stopping abortions

[dairygirl4u2c]

ty

feel free to add your own conditions to my question. It's a general question, if you think "violence" shouldn't include killing for example, simply vote yes and note that as long as it does not include killing. If you have certain conditions for "chaos" feel free to include them. I can't be expected to include every condition in my questions or it'd become a thesis and very complicated question. Answer with general intent in mind and add the conditionals if you feel you must.

Edited April 9, 2006 by dairygirl4u2c

[stbernardLT]

this is a silly poll.

[dairygirl4u2c]

why?

[stbernardLT]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='Apr 9 2006, 12:13 PM']why?
[right][snapback]940862[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Because it has been posted many times before just in different ways and again the majority will say yes. Live by the sword die by the sword. Jesus lived by forgiveness and died by forgiveness, shouldn't we do the same. For a christian to say it is ok to kill the mother or act violently towards her is just ridiculous. Most of these mothers are victims themselves and need to be brought to Christ, violence has never been the Christian way of doing this. In violence we lose the message of love and share a message hate. And this does not fit the death penalty exception of the only way to protect society. Whoever votes no is in need of many prayers.

Edited April 9, 2006 by stbernardLT

[catholicinsd]

Because, violence is not the answer.

[dairygirl4u2c]

I agree most will probably say yes. At least someone other than me said I don't know.

But, imagine someone who got himself into a drug circle and there are people who may rat on him or he needs to make examples of the debtors if he is to have any respect in his circles. The only way to fix the situation as he sees it is to bring certain enemies into his house and "humanely" kill them. He perceives this as his solution. Now, somehow or another the police won't get involved because there have been laws passed saying this action is okay. Maybe this is because of pressure from the drug lords, or knows, but there are laws sanctioning it. Do you who answer yes mean to tell me violence to stop him is not the answer if you are capable and cannot get police involved and you had good chance of success?

I'd simply say someone who goes out and shoots people instead of my example, but I wanted to make a better analogy.

Edited April 9, 2006 by dairygirl4u2c

[stbernardLT]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='Apr 9 2006, 12:30 PM']I agree most will probably say yes. At least someone other than me said I don't know.

But, imagine someone who got himself into a drug circle and there are people who may rat on him or he needs to make examples of the debtors if he is to have any respect in his circles. The only way to fix the situation as he sees it is to bring certain enemies into his house and "humanely" kill them. He perceives this as his solution. Now, somehow or another the police won't get involved because there have been laws passed saying this action is okay. Maybe this is because of pressure from the drug lords, or knows, but there are laws sanctioning it. Do you who answer yes mean to tell me violence to stop him is not the answer if you are capable and cannot get police involved and you had good chance of success?

I'd simply say someone who goes out and shoots people instead of my example, but I wanted to make a better analogy.
[right][snapback]940879[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

All the guy is doing is avoiding consequences that he put himself in, and again any type of killing is wrong. We are not God and we cannot take something that he has givin', this is also called stealing. God created life, he copyrighted it, its not ours to use as we see fit or to abuse as we see fit. These scenarios are absurd.

[YMNolan]

wow, I totally hit "no" on accident, ley me say emphatically... "YES".

violence is bad! That's just a big cycle of sin going on.

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='stbernardLT' date='Apr 9 2006, 12:21 PM']  Most of these mothers are victims themselves and need to be brought to Christ, violence has never been the Christian way of doing this.  [right][snapback]940870[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]Have you ever read [i]Orthodoxy [/i]by Chesterton?

Crusades anyone?

[Maria]

What do you mean by violence? I mean, I could imagine someone arguing that out-lawing abortion commits violence to the financial, emotional, etc. health of women who would seek abortions. Likewise, it could do 'violence' to the financial health of abortionists. We live in a really weird world. I'll only vote if violence is defined.

[Maria]

Yes, I've read Orthodoxy. The only thing worth fighting for...

[Tarcisius]

if an abortion doctor was holding your 8 yo son in one hand and a butcher knife in the other and he said he was going to stab him in the face, and he then made as if to do so, would you not as a Catholic be morally obliged to try to stop him with force if it was possible to do so?

If you answered yes, how is this situation differernt from the children killed everyday at the clinics.

[Crusader_4]

I agree with you,

If force could be used to defend the lives of the unborn without endangering more lives of the unborn i would argue that violence could be seen as acceptable (as i would argue u are protecting the weak who have no one to protect them and their lives are endanger). Fortunatly, in our situation in the western world where there is democracy and the chance that abortion can change thru peace and the changing of hearts i can see that violence is not the answer now...i still believe that we can save more souls and lives by going about peaceful means as the violence would be counterproductive in my eyes setting back the many gains of the pro-life movement....the prolife movement is gaining steam every year and it is only a matter of time before roe vs. wade is overturned. Abortion will be history like slaverly it takes time to change people's hearts tho....it takes time and vioilence wont do that. Unlikje for example, Radical Islam where i really dont see many people changing their hearts and they are seeking to destory Christendom (or what is left of it) that requires a different mode of action such as the crusades. But if there is a specific instant which i cannot personally imagine that violence could save an unborns life by violence i probably wouldnt see anything evil in that action as you are acting in defence for a person who physically cant.

Edited April 12, 2006 by Crusader_4

[Tarcisius]

Crusader, I think your on the right track but im not sure you got to the crux of it.

[quote]But if there is a specific instant which i cannot personally imagine that violence could save an unborns life by violence i probably wouldnt see anything evil in that action as you are acting in defence for a person who physically cant.[/quote]

If a Catholic were to take a gun, to a clinic and shoot the doctor, he would save the lives of those children that day. This is not very hard to imagine, as it has actually happened several times. It could happen much much more often.

Emotion really gets in the way here, I know its hard to see killing a doctor as the answer but when you get down to it, YOU do have the power to go and save children today, thats what matters.

[goldenchild17]

I said no as it leaves out way too many variables at this stage. Do I think one should defend the defenseless and innocent at all costs(even if it means violence)? Yes I do. Do I think this should be unorganized random attacks on individuals with no clear goal in mind or a way to attain that goal? No. Do I think a crusade of sorts would be warranted in this situation? I do believe so. However, how we could effectively gather an army of Catholic crusaders to fight, how we would be able to target all the "enemy"(as it were) and how we could do so openly without being forced into submission by the authorities, are all things that I don't see being able to be answered, and so I would have to say no. Unorganized random violence against individuals will get us nowhere.