Supporting abortion = automatic ex communication

[gitlance]

I think because some want to steal money, we should make it legal for all to do it so we can avoid the violence associated with it when done illegally...

 

[Miss Shelby]

I think because some want to steal money, we should make it legal for all to do it so we can avoid the violence associated with it when done illegally...

yeah, lots of people wouldn't die in hold ups if hold ups were legal. Sheesh, no brainer there.

 

[Fantine]

The author of the article cited Canon Law about "procuring an abortion" and then proceeded to theorize that "procuring an abortion" could be construed to mean dozens of other things.......

Even voting for a pro-choice politician for reasons other than his/her pro-choice position, perhaps because you believe, as (s)he does, that if more were done to:

-improve education;
- reduce poverty;
- help battered and abused women, etc., etc., etc.

there would be as much, or more, reductions in abortions than there would be if repeal of a law sent women to other states, or other countries, or illegal abortionists, or buying RU486 off the internet (if such a thing is even possible--I know that all sorts of prescription drugs are advertised on the internet.)

I don't believe that any politician in America is really "pro-abortion."

And I don't believe that either Fr. Corapi's or the author's spinning their wheels constitutes anything other than their own individual opinions (as the author is even quick to point out in his disclaimer, quoted twice....)

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Guys, I don't think any of us think that abortion is a legitimate form of birth control. And very few of us believe even that abortion can sometimes be a morally acceptable choice.

What some of us say is that non-Catholics who genuinely believe - albeit falsely - that it is a morally acceptable choice, should not be punished by the law of the land. For the simple reason of equity (justice), which is a basic secular right. You see, when a man makes a woman pregnant, he is not legally punishable. Why force the woman, then, either to bear the heavy lifelong consequences or to be legally punished? In many (perhaps the majority) of cases, it is the man who cajoles, seduces or even forces her. Where is the justice, in secular terms, in making her alone bear the consequences?

On the moral plane this argument does not stand, of course. And keeping abortion legal has nothing to do with its remaining an extremely grave sin - for Catholics, and for others who believe as we do, that it is equal to murder.

Most of you will disagree with the opinion I expressed. Let's not get into that debate again: the only reason I made the argument is to show that to support legalized abortion is not the same as to deny that abortion is morally always wrong; therefore, it cannot be called a heresy.

I see what you are saying Globalnomad, nice to see you again by the way

The argument that I have heard is this.

Would all those that are "Pro-life" support a law which would legally compel them to undergo a kidney or partial liver transplant donation should a family member require a transplant in order to live? What about a friend or a stanger?

We, as Catholics, consider it an extremely noble act when one does undergo a living donor transplant and would consider it morally reprehensible should parents just watch their children die, when they have the power to save them, but would we support a law the would compel organ donation? Would politicians be excommunicated should they fail to support this law?

The secular argument for abortion is that one should never be compelled to give their life for another. A person's body is considered sovreign, and should not be violated by the intrusion of the State in the form of laws.

The Catholic church can and should use all of its moral authority to govern its own and to promote its morality in the world. If a Catholic actually promotes abortion as good, then they are excommunicated, but if others disagree on how we should solve the abortion problem, why the need for excommunication? Are all Catholics required to vote Republican or be excommunicated?

I don't believe that laws solve problems, they only create new ones. If you want to stop a woman from getting an abortion, talk to her, befriend her, show her that you care. Offer real help. Laws don't help, they only force your will on another and make you feel better about yourself. What do they do for the woman?

God has said, Let whomsoever will come. Drink of the water of life freely. God does not force, why should we?

 

[zhilan]

Why don't you not spend time speculating whether what others believe in their heart excommunicates them or not and leave that up to the person, their Spiritual Father, and God. Perhaps if we all spent more time looking into our own hearts and worrying about our own salvation rather than running around with Papal mitres excommunicating people left and right, OBOB might be a much better place.

 

[Miss Shelby]

Why don't you not spend time speculating whether what others believe in their heart excommunicates them or not and leave that up to the person, their Spiritual Father, and God. Perhaps if we all spent more time looking into our own hearts and worrying about our own salvation rather than running around with Papal mitres excommunicating people left and right, OBOB might be a much better place.

who is 'you' ?

 

[zhilan]

who is 'you' ?

The people making threads upon threads about how x,y, and z mean you're not Catholic.

I just think that perhaps it is better to look inward and worry about oneself before going on a crusade to condemn others.

 

[HappyMomof4]

I don't think I give a lot of credence to "catholicplanet". There are some wacko articles on the end of the world there. The guy who runs the site, Ron Conte wrote this article:

http://www.catholicplanet.com/future/overview1.htm

An Extremely Concise Overview of the Entire Future:

2009/2010 to 2039/2040: the first part of the tribulation, including the first Six Seals and the first Six Trumpets.
2009: U.S. President Hillary Clinton becomes Prolife.
2009: Pope Benedict XVI suggests building a Church, a Temple, and a Mosque in Jerusalem.
2009: A small war among the Arab/Muslim nations consolidates power with extremist leaders. Iran and Iraq lead them.
2009/2010: Pope Benedict XVI dies. The next Pope, Peter the Roman, enforces true doctrine and practice, resulting in the great apostasy.

There's more after that. It goes up to the years 2440.

 

[Da_Funkey_Gibbon]

Wow.

How much you wanna bet that guy still lives with his mum...

 

[The Princess Bride]

Wow.

How much you wanna bet that guy still lives with his mum...

 

[Maynard Keenan]

That doesn't appear to be an authoritative document. Furthermore, the proposed amendment states that if a mother is pregnant and will die by carrying the baby to term, then by law the mother must die. I can not and will never support taking that decision away from the mother. Who are we as society to force her to die, even if it is morally correct for her to choose to carry the baby?

