And now after birth abortion

[MikeK]

They already did. What happened to Terri Schindler Schiavo set the precedent for that.

Or those who support capital punnishment in modern society. So many members of the culture of death

 

[LivingWordUnity]

why stop with infanticide? let's expand it to include the disabled and undesirables. then we can just introduce genocide.

They already did. What happened to Terri Schindler Schiavo set the precedent for that.

Or those who support capital punnishment in modern society. So many members of the culture of death

There's a difference between capital punishment and the deliberate killing of someone who we know is innocent. The former is not considered murder (assuming a just trial) and is frowned upon by the Church but with no absolute prohibition while the later is always called murder.

 

[GNJ]

...This isn't even a real article, a quick google proves that. They're just using terms like "post-birth abortion" to fool naive people into thinking it's actually a thing, because they know if they said there was growing support for infanticide, nobody would believe them straight up.

The former is not considered murder (assuming a just trial) and is frowned upon by the Church but with no absolute prohibition while the later is always called murder.

I think most people do consider capital punishment to be murder, actually.

 

[FlaviusAetius]

I think most people do consider capital punishment to be murder, actually.

Well they'd be wrong and using emotional appeal to garner sympathy for murderers and rapists.

the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

Morally the State is justified to kill dangers to society through a court of law with a jury of a criminals peers. If America doesn't have to adhere to Catholic morality on things like birth control and abortion then it certainly doesn't have to adhere to Catholic (divided I might add) view on capital punishment.

Lawfully of course the state has the right to kill whomever breaks its laws in regards to extreme cases like murder.

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

Well they'd be wrong

That's an opinion

Morally the State is justified to kill dangers to society through a court of law with a jury of a criminals peers.

That's not even close to the stand on capital punishment articulated by the Church.

If America doesn't have to adhere to Catholic morality on things like birth control and abortion then it certainly doesn't have to adhere to Catholic (divided I might add) view on capital punishment.

1) The church isn't divided on the subject. It has a well known, well understand, well established stand that is basically against it expect under the most extreme circumstances conceivable. Circumstances, btw, that do not apply to the USA.

2) American doesn't have to adhere to the Catholic punishment. The fact that it doesn't is part of the culture of death (along with BC and abortion) the permeates the American culture

Which begs the question:

Why are you embracing the culture of death in America ?

 

[FlaviusAetius]

That's not even close to the stand on capital punishment articulated by the Church.

I'm speaking on the moral grounds of a secular government that does not adhere to the mewling demands of God.

1) The church isn't divided on the subject. It has a well known, well understand, well established stand that is basically against it expect under the most extreme circumstances conceivable. Circumstances, btw, that do not apply to the USA.

Fine, I'll admit to this. But its interpretation differs greatly among the laity.

2) American doesn't have to adhere to the Catholic punishment. The fact that it doesn't is part of the culture of death (along with BC and abortion) the permeates the American culture

Which begs the question:

Why are you embracing the culture of death in America ?

1. Discussion here and in other places makes it pretty clear most people don't want Christian morality governing the laws of the USA.

2. I realized I'm a huge hypocrite if I lie to myself saying I'm Pro-Life. I've contemplated being in the shoes of extreme cases in regards to abortion, the fact is while I may struggle with it there is a possiblity that if I had a wife with the threat of dying due to pregnancy I'd choose the wife over the child. If it was a situation of a wife/daughter raped I'd likely consider abortion. Finally the strongest possibility of allowing abortion would be if I knew the child would be severely mentally disabled or monstrously deformed; mild retardation I could tolerate (conditional love has degrees of acceptance after all) but severe retardation where the kid is a drooling sack of flesh that you have to care for with only gurgles and cries to offer honestly disgusts me.

