Proposition: Lying To Planned Parenthood Is A Sin

[kafka]

here is Conte's refutation of Kreeft's conclusions:

http://ronconte.wordpress.com/2011/02/19/on-lying-intrinsic-evil-and-moral-intuition-reply-to-peter-kreeft/

[lilac_angel]

The commandment is "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour" You must not testify falsely against your neighbor. Was Lila Rose falsely testifying against her neighbor, i.e. making things up about them? No. She didn't break the commandment. According to your logic, we should be scrupulous to a fault, making mountains out of molehills about things like the Easter bunny to our children, surprise parties, etc. Obsessive introspection does not lead to fruitfulness.

It's all in the intention. For instance, God commended the DISHONEST steward.

LUKE 16:8 The end does not justify the means, [b]but we must be wise, and exercise common sense[/b].

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='LoreleiLynn' timestamp='1298244927' post='2214230']
[color="#333333"] The commandment is "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour" You must not testify falsely against your neighbor. Was Lila Rose falsely testifying against her neighbor, i.e. making things up about them? No. She didn't break the commandment. According to your logic, we should be scrupulous to a fault, making mountains out of molehills about things like the Eastern bunny to our children, surprise parties, etc. Obsessive introspection does not lead to fruitfulness.[/color]

[color="#333333"]'It's all in the intention. For instance, God commended the DISHONEST steward. [/color]

[color="#333333"]LUKE 16:8 "The end does not justify the means, [b]but[/b] we must be wise, and exercise common sense."[/color]
[/quote]

You need to look a bit deeper than the commandment. The 6th commandment says "Thou shalt not commit adultery." Does that mean that fornication or masturbation are not intrinsically evil acts? Of course not!

God did not commend the dishonest steward. His master did, "insofar as he acted prudently." "For the children of [i]this world,[/i]" he said, "are more prudent than the children of light." God was being a bit ironic when he said, "And I say to you, make friends for yourselves with the Mammon of wickedness, so that when you fail, they can receive you into their everlasting dwellings." He was saying, in other words, "Don't be stupid, because you'll go to hell."

~Sternhauser

Edited February 20, 2011 by Sternhauser

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='kafka' timestamp='1298245001' post='2214231']
here is Conte's refutation of Kreeft's conclusions:

[url="http://ronconte.wordpress.com/2011/02/19/on-lying-intrinsic-evil-and-moral-intuition-reply-to-peter-kreeft/"]http://ronconte.word...o-peter-kreeft/ [/url]
[/quote]

Bravo to Conte for exposing Kreeft's embrace of heresy. Shame on Kreeft for requiring him to do so.

~Sternhauser

Edited February 20, 2011 by Sternhauser

[kafka]

[quote name='lilac_angel' timestamp='1298245187' post='2214233']
It's all in the intention. For instance, God commended the DISHONEST steward.

LUKE 16:8 The end does not justify the means, [b]but we must be wise, and exercise common sense[/b].
[/quote]
this is not Catholic teaching.


“A[b] good intention [/b](for example, that of helping one’s neighbor)[b] does not [/b]make behavior that is intrinsically disordered, such as lying and calumny, good or just.” (CCC, n. 1753).

“Reason attests that there are objects of the human act which are by their nature “incapable of being ordered” to God, because they radically contradict the good of the person made in his image. These are the acts which, in the Church’s moral tradition, have been termed “intrinsically evil” (intrinsece malum): they are such always and per se, in other words, on account of their very object, and [b]quite apart from the ulterior intentions [/b]of the one acting and the circumstances. Consequently, without in the least denying the influence on morality exercised by circumstances and especially by intentions, the Church teaches that ‘there exist acts which per se and in themselves, independently of circumstances, are always seriously wrong by reason of their object’.” (Veritatis Splendor, n. 80).

“If acts are intrinsically evil, [b]a good intention [/b]or particular circumstances can diminish their evil, [b]but they cannot remove it[/b]. They remain “irremediably” evil acts; per se and in themselves they are not capable of being ordered to God and to the good of the person. ‘As for acts which are themselves sins (cum iam opera ipsa peccata sunt), Saint Augustine writes, like theft, fornication, blasphemy, who would dare affirm that, by doing them for good motives (causis bonis), they would no longer be sins, or, what is even more absurd, that they would be sins that are justified?’. [b]Consequently, circumstances or intentions can never transform an act intrinsically evil by virtue of its object into an act “subjectively” good or defensible as a choice[/b].” (Veritatis Splendor, n. 81).

“For this reason – we repeat – [b]the opinion must be rejected as erroneous [/b]which maintains that it is impossible to qualify as morally evil according to its species the deliberate choice of certain kinds of behaviour or specific acts, without taking into account the intention for which the choice was made or the totality of the foreseeable consequences of that act for all persons concerned.” (Veritatis Splendor, n. 82).

Veritatis Splendor is an encyclical written by Ven. John Paul II expressing moral teachings drawn from Tradition, Scripture and the natural law. It was an act of Magisterium, exercised by the Pope.

Edited February 20, 2011 by kafka

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='kafka' timestamp='1298245528' post='2214236']
this is not Catholic teaching.


