, but that doesn’t justify abortion. Because not enough people do the right thing does not mean that a grave wrong can be allowed, justified, or even made legal! Right is right no matter what anyone does or does not do. There is never any justification for an abortion. **

 

[Mom_of_one]

Bella3502:

Let me try and say this one more time.

I do not believe that Roe v. Wade will ever be overturned. But if it were overturned, the decision would affect poor, mostly minority women. Women with money, from affluent backgrounds will still be able to secure safe abortions in safe, sterile surroundings, from doctors who will keep their “dirty little secrets.”

I never said that Catholics only want “take abortion away from the poor?”. (YOU SAID THAT, Lisa.)

But by criminalizing it, that is exactly what will happen.

Think back to the days of prohibition. If you had money, you could get booze without going to jail.

Just because a rich person may or will make a bad choice doesn’t justify keeping abortion legal. Money can get a rich person just about anything—Angelina Jolie can adopt a baby a heck of alot quicker than I can----but right and wrong don’t depend on what is in your bank account. Osama has got millions and he organizes terror attacks. So what?

 

[Bella3502]

I’ve already addressed your coat hanger argument. You have ignored my response.

I have not ignored your response… I just don’t agree with it.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Bella3502:

I have not ignored your response… I just don’t agree with it.

On what basis?

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Bella3502:

Let me try and say this one more time.

I do not believe that Roe v. Wade will ever be overturned.

Well, true. The United States may decide to sully what it stands for by allowing an illogical and internally inconsistent law to stand on its books. Let’s see if Roberts is confirmed. Then let’s see if Renquist’s replacement is confirmed. Then let’s see if R v W stands on its own merits as law – not on the basis of what it attempts to say – but on the basis of law.

Long before any of the other incursions into R v W happened the lower courts were ruling that the unborn are human and therefore subject to the protection of the Constitution and of the law. Why? Because the killing of the unborn is a house built on sand.

Bella3502:

But if it were overturned, the decision would affect poor, mostly minority women. Women with money, from affluent backgrounds will still be able to secure safe abortions in safe, sterile surroundings, from doctors who will keep their “dirty little secrets.”

True, but that does not argue against removing R v W from the books. The poor always get disproportionately nailed for criminal activity. The rich always get overlooked when the police are looking for perps. Well, maybe ‘always’ overstates the case. But this does not argue against having laws.

Abortion harms mothers, fathers, everyone who knows them as well as the babies whose limbs are broken, wrenched from their sockets; whose brains are sucked out; whose skin is seared by caustic substances. Why? Because of natural law. God made us to be not the givers of life but the recipients of life. We are hardwired to bond with the gifts which God gives us which are children. True, sometimes things go horribly wrong. But the law and the norms of society need not pander to what is wrong rather than what is lifegiving.

Bella3502:

I never said that Catholics only want “take abortion away from the poor?”. (YOU SAID THAT, Lisa.)

This contradicts this:

Bella3502:

But by criminalizing it, that is exactly what will happen.

Bella3502:

Think back to the days of prohibition. If you had money, you could get booze without going to jail.

There is not an abortion-equivalent for social drinking. Abortion is as absolutely harmful to the aborted child as the first drink is to an alcoholic. If booze were as universally lethal as abortion is, then prohibition would still be on the books.

Your concern for the poor and the marginalized is laudable and in no measure flies against the Church’s concern for the same. However, it is the poor and the marginalized who most suffer from the eugenic scourge which is abortion. The links which TradAng gave you may take quite some time to read. And they may actually squeeze the blood out of your heart, they are so shocking. But they are worthwhile, forwarding reading.

Finally, try to understand what we have been trying to say. The Church is not trading off the benefits to the rich with the benefits to the poor. The Church has a comprehensive vision which includes both. The Church is going for the whole package: the souls of individuals and the souls of the nations; everything. That is why you see the Church feeding the poor, clothing the naked, giving shelter to the homeless, defending the oppressed, and striving to save the lives of the innocent. The Church does not consider this to be an auction or a barter or in any way a quid pro quo. The Church considers this to a homecoming. We will take no prisoners.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Bella:

According to the laws of almost every country on this world, MURDER, MANSLAUGHTRER and all other forms of killing of the Innocent ARE ILLEGAL - THEY ARE AGAINST THE LAW! But, Murder, Manslaughter and other forms of homocide still accur with alarming frequency in today’s world.

Bella, using YOUR LOGIC shouldn’t MURDER, MANSLAUGHTER and other forms of Homocide also be MADE LEGAL? Why are you insisting on those laws if the rich will get away with violating them as certain of them have recently?

Bella3502:

Let me try and say this one more time.