3. Objective morality doesn't exist and no subjective morality hold any ground outside popular support. In 500 years in some apocalyptic setting the common morality could may well include cannibalism for all I know; there is no point holding any kind of morality in high regard. It's nihilism but I understand a man cannot live simply on nihilism, he must create a morality to adhere too even if its simply arbitrary thoughts from his own head. The strongest morality in my opinion is to do what society deems acceptable to refrain from being harmed by society. Protect yourself and protect those you choose to care for; even if it requires harming someone else.

4. Unconditional Love doesn't exist. See 2; we only love based on emotional tugs but things can override those feelings to the point where we're willing to kill our own flesh and blood.

So yes, I suppose I embrace the Culture of Death simply because I realize I can't escape it. That doesn't mean I hold sympathy for others who embrace the culture of death, in fact when concerning women who abort their children I still feel extreme hatred for them and wish nothing but suffering in their lives. It's two-faced I realize that, but then isn't that the natural state of Man? A multi-faced creature that puts on masks to hides it inner evil; a smiling gaze on the outside but inside anger that is almost murderous in its burning hatred.

Christian morality requires people to become beyond their own human nature. I admit I admire Catholicism and still dream of returning because I see them as stronger individuals for overcoming their own animal nature. However I cannot bow down to a possibly non-existent God who stands idle while the world eats itself. Therefore Catholicism is still one of the many subjective moralities of the fallen world and its better off that I allow myself the total freedom of nihilism rather than be a hypocrite in a morality created by a God who does not seem to play any role in human life and is content to wait until death only to punish as a harsh judge.

 

[prov1810]

Finally the strongest possibility of allowing abortion would be if I knew the child would be severely mentally disabled or monstrously deformed; mild retardation I could tolerate (conditional love has degrees of acceptance after all) but severe retardation where the kid is a drooling sack of flesh that you have to care for with only gurgles and cries to offer honestly disgusts me.

Even if you know how the person is going to turn out, it makes no difference. If you do something that results in a human life, you are responsible for that life.

And a person's right to life is not based on what you feel about them. Everyone wants to be Caligula now.

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

I'm speaking on the moral grounds of a secular government that does not adhere to the mewling demands of God.

Fine, I'll admit to this. But its interpretation differs greatly among the laity.

1. Discussion here and in other places makes it pretty clear most people don't want Christian morality governing the laws of the USA.

2. I realized I'm a huge hypocrite if I lie to myself saying I'm Pro-Life. I've contemplated being in the shoes of extreme cases in regards to abortion, the fact is while I may struggle with it there is a possiblity that if I had a wife with the threat of dying due to pregnancy I'd choose the wife over the child. If it was a situation of a wife/daughter raped I'd likely consider abortion. Finally the strongest possibility of allowing abortion would be if I knew the child would be severely mentally disabled or monstrously deformed; mild retardation I could tolerate (conditional love has degrees of acceptance after all) but severe retardation where the kid is a drooling sack of flesh that you have to care for with only gurgles and cries to offer honestly disgusts me.

3. Objective morality doesn't exist and no subjective morality hold any ground outside popular support. In 500 years in some apocalyptic setting the common morality could may well include cannibalism for all I know; there is no point holding any kind of morality in high regard. It's nihilism but I understand a man cannot live simply on nihilism, he must create a morality to adhere too even if its simply arbitrary thoughts from his own head. The strongest morality in my opinion is to do what society deems acceptable to refrain from being harmed by society. Protect yourself and protect those you choose to care for; even if it requires harming someone else.

4. Unconditional Love doesn't exist. See 2; we only love based on emotional tugs but things can override those feelings to the point where we're willing to kill our own flesh and blood.

So yes, I suppose I embrace the Culture of Death simply because I realize I can't escape it. That doesn't mean I hold sympathy for others who embrace the culture of death, in fact when concerning women who abort their children I still feel extreme hatred for them and wish nothing but suffering in their lives. It's two-faced I realize that, but then isn't that the natural state of Man? A multi-faced creature that puts on masks to hides it inner evil; a smiling gaze on the outside but inside anger that is almost murderous in its burning hatred.

