Why do we as Catholics believe that life begins at conception?

[openmind77]

That’s true, but it gets worse. He believes that any fetus, even one he agrees is an unborn human being, is ALWAYS subject to summary “removal” by virtue of his presence within the womb. Womb’s are frightfully dangerous places in his world! And to think, everyone one of us runs that gauntlet.

Yes, the pregnant woman’s rights are paramount because it is her body that is in question.

However, it is not as bleak as you think - according to Hindu theology, the soul which missed a chance to be born, just needs to wait for the next chance to be born to another woman or may even be to the same woman, in case she decides to get pregnant again and is prepared to have the baby.

According to Catholic theology. I guess, the unborn soul goes straight to heaven for eternity?

In any case, third party’s are not concerned, unless they decide to make things worse for the people actually involved.

 

[SuperLuigi]

=openmind77;13775562]Nobody is shooting anyone (In fact I think all handguns and automatic weapons should be banned in the US like in Australia - strangely enough most ‘pro-life’ people are against gun control).

If gun control worked, Chicago would be of the safest places on earth.

Why would anyone expect a criminal to follow a gun law? Criminals break laws.

Anyway, it does not matter that I don’t know exactly, since I am not doing any abortions. The
sole decider is the pregnant woman who seeks the termination and it is her body and she should have the last word and total control over what stays inside her own body.

The same kind of personhood argument was used to keep slavery legal for as long as it was.

Also, where all of these “my body, my choice” folks on Big Gulps, salt, vending machines in public schools, mandatory health insurance, smoking, tobacco and transfat?" to paraphrase Jason Lewis.

Not that these things are all good, but it’s still restricting “choice”.

 

[Porknpie]

The soul definitely does not enter the fetus before 6 months, that is what I believe. I could be wrong and so could you.

I already showed you a birth of a baby at 5 months so your 6 month hypothesis of “definitely does not” is already in error.

And since you could be wrong, I may be right :yup: … as you have no evidence to support your conclusion of 6 months. I:nope:

“Neither you (or I) should impose your beliefs on her.”

Please explain this: You profess that she has right to end a life inside of her. Based on what?

I profess that the human life inside of her…a “someone”…has a right to live, equal to hers. I profess that you have no right to impose your beliefs on the human life inside of her, especially as this human life has no way of defending themselves. I step in to defend this life as it can not defend itself. I believe I have the right to do so, even if you object.

“The pregnant woman is not killing anyone.”

This is a head in sand moment. My God expects me to defend the life of the most innocent, this life included, as he calls us to love, especially those in most need.

“Those people who have made her life difficult and made her suffer”

The one who suffers is the unborn who have their arms and legs removed from their body, and their head crushed or cutoff.

They find it difficult to reach the day of their supposed birth.

“will answer for it to the Christ, regardless of what anyone else thinks.”

Those who abort their child, those who support the women’s right to do so, including those in the medical profession will have to answer for it. Yet, the Lord is all loving, all forgiving. He will forgive all if one sincerely repents.

"He will be here soon, so you won’t have all these problems about not knowing (or you could just go about your own business and not interfere with the woman’s life - then you won’t have any problems either)

He will come again, and will judge all fairly. Those non-Christians that conduct themselves against the natural law, including the taking of innocent life, will have to answer Him. Those Christians who likewise do so, who reject the teachings of The Church, will likewise have to answer to him.

 

[Porknpie]

Yes, the pregnant woman’s rights are paramount because it is her body that is in question.

You have a premise here that she has rights… based on what?

Help me to understand where her rights come from.

 

[openmind77]

I already showed you a birth of a baby at 5 months so your 6 month hypothesis of “definitely does not” is already in error.

I don’t think you understood what I said. If a fetus is born prematurely the soul does enter immediately whenever the birth takes place - even if it is five months.The six month period I mentioned is while inside the mother’s womb.

Please explain this: You profess that she has right to end a life inside of her. Based on what?

Again, I said she has the right to have the fetus removed from inside her. She is not killing anyone.

… I step in to defend this life as it can not defend itself. I believe I have the right to do so, even if you object.

You can explain your reasons to the Christ when he comes very soon. I am sure he will be sympathetic to your reasons for interfering with the woman’s life.

…
Those who abort their child, those who support the women’s right to do so, including those in the medical profession will have to answer for it.

I guess we have a difference of opinion. Luckily we will know the truth in just a couple of years

He will come again, and will judge all fairly.