I do not believe that Roe v. Wade will ever be overturned. But if it were overturned, the decision would affect poor, mostly minority women. Women with money, from affluent backgrounds will still be able to secure safe abortions in safe, sterile surroundings, from doctors who will keep their “dirty little secrets.”

I never said that Catholics only want “take abortion away from the poor?”. (YOU SAID THAT, Lisa.)

But by criminalizing it, that is exactly what will happen.

Think back to the days of prohibition. If you had money, you could get booze without going to jail.

Bella, There are laws against Rape and Child Molestation, but those laws don’t keep those things from happening and don’t keep celebraties and the super rich from getting away with these…

According to YOUR LOGIC, shouldn’t these laws be repealed as well?

Or, Do you want these laws because you know they and the people who enforce them and the public order may be the only things standing between you and your children and the monsters who would gladly do these horrendous things to you and your children?

In which case, why not extend the protection of law to babies in uturo who are human beings who need and deserve that protection just as much as you and I do?

Please understand, we will be judged by how we treat the weakest and most powerless among us. Are you saying that you refuse to protct the weakest because you know the strongest will find ways to circumvent the laws? Or, Are you saying that you don’t want to admit that, since 1973, we’ve slaughtered 46 MILLION Human beings, a crime every bit as foul as 200 years of slavery?

Bella, I don’t think you’re willing to admit to yourself what abortion is, and that each abortion is the deliberate killing of a human being… Have you read those links I gave you?

Blessed are they who act to save God’s Little Ones, Michael

 

[Hildebrand]

estesbob:

Well thats quite a straw man you knocked down there. Nothing in he story talked about sanctions on those who vote for a pro-abortion candidate. However Church teaching has been very clear that a public official cant publicly support abortion and call themselves a Catholic. I really dont care if Kerry, Kennedy, Cumo, et al go to communion or not. that is betwee them an the Lord. BUT they insult and degrade practicing catholics when they claim what they are doing is OK. Its not.

Three points:

It is a grave sacrilege. Sacrilege against the Eucharist is rampant in the Church. The Church must return back to the days when only Catholics living the Catholic faith are the ones who ought to be allowed to receive the Sacrament of Communion. Including sermons on Easter and Christmas to those once/twice a year Catholics telling them they are not to come and present themselves for communion. A soul in mortal sin is pretty much a soul whored to the devil. And when the Church does nothing while Christ is forced to commune with millions of these sick, vile, and poor souls who believe nothing is wrong? It is what it is: a sacrilege.

The politicians and other faithless Catholics must be corrected for their own salvation. Give them a fighting chance to change. For their sake, denial of the Eucharist is an act of mercy.

Third, it is a scandal to all the faithful. Others fall into the sins of these politicians partly because they see no outcry. There are no consequences, only support and acceptance.

So for Christ in the Eucharist, the sinner, and for the Holy Catholic Church, please help these poor sinners!

 

[Hildebrand]

Bella3502:

Think back to the days of prohibition. If you had money, you could get booze without going to jail.

Huh? “going to jail”? Name one woman who went to jail for killing her child by aborting it? I could not find one, Judy Brown could not find one, please look for cases if you truly think women went to jail.

"Some pro-choicers have attacked politicians who oppose abortion. They complain that legislation restricting abortion would cause women to be jailed for having abortions.

The only people who propose prison sentences for abortive women are pro-choicers. The goal of pro-lifers was always to put abortionists in jail, where they belong. Pro-choicers don’t think this is fair. They want abortionists to be able to injure and kill women, free of fear of prosecution. But if abortionists are going to jail for injuring women, pro-choicers want the women to go to jail, too.

Laws against abortion have always targeted the abortionist."

priestsforlife.org/lte/lte26.html

Photo of premature babies:

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/fotos/preemie.jpg

[paloaltoonline.com/news_features/year(name removed by moderator)hotos2001/pages/10.htm](http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news_features/year(name removed by moderator)hotos2001/pages/10.htm)

Photos of aborted babies:

http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/photosassorted/index.htm

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Pete:

The Catholic Church cares about a lot of issues, but over the years, the Church has found 5 that stick out as being particularly lethal to the Church or society that allows them to take hold - They are Abortion, Fetal Stem Cell Sesearch (requires Abortion), Human Cloning (takes the place of God), Euthanasia (also takes the place of God) and Gay Marraige (destructive of he Sacrament of Marraige).

You’re hearing about Abortion, because several of the people here are actively involved in the struggle. If you were on one of the Terri Schiavo threads, you’d be hearing about Euthanasia.

Regarding Taxes, Bush is doing exactly what John Kennady did in 1961 when he reduced the Marginal Rates from 95% to 25% in order to stimulate economic growth. If you’ve studied Economic Cycles, between the Major Cycles and the hit the economy took on 9/11, we should be in a Major Depression (the real thing with apple carts and soup lines).

