Why is prolife weak in preserving one's own right to life and seem to disfavor the right to bear arms?

[Bennie_P]

And how do we perform our duty to self defense if we are denied the means by which to do it?

Regulated by whom and by what standards? What may be considered reasonable by some, may be considered unacceptable by others.

Also, a RIGHT that is REGULATED, is no longer a RIGHT because once you start ‘chipping away’ at a RIGHT, it becomes easy to lose most, or all, of it and then you are left with no means to perform your DUTY.

This is an interesting Gun Club they don’t like regulation either.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Light ‘n’ up and Just trust Jesus.

Jesus tells us that we will be judged by what we do and what we failed to do.

**Psalm 91:2 He shall say to the Lord: Thou art my protector, and my refuge: my God, in him will I trust. **

"Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. – Matthew 7:21.

 

[Sir_Knight]

This is an interesting Gun Club they don’t like regulation either.

You’re ignoring the point.

 

[Bennie_P]

Jesus tells us that we will be judged by what we do and what we failed to do.

"Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. – Matthew 7:21.

Here load a whole bible onto to your computer, actually you can get several translations. e-sword.net/index.html it is free. Here is some the Free translations you can down load after you download the basic software.
American Standard Version
Bible in Basic English
Contemporary English Version
Douay-Rheims Bible (w/ Deuterocanon)
English Standard Version
Good News Translation
GOD’S WORD
International Standard Version
Jewish Publication Society Old Testament
King James Version
King James Version (Red Letter)
King James Version (w/ Strong’s) (This is included in the e-Sword installation.)
King James Version (w/ Apocrypha)
Literal Translation of the Holy Bible
Modern King James Version
Revised Version
Analytical-Literal Translation
Darby Bible
English Majority Text Version
James Murdock New Testament1,
Webster Bible
Weymouth New Testament
Young’s Literal Translation
Hebrew Old Testament (w/ Strong’s),
Greek Old Testament (Septuagint)
Latin Vulgate (w/ Deuterocanon)
Check out the web site, they do offer some modern translations that you may purchase, if you want, but not required, all that I listed are free!
The software is Awesome, once you check out the features you’ll love it.
This is a feature I really like - so check it out.

 

[roymckenzie]

This is an interesting Gun Club they don’t like regulation either.

I think this qualifies as the logical fallacy called a red herring.

 

[roymckenzie]

Where there are a lot of generalities thrown around about PRO-LIFE people let us more simply list them.

“Pro-Life” should also:

• equal opposition to the death penalty
• equal pro-self defense (at least modestly pro-gun)
• equal opposition to mercy killing ~ euthanasia
• equal pro-foreign intervention against genocide (why are we not in Darfur?)
• equal opposition to an Iraq pull out of our troops

My friend, much of what you have to say is solid and well supported by the Catholic Church. It is not Catholic to be opposed to the death penalty.
CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH - 2267:

Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity with the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm—without definitively taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself—the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.”.

Is capitol punishment over used and is it used immorally at times, I would say yes it is. It is clearly immoral and therefore against the Catholic Church and the teachings of Jesus to use the death penalty for vengeance or punishment. If there is no other way to protect society it would be the obligation of duly constituted government to remove the risk a person presents to other people even if it required the termination of that persons life.

We are obligated to protect society.

 

[Ender]

“Pro-Life” should also:

• equal opposition to the death penalty
• equal pro-self defense (at least modestly pro-gun)
• equal opposition to mercy killing ~ euthanasia
• equal pro-foreign intervention against genocide (why are we not in Darfur?)
• equal opposition to an Iraq pull out of our troops

I think the biggest problem with the “pro-life” label is that too much gets included in the definition. Whatever the agenda is, defining one’s personal concerns as pro-life automatically adds a little extra lift. It’s like a little boat snagging a tow from a bigger, faster one; it’s great for the little boat but let’s not ignore that it does slow down the bigger one and too many hitchhikers will stop it altogether.

• I oppose pulling out of Iraq, but it’s not fully a life issue (despite the fact that people would die by the hundreds of thousands should we leave too soon.)
• The genocide is Darfur is not simply a life issue. There are way too many political complications involved.
• The death penalty is not simply a life issue. I say this because it is not a black or white question, even for Catholics.

Abortion, euthanasia, fetal stem cell research - these are the true life issues about which there is no debate within the Church, there are not two sides to these issues: one is right, the other is wrong. We need to be very careful about attaching too many partial life issues to the pro-life ship. We have done this in the past and the result has been to anchor the true life issues in place where no one moves forward.

