Anonymous wrote:We’ll, the problem is when 5 right wing Catholics on the Supreme Court force the rest of us to adhere to their beliefs.
[Report Post]

[Post New]05/10/2022 15:06 Subject: Trying to understand Catholic arguments for and against abortion [Up]
Anonymous



Anonymous wrote:
We’ll, the problem is when 5 right wing Catholics on the Supreme Court force the rest of us to adhere to their beliefs.


You condone discrimination? Wow!

We don’t have these judges by chance. They were hand picked by Leonard Leo of the Federalist Society, a rightwing Catholic himself who controls judge selection by Republican presidents. Republicans want mainly to entrench control by the wealthy, but to do this they must give their base of evangelicals and hardline Catholics the anti abortion red meat they want. Since Leonard Leo is a devout Catholic he has made sure that in doing this, he always picks those with his beliefs. They are there to strike down abortion, to support dark money and to facilitate every advantage for the extremely wealthy and corporations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know there are other Catholics like me: 56% of U.S. Catholics believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases, and 68% believe that Roe v. Wade should not be overturned. Those stats come from the Pew Research Center https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/10/20/8-key-findings-about-catholics-and-abortion/

I'm interested in learning more about the moral arguments made by both sides because I am getting closer to leaving the Catholic Church over this issue. I have always been able to avoid and ignore the anti-abortion organizing by the Church while I have participated in other Catholic social justice ministries and regular parish life and rituals. But I can't ignore it any longer.

In case others are interested, here are the sources I have found helpful.

Catholic positions against abortion

The Catechism #2270--2275: human life begins at conception and the embryo should be given the rights of a person https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P7Z.HTM#-2C6

Fact sheet from the USCCB: "Scientists increasingly understood that the union of sperm and egg at conception produces a new living being that is distinct from both mother and father. Modern genetics demonstrated that this individual is, at the outset, distinctively human, with the inherent and active potential to mature into a human fetus, infant, child and adult ... Given the scientific fact that a human life begins at conception, the only moral norm needed to understand the Church's opposition to abortion is the principle that each and every human life has inherent dignity, and thus must be treated with the respect due to a human person." https://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/abortion/respect-for-unborn-human-life

Catholic positions for abortion

Video: "The Value of Life: Scientific and Moral Reflections on Abortion" -- One compelling argument is made that "the autonomy of the pregnant woman is a frame that circumscribes all other framing of early life by biological landmarks." https://www.catholicsforchoice.org/resource-library/the-value-of-life-scientific-and-moral-reflections-on-abortion/

Article: "The history of Catholic teaching on abortion isn’t as clear cut as you think" -- "Even though Catholicism is a religion with a strict and prominent hierarchy, it has a deep respect for individual reason and choice. When navigating complex moral questions, a person must first look to their own conscience to find the correct answer — not Church leaders. This principle is known as the “primacy of conscience,” and the Catechism goes further to say, “A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience ... For some, the primacy of conscience gives sufficient room within the Catholic Church for individuals to make up their own minds on abortion." https://theoutline.com/post/8536/catholic-history-abortion-brigid

Two books I have ordered but not read yet:
"A Brief, Liberal, Catholic Defense of Abortion" by Daniel Dombrowski
"Our Right to Choose: Toward a New Ethic of Abortion" by Beverly Wildung Harrison

To conclude, the differences seem to be about fetal development, when life begins, and the autonomy and dignity of the person, in this case the pregnant woman. On all three of these issues, I feel myself landing squarely on the pro-choice side. Could someone attempt to talk me out of it? I'm hoping for a respectful conversation here. I don't feel safe discussing this with family and friends. I live in a very Catholic world.

As a Catholic I do agree that abortion is a sin because it’s the taking an innocent human life. I do think there is a difference between an embryo and say a 15 week old baby. I also think abortion is justified in cases of threats to a mothers life and rape. My suggestion is to read as much as you can and then seriously pray on the matter.

Anonymous wrote:I know there are other Catholics like me: 56% of U.S. Catholics believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases, and 68% believe that Roe v. Wade should not be overturned. Those stats come from the Pew Research Center https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/10/20/8-key-findings-about-catholics-and-abortion/

I'm interested in learning more about the moral arguments made by both sides because I am getting closer to leaving the Catholic Church over this issue. I have always been able to avoid and ignore the anti-abortion organizing by the Church while I have participated in other Catholic social justice ministries and regular parish life and rituals. But I can't ignore it any longer.

In case others are interested, here are the sources I have found helpful.

Catholic positions against abortion

The Catechism #2270--2275: human life begins at conception and the embryo should be given the rights of a person https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P7Z.HTM#-2C6

Fact sheet from the USCCB: "Scientists increasingly understood that the union of sperm and egg at conception produces a new living being that is distinct from both mother and father. Modern genetics demonstrated that this individual is, at the outset, distinctively human, with the inherent and active potential to mature into a human fetus, infant, child and adult ... Given the scientific fact that a human life begins at conception, the only moral norm needed to understand the Church's opposition to abortion is the principle that each and every human life has inherent dignity, and thus must be treated with the respect due to a human person." https://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/abortion/respect-for-unborn-human-life

Catholic positions for abortion

Video: "The Value of Life: Scientific and Moral Reflections on Abortion" -- One compelling argument is made that "the autonomy of the pregnant woman is a frame that circumscribes all other framing of early life by biological landmarks." https://www.catholicsforchoice.org/resource-library/the-value-of-life-scientific-and-moral-reflections-on-abortion/

