Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Lying To Ourselves


Lil Red

Recommended Posts

Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='01 January 2010 - 10:07 PM' timestamp='1262398046' post='2028276']
Would it be wrong?

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

Yes. It would be wrong. St. Thomas aquinas says in the Summa the the willful taking of life is always wrong. To kill an abortionist is to will the killing of another. The reason just war is acceptable is because it is justly defending or fighting. One intends to repel a force and threat, not to kill This is different from killing an abortionist since there are other ways of preventing abortion then killing (in this instance willing the stopping of abortion can be removed from killing the abortionist so to kill that abortionist is to willingly kill another individual and not simply to defend although that may be a secondary purpose) and there are no other ways to stop another army other than with proportionate force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='01 January 2010 - 09:18 PM' timestamp='1262398723' post='2028280']
Well, there is that little tablet called the Ten Commandments.
[/quote]

The one that said "Thou shalt not murder." Murder is not defined as "killing a human being."

~Sternhauser

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HisChildForever

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='01 January 2010 - 09:49 PM' timestamp='1262400542' post='2028297']
The one that said "Thou shalt not murder." Murder is not defined as "killing a human being."

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

You ARE the guy who said that the state should not use "aggression" against criminals, right? (With "aggression" being defined as "putting them in handcuffs and bringing them to the station".) I am absolutely baffled as to why it's wrong to put a criminal in prison but totally fine to murder an abortionist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam' date='01 January 2010 - 09:19 PM' timestamp='1262398761' post='2028281']
Yes. It would be wrong. St. Thomas aquinas says in the Summa the the willful taking of life is always wrong. To kill an abortionist is to will the killing of another. The reason just war is acceptable is because it is justly defending or fighting. One intends to repel a force and threat, not to kill This is different from killing an abortionist since there are other ways of preventing abortion then killing (in this instance willing the stopping of abortion can be removed from killing the abortionist so to kill that abortionist is to willingly kill another individual and not simply to defend although that may be a secondary purpose) and there are no other ways to stop another army other than with proportionate force.
[/quote]

I fail to see how the mere circumstance of "there is no other option" suddenly means that pulling the trigger and killing an aggressor is not [i]willed[/i]. The intention of the act is not in the circumstances. It is, of course, in the will.

St. Thomas did not say that it was intrinsically wrong to will to kill another. ST II-IIae, Question 64: Article 7: "But as it is unlawful to take a man's life, except for the public authority acting for the common good, as stated above (Article 3), [b]it is not lawful for a man to intend killing a man in self-defense,[/b] [b][i]except[/i] for such as have public authority[/b], [b]who while [i]intending to kill a man[/i] in self-defense,[/b] refer this to the public good, as in the case of a soldier fighting against the foe, and in the minister of the judge struggling with robbers, although even these sin if they be moved by private animosity."

I don't agree with most of the past paragraph, myself, for in many cases, the only "authorities" happen to be the tyrants themselves, and because the public good is not an entity distinct and separate from the good of every individual in society. Furthermore, no individual can possibly grant to a third party a right that he himself does not have.

It is written further:

"Nevertheless, as stated above (2) [b]the slaying of a sinner becomes lawful in relation to the common good[/b], which is corrupted by sin. . . .

Reply to Objection 3. By sinning man departs from the order of reason,and consequently falls away from the dignity of his manhood, in so far as he is naturally free, and exists for himself, and he falls into the slavish state of the beasts, by being disposed of according as he is useful to others. This is expressed in Psalms 48:21: "Man, when he was in honor, did not understand; he hath been compared to senseless beasts, and made like to them," and Proverbs 11:29: "The fool shall serve the wise." [b]Hence, although it be evil in itself to kill a man so long as he preserve his dignity, yet it may be good to kill a man who has sinned, even as it is to kill a beast.[/b] For a bad man is worse than a beast, and is more harmful, as the Philosopher states (Politics I.1and Ethics VII.6)." ST II-IIae Q.64


~Sternhauser

Edited by Sternhauser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='01 January 2010 - 09:52 PM' timestamp='1262400745' post='2028300']
You ARE the guy who said that the state should not use "aggression" against criminals, right? (With "aggression" being defined as "putting them in handcuffs and bringing them to the station".) I am absolutely baffled as to why it's wrong to put a criminal in prison but totally fine to murder an abortionist.
[/quote]

That is not what I said. I said the State necessarily operates through aggression, and that for that reason, the institution is immoral.

[url="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/aggression"]http://dictionary.re...owse/aggression[/url]

~Sternhauser

Edited by Sternhauser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

HisChildForever

In the other thread, you sure were quick to critisize me for "dodging" your questions. Yet here you are, doing the exact same thing you claimed I was doing to you.

For the second time I am going to ask you:
If you had the opportunity to kill an abortionist, would you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='01 January 2010 - 10:11 PM' timestamp='1262401866' post='2028308']
In the other thread, you sure were quick to critisize me for "dodging" your questions. Yet here you are, doing the exact same thing you claimed I was doing to you.

For the second time I am going to ask you:
If you had the opportunity to kill an abortionist, would you?
[/quote]

I'm not dodging it, HisChildForever, I'm refusing to answer it. I'll be very forthright about that fact.

~Sternhauser

Edited by Sternhauser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Moosey' date='01 January 2010 - 10:19 PM' timestamp='1262402383' post='2028316']
Same thing :whistle:
[/quote]

If you asked someone a question, and he chose to not respond, would you consider that "dodging the question?"

~Sternhauser

Edited by Sternhauser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='01 January 2010 - 10:21 PM' timestamp='1262402512' post='2028317']
If you asked someone a question, and he chose to not respond, would you consider that "dodging the question?"

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

Yup

It is not morally permissable to kill an abortionist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HisChildForever

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='01 January 2010 - 10:18 PM' timestamp='1262402314' post='2028314']
I'm not dodging it, HisChildForever, I'm refusing to answer it. I'll be very forthright about that fact.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

Why are you refusing to answer it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='01 January 2010 - 10:23 PM' timestamp='1262402627' post='2028319']
Why are you refusing to answer it?
[/quote]

The answer to that question, too, is not your business.

~Sternhauser

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HisChildForever

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='01 January 2010 - 10:24 PM' timestamp='1262402697' post='2028322']
The answer to that question, too, is not your business.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

Um, then why did you storm in here demanding to know why killing abortionists should be condemned? Why bother participating in this thread or continuing that kind of debate if you refuse to answer the questions asked of you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='01 January 2010 - 10:27 PM' timestamp='1262402843' post='2028324']
Um, then why did you storm in here demanding to know why killing abortionists should be condemned? Why bother participating in this thread or continuing that kind of debate if you refuse to answer the questions asked of you?
[/quote]

Because my personal view is absolutely immaterial to the objective status of whether the killing of an abortionist is moral or not.

~Sternhauser

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote][b]2258 [/b]"[i]Human life is sacred[/i] because from its beginningit involves the creative action of God and it remains for ever in aspecial relationship with the Creator, who is its sole end. God aloneis the Lord of life from its beginning until its end: no one can underany circumstance claim for himself the right directly to destroy aninnocent human being."[/quote]

Unless your personal view goes against Church teaching

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...