Ender

 

[BlestOne]

hmmm… am I weird? I am very definitely a card carrying, loud mouthed marcher for prolife causes but I am anti gun control. My basic belief is that if we outlaw guns only the criminals will have them since all of us law abiding types will turn ours in and then we will be sitting ducks.

 

[melensdad]

My friend, much of what you have to say is solid and well supported by the Catholic Church. It is not Catholic to be opposed to the death penalty.

I think you and I are in total agreement on the issue of the death penalty. Within the Catholic Church we GENERALLY oppose the death penalty, although the Church does allow for SOME use of it. However within a modern Western society, I believe (maybe I am misinterpreting things) the Catholic Church believes the death penalty should be opposed. I believe my post may have been slightly confusing and very incomplete, but my intention was to say: Generally a Pro-Life Catholic should oppose capital punishment within Western society where other means of keeping society safe are possible.

I think the biggest problem with the “pro-life” label is that too much gets included in the definition . . .
We need to be very careful about attaching too many partial life issues to the pro-life ship. We have done this in the past and the result has been to anchor the true life issues in place where no one moves forward.

Ender, I tend to agree with your statements within the context of the PRO-LIFE MOVEMENT. But as I understand this thread, the original post was asking why some who hold the Pro-Life beliefs do not hold a very strong belief in the obligation to self-defense. Many who follow the Catechism’s “grave” duty statement interpret it to be a belief that guns are a very legitimate form of self-defense. It was from the standpoint of the original post that I provided the list of beliefs that are supported by Church teachings (at least I believe they are).

 

[vern_humphrey]

I think the biggest problem with the “pro-life” label is that too much gets included in the definition. Whatever the agenda is, defining one’s personal concerns as pro-life automatically adds a little extra lift. It’s like a little boat snagging a tow from a bigger, faster one; it’s great for the little boat but let’s not ignore that it does slow down the bigger one and too many hitchhikers will stop it altogether.

• I oppose pulling out of Iraq, but it’s not fully a life issue (despite the fact that people would die by the hundreds of thousands should we leave too soon.)
• The genocide is Darfur is not simply a life issue. There are way too many political complications involved.
• The death penalty is not simply a life issue. I say this because it is not a black or white question, even for Catholics.

Abortion, euthanasia, fetal stem cell research - these are the true life issues about which there is no debate within the Church, there are not two sides to these issues: one is right, the other is wrong. We need to be very careful about attaching too many partial life issues to the pro-life ship. We have done this in the past and the result has been to anchor the true life issues in place where no one moves forward.

Ender

It’s a smokescreen – like Germans pretending not to know where those cattle cars loaded with Jews were going.

“Well, you can’t say I am not pro-life!! I’m opposed to what’s happening in Darfur. So that means I can support pro-abortion politicians and be as pro-life as you are!”

 

[melensdad]

Vern, your point about Darfur is spot on. I glossed over Ender’s comment and didn’t respond to it, but that was clearly an error on my part.

I strongly believe we are seeing real genocide in Darfur that is government sponsored and the UN is clearly unable or unwilling to deal with the situation there. The Sudan is acting in a criminal way with what it is doing in Darfur. Any Catholic should be concerned about the situation in Darfur, Sudan and, I believe, should support some sort of military incursion into Sudan to secure the Darfur region from continued genocide. Yes, it is an impoverished nation, yes it is largely tribal clashes, yes it is largely non-Christian, yes the Sudan has told the world it is an internal matter. It is also government sponsored killing of roughly 200,000 people and we are sitting here doing nothing about it.

 

[estesbob]

Where there are a lot of generalities thrown around about PRO-LIFE people let us more simply list them.

“Pro-Life” should also:

• equal opposition to the death penalty
• equal pro-self defense (at least modestly pro-gun)
• equal opposition to mercy killing ~ euthanasia
• equal pro-foreign intervention against genocide (why are we not in Darfur?)
• equal opposition to an Iraq pull out of our troops
  .

Says who? Certainly not the Church. The Church says that the life issues we must concentrate on are Abortion and Euthanasia-that no issue or combination of issuea trump these. . The Church does not oppose the Death Penalty. The Church has not called for pulling troops out of Iraq.

It appears you definition of pro-life is anyone who adopts the left wing political agenda.

 

[estesbob]

It’s a smokescreen – like Germans pretending not to know where those cattle cars loaded with Jews were going.

"Well, you can’t say I am not pro-life!! I’m opposed to what’s happening in Darfur. So that means I can support pro-abortion politicians and be as pro-life as you are!"

Exactly!

 

[prodigal-sun]

I think the biggest problem with the “pro-life” label is that too much gets included in the definition. Whatever the agenda is, defining one’s personal concerns as pro-life automatically adds a little extra lift. It’s like a little boat snagging a tow from a bigger, faster one; it’s great for the little boat but let’s not ignore that it does slow down the bigger one and too many hitchhikers will stop it altogether.