Here we both agree. But we should not forget his criteria for judgement from Matthew 25:35-40, the sheep are:

• Those who care about the poor and hungry (think foodstamps)
• Those who care about the poor and sick (think Medicaid)
• Those who care about strangers (think refugees/immigrants)
• Those who care about those in prison (think reduced prison sentences, and decriminalizing offenses like drug addiction)

Those non-Christians that conduct themselves against the natural law, including the taking of innocent life, will have to answer Him. Those Christians who likewise do so, who reject the teachings of The Church, will likewise have to answer to him.

In other words everyone will have to answer to him, especially those who have hurt other people for the sake of personal beliefs.

 

[graciew]

However, it is not as bleak as you think - according to Hindu theology, the soul which missed a chance to be born, just needs to wait for the next chance to be born to another woman or may even be to the same woman, in case she decides to get pregnant again and is prepared to have the baby.

:tsktsk:

 

[guanophore]

Yes, the pregnant woman's rights are paramount because it is her body that is in question.

Pregnancy is not a disease or ailment, Oh close minded One. It is a natural sequalae to enganging it the behavior that is meant for procreation. The offspring is not some sort of tumor or oppressive presence. It is a baby. God created humans with the gift of procreation.

However, it is not as bleak as you think - according to Hindu theology, the soul which missed a chance to be born, just needs to wait for the next chance to be born to another woman or may even be to the same woman, in case she decides to get pregnant again and is prepared to have the baby.

Being prepared to have a baby is not a requirement to successfully have one. Unplanned pregnancies can be the greatest gift.

The same kind of personhood argument was used to keep slavery legal for as long as it was.

I think maybe ClosedMinded One supports slavery. Maybe it is an opportunity for a soul to incarnate for a growthful purpose? Maybe the soul requires suffering,and having it’s life at the mercy of those who do not respect life?

If gun control worked, Chicago would be of the safest places on earth.

Why would anyone expect a criminal to follow a gun law? Criminals break laws.

The same kind of personhood argument was used to keep slavery legal for as long as it was.

Also, where all of these “my body, my choice” folks on Big Gulps, salt, vending machines in public schools, mandatory health insurance, smoking, tobacco and transfat?" to paraphrase Jason Lewis.

Not that these things are all good, but it’s still restricting “choice”.

Also, where all of these “my body, my choice” folks on Big Gulps, salt, vending machines in public schools, mandatory health insurance, smoking, tobacco and transfat?" to paraphrase Jason Lewis.

Not that these things are all good, but it’s still restricting “choice”.

Don’t leave out required vaccinations in order to attend public school, and in many cases, to get a job. And people’s choice to smoke is also very restricted. How dare society impose such restrictions on what people choose to put in their bodies!

 ... as you have no evidence to support your conclusion of 6 months.

The CloseMindedOne has not produced any evidence to support any of the outlandinsh claims he has made.

Please explain this: You profess that she has right to end a life inside of her. Based on what?

Use the “search thread” tool, and enter his username. You will find an astounding supply of irrational ideas.

I profess that the human life inside of her....a "someone"...has a right to live, equal to hers.  I profess that you have no right to impose your beliefs on the human life inside of her, especially as this human life has no way of defending themselves.  I step in to defend this life as it can not defend itself.  I believe I have the right to do so, even if you object.

Look out, PnP! the ClosedMIndedOne has someone coming who he believes is a “Christ” that supports abortion and killing of the innocent, and will take retribution upon all who try to interfere. We have another name for this entity, who is a liar and a murderer from the beginning.

The one who suffers is the unborn who have their arms and legs removed from their body, and their head crushed or cutoff.

They find it difficult to reach the day of their supposed birth.

Those who abort their child, those who support the women’s right to do so, including those in the medical profession will have to answer for it. Yet, the Lord is all loving, all forgiving. He will forgive all if one sincerely repents.

He will come again, and will judge all fairly. Those non-Christians that conduct themselves against the natural law, including the taking of innocent life, will have to answer Him. Those Christians who likewise do so, who reject the teachings of The Church, will likewise have to answer to him.

Let us pray for the lot of them.

 

[openmind77]

The doctrine of reincarnation can be used to make a strong case against abortion:

If a foetus is aborted, the soul within it suffers a major karmic setback. It is deprived of the opportunities its potential human existence would have given it to earn good karma…

People can make strong cases using all sorts of arguments even those they don’t believe in. Which is why it is best to let the Christ explain these cases which nobody is sure of, and in the meantime not interfere with other people based on your personal beliefs.

