Satan And Abortion

[cathoholic_anonymous]

[quote name='S][N' post='1407050' date='Oct 22 2007, 08:52 AM']
Genocide and abortion are close but different due to the situations which can surround them. Genocide has NO justification, it's merely a weapon of war, politics and hatred. Abortion can be (imo) a justified use in special and strict circumstances. A woman that goes out partying and gets herself pregnant and doesn't want it, is not a justification, and any woman that uses abortion for those reasons is disgusting. That type of abuse of abortion I am against.[/quote]

The perpetrators of genocide may hate their victims, whereas few women who go and get an abortion do so be cause they 'hate' the foetus. But there is one thing in common: a belief that one person is worth less than the other. In the case of genocide, it is because of the ethnicity, nationality, or religion of a specific group of people. In the case of abortion, it is because one life is hidden and the other is very much visible. To say that abortion is justified in some circumstances is like saying that in some circumstances one life can be privileged above another.

In Catholicism the level of culpability may change. The woman who goes out partying, has sex, and then gets an abortion would be considered fully culpable for her actions in Catholic thought. A frightened woman who has an abortion when her life and the baby's life are at grave risk would not be held as culpable. But differences in culpability don't alter the fact that abortion, like murder, is intrinsically wrong.

[quote]Not all women are victims of peer pressure, stress from thinking if she doesn't get rid of it the husband will dump her etc. This is a used up line.[/quote]

That's not the only kind of thing I was referring to, although those things do happen a lot more frequently than pro-choicers are prepared to admit. A lot of women, especially young women, think of babies, look at their carefully planned lives, and are mentally paralysed at the thought of the two being united before they are 'ready' for it. It's possible to persuade yourself that you are less capable than you really are and to dismiss giving birth without thinking it through carefully.

[quote]"because peace begins in the womb and if there is no peace there we can have no lasting peace anywhere."

How so? Sound like you just copied that from a Pro-Life book or pamphlet(sp?) and have no real understand of it's meaning.[/quote]

I have a very good understanding of its meaning, as I was nearly not here. My mum was offered an abortion for me because of my disabilities. She was told that there was a worryingly high chance (80%) of my being born 'seriously defective'. I have autism and unusually severe dyspraxia. I'm an adult woman now and I'm still not fully toilet trained, nor can I tie my own shoelaces. I'm also at one of the top three universities in the entire world. And when I got here people were all over me, gushing about my success and my determination. The student newspaper asked if they could do a feature on me called 'An Extraordinary Life'. Members of the student union approached me with obsequiousness bordering on reverence. And three weeks later one of these exact same students was participating in a Cambridge Union debate called 'This House would make it easier to get an abortion'. In Britain it is legal for a disabled baby to be aborted at any point up to birth, whereas there is a limit for 'normal' babies. (Theoretically only seriously disabled babies may be aborted up to birth, but in reality that isn't adhered to - there was a controversial case where a mother decided to abort her child because it had a cleft palate.) The same student who had congratulated me and promised to do anything she could to make life easier for me, telling me all about Cambridge's great equality and diversity, stood up in one of the world's most famous, most prestigious unions and defended that motion.

It made me feel terrible. So I'm worth something once I've 'proved' myself by being accepted into a university like Cambridge. I'm worth something once I've published books. This performing monkey matters when she's able to make people feel good about their Tolerance and their Diversity and their Equal Opportunities.

But she's not worth anything when she's still in the womb. Then she's just an unfair future burden on her mother. Unlike typically developing babies, she's expendable.

Peace begins in the womb. No one can come up to me in the courts of Cambridge and tell me how happy they are to welcome me to this place if they also support abortion. It's futile to talk about equal opportunities to enter great universities if people with disabilities don't even have an equal chance to enter the world.

'With disabilities' can be safely removed from that sentence. This is just a more obvious example of discrimination. In reality, [i]all[/i] abortion involves a strong degree of discrimination and prejudice, as one life is exalted above another life - a life which is often denied totally.

