P
pensmama87
Guest
Pregnancy is a unique circumstance. There is no other situation where one human being literally lives inside another.
- Status
G
guanophore
Guest
Sure!
But in the meantime, I do not think it is the best solution to most of our social and moral problems.
In some cases, I think it is true that the woman knows there is a baby and she is deliberately ending the life of a human being, rationalizing it to herself.
The biggest problem to your approach is that this kind of killing is currently legal in the US. How do you propose that we punish those who participate in something that is not considered a “crime” by our society?
Neither. I am suggesting that the solution is not in the legal or prison system, but in the Love of Christ.
M
Maciej11
Guest
Greetings from Poland! Our new government is about to vote a total abortion ban and I try to get some broader perspective from pro-life Catholics in the world. The recent Trump comments seem to be just about this problem. Currently abortion in Poland is allowed if the pregnancy results from rape, the baby is deformed or there is a threat to the woman’s health or life. Moreover the “morning after” pill is legal. The new law makes all of this illegal. The sole exception is an “immediate” threat to the woman’s life. + The woman is responsible for abortion and can go to jail for up to 5 years.
I struggle especially with one aspect, namely the babies suffering from anencephaly and similar conditions. As far as I know the Catholic teaching considers “death” a medical category, and as such the brain death is recognized as the “true” death. How to deal with the situations when the foetus does not possess large parts of brain, or is completely deformed? Should mothers serve the same time in jail for “killing” this kind of baby as for killing the normal one? But on the other hand how to define “death” in this case?
Frankly speaking, I don’t like the new law. In theory a teenage raped girl could finish for three years in jail for taking a “morning after” pill. I am not 100% sure if this is the right approach. But this is the medical problem of completely malformed children which makes me feel particularly uneasy. Does anyone of you know some well-though Catholic books dealing with these borderline cases, and especially how to sanction them in civil law?
Thank you in advance!
I struggle especially with one aspect, namely the babies suffering from anencephaly and similar conditions. As far as I know the Catholic teaching considers “death” a medical category, and as such the brain death is recognized as the “true” death. How to deal with the situations when the foetus does not possess large parts of brain, or is completely deformed? Should mothers serve the same time in jail for “killing” this kind of baby as for killing the normal one? But on the other hand how to define “death” in this case?
Frankly speaking, I don’t like the new law. In theory a teenage raped girl could finish for three years in jail for taking a “morning after” pill. I am not 100% sure if this is the right approach. But this is the medical problem of completely malformed children which makes me feel particularly uneasy. Does anyone of you know some well-though Catholic books dealing with these borderline cases, and especially how to sanction them in civil law?
Thank you in advance!
G
guanophore
Guest
How do you think these issues were handled when Jesus walked the earth?
C
CradleJourney
Guest
With all due respect, your comparison is invalid. The teenage boy has many options, some legal, and none of which hinge on severe pressure to kill the clerk. The boy in your scenario could request assistance, make a “will work for food” sign, shoplift, beg, etc - and can go or be turned into child protective services and will be helped - no need to resort to murder.
The girl, however, is being pressured by her own parent (not ignored because of the parent’s drug use but directly pressured) to have the abortion. On the streets she is more likely to be raped and assaulted than a teenage boy, thus her own life as homeless would be more at risk than his. Speaking from experience, a teenage boy with a drug-addicted mom, is much more likely to be invited to crash at a friend’s parents house and “adopted” by one or more sets of parents to help him along while a pregnant girl from what appears to be a decent family isn’t going to get nearly the same level of outside support. In fact, while the boy would be considered a victim, the girl would be considered a failure(she got herself pregnant, she needs to deal with it) and the fact is a very large number of adults in her vicinity would, in fact be more than willing to assist her in getting the abortion for her own sake (her life would be easier, her mom will take her back, etc). Even pro-life people she approached would possibly want to assist her in returning home and working it out with her mom - who, of course, would then turn around and insist she “lose” the baby as soon as the pro-life people stepped out of the room.
Do you have any idea the amount of pressure a parent can place on a teen? The effects of pregnancy hormones combined with normal teenage hormones has on a girls emotional and mental state? The fear involved in suddenly having your body change in ways you hadn’t even imagined? And trust me there is still huge social stigma/pressure associated in many areas with being a pregnant teen (how stupid do you have to be not to use birth control? Who’s the father? Why don’t you just get rid of it?). There’s the fact of having your life permanently altered (stretch marks, labor, missed school, lost friends, lost reputation, criminal issues if it involved rape/incest/molestation). There’s even a strong stigma against adoption (she gave her baby away!!). Other teenage girls can be ridiculously vicious - combine that with the parental pressure - pressure from others in her life who are convinced abortion is no big deal and you have a mixture of circumstances that certainly mitigate or even eliminate any “choice” she feels she has. Girls in this situation certainly do not need to have the possibility of criminal charges added into the mix.
