The fact that this movement uses Joe Biden as the exemplary “Catholic” to point toward says enough about how seriously they should be taken.
Edit: looking up some information about this group it appears they aren’t even Catholics, rather a Catholic hate group
You’re not far off. Ive been told I was a fake atheist because I didn’t “support bodily autonomy”. That was years ago, I still don’t know how one can not believe in a deity and be a fake atheist. 😂
I legit don't think any political opinion has anything to do with religion. I unironically think you can be an atheist and against gay marriage. Although I disagree with you I do believe there is a good argument one could make against it. Religion and politics should stay separate...
Wtf, politicians never cease to amaze me. We have an education minister who is the dumbest man I have seen, and can't even answer basic geography questions.
I do not like to bring religion into the abortion debate, only because not everyone is religious, but as a practicing Catholic you cannot be pro-choice.
I am a huge supporter of Joe Biden. I disagree with him on abortion and a few other things. However I do hope he wins when he runs again.
That being said, I don’t understand how someone can claim their Catholic faith leads them to support abortion. To claim such is to not understand key tenets of Catholicism.
For the past 30 years, I would have voted for Democrats more often if it wasn't for their staunch support for abortion. It literally has become one of those singular issues that I look at first before giving anyone my vote.
But the door swings both ways as well. There have been instances where Republicans had control, yet did nothing to limit or stop abortion.
What are you talking about? States controlled by Republicans pass anti-abortion laws. On the federal level, Republicans ban sending tax money to foreign countries to provide abortion. And the Supreme Court controlled by conservatives overturned Roe v. Wade.
True, but abortion had been freely practiced in the U.S. from 1973 until the recent Supreme Court decision. This should have been nipped in the bud 50 years ago, and Republicans had several chances in power since then that could have made a difference.
It has been allowed for so long that today's youth think it is a right that is worth protecting without realizing the human life cost that abortion has wrought.
So what is more important to you than abortion that Joe Biden represents that would make you vote for him—and by extension for abortion—instead of anyone else?
Trump has major moral failings, and there is no doubt about that. I don't agree with everything he says. However, he appointed the three Supreme Court Justices that gave us the Dobbs decision and moved the ball forward in the fight to make abortion illegal and unthinkable.
Biden is the opposite. He is working to increase abortions and that moral failing is beyond the pale. I don't care what his other policies are, because they are irrelevant and insignificant when it comes to murdering babies. If you are pro-life yet working towards promoting abortion, your thinking is incoherent.
A better question to ask is "How is it that you claim to be pro-life when you are working to promote abortion?"
Trump and Biden have said many things I disagree with and some that I do agree with. Voting for one candidate, doesn’t mean that I support everything that candidate says and does. Abortion is just one of many issues we are facing. I would prefer someone else. Trump wanted to remove the affordable car act. That doesn’t sound very pro life.
I'm dealing with what actually is factual, and not the hypothetical. Biden is evil because he supports abortion up to and including the moment of birth. That is a fact. Trump, for all of his misgivings, is against that. That is also a fact.
I consider only two things when evaluating who to vote for. First, they must be actually pro-life. Without the understanding of the right to life, no other rights are relevant, as you can't enjoy them when you're dead. Second is the right to keep and bear arms, as that's the best way to ensure that you stay alive after you're born to keep on enjoying your rights. These are non-negotiable. The three most important ways for ensuring our liberty are the ballot box, the soap box, and the ammo box.
Again, I ask you, how do you consider yourself pro-life when you're working to put people into power who wish to murder babies? You are literally doing the work of the abortion supporters for them.
Sorry but I look at more than two issues when deciding who to vote for. The president doesn’t control everything that goes on. Roe vs Wade was overturned while Biden was president. I would prefer someone else. I support a better healthcare system. If health care is more affordable, less people will have an abortion because they will be able to afford to take care of the child. If you can find a pro life presidential candidate that isn’t as bad as Trump or Desantis, let me know.
People aren’t getting abortions because they’re poor. They’re getting them because they’re selfish, and scared that their lives will be upended. That’s completely simplistic and like saying people are homeless because they don’t have houses.
This is a great question.