"A[b] good intention [/b](for example, that of helping one's neighbor)[b] does not [/b]make behavior that is intrinsically disordered, such as lying and calumny, good or just." (CCC, n. 1753).
[/quote]

Kafka, Catholic doctrine on the subject has been posted numerous times. The time has come when they forsake sound doctrine, and gather teachers to themselves.

~Sternhauser

[lilac_angel]

I'm pretty sure that a Biblical passage (LUKE 16:8 "The end does not justify the means, but we must be wise, and exercise common sense") is Catholic teaching.

You're allowed to defend people by breaking Catechism and Biblical laws by MURDER; why would lying be any worse or different in defense? Self-defense can come in more than one form, usually a form that in other circumstances would always be immoral.

The Vatican spies are relatively recent; maybe we should start rooting those out before throwing the stones at other people? The Church is not setting a very good example. Why don't we start there?

The point is not what you would personally do (not that you'd know for sure what you'd do in the situation), but it is perfectly morally acceptable to kill then.

[kafka]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1298245778' post='2214237']
Kafka, Catholic doctrine on the subject has been posted numerous times. The time has come when they forsake sound doctrine, and gather teachers to themselves.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]
I know Stern. It is all over the place. It is one sign that the first part of the Tribulation will soon begin.

2 Timothy
{4:3} For there shall be a time when they will not endure sound doctrine, but instead, according to their own desires, they will gather to themselves teachers, with itching ears,
{4:4} and certainly, they will turn their hearing away from the truth, and they will be turned toward fables.

Grace and peace to you.

[lilac_angel]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1298245778' post='2214237']
Kafka, Catholic doctrine on the subject has been posted numerous times. The time has come when they forsake sound doctrine, and gather teachers to themselves.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]


The time has come when they don't wearily read through every thread and debate on the topic, yet are born false witness against by being accused of forsaking sound doctrine.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='lilac_angel' timestamp='1298246151' post='2214239']
I'm pretty sure that a Biblical passage (LUKE 16:8 "The end does not justify the means, but we must be wise, and exercise common sense") is Catholic teaching.[/quote]

Yes, the actual text (which does not say, "the end does not justify the means, but we must be wise and exercise common sense" is Catholic teaching. The contextual meaning of which you are butchering with your interpretation.

[quote]You're allowed to defend people by breaking Catechism and Biblical laws by MURDER; why would lying be any worse or different in defense? Self-defense can come in more than one form, usually a form that in other circumstances would always be immoral. [/quote]

Where did you receive your catechesis? Murder is not merely killing. Killing is not intrinsically immoral.

~Sternhauser

Edited February 21, 2011 by Sternhauser

[lilac_angel]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1298246383' post='2214242']

Where did you receive your catechesis? Murder is not merely killing. Killing is not intrinsically immoral.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

The same one Peter Kreeft got his from, apparently.

Edited February 21, 2011 by lilac_angel

[lilac_angel]

Don't we look at culpability in sin? Is it possible that her culpability, in God's eyes (who sees perfectly clearly into all hearts, as opposed to the inability of humans to do so) may be reduced - or, due to his infinite Mercy - mitigated to almost nothing, due to the fruits that her actions bring about, since all the unbaptized babies are saved, at least?

Changing people's minds, which was the best method mentioned above by someone in opposition to what Lila Rose is doing, is extremely difficult these days; however, exposing sex traffickers has certainly changed a few minds. At least we know that she isn't likely some corrupt monster ("by their fruits you shall know them") - I'm rather glad about that recent House ruling.

Edited February 21, 2011 by lilac_angel

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='lilac_angel' timestamp='1298247512' post='2214252']
Don't we look at culpability in sin? Is it possible that her culpability, in God's eyes, may be reduced - or, due to his infinite Mercy - mitigated to almost nothing, due to the fruits that her actions bring about, since all the unbaptized babies are saved, at least? Changing people's minds is extremely difficult these days; exposing sex traffickers has certainly changed a few minds.
[/quote]

Are you going to come out and say it's OK to sin? Because that is precisely where your statements are pointed. Either sin is always morally wrong, or it is sometimes morally acceptable. Make your decision and stand your ground on it.

~Sternhauser

[lilac_angel]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1298248098' post='2214257']
Are you going to come out and say it's OK to sin? Because that is precisely where your statements are pointed. Either sin is always morally wrong, or it is sometimes morally acceptable. Make your decision and stand your ground on it.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

Sin is always morally wrong; we should get those spies out of the Vatican. I'm just saying that we have to take into account intent and culpability when judging others and playing God by making a potentially non-grave sin into something graver than God sees it to be.

[peach_cube]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1298248098' post='2214257']
Are you going to come out and say it's OK to sin? Because that is precisely where your statements are pointed. Either sin is always morally wrong, or it is sometimes morally acceptable. Make your decision and stand your ground on it.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]
God forbid we discuss it, that could actually help people. Keep in mind you are talking with Catholics, as much as you want call us heretics as you did with Dr. Kreeft, we are in fact your brothers and sisters in Christ. If you are not patient enough to dialogue with people then perhaps you shouldn't...