Rather than spend time and energy fighting to create punishments, why not put the effort into eliminating the factors that create the situations to begin with.
IMHO - the best place to start is in elementary school. My volunteer work at a local public school has opened my eyes to just how many children need help and support - and what a difference can be made by giving them some positive adult attention, additional learning opportunities, and help with their studies.
Help create educated, confident, happy kids with skills and you reduce the number of victims, bullies, criminals, abusers, and addicts down the road. Creating more girls and guys who are able and willing to listen to messages about chastity and respect, resulting in better relationships, less sex outside marriage, greater sense of responsibility and in the end, fewer unwanted pregnancies happening in less than ideal circumstances resulting in less victims of abortion.
Oh - and when you are someone making that difference in the community - people respect you - and are more willing to listen to your views, about God, about abortion, about values. It’s not about writing laws but changing hearts.
O
Oreoracle
Guest
Umm…the problem may be diminished from a pro-life standpoint, but are you seriously suggesting there will be no alleyway abortions if they’re banned? Don’t you think these would be more dangerous than the more professional alternatives?
The jokes you’ll sometimes here about women falling down the stairs or being kicked in the stomach or drinking harmful chemicals to terminate a pregnancy came from somewhere. Abortion predates the medical practice itself. Further, it’s anyone’s guess how bad the situation might be because you won’t have any statistics on these hidden abortions.
J
jeffrey_erwin
Guest
**A valid point. Running the qualified practitioners out of the abortion business will result in fewer abortions but also an increase in deaths and sterilization of women.
It’s a trade-off, not a panacea.
I don’t feel that, as a religious person, I am called upon to force my particular viewpoint onto others who don’t share that belief or follow the same religious law.
The usual response to this argument is “What about rape, theft, etc?”
But those actions are not in dispute between our various religions as to whether or not they are crimes.
I have suggested that our child support laws be annulled. These certainly contribute to the incidence of abortion.
Lets’s put our money where our mouths are. **
P
Peter_J
Guest
Is this supposed to be a joke?
K
kainosktisis
Guest
I am someone who’d gone the abortion route long ago. I knew it was wrong then, but I did it anyways. I had no support from my Catholic parent: I was told to get an abortion or I was on my own. I am also a sexual abuse/incest survivor.
I have since come in full communion with the Church & received forgiveness in the sacrament of penance.
It is beyond me how this topic is even being broached at the moment. For all the talk of mercy, this is pure judgment & condemnation - the very things I was told the Catholic Church didn’t do. I am pro-life, but admittedly as one who’s walked where many here openly condemn with what appears almost blood-lusting punishment, do you honestly think anyone involved in an abortion would want to seek out the Church for help - let alone forgiveness with this kind of dialog???
Frankly it is this kind of thinking that leads to post-abortive women who take their own lives. I can’t speak for all women who’d taken the abortion route, but I know this talk of punishment will only add fuel to the fire of the PCers who look for any opportunity to turn others from seeking life. It is a step backwards for the PL movement.
No one who’s ever had an abortion goes without the consequences of it: they either have to suffer with post-abortion trauma (It is post-traumatic stress) or they seemingly lop off a part of their conscience & heart to continue living in denial or ignorance of their actions.
I’m hearing a lot of judgment here…That’s totally not what brought me back to God…
What happened to St. JP2’s words to post-abortive women in his Evangelium Vitae? What happened to this being the Jubilee Year of Mercy? Was that all just meaningless words??
J
JimG
Guest
You put the matter very well. Talk of punishment does nothing to help the pro-life movement or save unborn children. It can only hurt the pro-life cause.
G
guanophore
Guest
You think it is better to end the life of the child than to make the persons responsible pay for the expenses?!
God bless you through your difficult journey, and may He continue to heal you in every way you have been wounded.
Your example is one reason that we need to find ways to support the victims, both pregnant and unborn.
I agree with you, presenting an attitude of punishment, blame, and disrespect is furthest from the help that is needed.
Please do not confuse the bigoted and condemnatory attitudes of certain individuals with the position of the Church, which is opposite.
Yes.
I have been thinking every time I look at the thread title - the people involved in abortions already have consequences…
This is why the Church (and her members) need to be focused on healing rather than punishment.
I am sorry that for some, who are ignorant and blind to the wounds, it may be just words. We forget that, when we are finding fault in others, we are neglecting the log that is in our own eye. People calling for condemnation actually say more about themelves than they do about others.
P
Peter_J
Guest
Huh?
You think it is better to end the life of the child than to make the persons responsible pay for the expenses?!
I’m not sure whom you’re responding to, but jeffrey erwin said that child support laws should be annulled because they contribute to the incidence of abortion.
P
Padres1969
Guest
Likely a true statement in terms of hurting the pro-life cause.
