Why almost half the Catholics not prolife?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Raafat
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
“Abortions are of necessity”?

Disagree. Killing a baby is rarely if ever a necessity (just to save mom’s life).

Further, I find it noteworthy when someone says an abortion is “necessary,” because really what that means is the mother has “no choice ,” i.e. they MUST abort, and that puts the lie to the position that the other side favors, i.e. pro-CHOICE.
 
Last edited:
Diaconia said:
This is patently false.
Click to expand...
Yes that post you quoted was one of the most asinine, dishonest things I’ve ever read. It’s why I refrain from discussing the issue. This whole thread is an example of what anti-abortion people are up against when debating. The dishonesty, the rationalizations, the semantic games. Cut the crap. Put simply abortion is killing. Anyone involved in it is a killer. Repent or be thrown into the fiery furnace where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth. I said my piece, so anyone who has a problem or wants to reply or quote me or bait me can save your typing. I won’t respond. I will probably mute this thread.
 
Last edited:
Now, to answer, there are in fact lots of Catholics who favor abortion. We can argue over how many, but it’s lots. Lots of reasons for this, including:
–They want to go along with pro-abortion friends and families;
–They justify it by believing in things like overpopulation or hear catchy slogans like, “every child a wanted child.”
–Birth control. Lots of women sadly use it as birth control.
–Fear, including the loss of a lifestyle. Lots of women sadly are pro-life…till their baby in utero is diagnosed with Downs or something like it.
 
Last edited:
Raafat said:
Hello,

I would like yo know why almost half the Catholics, at least in the west are not pro-life?

I understand the support for any other issue, but this? This a hard one. I mean no disrespect, but I find it very weird.

Best regards.
Click to expand...
I don’t think “half” is actually correct. The truth is that there are a LARGE number of people who are counted as Catholics who honestly are not practicing the Catholic faith in any way whatsoever.

These people view being Catholic like being of Italian or Irish ethnicity. It’s part of their heritage or ethnicity, but not who they truly are.

Additionally, there are a number discrepancies on what a “practicing Catholic” means. Most polls (which are ran by non-Catholics and/or secularists) consider a “practicing Catholic” to be someone who goes to mass at least 12 - 13 times a year (one Sunday per month plus Christmas). To most “practicing Catholics” that’s no where close to being enough to consider someone to be a “practicing Catholic.” To most “practicing Catholics,” a “practicing Catholic” tries hard to attend Mass at least every Sunday and every holy day of obligation.

I would venture to guess, that the MAJORITY of Catholics who attend Mass every Sunday & Holy Day of Obligation are personally pro life (even if they vote for pro choice candidates). I know personally, that’s what I see the vast majority of parishes in my Archdiocese.

So in reality, the polls do not distinguish between people who actually believe in the religion vs those who don’t.

It is like polling Jews on whether they believe in God or not. If you are including atheists who self identify as Jewish because they have Jewish roots, then the % of Jews who don’t believe in God is going to look pretty high.

I hope this helps.
 
Last edited:
billsherman said:
There is absolutely no reason why that support couldn’t go to individuals who are out of work. I
Click to expand...
You do realize that the upport to the “Big Bad Evil corporations” goes to making supplies and to pay for salaries of essential workers, right? Or are they just expected to do things for free?
 
REPENT said:
You do realize that the upport to the “Big Bad Evil corporations” goes to making supplies and to pay for salaries of essential workers, right?
Click to expand...
Some of it, yes. But why not provide this aid to the workers directly? Cut out the middle man. Keep it from inflating a stock price, or being directed to something that doesn’t benefit the workers.
 
nicholasG said:
With a few exceptions, abortions are of necessity
Click to expand...
according to the church, killing a child is never a necessity
KMC said:
Is it immoral for me to disagree with certain governors definition of what is and is not “essential”?
Click to expand...
in some states you can buy a bottle of whiskey but not go to church to pray
TheLittleLady said:
Agree. The Church commands we protect human life from conception until natural death. THAT is how one is pro-life.
Click to expand...
60 million deaths by abortion against how many by the death penalty,

no comparison and this pro-life argument about including the death penalty or social programs is just a smokescreen to justify support for people trying to take God out of our society. pro-life for years was associated with anti-abortion until it was hijacked in a marketing scheme.
RepetantCatholic said:
I will vote for Biden, who has explained that while he personally is pro-life and wouldn’t want anyone in his family to have an abortion as a representative of the people he has to allow what has been considered legal in America to go on.
Click to expand...
political grandstanding, the truth is that Biden’s support for doing away with the Hyde amendment will lead to expanded abortions? How many children will be lead to their spiritual demise by the democrats pushing of alternate lifestyles which are anti-catholic?

This election is about God in our society, one group does everything it can to remove God and the other is pushing to keep God relevant.

