So if you witnessed someone committing a violent crime, you would do nothing? The person committing the crime obviously doesn’t think there’s anything morally wrong with their action so if you interfered, you would be imposing your moral belief on that person. With your view, one could not respond to any kind of conflict.HarryStotle:
But that’s the point. I don’t think very many women who have abortions say to themselves “I am now going to kill an innocent human being.” They say “I am going to remove these cells that are growing inside me.” They do not recognize the fetus as “an innocent human being.” But again (last time?) this is the point–different religions have different points at which they recognize the fetus as “an innocent human being.” This is not a question of science, it’s a question of belief. And everyone has a right to their own beliefs. And I have no right to inflict my beliefs on others, nor do they have a right to inflict their beliefs on me.
Why the Lack of Support & Exodus from the Church
- Thread starter NoelFitz
- Start date
- Status
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Murder is the willful killing of an innocent human being without justification. Abortion, by any reasonable application of that definition is the murder of an innocent human being.
That would be the cold hard logic of an argument.
Last edited:
E
Erikaspirit16
Guest
I agree with the entire post, of course.
For HarryStotle and tis_bearself, “fanaticism” (since we’re all using that word) is about a single issue. And THAT is the problem! You can talk all you want about the fanaticism of Jesus, the Apostles, and the early Christians–but it wasn’t centered on a single issue. If you read the Gospels, you can see a vast range of issues that Jesus was teaching about, not just one. And when pressed which commandment was the greatest, he said “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
Abortion is an important issue. No one is denying that. What I am denying is that it is the ONLY issue. And that–if you look at the polls–21% thought it should be totally or partly illegal in 1975 and 18% feel that way in 2017. No significant change. If it’s so evil, why isn’t this self-evident? Do you really think 80% of the population is in favor of evil? Or is it simply that there are other points of view, not just based on personal opinion, but established opinions of world religions?
No one is telling anti-abortionists what to think. I believe you are misguided in making morality only about abortion and ignoring all the other evils in the world. But that’s your decision. But you are bent on imposing your morality on the 80% who don’t believe what you believe. Jesus said “teach all nations.” He didn’t say “Impose your morality on all nations.”
H
HarryStotle
Guest
At the risk of invoking the spirit if not the letter of Godwin’s Law, let me point out that Hitler’s “final solution” with regard to extermination of Jewish people was to remove all legal recognition from – i.e., Hitler “did not recognize” – those with Jewish blood as human beings.HarryStotle:
But that’s the point. I don’t think very many women who have abortions say to themselves “I am now going to kill an innocent human being.” They say “I am going to remove these cells that are growing inside me.” They do not recognize the fetus as “an innocent human being.”
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Actually, the fanaticism of Jesus and the Apostles and the early Christians did boil down to one thing: the eternal worth of every human being in the eyes of God.
Everything else follows from that, including why Jesus was willing to be sacrificed on the cross. The failure to see abortion as the contravening epitome of the total failure of humanity to grasp the infinite love that God has for every single human life, is a complete failure to see and love as God does.
You can whitewash that failure with whatever alternative representation you wish, but God will not be mocked.
Who is more naked, more imprisoned, more hungry, more a stranger, more sick and less well taken care of than an unborn child locked in the prison of a womb where it will suffer chemical extermination or dismemberment? And who more qualifies as the “least of these” brothers and sisters than a child whose very initial humanity is being denied and revoked by those who hold an audacious and repugnant power over the very life of that helpless human being?
You are woefully in error here. Human failures to provide health care, or education, or welfare to relatively competent human beings does not even come close, morally speaking, to the deliberate killing of an innocent human life.
The unborn are the absolutely most helpless in society, and a failure to take abortion THAT seriously reflects upon the capacity of human beings to deflect from the most fundamental moral issue – the infinite value of every human life – by substitution.