 

[SaintGeorge]

But this is an authoritative document...

http://www.usccb.org/prolife/tdocs/prochoice.htm

 

[OnTheWay]

Guys, I don't think any of us think that abortion is a legitimate form of birth control. And very few of us believe even that abortion can sometimes be a morally acceptable choice.

What some of us say is that non-Catholics who genuinely believe - albeit falsely - that it is a morally acceptable choice, should not be punished by the law of the land. For the simple reason of equity (justice), which is a basic secular right. You see, when a man makes a woman pregnant, he is not legally punishable. Why force the woman, then, either to bear the heavy lifelong consequences or to be legally punished? In many (perhaps the majority) of cases, it is the man who cajoles, seduces or even forces her. Where is the justice, in secular terms, in making her alone bear the consequences?

On the moral plane this argument does not stand, of course. And keeping abortion legal has nothing to do with its remaining an extremely grave sin - for Catholics, and for others who believe as we do, that it is equal to murder.

Most of you will disagree with the opinion I expressed. Let's not get into that debate again: the only reason I made the argument is to show that to support legalized abortion is not the same as to deny that abortion is morally always wrong; therefore, it cannot be called a heresy.

Let's bear out your argument by rewording it a little differently. Let's say we're living in Germany in the late 30's or early 40's. A Catholic always knows that it's never okay to round up Jews for the purpose of forced labor which will lead to many deaths. However, society at large doesn't consider Jews to be human beings so in the interest of our personal confort and political correctness, er ah I mean "equity" we shouldn't say that KZ guards are guilty of any crime.

The vast majority of states in the US, as well as federal laws, are pretty draconian about how child support is enforced. However, the fact that reproductive realities may be a little more favorable to men does not give them the right to murder children. The man did not make the woman pregnant, they both engaged in sexual activity and that was the result. Attempting to relieve the woman's responsiblity to condone a murder is a fairly crass thing to say. I think it's highly reflective of people that live in a world where they think they ought to be able to do what they please with no consequences for their actions.

The idea that murdering children is ever "justice" is demonic quite simply. The attempts by pro-aborts to dehumanize the unborn are terrible, but that simply goes to a place that only demons could be comfortable.

 

[MichaelNZ]

Here's a question that I have been wondering about: Why does the Catholic Church automatically excommunicate someone who aborts an unborn baby, but doesn't automatically excommunicate someone who murders a child or an adult? Why do you get excommunicated for abortin but not murder? (although abortion is murder).

 

[Da_Funkey_Gibbon]

Here's a question that I have been wondering about: Why does the Catholic Church automatically excommunicate someone who aborts an unborn baby, but doesn't automatically excommunicate someone who murders a child or an adult? Why do you get excommunicated for abortin but not murder? (although abortion is murder).

An educated guess would be to underline the gravity of this particular sin. (Committing any form of mortal sin, like murder, brings about some form of excommunication - in that you can't receive the Eucharist until you go to confession.) The excommunication associted with abortion can also be lifted by a valid confession, I believe.

But honestly, I am unsure - I'm sure someone here know why though.

 

[scraparcs]

What's the difference between this form of excommunication and mortal sin anyway? Can't one be reconciled with valid confession in both cases?

 

[Da_Funkey_Gibbon]

What's the difference between this form of excommunication and mortal sin anyway? Can't one be reconciled with valid confession in both cases?

A great question that I would like to know the answer to too!

 

[boughtwithaprice]

A great question that I would like to know the answer to too!

Abortion cannot be forgiven by a diocesan priest. I believe that it has to be referred to the Bishop. The Bishop does have the authority to grant absolution, or he can grant that authority to the diocesan priest. The priest can't just claim it on his own without consulting the Bishop.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Let's bear out your argument by rewording it a little differently. Let's say we're living in Germany in the late 30's or early 40's. A Catholic always knows that it's never okay to round up Jews for the purpose of forced labor which will lead to many deaths. However, society at large doesn't consider Jews to be human beings so in the interest of our personal confort and political correctness, er ah I mean "equity" we shouldn't say that KZ guards are guilty of any crime.

The vast majority of states in the US, as well as federal laws, are pretty draconian about how child support is enforced. However, the fact that reproductive realities may be a little more favorable to men does not give them the right to murder children. The man did not make the woman pregnant, they both engaged in sexual activity and that was the result. Attempting to relieve the woman's responsiblity to condone a murder is a fairly crass thing to say. I think it's highly reflective of people that live in a world where they think they ought to be able to do what they please with no consequences for their actions.

The idea that murdering children is ever "justice" is demonic quite simply. The attempts by pro-aborts to dehumanize the unborn are terrible, but that simply goes to a place that only demons could be comfortable.

You are misconstruing the argument. I agree with you that abortions is grossly immoral, but to compare it to a nazi death camp, like the current pro-life arguments that I have seen, is missing the point. When you miss the point, you may gain friends with those that agree with you, but you will do very little to convince those that don't, and you even antagonize them further, all the while the abortions go on.

The way to address the abortion problem would be to answer the question: "Would you support a law that would require one human being to give up their life or part of their life for another?" I am not talking about moral authority, because we all know what we should do morally, but would you support legal authority whereby the State forces some of its citizens to give up there lives in favor of another?

 

[scraparcs]

Abortion cannot be forgiven by a diocesan priest. I believe that it has to be referred to the Bishop. The Bishop does have the authority to grant absolution, or he can grant that authority to the diocesan priest. The priest can't just claim it on his own without consulting the Bishop.

There are sins that can't be forgiven by the priest acting in the place of Christ?