What is a pro-choice Christian?

[parousia70]

Submit to your own teachings Catholic friend:

What makes you think I don't?

 

[parousia70]

Therefore, killing an innocent child, whether they are 3 weeks old in the womb, 6 months old in the womb, or 2 days old outside the womb - all instances of killing that child would be morally wrong.

Unless Commanded by God, of course. The way He Commanded Israel slay their enemies, cut the women open and dash their unborn against the Rocks. Then it's Morally Just.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I'm sort of scratching my head here trying to figure out how in the world that response is in any way related to what I said. Can someone show me where I talked about politics in anything I wrote? Can someone show me where I said anything about getting respect? Can anyone show me where I said anything about deserving anything?

This particular attack vector has two objectives. It deflects from a direct question that might be uncomfortable to answer. It also attacks you for not being absolutely perfect (adopting 14 kids, volunteering at the soup kitchen eight days a week, AND being a loyal Democrat) and attacking anyone you might associate with if they have any of the same imperfections. The second objective may not phase you, because you presumably know your heart, but it plays very well among pro-choice people. In any event, the question you asked doesn't get answered.

What was the question again? Oh, yeah. Does the unborn child possess the same inherent moral worth and value as you or I?

I'm not a Catholic, but as a Christian, I actually agree with the Catholic position that all humans are created in the image of God and from their conception possess the Imago Dei. We all possess inherent and innate moral worth and value that is intrinsic.

Yup. The rest is commentary.

 

[Fantine]

My problem with pro-lifers is not with their ministry, which, as I've said, is very necessary as long as it's not coercive, and whose "help" centers I contribute to financially.

My problem is with their political views, and the absolute insistence, of some of them, that you need to vote for candidates even if their characters are totally reprehensible (e.g. Donald J. Trump), and if their platforms run completely counter to the common good (and I have hardly ever found a candidate who calls himself "pro-life" who doesn't want to throw them under the bridge after they've been born).

As the mother of an adult son living in South Korea, I find the votes for Donald Trump--who is erratic, unpredictable, and dishonest (I feel constrained from using stronger language due to message board rules)--and who might begin a tragic and far reaching war--to be a far greater "sin" than my votes for pro-choice social justice candidates whom I knew would lose, living where I do.

So continue doing good--allow me to do good in the areas I am called to do good--and stop getting "holier than thou" on our votes.

 

[chevyontheriver]

My problem is with their political views, and the absolute insistence, of some of them, that you need to vote for candidates even if their characters are totally reprehensible (e.g. Donald J. Trump), and if their platforms run completely counter to the common good (and I have hardly ever found a candidate who calls himself "pro-life" who doesn't want to throw them under the bridge after they've been born).

As the mother of an adult son living in South Korea, I find the votes for Donald Trump--who is erratic, unpredictable, and dishonest (I feel constrained from using stronger language due to message board rules)--and who might begin a tragic and far reaching war--to be a far greater "sin" than my votes for pro-choice social justice candidates whom I knew would lose, living where I do.

So continue doing good--allow me to do good in the areas I am called to do good--and stop getting "holier than thou" on our votes.

You have gotten 'holier than thou' on your politics expressed here. Then you condemn people getting 'holier than thou'.

Your presumption that we all voted for Trump is stereotypical. Not correct but stereotypical. Your presumption that every 'pro-life' candidate wants to throw born babies under the bridge is also stereotypical. Not correct, but stereotypical. Your barely contained apoplexy about Trump is noted. Please step away from the partisanship, which I think you recognize you need to do in your last sentence.

 

[MoonlessNight]

Pro-Choice handbook for arguing about abortion:

1. Change the subject if possible. Go on long tangents about capital punishment, wars, poverty, the justice system, sexism and whatever else you can think of. If no one is talking about abortion you won't be obligated to defend killing the unborn.
2. Smear your opponents as many times as you can get away with. Say that they hate everyone but babies, that they aren't Christian, that they want to control every aspect of the lives of others and (worst of all) that they voted for Donald Trump. If the conversation is about how evil the other guy is, the fact that you excuse killing the unborn won't seem so bad.
3. If in the worst case scenario that you are actually forced to discuss the issue, offer ridiculous false dichotomies. Say that we either must allow abortions or we must execute anyone who even suggests that abortion might be bad, with no middle ground. Say that if we outlaw abortion we must also outlaw every other sin, and we must apply capital punishment to all of them. Say if we do anything against abortion we must be prepared to literally enslave women so that they can't have an abortion. Loudly insist that anyone who tries to take a position outside of these extremes is being dishonest, and that those are the only possibilities. If you can distract people with fallacious arguments you won't have to explicitly defend killing the unborn.