However there is absolutely no karmic impact by not being born - good or bad karma is only earned while in incarnation in a human body. In any case, the soul is not deprived for long, since it gets the chance to be born at the next opportunity, maybe even to the same mother.

 

[Rau]

…it gets the chance to be born at the next opportunity, maybe even to the same mother.

What a turn of fate that would be!

 

[openmind77]

What a turn of fate that would be!

Interesting isn’t it? A pregnant teenager who is not ready to have a child in high school, may be eager to become a mother later in life in her 20s or 30s. It may be better for the child too, to have a more mature mother, better prepared to raise a family. I believe it happens more often than you think.

Filial relationships and loyalties go way beyond one physical existence - they last across many lifetimes. Not for a moment should anyone believe that the soul of the unborn child, is thanking them for harassing its mother. No one should imagine that they know what is best for other people’s families or what God wants for them.

We still have to wait for the Christ to come and explain this to us - believe me, it will be soon.

 

[Porknpie]

Again, I said she has the right to have the fetus [human being, human life] removed from inside her.

In your opinion …she has a right.

Catholic’s reject that she has a right to kill the human life within her, and profess that we have a right to protect those most vulnerable.

God’s words through the prophet Jeremiah writing 2,700 years ago below. He speaks not of a “something” but a “someone” inside the Mother.

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
and before you were born I consecrated you;

Our right to protect this life comes from Christ, among other scripture verses includes the verse below. Nothing hinders a life coming to him more, than one that has their arms and legs cutoff and their head crushed, all before they are born.

"Jesus said, “Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven." (Mt 19:14)

And the thought of doing so, for the perceived comfort of the mother is to call what is evil, as good. God speaks of this in Isaiah 5:20:

Woe to those who call evil good
and good evil,
who put darkness for light
and light for darkness,

Openmind, can you explain where this woman’s “right” comes from?

 

[Rau]

Openmind, can you explain where this woman’s “right” comes from?

Imagine if sex between humans led in short order to the emission of an “egg”, which we then cared for for 9 months till the child emerged. One wonders whether parents would be entitled morally to despatch their offspring (“in-egg”) from the house, on the grounds that s/he occupies precious space in the house and creates work for the mother?

 

[kozlosap]

It is a natural sequalae to enganging it the behavior that is meant for procreation.

Let us pray for the lot of them.

And we wonder why there are so many millenials leaving the Church. I might suggest that our young adults are more interested in social justice and helping others in lieu of spouting dogma.

 

[davidv]

And we wonder why there are so many millenials leaving the Church. I might suggest that our young adults are more interested in social justice and helping others in lieu of spouting dogma.

Why is it either/or? Why not both/and?

 

[JimG]

And we wonder why there are so many millenials leaving the Church. I might suggest that our young adults are more interested in social justice and helping others in lieu of spouting dogma.

It sounds to me like guanophore was speaking of biology rather than spouting dogma. But in any case, advocating that unborn children not be killed does seem to be a form of social justice.

 

[estesbob]

And we wonder why there are so many millenials leaving the Church. I might suggest that our young adults are more interested in social justice and helping others in lieu of spouting dogma.

So there is a conflict between upholding the teachings of the Church and Social Justice??? Should the Church jettison 2,000 years of teachings to placate millennials?

 

[Rau]

And we wonder why there are so many millenials leaving the Church. I might suggest that our young adults are more interested in social justice and helping others in lieu of spouting dogma.

What a remarkable defence of the “right” to abortion!

 

[estesbob]

What a remarkable defence of the “right” to abortion!

One wonders how “social justice” benefits those denied the right to life?

 

[adrift]

The soul definitely does not enter the fetus before 6 months, that is what I believe. I could be wrong and so could you

You say definitely and than say you could be wrong. Clarify something for me. Those babies born before six months, according to you, have no souls. Does that mean babies that are born at 21 weeks souls are given to them when they reach a month after birth?

 

[openmind77]

In your opinion …she has a right.
…
Openmind, can you explain where this woman’s “right” comes from?

I fail to see what is there to be explained here. Every person has a right to control their own body - a man or a woman. No other person can dictate how the woman’s body should be used - to house a fetus or for anything else.

I really don’t see how the passages you quote from the Bible apply to abortion.

Jesus was merely saying that children should be allowed to come to him (apparently some disciples were trying to stop the children), there is really nothing more to read in there