What do we dare to discuss, what do Priests dare to preach?
#11
(06-08-2015, 04:49 PM)Southerncaliforniaguy Wrote: I want to add that I don't feel that my prolife position only considers the baby and not the mother who was perhaps the victim of rape or incest.  I can imagine that it is emotionally extremely difficult to carry a baby through to birth that was conceived by rape or incest.

But an abortion doesn't fix everything.  Many women become deeply depressed after an abortion -- "Post abortion syndrome".  And I suspect that emotionally it would be very difficult for a mother to give her baby up for adoption after the birth -- even if the baby was conceived because of rape or incest.  I think it is hard to do when you see the baby and you know that baby is yours.

In abortion, whatever the circumstances were that resulted in the pregnancy, one person dies and the other does not.  Of course, rape, incest, etc. should not be dismissed lightly, but as terrible as they were, they did not result in anyone getting killed.  An abortion, whatever the circumstances that resulted in the pregnancy may have been, directly kills a person- an innocent person.  You'd be very hard pressed to make the case for it being an ethical solution, even in  cases of rape or incest.
Reply
#12
(06-08-2015, 10:19 PM)Credidi Propter Wrote: In abortion, whatever the circumstances were that resulted in the pregnancy, one person dies and the other does not.  Of course, rape, incest, etc. should not be dismissed lightly, but as terrible as they were, they did not result in anyone getting killed.  An abortion, whatever the circumstances that resulted in the pregnancy may have been, directly kills a person- an innocent person.  You'd be very hard pressed to make the case for it being an ethical solution, even in  cases of rape or incest.

I find it baffling. Usually, if someone is opposed to abortion, it's because they're opposed to innocent lives being violently ended, but obviously, an unborn child is not guilty of his father's crime. So, if someone is in favour of permitting abortion in these cases but not in others, they must have a reason other than opposition to the violent ending of innocent life for opposing abortion in the cases they do oppose it in. What is that reason?
Reply
#13
(06-08-2015, 10:30 PM)Dirigible Wrote:
(06-08-2015, 10:19 PM)Credidi Propter Wrote: In abortion, whatever the circumstances were that resulted in the pregnancy, one person dies and the other does not.  Of course, rape, incest, etc. should not be dismissed lightly, but as terrible as they were, they did not result in anyone getting killed.  An abortion, whatever the circumstances that resulted in the pregnancy may have been, directly kills a person- an innocent person.  You'd be very hard pressed to make the case for it being an ethical solution, even in  cases of rape or incest.

I find it baffling. Usually, if someone is opposed to abortion, it's because they're opposed to innocent lives being violently ended, but obviously, an unborn child is not guilty of his father's crime. So, if someone is in favour of permitting abortion in these cases but not in others, they must have a reason other than opposition to the violent ending of innocent life for opposing abortion in the cases they do oppose it in. What is that reason?

Surely this betrays that the first decision—of being opposed to abortions—was based on emotions. So when stronger emotions are at play people will favor other things.
When people reason with reason most people find this very suspicious and start speculating one has another motive (because you simply hate women, of course, or because women deserve to be raped, of course!) or we simply cannot understand because we are not women (so we cannot feel), and when its a woman she's simply adopting her captor's narrative.
The problem is one of sanity, not of argument (actually, at the very beginning this, that is abortion, is precisely the example MacIntyre uses for how people are simply not talking rationally with each other).

EDIT: I meant captive as the one who captures, but I don't know the word. Dang it. -- captor
Reply
#14
(06-08-2015, 10:15 PM)Dirigible Wrote:
(06-08-2015, 10:06 PM)Southerncaliforniaguy Wrote:
(06-08-2015, 08:19 PM)richgr Wrote: The common interpretation of Cat Scratch Fever is its sexual nature. Even Ted Nugent, who wrote the song (unless we're talking about two different songs...), said so. If people don't want to listen, you just have to let them be unfortunately...

Actually I think that they were teasing me when they said that they didn't see it.  I think I responded a little too quickly -- and got suspended...  :(

The lack of that sort of casual nastiness is one reason I like this place. It's disappointing to find it so commonly on what are supposed to be Christian sites.

You know this is actually true.  And I have found that people (Catholics, Protestants) who dislike my conservative position on various moral issues will go to great lengths to try to prove that somehow I am the "evil" person.  They won't necessarily argue with what I wrote,  They will just be very critical of everything I post after that -- and very critical of me.
Reply
#15
One of the things that has surprised me on many religious forums are how few real pro-lifer's there seem to be.  However, they like to identify themselves as "pro-life".  But different people have different definitions of what it means to be "pro-life".

I suppose I am making the assumption that people would behave better if stronger morality were preached.  But is that even true?



Reply
#16
If stronger morality were preached would many people just drop out and join a more liberal religion?  Years ago I met a woman at a "Christian" singles group who told me that she had dropped out of Catholicism because the Priest had not approved her annulment.
Reply
#17
Eartha Kitt, one my favorite singers, was conceived via rape. The world would have missed a lot if she had been aborted! Here's an interesting link:

http://www.prolifeinfo.ie/abortion/child...ough-rape/

I understand your frustration, but it's also a very difficult subject, and I get where the abort rape and incest babies are coming from. It's hard to argue with people on forums about something so emotionally devastating. I think if I had had been raped and then got pregnant from it, I'd have a very hard time not wanting to commit suicide. Pregnancy destroys the body, it's a sacrifice even when the child is wanted, so someone in such a case, who is able to carry the baby full-term and survive, that requires real heroics... :(

Even if mortality were properly preached, there's still be people who sinned just because, to exercise their free-will. That's why there is mercy, as well as justice. Without mercy, there's no way to get the sinners back into the Church. (If I understand it correctly.)
Reply
#18
I understand the intellectual argument for allowing abortion in cases of rape & incest even if I disagree.  Clearly those cases need the most support of the mother especially therapeutic but it's a ultimately a cynical concession, not one based on principal.  The false canard being that it's something also forced on the mother by the external body (other than the obvious rapist).  The infant bears no guilt, of course in its creation anymore than the deliberately conceived baby should have credit by virtue  mother & father in wedlock sanctioned by the Church (which also has no control).  That idea of control is one of vanity.  So many couples want babies and can't have them... want girls and get boys... want boys and get girls.  etc etc. 

No easy answer and would never put the onus of the argument against the mother as much as against the doctor who would perform the abominable deed. 

I only ever hear one priest directly speak from the ambo at this subject and he's novus ordo, though I've been encouraging him to the TLM and inviting him to attend the local FSSP in choir.
Reply
#19
Southerncaliforniaguy,

It's not just you.  We're living in a politically correct age.  We're in a time of countless, widespread heresies, and of emasculated authority and weak teaching. Many of the Church's official teachers and pastors have succumbed, at least to some degree, to spirit of the age, or have been conditioned by it. In place of preaching the whole faith "in season and out of season," they teach the more socially acceptable parts of the faith, mixed with popular psychology and modernist biblical scholarship. Not all of them do, but many. The popes have been complaining about this for more than a hundred years, and it will take a long time to correct the problems. Take heart; our faith is more than 2,000 years old, and things work slowly.
Reply
#20
In Pope Francis' encyclical, Laudatio Si, he condemns abortion and transgenderism.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)