• I oppose pulling out of Iraq, but it’s not fully a life issue (despite the fact that people would die by the hundreds of thousands should we leave too soon.)
• The genocide is Darfur is not simply a life issue. There are way too many political complications involved.
• The death penalty is not simply a life issue. I say this because it is not a black or white question, even for Catholics.

Abortion, euthanasia, fetal stem cell research - these are the true life issues about which there is no debate within the Church, there are not two sides to these issues: one is right, the other is wrong. We need to be very careful about attaching too many partial life issues to the pro-life ship. We have done this in the past and the result has been to anchor the true life issues in place where no one moves forward.

Ender

My sentiments exactly… there is no middle ground on abortion and the fact that it is the #1 killer of the innocent warrants all the attention it gets.

Peace!

 

[vern_humphrey]

Vern, your point about Darfur is spot on. I glossed over Ender’s comment and didn’t respond to it, but that was clearly an error on my part.

I strongly believe we are seeing real genocide in Darfur that is government sponsored and the UN is clearly unable or unwilling to deal with the situation there. The Sudan is acting in a criminal way with what it is doing in Darfur. Any Catholic should be concerned about the situation in Darfur, Sudan and, I believe, should support some sort of military incursion into Sudan to secure the Darfur region from continued genocide. Yes, it is an impoverished nation, yes it is largely tribal clashes, yes it is largely non-Christian, yes the Sudan has told the world it is an internal matter. It is also government sponsored killing of roughly 200,000 people and we are sitting here doing nothing about it.

I’m not sure we can do anything about it, invasion or not.

 

[bilop]

Vern, your point about Darfur is spot on. I glossed over Ender’s comment and didn’t respond to it, but that was clearly an error on my part.

I strongly believe we are seeing real genocide in Darfur that is government sponsored and the UN is clearly unable or unwilling to deal with the situation there. The Sudan is acting in a criminal way with what it is doing in Darfur. Any Catholic should be concerned about the situation in Darfur, Sudan and, I believe, should support some sort of military incursion into Sudan to secure the Darfur region from continued genocide. Yes, it is an impoverished nation, yes it is largely tribal clashes, yes it is largely non-Christian, yes the Sudan has told the world it is an internal matter. It is also government sponsored killing of roughly 200,000 people and we are sitting here doing nothing about it.

The best we could probably do, is send in Special Forces, and train and arm the Christians and animists to be able to defend themselves against the Islamist Gov.

Remember, the slaughter in Bosnia was not ended by the UN or NATO, but by the Croatian army (trained and armed by the WesT).

God Bless

 

[vern_humphrey]

The best we could probably do, is send in Special Forces, and train and arm the Christians and animists to be able to defend themselves against the Islamist Gov.

Remember, the slaughter in Bosnia was not ended by the UN or NATO, but by the Croatian army (trained and armed by the WesT).

God Bless

Let us remember, there is a school of thought (and rather prevalent in the UN) that you should not arm the victims – not Politically Correct, you know.

 

[melensdad]

Says who? Certainly not the Church. The Church says that the life issues we must concentrate on are Abortion and Euthanasia-that no issue or combination of issuea trump these. . The Church does not oppose the Death Penalty. The Church has not called for pulling troops out of Iraq.

It appears you definition of pro-life is anyone who adopts the left wing political agenda.

Yes the Church does oppose the Death Penalty! It says it is unnecessary in modern western society but it does allow for the death penalty if there is no other way of keeping society safe. Please revisit that issue.

You are correct with regard to the fact that the Church has not called for pulling troops out of Iraq, but I never suggested that the church said that. In fact if you carefully read what I wrote, I stated that being pro-life would equal staying in Iraq!!!

Vern:

Let us remember, there is a school of thought (and rather prevalent in the UN) that you should not arm the victims – not Politically Correct, you know.

Yup, and I never understood that position. Victims are exactly the people we should be arming!!!
bilop regarding Darfur:

The best we could probably do, is send in Special Forces, and train and arm the Christians and animists to be able to defend themselves against the Islamist Gov.

Or we could go in, surround the refugee camps and march out any who wish to leave and relocate them to other nations (including the US).

 

[vern_humphrey]

Yup, and I never understood that position. Victims are exactly the people we should be arming!!!

The official positon seems to be they should dial 911 and wait for the UN “Blue Berries” to arrive.

 

[dwc]

I don’t agree that the right to bear arms is a prolife issue. I think you’re trying to hijack the prolife cause to support your agenda of unrestricted right to own guns. Let me guess – guns don’t kill people, people kill people, right?