Between Greenspan’s gradual release of “Air from the Bubble” (the late economy of the 90’s were a result of a massive Bubble) and those across the board Tax cuts Bush pushed-through (unlike the Hoover tax INCREASE), we didn’t have the Depression that should have happened - We had a Recession, which has been over for over a year.

Pete2:

Why is abortion the only issue that matters to Catholics? I am against abortion, but I find that the sins of the Republicans are far worse:

President Bush is openly against the poor with his pro-rich tax policies. He is openly against God’s earth with his pro-industry environmental policies. He is openly against peace with his pro-war aggressive military policy.

Isn’t it a sin to support a candidate who is against the poor, God’s earth, and peace? Is voting a sin?

Pete

Speaking of “against the poor” - Bush tried to push through Voucher Programs and School Choice for those poor parents who children were stuck in rotten schools. The Democrats have successfully thwarted that for 5 years. Who’s agains the poor on that one?

And, If you examine the data from the US Bureau of Census on upward mobility, you’ll find that what you said about people becoming poor in the way you said simply isn’t happening…

You said Bush is against the environment - This isn’t the board to engage on hat debate, but if the issue is the Kyoto Accords, please understand that the us Senate said that they’d vote the Kyoto Accords down 97-0 when they saw what VP Gore had negotiated! Are you saying that Bush should try to push something through the Senate that they’d NEVER RATIFY?

If you’re claiming that it’s because of the “arsenic in the water”? Please understand - President Clinton didn’t even sign the executive order until the last day he was in office! If he really believed in it, Don’t you think he would have signed it a few years earlier instead of dropping it as a political hot potato in the next President’s lap, one whod HAVE TO DO what President Bush did?

Speaking of MILITARY…Are you refering to War against Islamist Terrorsm?

I know the mother of a serviceman who diffuses bombs…I can’t tell you where he is, but one of the bombs he diffused was one place by Sunni Islamists in a Shia Mosque - The Islamists have been doing this since the late 1980’s! At least that’s what the SHIA website I frequent says! The Bomb, which according to the SHIA website would have been placed in the mosque whether my friend’s son was there or not, would have slaughtered hundreds of innocent Muslims. My friend’s son saved hundreds of lives who would have died a few years ago before we got involved… Would you rather that he wasn’t there and those Shias got slaughtered when the Islamist Bomb exploded?

Continued in the next post, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Continued from the Previous post to Pete:

And, then there’s Iraq… Since we’ve been in Iraq, The slaughter by torture and rape by Saddam Hussein has stopped. The deaths of 10,000’s/year - total 500,000+ who were tortured to death just in the 1980’s and 1990’s, not in war (Hussein slaughtered another 2 million by war). People are now able to find, bury and grieve for their loved ones, thanks to the US military. At the same time, we’ve rebuilt nearly 3,000 schools, hospitals and other government buildings, and provided fresh potable water and sewage facilities to over 4 million Iraqis (mainly in the South) who never had them.

And, I don’t know where you’re getting your “thousands and thousands being killed as a direct result of this Adminstration’s policies”. The fact is that Islamist terrorists were slaughtering people BEFORE we ever invaded Afghanistan (let alone Iraq), and they declared war before the slaughter of 9/11 which occured as a result of planning carried out during the CLINTON ADMINISTRATION! Again, I can go into detail about this - This board isn’t the place.

It seems that you’ve forgotten who it was that was removed, and maybe you’ve never heard of his role in various terrorist attacks against us and other people around the world… Some of that may come out during his trial. Some did come out during the trials for the people who bombed the WTC in 1993.

You can ignore everything I’ve said above, but it is all factual, and I can back it all up with links.

As I said, this isn’t the board for a Bush debate, but I sometimes wonder why people bring it up when a real evil such as the slaughter of 46 Million Human Beings over the last 32 years is brought up…

It may be that we’re worked up about Abortion because we know that every single Abortion snuffs out a Human Life, and that there’s no way a just God could allow us to continue protecting and blessing our country as He so obviously has.

Is this why you’re bringing up the stuff about Bush, because you don’t want to look at what our country has been doing to Innocent Human Beings for he las 32 years?

Blessed are they who act to save the Innocent, Michael

 

[Bella3502]

fix:

This logic is perverse. In any abortion the baby is murdered, rich or poor. Most of the abortions in the USA are about convenience. Surgical abortion is part of the issue, but there are uncounted numbers from contraception and other chemicals.

If I understand your logic, after making abortion illegal again, the next thing for Catholics to rally against is contraception until it too is illegal.

Sorry, but I don’t see that ever happening either.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

Bella3502:

Let me try and say this one more time.