Christian morality requires people to become beyond their own human nature. I admit I admire Catholicism and still dream of returning because I see them as stronger individuals for overcoming their own animal nature. However I cannot bow down to a possibly non-existent God who stands idle while the world eats itself. Therefore Catholicism is still one of the many subjective moralities of the fallen world and its better off that I allow myself the total freedom of nihilism rather than be a hypocrite in a morality created by a God who does not seem to play any role in human life and is content to wait until death only to punish as a harsh judge.

Well,

now I'm kind of depressed

 

[MikeK]

I'm speaking on the moral grounds of a secular government that does not adhere to the mewling demands of God.

Fine, I'll admit to this. But its interpretation differs greatly among the laity.

1. Discussion here and in other places makes it pretty clear most people don't want Christian morality governing the laws of the USA.

2. I realized I'm a huge hypocrite if I lie to myself saying I'm Pro-Life. I've contemplated being in the shoes of extreme cases in regards to abortion, the fact is while I may struggle with it there is a possiblity that if I had a wife with the threat of dying due to pregnancy I'd choose the wife over the child. If it was a situation of a wife/daughter raped I'd likely consider abortion. Finally the strongest possibility of allowing abortion would be if I knew the child would be severely mentally disabled or monstrously deformed; mild retardation I could tolerate (conditional love has degrees of acceptance after all) but severe retardation where the kid is a drooling sack of flesh that you have to care for with only gurgles and cries to offer honestly disgusts me.

3. Objective morality doesn't exist and no subjective morality hold any ground outside popular support. In 500 years in some apocalyptic setting the common morality could may well include cannibalism for all I know; there is no point holding any kind of morality in high regard. It's nihilism but I understand a man cannot live simply on nihilism, he must create a morality to adhere too even if its simply arbitrary thoughts from his own head. The strongest morality in my opinion is to do what society deems acceptable to refrain from being harmed by society. Protect yourself and protect those you choose to care for; even if it requires harming someone else.

4. Unconditional Love doesn't exist. See 2; we only love based on emotional tugs but things can override those feelings to the point where we're willing to kill our own flesh and blood.

So yes, I suppose I embrace the Culture of Death simply because I realize I can't escape it. That doesn't mean I hold sympathy for others who embrace the culture of death, in fact when concerning women who abort their children I still feel extreme hatred for them and wish nothing but suffering in their lives. It's two-faced I realize that, but then isn't that the natural state of Man? A multi-faced creature that puts on masks to hides it inner evil; a smiling gaze on the outside but inside anger that is almost murderous in its burning hatred.

Christian morality requires people to become beyond their own human nature. I admit I admire Catholicism and still dream of returning because I see them as stronger individuals for overcoming their own animal nature. However I cannot bow down to a possibly non-existent God who stands idle while the world eats itself. Therefore Catholicism is still one of the many subjective moralities of the fallen world and its better off that I allow myself the total freedom of nihilism rather than be a hypocrite in a morality created by a God who does not seem to play any role in human life and is content to wait until death only to punish as a harsh judge.

That is refreshingly honest.

 

[FlaviusAetius]

Even if you know how the person is going to turn out, it makes no difference. If you do something that results in a human life, you are responsible for that life.

And a person's right to life is not based on what you feel about them. Everyone wants to be Caligula now.

By Catholic standards you are right and I by no means wish to take that from you or the Church. Again like I said I feel Catholicism really has an ideal morality for humanity; though if I think deeply into it I probably could find some issues I may have.

