Unjust War As Intrinsically Evil As Abortion?

[dUSt]

[url="http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/catholicamerica/2008/05/donahue_vs_hagee_shenanigans.html"]http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith...henanigans.html[/url]

In the above article, even though I agree with some of the points he makes about the Catholic League, the author claims, ""Please note that an unjust war is just as intrinsically evil as an abortion."

My initial reaction, without diving into church documents, is that I don't agree with that. Do you?

[KnightofChrist]

I would initially agree, abortion is the taking of innocent life always, always, always. Whilst a unjust war on part of the individual troops of the aggressor may not be taking completely innocent lives. IE one soldier shooting and killing an enemy soldier, to protect his or his buddies lives, even though he belongs to the army of aggression, this would be part of an unjust war and would not be intrinsically evil, and certainly not as evil as abortion.

Edited May 16, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[Maggyie]

Evil is evil. Obviously we should try to avoid doing evil, period, so it's mostly academic whether something is "intrinsically" evil or not. At the same time, how annoying is it when people try to equate abortion and unjust war, or abortion and the death penalty.

They are not the same thing. And pointing that out is not equivalent to becoming a cheerleader for unjust war, either.

[Paladin D]

It's amazing to see the amount of ignorance from the comments posted on this blog.

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='dust (the ultra-handsome' post='1530321' date='May 16 2008, 10:01 AM']""Please note that an unjust war is just as intrinsically evil as [b]an [/b]abortion."[/quote]

i would agree that an unjust war is much more evil than one abortion, as it would be the source for very widespread suffering of the innocent, death and greed. however, death for death, i am not so sure.
i think there is definitely a difference between a baby being aborted, and an innocent child being murdered. not much difference, but i know if i had to choose i would save the child.
unjust wars create much more sins and horrors than just death though.

[Seven77]

[quote name='Maggie' post='1530347' date='May 16 2008, 11:37 AM']Evil is evil. Obviously we should try to avoid doing evil, period, so it's mostly academic whether something is "intrinsically" evil or not. At the same time, how annoying is it when people try to equate abortion and unjust war, or abortion and the death penalty.

They are not the same thing. And pointing that out is not equivalent to becoming a cheerleader for unjust war, either.[/quote]

great answer!

[CatherineM]

I guess the main difference I see between the two is that with an abortion, the parties involved are all there by their own choice. The doctor certainly is. The woman may be deluded, uniformed, but except for certain limited circumstances, she isn't being forced. With an unjust war, there will be innocent young men and women forced into a position of potentially taking lives. Both are obviously evil, and I do find it hard to put them on some kind of scaling system.

[dairygirl4u2c]

you can say that you're just defending yourself... and thus it's not an unjust war... but if the war is unjustified to begin with, that's arguably just a loophole. the person shouldn't haev went if it's an unjust war and for them to put themself in that situation, gives them no loop hole of saying self defense.

i agree abortion is wrose, cause it's innocent lives and in war it's mostly sideeffects of innocents dying, and people who are otherwise bad, even if an unjust war.

but i dont think you can get around it by saying that loophole bit.

Edited May 16, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote name='Maggie' post='1530347' date='May 16 2008, 11:37 AM']Evil is evil. Obviously we should try to avoid doing evil, period, so it's mostly academic whether something is "intrinsically" evil or not. At the same time, how annoying is it when people try to equate abortion and unjust war, or abortion and the death penalty.

They are not the same thing. And pointing that out is not equivalent to becoming a cheerleader for unjust war, either.[/quote]

i would agree with that.

but, if theoretically, abortion is not going to change, and other things will that are evil.... it's not being evil to vote for the candidate who can change things that are open to change, regardless of their stance on abortion.

[Cure of Ars]

Probably depends on the unjust war. Nuking whole nations just for giggles has to be worse.

[dairygirl4u2c]

well, if it's jsut for giggle then obviously it's worse...

if they are nuking nations in the name of catching osama... and it's all "unintended sideeffects",,,, i would very strongly argue that is worse than abortion.

now, one might say, that's so reckless that of course it is. but, some might try to be a techincal person and say it's mere unintended sideeffects, and abortino is intentional, and thus, it's intrinisically wrong to vote for a person who adovactes abortion but is anti nuking nations.
what a joke.
in reality,,, most people who have these weird view, usually wimper away when you start showing the difficult situations, and ask them how far they are willing to go to hold onto these principles that are suppsedly clear cut.

[Apotheoun]

Abortion -- by its very nature -- is always evil, and so there is no situation in which it can be justified.

War, on the other hand, can be either just or unjust, depending upon the particular circumstances surrounding the conflict, and -- of course -- the moral determination as to the status of a specific war is always open to a degree of debate.

[dairygirl4u2c]

i made a mistake... it is okay for the soldiers to fight and perhaps argue self defense etc, and be justifeid in other ways even in an unjust war...
but saying that the killing is ultimtely justified, because they are acting in self defense, as a awy to get around it being an unjust war, arguably, if it were an unjust war, is not a valid argument. the killing were immoral by those who would wage an unjust war.

if it's debatable there's exceptsions etc but just noting.

Edited May 17, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[Deb]

Abortion is evil. An unjust war is evil. The people who bring about that unjust war are evil. The poor soldiers who fight in that war are doing their duty to their country. So, I guess my quesion would be, when the soldier comes to the realization that the war was unjustly started, what is their moral obligation at that point? Does just following orders really excuse anything anymore?
Would one be evil to continue to do their duty in an unjust war?

[Apotheoun]

The key point is this: abortion is always, and by definition, evil, and so there can be no debate about the status of abortion as a means or an end; while war, on the other hand, can be either just or unjust depending upon the circumstances, and the moral status of a particular war is always open to debate. Thus it is not possible to equate abortion and war in general, because the former is always evil, while the moral status of the latter can only be determined after examining the details surrounding a given case, and -- of course -- men of good will could ultimately disagree about whether or not a particular war is just even after a diligent review of the facts.