I do not believe that Roe v. Wade will ever be overturned. But if it were overturned, the decision would affect poor, mostly minority women. Women with money, from affluent backgrounds will still be able to secure safe abortions in safe, sterile surroundings, from doctors who will keep their “dirty little secrets.”

I never said that Catholics only want “take abortion away from the poor?”. (YOU SAID THAT, Lisa.)

But by criminalizing it, that is exactly what will happen.

Think back to the days of prohibition. If you had money, you could get booze without going to jail.

Read your post,what does it sound like your saying?
Originally Posted by Bella3502
*"Making abortion illegal will NOT stop women from seeking them. And they will get them by any means available. But here is where the race card comes in again>>>> Rich women will still be able to see their nice doctors in their nice Beverly Hills clinics where they will get abortions in safe sterile surroundings. The poor minority woman will go back to the coat hanger and most likely end up somewhere bleeding to death.

There are no easy answers to the problem of abortion. Making it illegal for the poor* (which is what most Catholics advocate) is not a solution."Murder is illegal in every other instance facet of society (with the acception of a recent legal precedent)it is wrong and should be illegal.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Bella3502:

If I understand your logic, after making abortion illegal again, the next thing for Catholics to rally against is contraception until it too is illegal.

Sorry, but I don’t see that ever happening either.

Bella,

Since you don’t see anything we want happening, what do you see happening?

Don’t you agree that the Catholic Church has the right and the duty to make pronouncements regarding matters of Faith and Morals for CATHOLICS in order to ensure the Faithful conduct themselves in a manner befitting the Kindom of heaven? Or, Are you saying that the Church should modify the Teaching of the Church to suit people such as yourself?

Bella, in answer to repeated questions about the Humanity of the Fetus, you answered that you didn’t know. I have NO problem with those who don’t know or who hav e a hard time seeing the Fetus as Human, but who are willing to look at the literature on the subject and to adjust their opinion according to what they see.

I was there once myself, and, until 10 years ago, defended Abortion rights, even though I didn’t like abortion.

But, I just can’t abide the position stated by John Keary who said that he believed that “Life begins at Conception”, but “I support a woman’s Right to Choose”. What he really said is that the woman’s need for convenience supercedes the Babies Right to Life…

Terri Schiavo being dehydrated to death so Michael Schiavo could marry his live-in lover (with whom he had 2 children over 10 years) was just that philosophy taken to its logical conclusion.

Several people on the Board have done enough research to demonstrate that Michael’s story about Terry’s wishes CHANGED to suit his needs, and that Judge Greer chose to ignore the inconsistency because of his own conflict of interests.

The fact that NOT ONE women’s group spoke out on behalf of Terri during the trial, appeal and ordeal should be evidence enough of the connection of Abortion and what was done to her.

Bella, you can either do the hard thinking now, or you can do it when our country is in the throes of a real crises, or you or one of your friends is in the middle of one.

I hope you’ll agree that it’s better to ask and asnswer the questions now and not wait until then.

Blessed are they who act to save God’s Little Ones, Michael

 

[fix]

Bella3502:

If I understand your logic, after making abortion illegal again, the next thing for Catholics to rally against is contraception until it too is illegal.

Sorry, but I don’t see that ever happening either.

The abolitionists did not hold to your beliefs and it is good they did not.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Bella3502:

If I understand your logic, after making abortion illegal again, the next thing for Catholics to rally against is contraception until it too is illegal.

Sorry, but I don’t see that ever happening either.

Whatever gave you the idea that things come next? The Church is not a mechanistic entity. She is a relationalist (not relativistic) entity. Contraception is one of the bits and pieces arrayed against the Gospel of Life. Abortion is spindoctored as a backup to contraception. This is a lie. In many cases, contraception = abortion. As I have explained to you before, the Church has a comprehensive vision of life. She will not trade off one aspect of life for another. She will not trade off one human being’s life for another. That has been done by Someone far greater than any of us.

Certainly some kinds of contraception are on the chopping block already. Why? Because they are dangerous to the women taking them.

Here are some more links:

Humanae Vitae

Donum Vitae

Evangelium Vitae

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Bella: on your personal profile, you say you are Catholic. Yet you have publicly disagreed with core Catholic teaching. I am asking you to change your designation to something like ‘Undecided Catholic’ or simply remove the Catholic designation from your profile. The designation as it stands is misleading. A vulnerable person searching for answers and looking at your profile might assume you represent Catholic teaching which you do not.

You have been impervious to any of the explanations given to you. It appears that you have not done the reading we have offered you either, because none of your subsequent posts refers to that reading. You have simply persisted in your unsupported tautologies and then escalated by attempting to make this topic about other topics. These are tactics which we have come to associate with anti-Catholicism.

 

[Robert_Bay]

Notice:

Thank you to all those who have participated in this discussion. This thread is now closed.