It is not about Trump, it is a religious issue. it is unfortunate that we have Trump at the head but many would balk even if the GOP candidate was a solid Christian.

yes, the world is secular, but we all will be judged. we should do what we can to keep God relevant. There is a balance that can be achieved between secularism and God, but the Dems don’t want any part of it. as an example
“The number is down because we brought the number down, ” he told reporters Monday. “God did not do that. Faith did not do that. Destiny did not do that.”

“A lot of pain and suffering did that, ” the Democrat continued. “That’s how it works. It’s math. . . . (New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat)
Click to expand...
our faith and probably prayers are worth nothing to the democrats
RepetantCatholic said:
So, again, I’m not a one issue voter
Click to expand...
it isn’t one issue anymore, that is just propaganda to hide the hedonistic lifestyle democrats push
RepetantCatholic said:
I did not grow up in a Red State
Click to expand...
the church is supposed to be one church not different in different states or countries,
billsherman said:
Cut out the middle man.
Click to expand...
why not go full-blown socialism and let the government control everything?
it hasn’t worked anywhere it was tried before, but hay, maybe the next time is the charm.
 
upant said:
why not go full-blown socialism and let the government control everything?
Click to expand...
Because that’s not at all what I have suggested. I’d rather we stay away from government control of the means of production. With that said, I do think bailed out benefits should actually be purchased by the government. Or something similar, so that we aren’t just socializing losses (like we currently do with bailouts), but also socialized the profits. If a corporation needs a bailout, it becomes ours. That should be a pretty tough incentive for companies to avoid them.

I think, and have stated a few times, that direct aid to individuals is a far better policy. We can do it, we just would rather give the lion’s share of money to corporations. Americans like it that way! Privatize the profits, and socialize the losses!
 
Well, I will stick with the Catechism’s “marketing scheme” every time.

2319 Every human life, from the moment of conception until death, is sacred because the human person has been willed for its own sake in the image and likeness of the living and holy God.
 
TheLittleLady said:
Well, I will stick with the Catechism’s “marketing scheme” every time.

2319 Every human life, from the moment of conception until death, is sacred because the human person has been willed for its own sake in the image and likeness of the living and holy God.
Click to expand...
what does the catechism have to do with abortion groups hijacking the term pro-life? when someone says pro-life has to include more, the abortion industry wins.
 
Raafat said:
I would like to know why almost half the Catholics, at least in the west are not pro-life?

I understand the support for any other issue, but this? This a hard one. I mean no disrespect, but I find it very weird.
Click to expand...
It all depends on how “pro-life” is defined. Initially it meant “anti-abortion”, and as such was a powerful tool in that fight, so powerful that the term was first modified, and then co-opted by those against whom it was first applied. Now the term means pretty much whatever what someone wants it to mean, which allows them to conceive of themselves as being just as pro-life, if not more so, than those who use the term to mean “merely” being opposed to abortion. As an example I offer this:
billsherman said:
Does our society do enough to reduce car accidents or flu deaths? Certainly not. Is our society pro-life? Absolutely not.
Click to expand...
Most political issues influence people’s lives, and to that extent can be self-defined as life issues. “Your” position thus becomes the pro-life side, and you can assure yourself you are equally as pro-life as those who are concerned with abortion alone.

It is not so much that there are large numbers of Catholics who don’t oppose abortion as it is the number of Catholics who (a) either believe that Republicans do not (can not, or will not) effectively oppose it, or (b) believe the issue is offset by “other” pro-life issues that are more effectively addressed by the Democrats.

If pretty much everything is a life issue then it is simple to convince yourself that those who are “wrong” on those issues are less pro-life than you. The term loses its effectiveness as it loses its meaning.
 
upant said:
what does the catechism have to do with abortion groups hijacking the term pro-life? when someone says pro-life has to include more, the abortion industry wins.
Click to expand...
Not really. Having a consistent ethic on life doesn’t mean you have to vote democrat.
upant said:
and the other is pushing to keep God relevant.
Click to expand...
I would say that any progress on that is minimal.
 
Last edited:
VanitasVanitatum said:
Not really. Having a consistent ethic on life doesn’t mean you have to vote democrat.
Click to expand...
You’re absolutely correct.

All too often on this site we see comments like found in this thread. A consistent ethic of life is entirely absent. This is what happens when a theological ethic (such as life issues), are reduced to nothing more than ammunition in partisan warfare. These arguments make a mockery of the Church and life issues. If we get to pick and choose which issues are life issues, and which aren’t, which can be compromised away, and which can’t, we have neither an ethic nor a theology. We have a partisan talking point.

Can we bomb Canada to help out Boeing’s bottom line? I’m curious if anyone here thinks that you can be pro-life and believe war for profit is morally acceptable.
 
billsherman said:
These arguments make a mockery of the Church and life issues
Click to expand...
the US bishops just made abortion their priority issue. if we include everything a person thinks is pro-life, we wouldn’t be able to vote for anyone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top