JimR-OCDS Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 [quote name='KnightofChrist' date='21 July 2010 - 04:49 PM' timestamp='1279741758' post='2146088'] Jim should I take your silence to the above statement as agreement to the above statement? [/quote] Your statement isn't close to anything I've been posting so I didn't bother. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slappo Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 (edited) [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='21 July 2010 - 01:11 PM' timestamp='1279743072' post='2146090'] Nihil Obstat' [i]Do you believe that an abortion as defined by the Church can ever *not* be called murder, as you argued last October? [/i] A direct abortion as defined by the Church is murder, but really legally its more in line with manslaughter as defined in law where no malice or aforethought is used. However, as I have pointed out in October and in here, but which you prefer to dance around, [b]not all abortions are direct abortions as defined by the Church.[/b] Jim [/quote] Please show where the Church has defined this. [b]That would require a magisterial binding document[/b], not an opinion of a magazine or Church official. Edit: spelling Edited July 21, 2010 by Slappo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 (edited) [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='21 July 2010 - 04:13 PM' timestamp='1279743228' post='2146092'] Your statement isn't close to anything I've been posting so I didn't bother. Jim [/quote] Yes it is, during the 1800s up and until at least the 1960s lynching Blacks was legal in the South, and the majority agreed with its use. Using your logic lynching during that time was not murder, and your logic supports it. Edited July 21, 2010 by KnightofChrist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimR-OCDS Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 [quote name='KnightofChrist' date='21 July 2010 - 05:16 PM' timestamp='1279743370' post='2146095'] Yes it is, during the 1800s up and until at least the 1960s lynching Blacks was legal in the South, and the majority agreed with its use. Using your logic lynching during that time was not murder, and your logic supports it. [/quote] Well it wasn't legal to lynch blacks even in the south, but the cases were rarely enforced. [i][b]Lynching[/b], the practice of killing people by extrajudicial mob action, occurred [b]in the United States[/b] chiefly from the late 1700s through the 1960s. This type of murder is most often associated with [/i][url="/wiki/Hanging"][color="#0645ad"][i]hanging[/i][/color][/url][i], although it often included burning and various other methods of [/i][url="/wiki/Torture"][color="#0645ad"][i]torture[/i][/color][/url][i]. Only rarely were lynchers punished, or even arrested, for their crimes.[/i] [i][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching_in_the_United_States"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching_in_the_United_States[/url][/i] Thats besides the point of the discussion. No one today thinks that lynching blacks should be legal. You can not say the same about abortion. The very topic of this thread is whether it should be kept legal or not. Fine, make it illegal, but in doing so, describe the penalty for those who violate the law, as you would have it. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='21 July 2010 - 03:11 PM' timestamp='1279743072' post='2146090'] A direct abortion as defined by the Church is murder, but really legally its more in line with manslaughter as defined in law where no malice or aforethought is used. However, as I have pointed out in October and in here, but which you prefer to dance around, not all abortions are direct abortions as defined by the Church. [/quote] I find the 'definition' that you provided of "indirect abortion" to be sloppy and misleading at best. You've still yet to show me a document with any doctrinal authority that uses or defines the term. I don't care if it's 'legally' closer to manslaugher because the law means precisely nothing. However, seeing as the enormous majority of abortions are premeditated, and on the part of the abortionist it always is, I see no reason that it's not 'legally' closest to first degree murder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='21 July 2010 - 04:31 PM' timestamp='1279744289' post='2146097'] Well it wasn't legal to lynch blacks even in the south, but the cases were rarely enforced.[/quote] It was completely legal, in the state I live in it was just recently abolished, though it had not been practiced in decades. [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='21 July 2010 - 04:31 PM' timestamp='1279744289' post='2146097']No one today thinks that lynching blacks should be legal. You can not say the same about abortion. The very topic of this thread is whether it should be kept legal or not. Fine, make it illegal, but in doing so, describe the penalty for those who violate the law, as you would have it. [/quote] False there are many racists who do believe lynching blacks should be legal. All they need to do is become the majority again, make it the law of the land again, and your logic would support legalized lynching, as your logic supports legalized lynching in the womb. It would be nice if you could honestly admit