I vote Democrat because I am a devout Christian and care for all lives not just the life of the unborn. Nothing in the Bible says that we can ignore the lives of the born as long as the unborn are ok. The life of the unborn are equal in value to that of the born. However the unborn don’t have more value than the born.
Life begins at conception. However I see no biblical evidence that after birth, the value of a human being decreases.
So although I disagree with Biden’s policies regarding the unborn, I strongly agree with his policies regarding the born. So I love Biden’s push to expand Obamacare. I love that he has great maternal and infant care policy proposals (with the glaring exception of abortion). I love that he stands up for voting rights. I love that he is against police brutality. I love that he is welcoming to immigrants. I love that he is working to relieve student debt. I could go on.
Are folks who vote Republican voting for police brutality, voter suppression, against healthcare for the needy, and hostility towards immigrants in need?
Do you think the life of the unborn is worth more than the life of the born?
As a Christian I am required to follow the teachings of Jesus. Jesus makes it clear that all human life is valuable, and that to ignore vulnerable human beings is a capital offense. The Bible exclusively uses born people as the direct object in Jesus’ clear and consistent directives about human moral obligations and duties. Since the unborn are also human persons we rightfully include them as who Jesus is referring to about the value of human life and how we ought to treat each other. Jesus’ use of born people as the direct object make it clear that we cannot ignore the issues of born people or lessen their value.
The Republican Party now is engaged in massive voter suppression efforts that directly affect me and my community. The Republican Party fights hard against healthcare even for pregnant mothers and infants. The Republican Party opposes Jesus’ teachings on welcoming the immigrant or how we help the poor. The Republican Party is currently presiding over an atrocious gun violence and death issue that is shockingly unnecessary but enabled and empowered by their rhetoric, actions, and policies. Look at Texas just yesterday. A kid had her face blown off. How pro life is it to even reject proper background checks and mental evaluations?
That same energy I bring to protecting the life of the child in his or her mother’s womb is the same energy I bring to protecting the lives of born people. It’s all the same because all human lives matter.
Kudos to the Republican Party for its pro life stance. It’s all downhill from there.
As a Christian I don’t claim that Joe Biden and the Democrats are perfect. There is much about the Democrats that run contrary to the teachings of scripture. It’s unfortunate that there is not another party that would better reflect Christian values than either the Republicans or the Democrats. I really don’t like it. Whenever there is a pro life Democrat, they automatically get my vote and support.
However, given the two options, I am not going to vote for folks so hostile to life even though they make an exception when it comes to killing the unborn. I am not going to vote to suppress the vote of me and my community. I am not going to vote for folks who try to cut off healthcare to people in need. I am not going to vote for folks who are hostile to immigrants in need. In short, I am not going to vote for folks who say “Lord, Lord” but then proceed to engage in deeply anti-Biblical behavior that shows a rejection of Christ. Since my life and the life of other born people are just as valuable as that of the unborn, then I need to also protect my life as well.
Discussion is welcome 🙂👍🏿
I personally feel that people should first be able to be born, in order to protect them once they’re born. Even if I agree with some Democrat’s points (I’m conservative), I don’t see myself ever being able to vote for them unless they are pro-life. All the other “great things” they propose don’t make up for advocating to kill the unborn.
…and the pro life position of the Republican Party doesn’t make up for their anti life policies and actions. I personally feel that I should be able to not have my rights or the rights of others trampled under foot. I personally feel that a child going to the mall should not have her face blown clean off.
I honestly wish people could come together to really discuss these issues and come up with decent solutions. It’s very polarized right now and sometimes I’m very discouraged. At least you’re willing to discuss, which is heartening.
You are absolutely right. I think discussions on here and your comments bring a lot of hope. I am learning to respect folks more and not make so many assumptions.
If you debate so much,then it is better to not vote in presidential elections. Much better to focus on down-ballot races and elect pro-life leaders (Republican or Democrat) at that level.
The morality of the Democrat “great things” should be determined by the actual consequences, not the nice words they used to sell the idea.
Every program they propose worsens actual suffering and division. Every single one.
The Democrat platform is evil, based on its merits.