However I'm sorry but in my current mental ideology I have to give a different opinion. There is no such thing as a right to life, it's entirely based on how society tells you children are to be handled and on the emotional appeal that a child is able to garner to their parent. A society that has no limits on infanticide will see born children abandoned on the roads to die of exposure or killed by their parents; ala the Ancient Greeks or Roman Republic/Empire. And as I said, after the limits set by law it depends completely on the parents disposition if a child lives or dies. This is why you see some parents who due to emotional attachment are willing to raise children with say severe mental disability or with full body paralysis while other parents will kill healthy babies just because they turned out to be a girl. Admittedly I admire parents who choose to raise damaged children, however as cold as it sounds I cannot bring myself to call such severely disabled children the equal of healthy children. They are a permanent burden, some more severe than others and I imagine even those who claim they love their child unconditionally believe this in their sub-conscious. Again its all in degrees, like I said even someone like me would choose to accept responsibility for a child born without say a few limbs or with milder mental disability. I've seen myself some incredible people born without limbs, having a monstrous face is a superficial reason to kill your child so I probably would be willing to raise a child with that deformity, and so long as mental disability doesn't permanently create an emotional barrier (IE: The child isn't a drooling vegetable) I'd be willing to raise such a child.

Well,

now I'm kind of depressed

Apologies, but it's the reality that I've seem to have gathered from observing and asking questions about the world. I by no means intend to state my view is the only correct one, but currently it is the view I see and sometimes "truth > comfort" in my mind.

That is refreshingly honest.

Thank you, I been doing more self-examining in my idle time. I love the notion of God and a authoritative pure goodness that leads humanity, but at the moment I cannot find proof of such an entity or examples of His goodness in the world. So I refuse to adhere to all the sacraments, rituals, moralities required unless I truly believe. To just go through the motions would be an insult to myself and I imagine to God as well who is described as spitting out the "Lukewarm". Better to be cold than lukewarm even if the end result is self-inflicted damnation. Also I will give credit where credit is due, I am grateful for having a Catholic upbringing and the period of spiritual warmth I felt from age 11-17. Even with all the heavy guilt that came as a teenager, Catholicism helped build a conscience in me and mold a disdain for things considered sinful. I imagine without that background I'd be even more colder and misanthropic or worse (IMO) convinced that the Culture of Death is not just a necessary evil derived from the nature of Man but in fact a "good" that should be preserved and glorified. I am thankful I did not turn out that way, even with all the hatred and emptiness I feel in my mind.

Not sure if Hot = good / Cold = Bad. It's been a while since I saw that piece of scripture.

 

[brewmama]

Is it possible to have a, legal, partial birth abortion in America..?

Oh yes. The democrats made sure of that. Otherwise, you know, war on women.

 

[MikeK]

Is a partial birth abortion worse than an abortion immediately after conception?

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Is a partial birth abortion worse than an abortion immediately after conception?

Every abortion is a tragedy. But it's worse when more abortions happen than when fewer of them do.

 

[Sword of the Lord]

Oh yes. The democrats made sure of that. Otherwise, you know, war on women.

I find it funny that they can and do use that term, but when we say "War on Babies" and "Infant Genocide" it's nonsense.

 

[brewmama]

Is a partial birth abortion worse than an abortion immediately after conception?

It may not be worse morally but it's a heck of a lot more painful and violent.

 

[MikeK]

Every abortion is a tragedy. But it's worse when more abortions happen than when fewer of them do.

When someone asks a direct question, the correct response is to answer it directly. We don't know that ban on partial birth abortions doesn't reduce the number of abortions, but it does result in a higher rate of physical injury to mothers who elect 3rd trimester abortions.

 

[MikeK]

I find it funny that they can and do use that term, but when we say "War on Babies" and "Infant Genocide" it's nonsense.

It isn't nonsense as much as it makes us look like as big of melodramatic fools as pro-choice shills are. Harsh language riles up a base but it is polarizing and does not win converts.

 

[Michie]

It isn't nonsense as much as it makes us look like as big of melodramatic fools as pro-choice shills are. Harsh language rules up a base but it is polarizing and does not win converts.

Well you should stop using polarizing terms Mike.

 

[MikeK]

Well you should stop using polarizing terms Mike.

Thank you for your contribution.

 

[Michie]

Thank you for your contribution.

Always welcome.