Why almost half the Catholics not prolife?

[VanitasVanitatum]

An example (which has probably been used by a lot of pro-choicers before, but idc):
Imagine a 19 year old girl who is raped. The man who raped her chose to do that. Imagine she ends up being pregnant, but doesn’t have the resources, time or isn’t mentally stable enough to raise a child. She didn’t choose to be raped, and she didn’t choose to get pregnant. Now, this child would have two possible outcomes if it were to live:

1. The mother chooses to keep the baby: They are born into an unstable family, with scarce resources and a traumatized mother.
2. The mother chooses to put the baby up for adoption: They will spend years in an unreliable, unsteady system without a guarantee that he will be adopted by loving, caring and stable parents.

In both cases, we would be damaging at least one life.

That’s a reason to fix the foster care system not abortion.

A baby - in the early stages of pregnancy - is nothing more than a clump of cells. This makes abortion no worse than the removal of a tumor.

A judgement based on appearances is a shallow one.

So, even though the Bible supports the birth of all life from the moment it is conceived, it most importantly supports the concept of life . God would support the removal of a tumor to save a person’s life, which isn’t very different from abortion in the early stages of pregnancy.

God will not support sacrificing others for personal gain. The answer to alleviate sufferings by finding alternatives and providing for them.

 

[upant]

The US bishops, however, would never suggest that life issues such as the death penalty and ignoring medical experts when setting public policy over COVID-19, don’t fall under the banner of pro-life.

as stated above everything can be pro-life,

the US bishops separated the issue of abortion and prioritized it.

they saw an obvious need to do that

 

[upant]

When pro-life is used to mean anti-abortion charges of hypocrisy usually follow suit.

as I said, great marketing.

 

[TheLittleLady]

According to the first PEW survey:

26% of those who think abortion should legal in all or most cases go to Mass every week.

Heck, more than half who think abortion legal all/most do not even believe in God.

This tells me that the study was of both practicing and non-practicing Catholics. Take that into consideration before painting the average US Parish next Sunday with a broad brush.

I wish they had broken it out as “illegal in ALL cases” and “illegal in MOST cases”.

 

[Elf01]

If pro-life is merely a political issue, the Church has lost.

If it’s a religious issue the pro life movement has lost.

 

[Mac]

Nicolas, the Church teaches abortion is murder. Pro life is an appropriate term for those against murder. This moral issue out weighs all other issues, a Catholic can never support abortion, this includes voting for pro abortion politicians.

If every Catholic voted against pro abortion politicians it would be over. Be part of the solution not the problem

 

[krayzevuze]

Catholic can never support abortion, this includes voting for pro abortion politicians.

is this really the Church magisterial teaching on the matter? it seems they can only not vote for them if they are voting for them because of abortion, but for other proportionate reasons can, and this is a prudential judgment (which ofc can be right or wrong, but the debate is here)

 

[Mac]

A Brief Catechism for Catholic Voters | EWTN

Yep it is Church teaching we cant vote for pro abortion politicians.

 

[krayzevuze]

this is an interesting article although it seems, particularly in question 3, in contradiction to this:

[N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.]

Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion: General Principles | EWTN (the doc cdf)

by the CDF, although this doesnt say what the proportionate reasons are, and I assume other mortal sins and the " do much more for the culture of life than a pro-life candidate" would count, and a persons judgment of these things could be wrong, but still it doesnt seem to lend itself to this priests conclusion that it is a mortal sin

 

[TMC]

is this really the Church magisterial teaching on the matter? it seems they can only not vote for them if they are voting for them because of abortion, but for other proportionate reasons can, and this is a prudential judgment (which ofc can be right or wrong, but the debate is here)

This is what the Church teaches.

 

[SeekSalvation]

If you can answer the question:

“Why do 2/3 of Catholics not believe in the True Presence of Christ in the Eucharist”?

…I think you will have your answer.

 

[TMC]

If you can answer the question:

“Why do 2/3 of Catholics not believe in the True Presence of Christ in the Eucharist”?

…I think you will have your answer.

I don’t think that stat is true, but even it is what is the connection? Plenty of evangelicals are pro-life, and as far as I know none of them believe in the True Presence.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Nicolas, the Church teaches abortion is murder.

The word “murder” appears 16 times in the Catechism, I just read all of the entries and none mention abortion. #2268 is very specific, yet, no mention of abortion.

2268 The fifth commandment forbids direct and intentional killing as gravely sinful. The murderer and those who cooperate voluntarily in murder commit a sin that cries out to heaven for vengeance.