[quote]"Should people be allowed to 'choose' something that destroys life?"

If it can save a life, not just physically, but mentally, Yes.[/quote]

Abortion can leave women traumatised. It is no easier than giving birth. In fact, it can have more of a negative effect in the long-term. Adoption is much better in cases of mental health difficulties, because it offers the woman both closure and integrity.

As for saving a life physically, in certain circumstances that is permissible. One of my friends was told that her gall bladder was in imminent danger of rupturing and that both her life and the life of her foetus were at risk. The gall bladder needed to be removed. This procedure would cause the child to die.

Either way, there was death involved. Death for her and for the baby, or death for just the baby. She had her gall bladder removed and the baby died. I spoke to a very knowledgeable priest about this and he told me that in this specific circumstance there had been no sin. He likened it to chemotherapy - a pregnant woman suffering from cancer is permitted to receive treatment even if it is likely to kill the baby, because the primary purpose of the chemo isn't to facilitate an abortion but to save a life. I think this is known in theologese as 'the principle of double effect'.

However, such circumstances are [i]extremely[/i] rare. They also can't be offered as routine justification for abortion, as they involve a different approach. Chemotherapy exists purely to kill cancer. Abortion exists purely to kill the child. We make a distinction: the mother can never be done to death to save a baby, and a baby can never be done to death to save its mother.

Edited October 22, 2007 by Cathoholic Anonymous

[GodChild]

The evil of abortion is self evident in how unnatural it is for a woman to kill her own child. Every human instinct (even in animals) is geared toward [i]protecting[/i] the young - to destroy and kill your own child is abhorrent and unnatural.

That story, if its true - is very disturbing and scary

[S][N]

"To say that abortion is justified in some circumstances is like saying that in some circumstances one life can be privileged above another."

Towards abortion, yes. But trying to connect genocide and abortion as the exact same just isn't plausible. I'll grant there maybe a couple connections, such as seeing one life is more favoured than the other. HOWEVER the same reasoning, the same content behind it are not. Genocide's sole purpose is the destruction of a group of people for political, religious or just plan power.

Abortion (the ones I accept as justified) are to save the life of the mother, whether that is her physical body or her mental stability. Yes abortion would cause mental problems down the track, but also more problems if not taken. Again this depends on A LOT of variables about the woman.

As much as I hate abortion, it does have justification in some circumstances, the same as war does, another thing I despise.

-------

As for the story, was a good read and very impressive with what you've accomplished.

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='Cathoholic Anonymous' post='1407085' date='Oct 22 2007, 08:22 AM']The perpetrators of genocide may hate their victims, whereas few women who go and get an abortion do so be cause they 'hate' the foetus. But there is one thing in common: a belief that one person is worth less than the other. In the case of genocide, it is because of the ethnicity, nationality, or religion of a specific group of people. In the case of abortion, it is because one life is hidden and the other is very much visible. To say that abortion is justified in some circumstances is like saying that in some circumstances one life can be privileged above another.