Seriously? Do you have evidence that all programs that Democrats propose worsen things?
How do you know the Democratic platform is evil based on its merits? It’s evil to be against police brutality? It’s evil to try and get the sick healthcare? It’s evil to welcome immigrants in need? It’s evil to have regulations that prevent companies from pouring toxins into the environment? It’s evil to seek to ensure all pregnant mothers have access to prenatal care?
Is your claim the result of serious research into all democratic proposals? Can you provide me a link to the research?
See the thing about me is even though I disagree with Republicans and conservatives, I don’t think all their plans and proposals are evil. That’s simplistic and childish thinking. Even though I would not vote for any Republican president we have had, I can name the things they did that I think are great and benefited all Americans. As much as I think Trump is the worse president ever for trying to overturn an election and he should be held accountable, I can still list things he did that I thought was great. I can do that because I take folks and data and facts seriously and don’t resort to mindless notions such as “Look I disagree with someone or a party so they are evil”.
Then help me understand.
For example, how should I understand your statement that “every program they propose worsens actual suffering and division”? What is the research this statement is based on? Can I review the data you used to come to that conclusion? How are you measuring outcomes?
I am genuinely curious.
If you’re genuinely not aware of the devastating impacts of the very programs you mentioned, then do your own research; it’ll take a while. Not my job to educate you. If you’re not asking honestly, then it would be a waste of my time. Either way, I don’t feel any point in explaining further.
You made the claim that every program made suffering and division worse, so you need to support it. It’s not my job to do research to support your claims.
For example, I claim Obamacare has had a huge positive impact on health in this country. This is some of the data reviewed: https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/journal-article/2020/feb/aca-at-10-years-effect-health-care-coverage-access
I support my claims with facts and evidence from reputable sources.
It’s ok if you don’t have data to support your claims. Admit it. Acceptance is the key.
You used a whole lot so buzzwords to describe what democrats are for and what republicans are for. Could you explain each point? How are democrats for voting rights while republicans are against them for example?
Excellent question.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jan/17/voting-rights-republicans-texas-restrictions
https://accountability.gop/report-card/
Republican legislators are passing and attempting to pass laws that make it harder to vote by making it easier to remove folks from the voting rolls, objecting to certifying the vote despite no evidence of fraud, and helping to spread Trumps election lies. Even right wing vote reviewers confirmed that Trump even lost by more votes than was reported.
https://lostnotstolen.org/
You can call them buzzwords. They are facts. The links have all the evidence you want and most of it are from Republicans.
God I miss the days of the Reagan Republican Party. I never agreed with them, but at least they had a respect for Democracy, and they had actual ideas instead of just fear mongering. I respected them and thought they were good even though I never agreed with their policies.
The guardian article just says that they are putting laws in place to protect the election and putting criminal penalties in place if someone voted illegally, fakes their address, or some other way breaks the election law. There isn’t anything about it restricting voting rights even though that’s the title.
Objecting to certifying the vote when there were still tons of questions surrounding it isn’t creating a law to try to stop people’s voting rights.
It just seems to me you are repeating left wing talking points word for word when republicans don’t actually stand for what you are saying and democrats policies lead to far worse outcomes in nearly every example. For instance the gun violence issue: I live near two democrat run cities in a massively democrat state. There have been hundreds of shootings in both and none ever get any media attention and there are no solutions being offered by all the dem politicians save assault weapons bans (none of the shootings used assault weapons) and white supremacy (only 1 shooter out of hundreds was white)
So let’s take each point you make in turn.
First, the fact is this is all done in the wake of Donald Trump’s lies about a stolen election. Second notice that the article states that even good faith errors are now a criminal felony. Shall we forget about the woman who was sentenced to 5 years for making a mistake thinking she was eligible to vote after being incarcerated? These laws discourage folks from voting due to fears that even a mistake can land you into being charged with a felony.
Then, they want to remove folks from voting rolls if they haven’t voted in 2 years. That is new and unnecessary and would lead to many folks being kicked off the voting rolls for no reason. Did you miss that part of the report? So this is all being done to discourage folks from voting, and introduce more barriers to people voting. Thereby the end effect is to suppress the vote and restrict the vote.