Nowhere does Jesus say you can pick and choose between those you deem as having a right to go on living and those who don’t. Taking upon yourself the right to determine who will live and who can be killed, or who will enjoy medical or educational or social benefits and who won’t, is playing God. To claim that because we fail at times to care for our brothers and sisters, we therefore attain a right to kill some of them is Faustian at its core.
Last edited:
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Perhaps he didn’t explicitly say “impose” morality on all nations, but he did say…
So apparently, God will impose morality and righteousness on all because it is the absolutely right and moral thing to do.
Now if you wish to teach “all nations” that what they do matters little or nothing in the eyes of the Creator of the universe who will one day judge every person according to their actions, then you will need to be prepared for the consequences of what you teach rather than what you have “imposed.”
By the way, this section of Matthew I quoted in the last two posts has the heading: “The Judgement of the Nations.” You may want to read it very carefully.
Last edited:
E
Erikaspirit16
Guest
Absolutely. No argument from me. “Love thy neighbor as yourself.” And then you quote Matthew 25: 42-45! Terrific! It talks about feeding the hungry, giving the thirsty something to drink, visiting the sick…" Applying this only to the unborn is the problem. Apply it to everyone.
Obviously we disagree. So far your argument has consisted of a magic mantra of repeating “abortion is murder” over and over. That argument hasn’t moved the needle in terms of the numbers of people in the US who think abortion should be illegal–21% in 1975, 18% in 2017. 42 years. No effect. Why not?
Where have I (or Biden, or Kaine, or …) EVER claimed the right to decide who will live and who will die? That’s exactly what I am against–forcing MY opinion on others. Giving people a choice is not forcing my opinion on them. It’s the opposite.
Exactly. God will. Not me. Not you.
Last edited:
R
RandomAlias
Guest
Well said. That is a great one-line summary of the entire salvation history, the Commandments, Jesus Christ, and his teachings.
R
RandomAlias
Guest
No, just one thing.
E
Elf01
Guest
Do you support legalizing drugs?
Last edited:
R
RandomAlias
Guest
Erikaspirit16, You often cite polls and refer to public opinion. One must be careful not to see polls as a true test of what’s right and wrong.
We the people, even the majority of people, can be misinformed or uninformed with regard to right and wrong. We are influenced by propaganda, most of all the soft propaganda being fed to us by television, movie entertainment, and print media. (Hard or overt propaganda, such as we see in connection with politics, is also influential, but I am more concerned about the propaganda we see every day and don’t even notice.) We are individualistic and self-absorbed, and believe that to be a good thing.
Polls can be useful to see what people think, but not to decide what is true or what is right.
Last edited:
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Why are you presupposing an either/or here as if proper morality is completely beyond the sphere of people of good will to promote or try to bring about. I mean if it represents the right thing to do, the determinably good way of being, then why would we stand back and wait for God to impose it and do nothing ourselves as if moral responsibility has nothing to do with us as moral agents?
It isn’t like the agents of evil are just standing back and muttering, “It isn’t up to us.” No they are imposing their immorality all of the time on everyone. Time for a little push back, wouldn’t you say?
“No. No.” you reply. “Everyone ought to be free to decide based upon the radical efforts of the agents of evil while agents of good ought to stand by and do nothing, because the task is not ours. Good moral agents ought to do NOTHING to promote good moral values.”
I suppose that would be despite the fact that millions upon millions of human souls are placed in extreme peril.
Surely, the HOW can be debated, but not whether we ought to at all.
Last edited:
H
HarryStotle
Guest
By the way, the laws of any state function to IMPOSE morally grounded laws upon the people of that state.HarryStotle:
Exactly. God will. Not me. Not you.
Your position seems to amount to…
- The Church has a very solid, very well grounded morality based upon what the Creator and Sustainer of all reality had in mind for creating human beings to begin with.
- Catholics should stand back and permit every other system of morality to have its say in the laws of the state, but Catholics should not try to impose our morality – even though it is the best conceivable one – on others.
- We ought to leave others blithely ignorant of the true morality we possess because it is up to God to do so, most tellingly at the final judgement when millions of souls will be in grave jeopardy.
