Trying to understand Catholic arguments for and against abortion

[Anonymous]

I think the interesting question for Catholic theologians are the edge cases. In a fire, do you save the 5 year old, or the 100 frozen embryos? If life begins the moment the sperm hits the egg, how do you explain twins that don’t split until day 6? Does the soul split in half, or were there two souls in one body? If abortion is acceptable to save the life of the mother, why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but the Catholic Church is explicit that there is no Catholic argument for abortion. Advocating for abortion is a grave sin.

They are explicit about lots of issues that people ignore. Very few catholics refuse to use birth control or deny themselves the power of IVF or other reproductive technologies, etc.

Focus on what you want to get out of your church...there are Catholic churches that spend their time and energy on soup kitchens and shelters and education, etc. and don't get involved in these tiresome reproductive issues. You can find them if you look.

[Anonymous]

The #1 tenet of Catholicism is life, so anything that prevents that is against Catholic teaching essentially. That's also why they have been against barrier birth control (prevents creation of life) like condoms, but rhythm method is OK since it's not stopping life creation.

Where things get dicey I think is the stance on gay marriage. The purpose of marriage is to create life, so that's been the reasons against gay marriage as I understand it. But if that's the reason, shouldn't they also prevent marriage between people too old to conceive? Or infertile people?

[Anonymous]

Pro choice Catholics are making a political point: the U.S. government has no business telling citizens what to do with respect to their own health care, reproductive decisions, and bodies. Same argument if the government decided that religious circumcision was child abuse and started arresting mohels.

BTW, the "states right" argument is legally weak and utterly ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Focus on what you want to get out of your church...there are Catholic churches that spend their time and energy on soup kitchens and shelters and education, etc. and don't get involved in these tiresome reproductive issues. You can find them if you look.

Catholic here and that's a lot of churches in this area. They don't really bring up the issue, and focus on charity works in the community. They do great work there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does Alyssa Milano talk about moral theology/Christian ethics in this video? That is what we are talking about here.

Did you watch the video?

Alyssa Milano is who you look to for this issue?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The #1 tenet of Catholicism is life, so anything that prevents that is against Catholic teaching essentially. That's also why they have been against barrier birth control (prevents creation of life) like condoms, but rhythm method is OK since it's not stopping life creation.

Where things get dicey I think is the stance on gay marriage. The purpose of marriage is to create life, so that's been the reasons against gay marriage as I understand it. But if that's the reason, shouldn't they also prevent marriage between people too old to conceive? Or infertile people?

Considering how much death God is responsible for, the obsession with "life" just seems nonsensical if not hypocritical. But sense and religion are different circles with little overlap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The #1 tenet of Catholicism is life, so anything that prevents that is against Catholic teaching essentially. That's also why they have been against barrier birth control (prevents creation of life) like condoms, but rhythm method is OK since it's not stopping life creation.

Where things get dicey I think is the stance on gay marriage. The purpose of marriage is to create life, so that's been the reasons against gay marriage as I understand it. But if that's the reason, shouldn't they also prevent marriage between people too old to conceive? Or infertile people?

These are religious questions. The government is required to stay out of it. That's why people flocked to this country: so they would not be forced to live under the rules and beliefs of someone else's religion or be prevented from practicing their own according to their own conscience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The #1 tenet of Catholicism is life, so anything that prevents that is against Catholic teaching essentially. That's also why they have been against barrier birth control (prevents creation of life) like condoms, but rhythm method is OK since it's not stopping life creation.

Where things get dicey I think is the stance on gay marriage. The purpose of marriage is to create life, so that's been the reasons against gay marriage as I understand it. But if that's the reason, shouldn't they also prevent marriage between people too old to conceive? Or infertile people?

Actually the #1 tenet is love.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The #1 tenet of Catholicism is life, so anything that prevents that is against Catholic teaching essentially. That's also why they have been against barrier birth control (prevents creation of life) like condoms, but rhythm method is OK since it's not stopping life creation.

Where things get dicey I think is the stance on gay marriage. The purpose of marriage is to create life, so that's been the reasons against gay marriage as I understand it. But if that's the reason, shouldn't they also prevent marriage between people too old to conceive? Or infertile people?

You understanding of the purpose of marriage is wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but the Catholic Church is explicit that there is no Catholic argument for abortion. Advocating for abortion is a grave sin.

They are explicit about lots of issues that people ignore. Very few catholics refuse to use birth control or deny themselves the power of IVF or other reproductive technologies, etc.

Focus on what you want to get out of your church...there are Catholic churches that spend their time and energy on soup kitchens and shelters and education, etc. and don't get involved in these tiresome reproductive issues. You can find them if you look.

And you can and should ignore them when they tell you what candidate to vote for solely based on their stance on abortion. I vote democratic and and am pro choice. I chose a church that has the same stance...very progessive, gay jesuit parish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the interesting question for Catholic theologians are the edge cases. In a fire, do you save the 5 year old, or the 100 frozen embryos? If life begins the moment the sperm hits the egg, how do you explain twins that don’t split until day 6? Does the soul split in half, or were there two souls in one body? If abortion is acceptable to save the life of the mother, why?

It’s not. Either both manage to live or both die.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The #1 tenet of Catholicism is life, so anything that prevents that is against Catholic teaching essentially. That's also why they have been against barrier birth control (prevents creation of life) like condoms, but rhythm method is OK since it's not stopping life creation.

Where things get dicey I think is the stance on gay marriage. The purpose of marriage is to create life, so that's been the reasons against gay marriage as I understand it. But if that's the reason, shouldn't they also prevent marriage between people too old to conceive? Or infertile people?

Considering how much death God is responsible for, the obsession with "life" just seems nonsensical if not hypocritical. But sense and religion are different circles with little overlap.

You’re missing the “why”. Life is so important to the church because they want to create as many followers as possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pro choice Catholics are making a political point: the U.S. government has no business telling citizens what to do with respect to their own health care, reproductive decisions, and bodies. Same argument if the government decided that religious circumcision was child abuse and started arresting mohels.

BTW, the "states right" argument is legally weak and utterly ridiculous.

How is the states rights argument weak and utterly ridiculous? It was how it worked in the country for hundreds of years until Roe.

The fact is that a zealous faction wanted to shortcut the legal process for enshrining an unenumerated right into the Constitution by using the Supreme Court for politics instead of doing the work required to do a Constitutional amendment. So fifty years later, we are still arguing about this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The #1 tenet of Catholicism is life, so anything that prevents that is against Catholic teaching essentially. That's also why they have been against barrier birth control (prevents creation of life) like condoms, but rhythm method is OK since it's not stopping life creation.

Where things get dicey I think is the stance on gay marriage. The purpose of marriage is to create life, so that's been the reasons against gay marriage as I understand it. But if that's the reason, shouldn't they also prevent marriage between people too old to conceive? Or infertile people?

This annoys me when people think that the whole purpose of marriage in Catholics may is to procreate. There are 3 purposes and if one cannot procreate it does not discredit them in the Catholic Church. Canon law 1654 tells a little bit about it. Stop saying stupid things that “you understood” as fact.