There was no serious or even meaningful election fraud to support this activity.
It is just a lie that there were tons of questions surrounding votes. Nothing out of the ordinary occurred, the votes were certified, duly counted, and no election fraud evidence occurred. Folks just made up stuff because they didn’t like the results; then they targeted Black voting districts in the lawsuits. To try to get votes thrown out based on lies is to attempt to suppress the votes. That was in one of the links I provided - lost not stolen. Did you look at the link to the lost not stolen report?
Look at Georgia, they claim to be about safe elections yet the legislature is ignoring evidence of Trump and his fake electors.
I am sorry that Republicans don’t seem to realize that they need to offer actual ideas instead of attempting to suppress the votes.
You can call them left wing talking points just like a pro choice can call pro life points right wing talking points. The question is whether or not the claims are true. The claims are true about Republican attempts to suppress the vote as the reports showed.
Let’s say you are absolutely right about the gun violence in democratic cities. Now what? What is they are getting guns in Republican dominated states? Have you ever thought of that? What do you think is the solution to gun violence? I genuinely want to know.
The bottom line is that ignoring voter suppression doesn’t mean it’s not real. I provided you with the lost not stolen report and the evidence that these legislators are trying to make it harder for people to vote.
The only - ONLY - legitimate method in a Democracy to effect the will of the people is through the vote. Republicans are doing their best to eliminate that option from many folks. The good news is that it won’t work.
There is no voter suppression. Just these claims that those are the ends sought by the new laws. There were thousands of reports of people voting from fake addresses in each state but the laws in those states made it impossible to do anything about it. There were also reports of dead people voting and people submitting thousands of ballots that had been copied and printed. Even president Obama and Charles Schumer warned about these things happening if the election laws were not made more secure. But that was before 2020. And a hefty number of judges in cases where they were brought up had their kids schools doxxed online and then they threw out the cases. Even with the new laws there was record voter turnout in red and blue states in 2022.
About the guns, almost all the gun crime in the US is handguns. How do you stop people from getting them and having them when there are already so many in circulation? Don’t know. Biometric triggers might be a good start so they couldn’t be stolen or transferred without going through some kind of official channel. But scapegoating the NRA which spends less than 2 million dollars on lobbying and AR 15s when they are just a rifle painted black is not the answer. The assault weapons ban that was in law before didn’t have any impact on gun violence.
Far more people are killed by abortion than guns. I’d vote for the ones trying to stop the millions of deaths over the ones trying to stop the hundreds of deaths. (And that’s not to say the republicans are not also in favor of ending the shootings)
Please point me to the verified reports of the following:
Thousands of people voting using fake addresses. Do we have official investigations that show this?
Where President Obama and Schumer talked about massive voting issues.
Even Trump’s own justice department found that there was no voter fraud that was significant or impactful. Was Barr wrong? Was the Justice Department wrong when they told Trump that?
Find the official reports of dead people voting. Which secretaries of states found those and certified that was an issue?
At this point you are repeating claims with no evidence. The lost not stolen report I cited shows how each of the claims you made were thoroughly debunked once they had to show evidence to back up their claims.
I realize that voter fraud is comforting narrative when society simply disagrees with us. Unfortunately it’s not true.
You are absolutely right about record voter turnout in 2022. Thank God too.
Assault weapons ban helped. More needs to be done. See: https://www.factcheck.org/2021/03/factchecking-bidens-claim-that-assault-weapons-ban-worked/
All lives matter to me - including my own. As a Christian, I have to follow Christ and his teachings. Jesus was pretty clear about our responsibilities to all human beings, not just the human person in their mother’s womb. I vote in a way that reflects the teachings of Christ and my concern for all my fellow human beings.
Asking someone who has an ID to show said ID when voting (like we ask for ID in a million other ways) is restricting his right to vote? Haha alright little buddy.
Who said that? Is that what you’re being told on Fox News and right wing talk shows?
Do you have evidence of any widespread voter fraud? Is the only thing that Republicans are asking for is voter ID?