Infanticide, fratricide, parricide, and the murder of a spouse are especially grave crimes by reason of the natural bonds which they break. Concern for eugenics or public health cannot justify any murder, even if commanded by public authority.

Yep it is Church teaching we cant vote for pro abortion politicians.

Actually, that is the opinion of EWTN or the author, not official documents from US Bishops.

You might want to read the most recent instruction from our Bishops:

https://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/faithful-citizenship/upload/forming-consciences-for-faithful-citizenship.pdf

From the introductory letter:

“The threat of abortion remains our preeminent priority because it directly attacks life itself,
because it takes place within the sanctuary of the family, and because of the number of lives
destroyed. At the same time, we cannot dismiss or ignore other serious threats to human life and
dignity such as racism, the environmental crisis, poverty and the death penalty”

 

[Ender]

When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.

Clearly this caveat has to exist since there could be circumstances that would morally disqualify one candidate regardless of his position on abortion. That said, this is also the excuse used to justify voting for a candidate who supports abortion, and it explains the value of expanding the meaning of “pro-life”. The “presence of proportionate reasons” is in the mind of the voter, and this is why so many serious Catholics support politicians despite their support for abortion.

 

[Ender]

You might want to read the most recent instruction from our Bishops:

From the introductory letter:

“The threat of abortion remains our preeminent priority because it directly attacks life itself,
because it takes place within the sanctuary of the family, and because of the number of lives
destroyed. At the same time, we cannot dismiss or ignore other serious threats to human life and
dignity such as racism, the environmental crisis, poverty and the death penalty”

And this is why Catholics will never abandon politicians who support abortion: because the bishops won’t. This justifies defining other issues on a par with abortion, if not individually then collectively. What they give with one hand (“preeminent priority”) they take away with the other (“at the same time…”).

 

[krayzevuze]

Clearly this caveat has to exist since there could be circumstances that would morally disqualify one candidate regardless of his position on abortion. That said, this is also the excuse used to justify voting for a candidate who supports abortion, and it explains the value of expanding the meaning of “pro-life”. The “ presence of proportionate reasons ” is in the mind of the voter, and this is why so many serious Catholics support politicians despite their support for abortion.

And this is why Catholics will never abandon politicians who support abortion: because the bishops won’t. This justifies defining other issues on a par with abortion, if not individually then collectively. What they give with one hand (“preeminent priority”) they take away with the other (“at the same time…”).

if the bishops are using it this way, and I know they can not hate the Church or cause harm to it esp. if they all teach it, then we’ll just trust God that it is so and that it is well

 

[otjm]

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.

Polls which question the view of Catholics on abortion rarely, if ever, distinguish between and among the following: Catholics who attend Sunday Mass and one or more Masses druing the week; Catholics who attend Mass every Sunday, Catholics who attend Mass occasionally during the year; Catholics who attend Mass Christmas and Easter and rarely otherwise, and Catholics who don’t attend Mass at all.

To put that in perspective, about 23% of Catholics attend Mass every Sunday.

So about 77% of Catholics do not follow the required Sunday Mass; sit should come as no surprise that a poll would show that “50%” of Catholics are not pro life… I would suspect, but can’t show that the vast majority of those attending Sunday Mass every week are pro life.

 

[Ender]

if the bishops are using it this way, and I know they can not hate the Church or cause harm to it esp. if they all teach it, then we’ll just trust God that it is so and that it is well

Bishops make mistakes just like the rest of us; their actions are subject to the same analysis as ours. The idea that “it must be right because a bishop did it” is not reasonable. Good intentions do not guarantee good outcomes.

 

[goout]

I would put it this way. Our culture has some false idols:
The deification of sexual license. Anything that inhibits the expression of sexuality is anathema.
The exaltation of tolerance as an absolute (ie relativism). Abortion has been cast as an issue of tolerance towards struggling women, and the opposition of abortion has been successfully (and falsely) cast as diminishing women’s concerns.

As a culture, we find it difficult to say things when we know the accusation of intolerance is sure to come. Not only do some Catholics tolerate abortion, those of us who do say it is wrong ought to be laying down in the street to stop it, or some action that rises to the barbarity of abortion. But we are much too comfortable in our protests. Mea culpa.

 

[goout]

krayzevuze:

if the bishops are using it this way, and I know they can not hate the Church or cause harm to it esp. if they all teach it, then we’ll just trust God that it is so and that it is well

Bishops make mistakes just like the rest of us; their actions are subject to the same analysis as ours. The idea that “it must be right because a bishop did it” is not reasonable. Good intentions do not guarantee good outcomes.

Why can’t you simply take the statements of our religious superiors at face value?