Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Firstoff, I admit that The Church has suffered irreparable damage and loss of the "high ground" due to its handling of the pedophile scandals. We won't see this resolved in our lifetime, and all I can say is, "Boy, does someone have some explaining to do when they're 'called up yonder' someday". But that's a different thread.
The Church's position, as I understand it, is this--once you've started a new life, it is no longer your choice, morally speaking, to end it. It would be like the mother of a 1-year old "choosing" to quit feeding it.
Does the Church's position reflect today's modern sensibilties? No. It's not a democracy, and it's run by a male heirarchy. They don't have uteruses. Does it give one any option to prevent pregnancy?---not many, I'm afraid.
But in the context of a 2,000 year old system, I believe the Church's position on abortion is pretty consistent. And viewed in this light, I think it's easy to see why the Church feels duty-bound to object....
Hope I've explained it (somewhat, at least)
Because I've given you the opportunity to convince me of your point of view. If you don't take advantage of it, then I won't be convinced. I'll always listen to reason, but one arbitrary opinion is no more convincing than any other.
Call me cynical, but I don't think there is anything anyone can say to change the minds of pro-lifers. It's going to take something catastrophic to change their minds, like some sort of a disease where the fetus kills its host, and the only way to fix it is to abort. Maybe, then, just maybe.
I try not to discuss religious conservative issues too much. Now I just roll my eyes and look down upon them
Call me cynical, but I don't think there is anything anyone can say to change the minds of pro-lifers. It's going to take something catastrophic to change their minds, like some sort of a disease where the fetus kills its host, and the only way to fix it is to abort. Maybe, then, just maybe.
I try not to discuss religious conservative issues too much. Now I just roll my eyes and look down upon them
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,373,658 times
Reputation: 40731
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjb68-19
Hmmmm, that's funny, I don't remember saying anything about someone seeking an abortion being personally irresponsible, hmmm, i went back and check my quotes, nope, didn't even say the word abortion. Are you putting words in my mouth???
Well, I didn't say you said it, did I?
But you did say "there's absolutely no excuse anymore for getting knocked up!!" and I will say that based on the failure rate of many birth control methods that's an unacceptable, untrue judgement to place on people. Read the chart, even surgical sterilization is not 100% effective.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,373,658 times
Reputation: 40731
Quote:
Originally Posted by bily4
The U.S. Catholic Church is more progressive than the "out of Rome" Catholic Church. There are so many Catholics however that in real life you will find Catholics on different sides of every issue, even different Priests and parishes are considered "liberal" or "conservative".
While I know this is true in practice, as long as the church continues to maintain it's centralized hierarchy I believe those who identify themselves as Catholic will likely continue to be judged by the proclamations and actions of that hierarchy.
I'm surprised at your surprise. I would imagine that the Catholic League (I'm a Catholic, and I understand the League can get a little crochety now and then) has voiced its objections for the same reason that a Muslim group might object to a cartoon showing The Prophet enjoying a meal of pork chops
This is a direct and defamatory attack against the founder of a religion. Arguing that women's rights to choose are shrinking is not a specific attack on the founder of Christianity.
Quote:
---or that the NAACP might not hold with the "N" word being used
This is a word that degrades and defames a specific ethnic/racial group. The advertisement's language did not degrade nor defame any group.
Quote:
---or that the local chapter of N.O.W. might object if JC Penney announced a sale on "wife-beater" undershirts
This is a closer parallel because the ad might seem to endorse wife-beating, just as the pro-choice ad might seem to endorse the right to choose abortion.
Quote:
--Or the Jewish Defense League might raise objections to a sale on Auschwitz memorabilia
The advertisement is not selling a product related to abortion.
Quote:
---Why couldn't ALL these offended parties just "look the other way"?---I don't know; maybe we're all just a little thin-skinned--what do you think?
You know, there are so many birth control options out there for women and men nowadays - there's absolutely no excuse anymore for getting knocked up!!
But abortion is not always a choice people make because of unintended pregnancy.
Suppose a 30-year-old woman had a routine AFP test in pregnancy that showed high probability for Down Syndrome or spina bifida and one of these conditions was confirmed through amniocentesis. Suppose she and her husband are not able to support a child with special needs of this kind either financially or emotionally, and suppose further that they have no family to help them.
Suppose also that the child's impairment would be so severe that she or he would require lifelong nursing care? Suppose the impairment would make the act of living a daily, painful challenge for the child?
One might argue, "Well, you shoulda known before you got pregnant that this was a risk!" I would ask then how many of us genuinely believed -- believed with our whole heart -- that this risk could really happen to us personally.
Many people do consciously choose to raise a child with severe impairments. Their love, patience, and forbearance is commendable, as is their joy in their children. That said, not everyone is capable of this kind of approach.
Sometimes, abortion is not merely a convenience, but a bitter and difficult choice.
no, there not all 100 percent, but the chances are MUCH MUCH GREATER than zero percent.
But someone has got to be the unfortunate sucker who's last in line when the Lucky Fairy runs out of her presents to all the rest of us.
Plenty of people's kids slipped past the IUD, crept through the teeny pinhole in the condom, or beat Ortho-Novum despite their parents' best efforts to have things be otherwise.
Suppose you were in your forties, were done having children (but were premenopausal) and got the Mirena IUD, for example? Mirena's got an excellent user rate (well into the 90%), but even so, it's not 100%.
There really isn't any excuse for getting knocked up. Ok, so birth control pill is only 99 percent effective, so 1 percent may get pregnant. That sure would cut down on the amount of abortions, don't you think. Anyway, if someone is really adament about not wanting to get pregnant and they don't want to take a chance with the 99 percent birth control pill - getting your tubes tied would be 100 percent effective.
Not even getting your tubes tied is 100% effective. Even barring ectopic pregnancy, which happens more often with tied tubes, you still have some degree of failure.
Moreover, not every abortion occurs as a result of unintended pregnancy.
But abortion is not always a choice people make because of unintended pregnancy.
Suppose a 30-year-old woman had a routine AFP test in pregnancy that showed high probability for Down Syndrome or spina bifida and one of these conditions was confirmed through amniocentesis. Suppose she and her husband are not able to support a child with special needs of this kind either financially or emotionally, and suppose further that they have no family to help them.
Suppose also that the child's impairment would be so severe that she or he would require lifelong nursing care? Suppose the impairment would make the act of living a daily, painful challenge for the child?
One might argue, "Well, you shoulda known before you got pregnant that this was a risk!" I would ask then how many of us genuinely believed -- believed with our whole heart -- that this risk could really happen to us personally.
Many people do consciously choose to raise a child with severe impairments. Their love, patience, and forbearance is commendable, as is their joy in their children. That said, not everyone is capable of this kind of approach.
Sometimes, abortion is not merely a convenience, but a bitter and difficult choice.
Charles, you serve up a good point, but fear, it is moot, b/c the percentage of that person you decribe, is a very low percent compared to those who actually do choose abortion...so, while it is a very good point, it is unfortunately a moot point when it comes to maybe 1% out of 100%, yanno? But I hear ya and know where your coming from.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