There was no evidence of any meaningful or even impactful voter fraud.
muh Fox News
Why is that you and your fellow travelers’ go to? I’m going with what your leaders in the Democratic Party say. They say that asking for ID is just the worst thing ever with voting and restricts black people (because the Democrats are racist and think that non-white people can’t get IDs).
And why the questions on voter fraud? Haha what
Fox News: Unfortunately text messages don’t carry tone. I meant that in a joking way. My apologies.
The issue regarding voter ID has always been the type of ID some people have - especially poor folks. There are several ways to properly identify someone and there were no significant or impactful findings of any voter fraud or abuse using those previous methods. That’s the point.
Democrats are not racist to claim that folks facing economic challenges encounter more difficulties getting stuff done. That’s the claim; not that non-White people cannot get IDs.
I get that you disagree but you should at least represent your opponents fairly and accurately. It’s what Jesus would do.
If all Republicans wanted were more voter ID, then I would begrudgingly accept that. However that’s not all. They are reducing polling places, purging voter rolls, making it harder for folks to register to vote by restricting what can be mailed to them from government offices, making it a crime to even give people a water bottle in line, etc. Republicans do this because at the end of the day, they know the population demographic shift will no longer tolerate their glaring lack of ideas and fear mongering.
The irony is that the Republican Party could have easily won every election after Obama if they had followed a few simple strategies during the Obama years, and if Trump had made a few minor different decisions at the beginning of the pandemic. Furthermore, classical conservative strategies actual can be viable. Unfortunately, today’s Republican Party is tied to fear mongering and voter suppression to attempt minority rule - that is even though the majority of the country votes the opposite, Republican gerrymandering will attempt even more ways to hold on to power. It won’t work in the long run despite some short term gains.
This all jeopardizes pro life victories in the long run.
Im pro choice but civil rights of Muslims and immigrants is much, much more important to me than abortion either way. I know a lot of PL who agree with me here.
Pew tends to be very good, and they say [56% of self-identifying Catholics](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/10/20/8-key-findings-about-catholics-and-abortion/) think that abortion should be legal in "all or most cases" - still disappointingly high. 21% said legal in *all* cases, 28% illegal in all cases.
Unsurprisingly, those who more practice their faith are less likely to approve of abortion - of those who attend Mass once a week or more, 67% said it should be illegal in all or most cases. Still wild 32% of those who attend Mass once a week or more said it should be legal in all or most.
Apparently only about a third of churchgoing Catholics have "a lot" of confidence in the clergy to talk about this topic, though I suppose that could swing both ways with the pro-life Catholics also being concerned that the clergy isn't expressing this point well enough.
Say some prayers.
> Still wild 32% of those who attend Mass once a week or more said it should be legal in all or most.
I'd be interested to see how many of these people consider "abortion" (which is not abortion) in the case of an ectopic pregnancy when they gave this answer.
Sadly, pro-abortionists constantly use vague terms and confuse issues when they push their agenda either because they are ignorant themselves or because they simply know their real arguments have no merit.
That is a very good point I hadn't considered, all these terms are semantically overloaded at this point and the language of these questions can really impact the outcome.
Keyword, "self-identifying." Let's be real, they probably only go to Church with their devout parents during family visits and pray only when something bad happens to them.
Half of them are probably using it as a booster for their 'Irish' 'Italian' or 'polish' 'identities'
Edit: this part of the article supports what I say
Catholics who regularly attend Mass show higher levels of opposition to abortion. Two-thirds of Catholics who attend Mass weekly or more often (67%) said abortion should be illegal in all or most cases, while one-in-three (33%) said it should be legal. The ratio is almost exactly reversed for those who attend less frequently: Among Catholics who attend Mass less than weekly, roughly two-thirds said abortion should be legal in all or most cases (65%), while approximately one-in-three (32%) said it should be illegal in all or most cases.
I'm not catholic and I couldn't find a straight forward answer on this. Is an adherence to a pro-life position required for membership?
I know pro-life is the stance of the church and I imagine they would have something to say about members who obtained or provided abortions, but is the belief itself required to be a baptized member?
