Common Ground: 'We Share the Goal of Reducing the Incidence of Abortion' But See Other Issues for Good Catholics

Way to go Family Research Council: "While other issues are important -- such as helping the poor, the death penalty, views on war -- these are things that aren't tenets of the Catholic Church." Not tenets of the church??? I mean, for heaven's sake.

As they always have done, women will seek abortions to end unwanted pregnancies. And there will always be unwanted pregnancies; all we can hope to do is reduce the number of them and to ensure that women who choose to end those pregnancies have access to safe, legal, affordable abortions. I would feel more solidarity with the my Roman Catholic brothers and sisters on abortion if the Church condoned the use of effective contraception.

"I would feel more solidarity with the my Roman Catholic brothers and sisters on abortion if the Church condoned the use of effective contraception."

So sinning in one fasion becomes acceptable when it prevents the opportunity (vice the neccesity) to sin in another way?

Most Christians, even most Roman Catholics in America do NOT believe contraception is a sin. Polls show that Roman Catholics in the US use contraception as much as non-Catholics do.

I think it was time for Catholic Democrats to speak up and defend themselves not allow others to frame what they stand for. Why should they concede the debate to those who clearly have a less-than-objective opinion?

Billy Strain

The truth about abortion
On abortion, when man and women have sex and the man walks away and dose not stay a round to see if the women are pregnant and if the woman is pregnant stay and around and support her during pregnancy and help raise the child is this not aborting a child when A man aborts it is all right but if a women aborts the Repugent party wants to call it murder. What is fair about this remember if it takes two too tango it takes two to abort. That means no man has a right to say if a woman can have an abortion when he has all ready committed a few himself. Look at all the unwed mothers, now how many spineless men love to abort It’s a women thing only men can already abort freely.
Article [X.]
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
AMENDMENT XIV
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Quit arguing apples and oranges. Women do not go pay a lot of money to get artificial inseminated just to have an abortion. Their is a man involved and to be fair and not deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws is Unconstitutional. And un Christian, and as the Bible says, John 8: 7When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." 8Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground. 9At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" 11"No one, sir," she said.
"Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin."

"Most Christians, even most Roman Catholics in America do NOT believe contraception is a sin. Polls show that Roman Catholics in the US use contraception as much as non-Catholics do."

Are you purporting that popular opinion determines what's a sin and what isn't?

Ice Wolf asks me:
"Are you purporting that popular opinion determines what's a sin and what isn't?"

My reply is that this is often true, or at least what is acceptable or unacceptable to a culture often defines sin. Eating rare meat was a sin to the ancient Hebrews. Blood was a manifestation of life to them, life that belonged to Yahweh alone. Therefore eating meat containing visible blood was a sin.

Looking at the historical Bible, we see that the question of eating animal flesh only came up with reference to consuming the blood contained therein. Within our culture we debate over the acceptance of eating animal flesh at all, whether or not it's been cooked enough to remove the visible blood. I am not a vegetarian, much less a vegan, but I do respect the beliefs of those people who do not eat animal products.

My point is that the definition of sin has changed within the Bible and within human history. Both Jesus and Paul discounted the traditonal Hebrew dietary laws stated in Leviticus and Deuteronomy.

Given my own personal choice, I would rejoice if every pregnancy were welcome and every child resulting from those pregnancies was eqaually welcomed. I have come to understand that this is a utopiam fantasy. Neither I nor anyone else lives in such a world.

Should people be responsible in their sexual activity? YES. Are people ALWAYS going to be as responsible as they themselves and society believe they should be? NO. That's why I believe that safe, effective, convenient and affordable contracption should be available to all. And that's also why I believe safe, legal and affordable abortion should also be available.

I am old enough to have heard first-hand stories of the horrors of back-alley abortions, of women who died from a perforated uterus, blood poisoning and embolism. Medical schools used to teach students how to treat the conditions resulting from coat hangers and chemical abortifacients, but such treatments aren't taught any more. Does anyone want to go back to the days when medical school students spent weeks of clinical time learning how to save the life a woman whose uterus has been perforated by a piece of wire?

A collection of cells does not a human being make. No matter how far medical science has advanced, we must never forget that a woman lays her life on the line whenever she gives birth. Women do still die in childbirth and from its complications. The decision on whether or not to carry a pregnancy to term MUST lie with each individual woman and her conscience.

"Eating rare meat was a sin to the ancient Hebrews."

Let's not forget to add eating shrimp, men sleeping with their wives during menstruation, and wearing the wrong combination of fabric.

Cathie, It seems to me that contraception isn't comparable to eating non-kosher foods because:

A. Nowhere in the Bible that I know of does God revoke his prohibition of contraception.
and
B. It's hard to believe that God would consume someone in a fire just for eating lobster.

Two obvious questions to challenge your pro-contraception stance then: Where in the Bible does God or any Apostle condone contraception? How could a sin of such gravity that it merited Onan's firery death suddenly become acceptable?

Ice Wolf - Nowhere in the Bible does it say that menstruating women all of sudden joined the ranks of the "clean" either, but we don't believe that they are unclean any more, do we? Also, the vile institution of human slavery is condoned and upheld throughout Scripture, culminating with Paul telling slaves to obey their masters. Does this mean that slavery is therefore good? Hardly. The Bible doesn't condone democratically elected, representative government, but I doubt any of us wish to give it up.

If you insist on literal interpretation of Scripture, then I say that the ONLY unacceptable form of contraception is coitus interruptus (what Onan did) and that all others are fine since they aren't mentioned. And there were other forms of contraception used even in ancient times: sponges soaked in oil or vinegar, crude IUDs in the form of small stones and the consumption of plants and bark containing what we now know to be estrogen.

Cathie, there seems to be three main arguments in your last post.

The first seems to be that contraception isn't a sin because menstration isn't. Again, they really aren't comparable because God didn't say that menstration is a sin, he just said that it's unclean, which is self-evidently true.

The second seems to be that because the Bible seems to condone slavery, and slavery is often bad, then ergo contraception, something the Bible doesn't condone (and in fact discourages) could often be good. That this doesn't stand to reason is obvious.

Finally you suggest that coitus interuptus is a sin, but that other forms of contraception aren't. This strict literalism is quite at odds with the liberal extrapolation you used in the two previous arguments. It also just doesn't follow common sence. Why would one form of contraception be abhorrent but all other forms be acceptable?

Ice Wolf, I don't think you read my last post correctly and I know that you're putting words in my mouth. I am not a biblical literalist; I was simply pointing out an argument that could stem from a literal reading of Scripture.

Your interpretation of menstruation as being "unclean" is incorrect. Unclean, meaning messy, yes, but that's not what the Old Testament conveys. There, menstruation is equated with spiritual uncleanliness.

And by the way, since you say that slavery is "often" bad, could you please cite an instance when it's ever good?

Oops! I meant that Ice Wolf read my last post INCORRECTLY.

And please, Ice Wolf, do learn how to make a logical argument. You have a tendency to pick and choose ideas both from this thread and from the Bible and tack them together totally out of context.

"Unclean, meaning messy, yes, but that's not what the Old Testament conveys. There, menstruation is equated with spiritual uncleanliness."

I recall nothing in the Bible which says that menstruation is "spiritually unclean."

"And by the way, since you say that slavery is "often" bad, could you please cite an instance when it's ever good?"

Well, it seems that as practiced by the Israelites it was good, because God more or less condones it.

What are you guys arguing like this for? I can answer both the topic of Abortion and Contraception in a few verses:

"My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be. How precious to me are your thoughts, O God!"

Life begins with God.

God is the "Author of Life", so He should decide who lives, not you.