Article: "The history of Catholic teaching on abortion isn’t as clear cut as you think" -- "Even though Catholicism is a religion with a strict and prominent hierarchy, it has a deep respect for individual reason and choice. When navigating complex moral questions, a person must first look to their own conscience to find the correct answer — not Church leaders. This principle is known as the “primacy of conscience,” and the Catechism goes further to say, “A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience ... For some, the primacy of conscience gives sufficient room within the Catholic Church for individuals to make up their own minds on abortion." https://theoutline.com/post/8536/catholic-history-abortion-brigid

Two books I have ordered but not read yet:
"A Brief, Liberal, Catholic Defense of Abortion" by Daniel Dombrowski
"Our Right to Choose: Toward a New Ethic of Abortion" by Beverly Wildung Harrison

To conclude, the differences seem to be about fetal development, when life begins, and the autonomy and dignity of the person, in this case the pregnant woman. On all three of these issues, I feel myself landing squarely on the pro-choice side. Could someone attempt to talk me out of it? I'm hoping for a respectful conversation here. I don't feel safe discussing this with family and friends. I live in a very Catholic world.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Patients should absolutely be free to make their own medical decisions with their doctor without the interference of religious extremists.

You know there are those who are not religious who don’t believe in abortion. We all know and don’t argue that it’s stilling a life. Do only religious people condemn murder? Of course not, non religious people don’t believe in that either. Why do many assume non religious people are immune from being anti-abortinists?

SOME extremist religious people think it is "murder" based on their religious beliefs.

Why should they force their religious beliefs on EVERYONE ELSE?

Please stop with the “extremist” nonsense and being over dramatic. They are following their religion with fidelity rather than a la carte.
I am not religious but will not tell someone to pick and choose what their faith says just because I don’t believe I’m it.
Anyway, it is stopping a life so in essence it’s not a reach to say it’s murder.
I’m neutral on the matter, and again, it’s not compulsory to be religious to be against abortion.

Anonymous wrote:
We don’t have these judges by chance. They were hand picked by Leonard Leo of the Federalist Society, a rightwing Catholic himself who controls judge selection by Republican presidents. Republicans want mainly to entrench control by the wealthy, but to do this they must give their base of evangelicals and hardline Catholics the anti abortion red meat they want. Since Leonard Leo is a devout Catholic he has made sure that in doing this, he always picks those with his beliefs. They are there to strike down abortion, to support dark money and to facilitate every advantage for the extremely wealthy and corporations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Patients should absolutely be free to make their own medical decisions with their doctor without the interference of religious extremists.

You know there are those who are not religious who don’t believe in abortion. We all know and don’t argue that it’s stilling a life. Do only religious people condemn murder? Of course not, non religious people don’t believe in that either. Why do many assume non religious people are immune from being anti-abortinists?

SOME extremist religious people think it is "murder" based on their religious beliefs.

Why should they force their religious beliefs on EVERYONE ELSE?

Please stop with the “extremist” nonsense and being over dramatic. They are following their religion with fidelity rather than a la carte.
I am not religious but will not tell someone to pick and choose what their faith says just because I don’t believe I’m it.
Anyway, it is stopping a life so in essence it’s not a reach to say it’s murder.
I’m neutral on the matter, and again, it’s not compulsory to be religious to be against abortion.

Anonymous wrote:We’ll, the problem is when 5 right wing Catholics on the Supreme Court force the rest of us to adhere to their beliefs.
[Report Post]

[Post New]05/10/2022 15:06 Subject: Trying to understand Catholic arguments for and against abortion [Up]
Anonymous



Anonymous wrote:
We’ll, the problem is when 5 right wing Catholics on the Supreme Court force the rest of us to adhere to their beliefs.


You condone discrimination? Wow!

We don’t have these judges by chance. They were hand picked by Leonard Leo of the Federalist Society, a rightwing Catholic himself who controls judge selection by Republican presidents. Republicans want mainly to entrench control by the wealthy, but to do this they must give their base of evangelicals and hardline Catholics the anti abortion red meat they want. Since Leonard Leo is a devout Catholic he has made sure that in doing this, he always picks those with his beliefs. They are there to strike down abortion, to support dark money and to facilitate every advantage for the extremely wealthy and corporations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Just like discriminating against blacks was legal until a constitutional amendment… oh, wait, the Supreme Court did that first too…. Those zealots demanding equal rights and not using the right process!

Whoa! Do you believe the 14th Amendment was done by the Supreme Court? Just FYI, in case you didn't know, the Supreme Court only made the pretty obvious interpretation of the 14th Amendment that racially discriminatory state laws violated the 14th amendment.

And now the Supreme Court can make the equally obvious interpretation that the 14th amendment prohibits the deprivation of liberty and the denial of equal protection caused by abortion bans. No?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Just like discriminating against blacks was legal until a constitutional amendment… oh, wait, the Supreme Court did that first too…. Those zealots demanding equal rights and not using the right process!

Whoa! Do you believe the 14th Amendment was done by the Supreme Court? Just FYI, in case you didn't know, the Supreme Court only made the pretty obvious interpretation of the 14th Amendment that racially discriminatory state laws violated the 14th amendment.

Anonymous wrote:Here's another perspective -- Sr. Joan Chittister "A Catholic Nun on What It Really Means to Be Pro-Life"

"We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is."

https://billmoyers.com/story/what-pro-life-means/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Just like discriminating against blacks was legal until a constitutional amendment… oh, wait, the Supreme Court did that first too…. Those zealots demanding equal rights and not using the right process!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Patients should absolutely be free to make their own medical decisions with their doctor without the interference of religious extremists.

You know there are those who are not religious who don’t believe in abortion. We all know and don’t argue that it’s stilling a life. Do only religious people condemn murder? Of course not, non religious people don’t believe in that either. Why do many assume non religious people are immune from being anti-abortinists?

SOME extremist religious people think it is "murder" based on their religious beliefs.

Why should they force their religious beliefs on EVERYONE ELSE?