- In the meantime, seeing as their fate is not our concern, let us tolerate the moral foibles of others and let them learn through their errors and sufferings and hope that they come out seeing things properly in the end, God willing.
- Oh, and bring me that finger bowl with the rose water so I can wash the stain and stench of fanaticism off my pretty little fingers.
Last edited:
E
Erikaspirit16
Guest
I am not saying, and never have said, that polls tell us what is right and wrong. But they CAN tell us what the general population THINKS is right and wrong. For those who scoff at polls, remember these have usually been taken every year for 40+ years with different samples. They show no shift in opinion. If you think they are inaccurate, I think the burden of proof is on you (not referring to you personally, but anyone who says they are inaccurate).
My only point in citing the polls is that if 80% of the population thinks abortion in most / all situations should be legal (and yes, it depends on HOW you ask the question) you have to make some assumptions why such a large majority thinks that way (and of course it’s not just the US, it’s Canada, Europe, et.c). Are they all evil people who glorify killing innocents babies? I doubt it. It’s because they don’t believe abortion (in some cases…) is NOT killing an innocent baby. And, for the 1 millionth time, it’s not always because of their personal opinion, it’s because other religions have different stages in the growth of the fetus where they say “abortion before this point is OK; after this point you are killing a baby.”
Last edited:
E
Erikaspirit16
Guest
I have said that over and over: Knock yourself out. Convince that 80% that they are wrong. Change the laws. But change the laws BECAUSE the vast majority of people agree, not IN SPITE of the vast majority of people.
Well, if you think all Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, etc. etc. are “agents of evil,” then OK. I personally think they are obeying the morality of their own religions, and are trying to live good lives. Could they be mistaken? Sure. Convince them that they are.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Your own posts argue against your conviction.
If it isn’t merely “their personal opinion,” but because of what their religion tells them, then explain why, as you posted previously, the majority of Catholics hold their own opinion OVER what their religion teaches. So, apparently for 53% of Catholics it IS because of their personal opinion.
If this is representative of religions generally, then personal opinion seems to trump religion in terms of the source of people’s convictions; perhaps “not always,” but at least the majority of the time.
Last edited:
S
Spyridon
Guest
If 80% of people think euthanasia should be legal, are you going to sit back and be okay with that?
I guess the Catholics in Nazi Germany who fought against the majority who supported Hitler were wrong for “imposing their morality…”
I think you have erred greatly here, @Erikaspirit16.
E
Erikaspirit16
Guest
You’re wrong. How many times do I have to say it? A million? A billion? No one is telling your or asking you to stand aside and watch what you think is a moral evil to take place. You are perfectly free to express your opinion and try and convince those who disagree with you–hold marches and rallies, circulate petitions, support candidates who agree with you, write letters to the editor, whatever.
In the US version of democracy, everyone gets to vote. Everyone gets to voice their opinion. And no, the laws of the states (or “a” state) do not IMPOSE the morality of a small minority on the majority (although I’m sure you could find exceptions). Laws reflect the consensus of the entire community, which is what I am saying. Catholics should argue in favor of their morality, but they should not impose it on those who have other beliefs. If you have convinced an overwhelming majority of the correctness of your views, passing a law is not “imposing” your morality, because they agree with you! In effect, you seem to be arguing for forced conversion, not rational argument.
And once again (last time…) I would say, judging by all the polls I have seen–go back to the post where I gave some links–after 40 years of anti-abortion rhetoric, there has been no shift in opinion. If you agree, you have to ask yourself why. If you come to the conclusion that demonic forces are inspiring the opposition, you can, but I think that’s nonsense.
S
Spyridon
Guest
E
Erikaspirit16
Guest
Sure, some drugs. 1) It puts criminals out of business 2) It lets the police shift their focus to other crimes. 3) It allows the state to collect taxes and regulate the quality of the drugs.
Some European countries have legalized certain drugs for years. I don’t see them descending into chaos.
But let’s not start yet another side issue! Start your own thread!
- Status