 

[A_Thinker]

Pro-Choice handbook for arguing about abortion:

1. Change the subject if possible. Go on long tangents about capital punishment, wars, poverty, the justice system, sexism and whatever else you can think of. If no one is talking about abortion you won't be obligated to defend killing the unborn.
2. Smear your opponents as many times as you can get away with. Say that they hate everyone but babies, that they aren't Christian, that they want to control every aspect of the lives of others and (worst of all) that they voted for Donald Trump. If the conversation is about how evil the other guy is, the fact that you excuse killing the unborn won't seem so bad.
3. If in the worst case scenario that you are actually forced to discuss the issue, offer ridiculous false dichotomies. Say that we either must allow abortions or we must execute anyone who even suggests that abortion might be bad, with no middle ground. Say that if we outlaw abortion we must also outlaw every other sin, and we must apply capital punishment to all of them. Say if we do anything against abortion we must be prepared to literally enslave women so that they can't have an abortion. Loudly insist that anyone who tries to take a position outside of these extremes is being dishonest, and that those are the only possibilities. If you can distract people with fallacious arguments you won't have to explicitly defend killing the unborn.

Stereotype/Ad hominem much ???

 

[parousia70]

Pro-Forced Birth handbook for arguing about abortion:

1) Don't talk about Miscarriage
2) Don't talk about Already Born Kids
3) Don't talk about War, the Death penalty, etc..
3) Don't talk about WHY the Republican Controlled Congress, Supreme Court and Presidency have FAILED to do anything to make it illegal.
4) Don't talk about Biblically mandated Abortions
5) Don't talk about Social Justice

 

[Fireinfolding]

What would it make a someone in something presented like this....

I set before you life (and good) and death (and evil) which could mirror a sort of pro choice stance ( as it is between two such similar options)
And the, "Therefore chose life that you and thy seed shall live (indicates a pro life stance here also)
I ask this because the choice between something like life and death is presented (as if given the option, or as a choice between the two)
But at the same time a nudge follows in desired direction which indicates that life is what should be chosen there (even though the choice is still presented)

 

[Fantine]

If I (and every other Democrat I know) did not face constant criticism from anti-abortion voters (which I believe, in the political arena, is a much more correct term than 'pro-life') I would be delighted to let them vote as they wish. It is their constant, unceasing, cacaphonous, judgmental nagging that drives me crazy---

If you had faced it for years (as we've had---and you, Chevy, have dished plenty of it out) you'd look at people who call themselves pro-life and see nothing but two eyes with big planks, too.

Pope Francis has made things better by presenting a better balance between social justice and social conservatism. Praise God! As he continues to appoint new bishops and cardinals to reverse the "counter-reformation" that has occurred since Vatican II, things will get better.

I even feel as if I could perhaps drive my car into a church parking lot with a Bernie Sanders sticker and not get it egged before the Mass was over....

So things are improving--but we've had it.

 

[Oldmantook]

That sums up the "pro-choice" argument as clearly as anything ever written. They simply do not value the life within.

On the most basic level, that is true as human life has no inherent worth to them. On the other hand, human life has monetary value to them as financially they profit from the sale of baby parts. On the spiritual side, the abortion industry is modern day child sacrifice from which they get their spiritual power and protection.

 

[AvaLynn]

Don't you actually decide for yourself if you are lying or cheating?
Like if you use your phone during work, or talk to other people
at work - not about work?
We don't live under those laws anymore. We are now living under Grace.
Galatians 5:14 The entire Law is fulfilled in a single decree: "Love your neighbor as yourself."
Romans 13:8 Be indebted to no one, except to one another in love, for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the Law.

Well, if that's the case, then I am going to go murder someone. It doesn't matter anymore anyway. Of course, the Ten Commandments are still valid! We got grace if we break them, but they are still a law we should try to follow.

 

[KWCrazy]

Pro-Forced Birth handbook for arguing about abortion:

1) Don't talk about Miscarriage HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ABORTION
2) Don't talk about Already Born Kids HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ABORTION
3) Don't talk about War, the Death penalty, etc.. HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ABORTION
3) Don't talk about WHY the Republican Controlled Congress, Supreme Court and Presidency have FAILED to do anything to make it illegal. NEITHER PARTY HAS HAD A 65% SUPERMAJORITY
4) Don't talk about Biblically mandated Abortions HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ABORTION
5) Don't talk about Social Justice HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ABORTION

So you're opposed to limiting the abortion debate to the topic of abortion?