That said, the idea that abortion should have legal consequences for the mother is not at all an illogical one. If a mother is complicit in the death of her child after birth she would be held accountable along with whomever it was who actually killed her child. For example a mother would be charged with murder or accessory to murder if she put out a hit on her kid or assisted in their death in any way. If you believe that an unborn baby should be afforded the same protections as a post live birth baby, and that the doctor who performs the act should be punished (or for that matter someone who harms a pregnant woman to the point she loses the baby), why then should a mother be immune from prosecution for her role in getting an abortion? I mean most abortions are not done without the mother’s express consent or request. Which means the mother is usually passively or even actively involved in the abortion taking place. If you believe abortion is murder, then the mother is at best an accomplice in that murder. And at worst the architect of it other than rare occasions where coercion or the like is used. But as in the case of a murdered child after birth, if the mother has such an affirmative defense, she could assert that at trial.
J
JimG
Guest
The objective is to stop abortion, not to punish women. When the brouhaha over Mr. Trumps original reply to Chris Matthews arose, this is what columnist for the National Catholic Register wrote about the matter.
ncregister.com/blog/matthew-archbold/mr.-trump-please-stop-talking-about-abortion/
ncregister.com/blog/matthew-archbold/mr.-trump-please-stop-talking-about-abortion/
M
mikekle
Guest
Abortion SHOULD have legal consequences, the same as killing any other person does, but in reality, according to US law, they already recognize the fetus as a life, as Ive said many times, in cases where a pregnant woman is killed, the killer is normally charged with 2 COUNTS OF MURDER…this means, by law, the fetus IS RECOGNIZED as a life.
Even if that woman was planning to abort, the courts would still charge the killer with 2 counts of murder.
It seems to me, they only like to recognize it as a life when it best suits them at the time, the way it is now, really a mother should not be charged with any crime if she kills her 2 yr old child, its still her child, her choice, still the same ‘life’ as when it was fetus, so…???
If they charge the mother for killing the 2 yr old, this means (according to them) the moment of birth is when life begins, but then again, they can still charge a person twice for killing a pregnant woman…?? its really confusing.
Even if that woman was planning to abort, the courts would still charge the killer with 2 counts of murder.
It seems to me, they only like to recognize it as a life when it best suits them at the time, the way it is now, really a mother should not be charged with any crime if she kills her 2 yr old child, its still her child, her choice, still the same ‘life’ as when it was fetus, so…???
If they charge the mother for killing the 2 yr old, this means (according to them) the moment of birth is when life begins, but then again, they can still charge a person twice for killing a pregnant woman…?? its really confusing.
J
JimG
Guest
Indeed it is confusing. A woman on her way to the abortion clinic cannot be charged for attempted murder, but if she and the unborn child are killed by a reckless driver along the way, that driver could be charged with double negligent homicide.
Did the Roe v Wade Justices think about such a schizophrenic consequence? Not at all. Justice Harry Blackmun was determined that abortion should become legal, and he convinced the Court to ignore reality.
Now, Professor Singer at Princeton proposes that the abortion “liberty” be extended past birth, so that parents might change their mind and have the child terminated some months after birth. If that became law, of course parents would not be charged with homicide for having their 6 month old legally terminated, although a non-parent who killed the child would certainly be charged.
It would be good to reverse legal abortion before we reach that point. One thing I can guarantee though, is that if we continue to harp on the necessity of draconian penalties for women, abortion will remain legals and infanticide may follow. Is that our objective?
P
Peter_J
Guest
John Kerry said something similar when he voted against the Unborn Victims of Violence Act: “I have serious concerns about this legislation because the law cannot simultaneously provide that a fetus is a human being and protect the right of the mother to choose to terminate her pregnancy.”
P
Peter_J
Guest
Good question.
I won’t lie to you: I thought I knew how bad things were on this forum; but after all the punish-the-mothers posts that I’ve read here in the last week, I don’t know what to think.
G
guanophore
Guest
Yes, sorry. Usually I include the post, but I think the very idea rattle me.Huh?
I’m not sure whom you’re responding to, but jeffrey erwin said that child support laws should be annulled because they contribute to the incidence of abortion.
Just kill off the child, that way no one has to pay?
Not holding the procreators of the child responsible for the consequences of their actions? How does putting the expense on the rest of society help?
G
guanophore
Guest
I wish coercion was rare but it is not. I agree with you, in principle. Our biggest problem is that our society has made this murder legal. This is what needs to be addressed first. Meanwhile, punishing women for participating in something that is not yet considered illegal is getting the cart before the horse.
We won’t change our culture without prayer, fasting, faith formation (many of those who are “pro choice” claim to be Catholic) and education. This is where we need to put our energies. It must begin with the household of God! If we cannot convince our own members of our Church that this is murder, how can we hope to influence the culture?
- Status