this flaw in your erroneous logic. But to do so would force you to admit that no matter what the majority believes doesn't mean that murder of any people should be legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimR-OCDS Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 [quote name='Slappo' date='21 July 2010 - 05:14 PM' timestamp='1279743259' post='2146093'] Please show where the Church has defined this. [b]That would require a magisterial binding document[/b], not an opinion of a magazine or Church official. Edit: spelling [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/sweat.gif[/img] [/quote] [font="Arial"][b]USCCB committee explains direct abortion, legitimate medical procedure [/b][size="2"]By [/size][/font][url="http://www.catholicnews.com/index.html"][font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#990033"]Catholic News Service[/color][/size][/font][/url] [font="Arial"][size="2"]WASHINGTON (CNS) -- The U.S. bishops' Committee on Doctrine in a June 23 statement discussed the distinction between the church's definitions of a direct abortion and a legitimate medical procedure that could result in an indirect abortion.[/size][/font] [url="http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1002604.htm"]http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1002604.htm[/url] This is the best I can find on-line. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slappo Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Jim, As a member of congress I would [b]ultimately [/b]try to make the punishments of abortion as some previously stated: Murder for the abortionist Assisted murder for the nurses etc depends on circumstances for the woman (murder/mental rehabilitation depending on circumstances) Possibly assisted murder for anyone who pressured the woman into the abortion (husband, boyfriend) As a member of congress until I saw the possibility of above punishments and laws taking place, I would continue to push to make abortion illegal and approve and pass laws with any punishments possible, although with my vote I would make clear that I believe stronger punishments to be more appropriate. This is in line with what JPII taught on politicians voting for anti-abortion laws. I don't have the document from JPII nor do I have the time to find it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimR-OCDS Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 [quote name='KnightofChrist' date='21 July 2010 - 05:41 PM' timestamp='1279744884' post='2146101'] [i]It was completely legal, in the state I live in it was just recently abolished, though it had not been practiced in decades. [/i]Even though it was on the books, it would be unconstitutional and therefore illegal. [i]False there are many racists who do believe lynching blacks should be legal. [/i]There aren't enough to make it a law. [i]All they need to do is become the majority again, make it the law of the land again, and your logic would support legalized lynching, as your logic supports legalized lynching in the womb. It would be nice if you could honestly admit this flaw in your erroneous logic. But to do so would force you to admit that no matter what the majority believes doesn't mean that murder of any people should be legal. [/i]I don't care if the majority thinks murder should be legal, its still murder and immoral. The question here however is about making abortion illegal. Yes, abortion is an intrinsic moral evil, but getting that into law with penalties, is the question I presented. I say you can't, despite what we believe about it. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisChildForever Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='21 July 2010 - 10:18 AM' timestamp='1279721936' post='2145874'] Also, we have to accept that we can't force others to accept our moral doctrines any more than they can force us to accept theirs. [/quote] Abortion can be looked at from other perspectives besides the theological. It is the murder of an unborn human person. We already have laws against the murder of a born human person. There is no difference between an unborn person and a born person save their current developmental stage (and yes, born persons go through plenty of developmental stages). The law should protect their right to life, just as it protects ours i.e. those of us already born. This is a human rights issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimR-OCDS Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Slappo [i]As a member of congress I would [b]ultimately [/b]try to make the punishments of abortion as some previously stated: Murder for the abortionist Assisted murder for the nurses etc depends on circumstances for the woman (murder/mental rehabilitation depending on circumstances) Possibly assisted murder for anyone who pressured the woman into the abortion (husband, boyfriend) [/i] Does this include all abortions, even early term abortions before viability? And why no penalty for the woman? After all it is the woman who seeks out the abortionist. Lastly, do you think such a law would have a chance at making it through Congress? Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slappo Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='21 July 2010 - 01:44 PM' timestamp='1279745083' post='2146104'] [font="Arial"][b]USCCB committee explains direct abortion, legitimate medical procedure [/b][size="2"]By [/size][/font][url="http://www.catholicnews.com/index.html"][font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#990033"]Catholic News Service[/color][/size][/font][/url] [font="Arial"][size="2"]WASHINGTON (CNS) -- The U.S. bishops' Committee on Doctrine in a June 23 statement discussed the distinction between the church's definitions of a direct abortion and a legitimate medical procedure that could result in an indirect abortion.[/size][/font] [url="http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1002604.htm"]http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1002604.htm[/url] This is the best I can find on-line. Jim [/quote] Unfortunately for you, this actually defends our argument and not yours. It is only the news company that uses the term indirect abortion, not the USCCB. In fact, based on a quote from the news article quoting directive 45, the term indirect abortion is an oximoron. directive 45 defined abortion as: [quote]The committee's statement quoted directive 45: "[b]Abortion (that is, the [u]directly intended[/u] termination of pregnancy before viability or the [u]directly intended[/u] destruction of a viable fetus[/b]) is never permitted. Every procedure whose sole immediate effect is the termination of pregnancy before viability is an abortion, which, in its moral context, includes the interval between conception and implantation of the embryo."[/quote] According to the underlined, and indirectly unintended destruction of a viable or in-viable fetus would not be an abortion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slappo Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='21 July 2010 - 01:55 PM' timestamp='1279745759' post='2146110'] Slappo Does this include all abortions, even early term abortions before viability? And why no penalty for the woman? After all it is the woman who seeks out the abortionist. Lastly, do you think such a law would have a chance at making it through Congress? Jim [/quote] Yes this includes all abortions even early term abortions. I stated the penalty for the woman would [b]depend on circumstances[/b]. If the woman was pressured or almost forced into the abortion by the abortionist and/or boyfriend, then her culpability in the crime is severely limited. Those women that with full knowledge and full consent were actively seeking an abortion would have the same penalty if not worse then the doctor. Do I think the law I would seek to ultimately pass would have a chance at making it through Congress? Not today. Maybe in 10 years, maybe in 20 years, maybe in 100 years. It doesn't matter if it has a chance now, or would even have a chance in the future. It would be my duty as a Catholic to continue to push towards the ideal of those laws whether or not they would pass. If I didn't push for them, then there would never be a chance of those laws making it through congress. As the first laws pass... $100 fine... whatever they are, that will open up the possibility of the punishment increasing over time. It is the reverse of how abortions and other such things passed... over time progressionists and "enlightenment" occurred... over time those things can be reversed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='21 July 2010 - 04:51 PM' timestamp='1279745514' post='2146108'] Even though it was on the books, it would be unconstitutional and therefore illegal.[/quote] Why do not the unborn get this same defense from you? Using the same logic abortion is unconstitutional and therefore illegal. [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='21 July 2010 - 04:51 PM' timestamp='1279745514' post='2146108']There aren't enough to make it a law.[/quote] It does matter there use to, and there could be again, and your logic would allow it to be completely legal. [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='21 July 2010 - 04:51 PM' timestamp='1279745514' post='2146108']I don't care if the majority thinks murder should be legal, its still murder and immoral.[/quote] But you do care what the majority thinks, that is the whole of your argument. You argue that the majority thinks abortion should be legal, that the majority do not believe the baby to be human, and that we cannot force our 'doctrines' on the majority. Do not make falsehoods that anyone reading your posts are going to know are indeed false. [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='21 July 2010 - 04:51 PM' timestamp='1279745514' post='2146108']The question here however is about making abortion illegal. Yes, abortion is an intrinsic moral evil, but getting that into law with penalties, is the question I presented. I say you can't, despite what we believe about it.[/quote] Pretend the babies being murdered in the womb, are blacks being lynched so that you may cease submitting to illogical nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slappo Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='21 July 2010 - 01:51 PM' timestamp='1279745514' post='2146108'] [b]Even though it was on the books, it would be unconstitutional and therefore illegal.[/b] Jim [/quote] Even though abortion is on the books as legal... [b]it is unconstitutional[/b] and ought to be illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now