 

[Fireinfolding]

Well, if that's the case, then I am going to go murder someone. It doesn't matter anymore anyway. Of course, the Ten Commandments are still valid! We got grace if we break them, but they are still a law we should try to follow.

I dont think you need to lift a hand against a brother to be a murderer, just hate him.

1 John 3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.

 

[SPF]

parousia70: Pro-Forced Birth handbook for arguing about abortion:

1) Don't talk about Miscarriage. Miscarriages are tragic, my wife has experienced this, and it was difficult for us. They occur as a result of sin that has entered the world. But miscarriages have no bearing at all on determining the morality of abortion.
2) Don't talk about Already Born Kids. Already born children have no bearing upon the morality of abortion. We should certainly take care of already born children, and do our best to support already born children who have needs. But already born children have no bearing on determining the morality of abortion.
3) Don't talk about War, the Death penalty, etc..These are all very important subjects to talk about. Unfortunately, they don't in themselves determine whether or not abortion is moral or immoral.
3) Don't talk about WHY the Republican Controlled Congress, Supreme Court and Presidency have FAILED to do anything to make it illegal.Again, great questions, but the answers to these have no bearing at all upon determining the morality of abortion.
4) Don't talk about Biblically mandated Abortions. This could certainly be important to aid in the discussion of the morality of abortion. I personally am not aware of any Biblically mandated abortions.
5) Don't talk about Social Justice. A very good subject to discuss, but unfortunately social justice has no bearing upon determining the morality of abortion.

The morality of abortion stands or falls upon how we understand the nature of the life inside the womb. As Fantime has so graciously pointed out, we all have basic rights such as the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Certainly we would agree that our basic right to life is the most valuable of these rights, and indeed the laws we have reflect this truth. Your right to pursuit of happiness, if it conflicts with my right to life, will mean that you can't pursue that particular activity that gives you happiness.

So the question is simple - does the unborn child possess the same inherent moral worth and value as the 2 hour hold child located outside the womb? If the answer is yes, then their right to life will trump a woman's pursuit of happiness for a temporary amount of time.

 

[SPF]

Oh, and Fantime, speaking of the Catholic position on abortion, here it is:

in 1995 Pope John Paul II declared that the Church’s teaching on abortion "is unchanged and unchangeable. Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his successors . . . I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written word of God, is transmitted by the Church’s tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal magisterium. No circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act which is intrinsically illicit, since it is contrary to the law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and proclaimed by the Church" (Evangelium Vitae 62).

I agree with the Catholic position on abortion.

 

[chevyontheriver]

If you had faced it for years (as we've had---and you, Chevy, have dished plenty of it out) you'd look at people who call themselves pro-life and see nothing but two eyes with big planks, too.

If that's how you want to see me, that is all you will be able to see.

 

[SkyWriting]

SkyWriting, your response here is nothing short of incredibly uncharitable and manipulative. Why are ministries that support women and children "fringe"? and why are groups that focus on children only "core"? And why would groups that only focus on saving the lives of unborn children be bad in the first place? We need BOTH.

If the unborn child possesses the same inherent moral worth and value as your or I, then any ministry that exists whose aim is to protect the life of that unborn child should be praised.

Likewise, ministries that exist which aim to help those in need, whether it's single pregnant women, homeless, orphans, widows, poor, etc... those ministries should also be praised.

Your manipulative, uncharitable, and dismissive terminology is utterly unhelpful.

I was personally involved in Pro-Life events that protested at abortion clinics
and "counseled" women that came to the clinics.

You would be stunned at how "utterly unhelpful" these actions were at saving lives.
Have you noticed that "Abortion protests" are getting rarer over time?
This is becasue the protest mentality is a failed endeavor. It does not work and save lives.
You can't protest or shame people into doing what you want, even saving babies.

 

[SkyWriting]

Well, if that's the case, then I am going to go murder someone. It doesn't matter anymore anyway. Of course, the Ten Commandments are still valid! We got grace if we break them, but they are still a law we should try to follow.

No you should not try and follow them.
Galatians 5:14 The entire Law is fulfilled in a single decree: "Love your neighbor as yourself."

 

[Fantine]

This article by a theologian discusses intrinsic and extrinsic evils. I have found it to be very helpful to me in forming my conscience.

the bishop conflates the “most fundamental” issues with the issues involving “intrinsic evil.” But the word “intrinsic” does not denote gravity: “intrinsic evil” isn’t just a fancy way of saying “very evil.” And speaking of ecology, the native habitat of the term “instrinsic evil” is moral theology; it does not apply in any straightforward way to civil laws. It applies to acts, not to the effects of policy.

https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/‘intrinsic-evil’-public-policy