In Catholicism the level of culpability may change. The woman who goes out partying, has sex, and then gets an abortion would be considered fully culpable for her actions in Catholic thought. A frightened woman who has an abortion when her life and the baby's life are at grave risk would not be held as culpable. But differences in culpability don't alter the fact that abortion, like murder, is intrinsically wrong.
That's not the only kind of thing I was referring to, although those things do happen a lot more frequently than pro-choicers are prepared to admit. A lot of women, especially young women, think of babies, look at their carefully planned lives, and are mentally paralysed at the thought of the two being united before they are 'ready' for it. It's possible to persuade yourself that you are less capable than you really are and to dismiss giving birth without thinking it through carefully.
I have a very good understanding of its meaning, as I was nearly not here. My mum was offered an abortion for me because of my disabilities. She was told that there was a worryingly high chance (80%) of my being born 'seriously defective'. I have autism and unusually severe dyspraxia. I'm an adult woman now and I'm still not fully toilet trained, nor can I tie my own shoelaces. I'm also at one of the top three universities in the entire world. And when I got here people were all over me, gushing about my success and my determination. The student newspaper asked if they could do a feature on me called 'An Extraordinary Life'. Members of the student union approached me with obsequiousness bordering on reverence. And three weeks later one of these exact same students was participating in a Cambridge Union debate called 'This House would make it easier to get an abortion'. In Britain it is legal for a disabled baby to be aborted at any point up to birth, whereas there is a limit for 'normal' babies. (Theoretically only seriously disabled babies may be aborted up to birth, but in reality that isn't adhered to - there was a controversial case where a mother decided to abort her child because it had a cleft palate.) The same student who had congratulated me and promised to do anything she could to make life easier for me, telling me all about Cambridge's great equality and diversity, stood up in one of the world's most famous, most prestigious unions and defended that motion.

It made me feel terrible. So I'm worth something once I've 'proved' myself by being accepted into a university like Cambridge. I'm worth something once I've published books. This performing monkey matters when she's able to make people feel good about their Tolerance and their Diversity and their Equal Opportunities.

But she's not worth anything when she's still in the womb. Then she's just an unfair future burden on her mother. Unlike typically developing babies, she's expendable.

Peace begins in the womb. No one can come up to me in the courts of Cambridge and tell me how happy they are to welcome me to this place if they also support abortion. It's futile to talk about equal opportunities to enter great universities if people with disabilities don't even have an equal chance to enter the world.

'With disabilities' can be safely removed from that sentence. This is just a more obvious example of discrimination. In reality, [i]all[/i] abortion involves a strong degree of discrimination and prejudice, as one life is exalted above another life - a life which is often denied totally.
Abortion can leave women traumatised. It is no easier than giving birth. In fact, it can have more of a negative effect in the long-term. Adoption is much better in cases of mental health difficulties, because it offers the woman both closure and integrity.

As for saving a life physically, in certain circumstances that is permissible. One of my friends was told that her gall bladder was in imminent danger of rupturing and that both her life and the life of her foetus were at risk. The gall bladder needed to be removed. This procedure would cause the child to die.

Either way, there was death involved. Death for her and for the baby, or death for just the baby. She had her gall bladder removed and the baby died. I spoke to a very knowledgeable priest about this and he told me that in this specific circumstance there had been no sin. He likened it to chemotherapy - a pregnant woman suffering from cancer is permitted to receive treatment even if it is likely to kill the baby, because the primary purpose of the chemo isn't to facilitate an abortion but to save a life. I think this is known in theologese as 'the principle of double effect'.

However, such circumstances are [i]extremely[/i] rare. They also can't be offered as routine justification for abortion, as they involve a different approach. Chemotherapy exists purely to kill cancer. Abortion exists purely to kill the child. We make a distinction: the mother can never be done to death to save a baby, and a baby can never be done to death to save its mother.[/quote]
Wow. What a powerful witness. You are a very eloquent woman.

[quote name='GodChild' post='1407086' date='Oct 22 2007, 08:39 AM']The evil of abortion is self evident in how unnatural it is for a woman to kill her own child. Every human instinct (even in animals) is geared toward [i]protecting[/i] the young - to destroy and kill your own child is abhorrent and unnatural.

That story, if its true - is very disturbing and scary [/quote]
God is natural. Going against God is an unnatural act. Therefore, Evil is unnatural. You've pretty much figured that out.

[bmb144]

You know what all of you have a point but there is one thing missing here and it always seems to be missing in such debates, so I'll ask the question....

[i]Where do the men come in?[/i]

You know it still takes two people to have sex, an egg does not become fertile without sperm.
So much emphasis is put on the women and her actions yet where are the men, the ones that helped her get pregnant.

Why do the men seem to get off free in this?