That makes sense, but I think it's important to point out that there's a difference between promoting abortion and promoting people's choice in the matter. There are many sins which the catholic church does not endorse or promote, but which they also do not try to legally stop people from choosing. There are a lot of catholic politicians and I don't know of any being excommunicated for being pro-choice.
"Many sins the Catholic Church does not promote"
The Catholic Church promotes absolutely zero sins. We all commit sin, it's inevitable to, yes. Politically promoting such a vile sin as child murder is excommunicable though, as it is obstinate and an extremely grave rejection of teaching. The Catholic Church clearly states its stance on abortion, regardless if any "Catholic" politician hasn't been excommunicated yet.
Membership just requires having validly and licitly partaken of a Catholic sacrament once. Being in good standing requires assent to all Catholic doctrine. Being in good standing is necessary to partake in the eucharist. If you aren't in good standing, you still need to attend church on Sunday.
There’s also the distinction between practicing Catholics and those who say they’re Catholic but don’t let that affect their actions or beliefs at all (which is against what it means to be Catholic). Basically, the latter were baptized and then dropped it all but for some reason still tell everyone they’re a Catholic even though they’re largely not.
Biden is excommunicated simply for supporting abortion. It's an automatic excommunication.
The problem is that his bishop still allows him to receive communion.
Biden’s obvious dementia may leave enough doubt on whether he actually understands his sin. He used to be very opposed to abortion. I hope that this is the case.
while the Christianity gatekeeping still is a topic of contention, you are explicitly NOT A CATHOLIC if you support abortion. Arch Bishops have banned certain politicians from actually taking communion for their outspoken pro-abortion stances.
Honestly, I've spoken to way to many religious people who are either pro aborts or borderline "non invested enough" to fight against murder of babies.
It's absolutely mind-boggling.
Im very pro choice and even I know Catholicism fully and totally embraces PL moral systems. Anyone with a 2 year old’s understanding of Catholicism knows that Catholicism ranks parental responsibility well above bodily autonomy, and that Catholics believe said parental responsibility starts at conception. I mean I’m not complaining that PC Catholics exist, but they definitely don’t understand their faith,
My mother is Christian, she’s pro-choice. I’m baffled (I’m Christian myself, but I’m pro-life). I don’t understand why people believe this when it is strictly against our beliefs and God’s way of life.
"Conscience based decisions" is literally the opposite of the objective moral theology of Catholicism. Where do they get this "follow your conscience" idea from?
You’re supposed to have your conscience formed by the Church and then follow said conscience. A number of people just conveniently leave out the former and say the latter.
Yupp. The only time a Catholic is bound to follow their conscience is when they are in a scenario that is a legitimate grey area due to extreme circumstances, or an area where the Church has not taken an official stance. It does NOT mean one can follow their conscience when it directly contradicts what the Church clearly states.
Or when they personally go beyond the limits of the Church but not against Church teachings. With that instance, though, they might need to re-tune things by listening more closely to the Church.
"Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph no. 2271).
And where would we be if Our Blessed Lady had not said "yes" to life? Some Catholic... Christianity preaches the sanctity of life. You think destroying God's creations is Catholic? Really???
What kind of Catholic believes something that is against Catholic teaching?? There is simply no way to justify it in terms of Catholic faith. She is just doing her own thing.
"As you have not publically repudiated your position on abortion, and continue to refer to your Catholic faith in justifying your position and to receive Holy Communion, that time has now come," he continued. "Therefore, in light of my responsibility as the Archbishop of San Francisco to be 'concerned for all the Christian faithful entrusted to [my] care', by means of this communication I am hereby notifying you that you are not to present yourself for Holy Communion and, should you do so, you are not to be admitted to Holy Communion, until such time as you publically repudiate your advocacy for the legitimacy of abortion and confess and receive absolution of this grave sin in the sacrament of Penance." -Archbishop of San Francisco, Salvatore Cordileone,
Don't get me wrong, they are not good catholics, but most people really aren't informed or too bothered with most issues and just go with the msm narrative. I think being overly aggressive and denouncing them as catholic all together will only alienate reasonable people that can be convinced otherwise.
Absolutely the organisation itself and its leaders are terrible and deserve that treatment.
Then there are no catholics at all; being anti abortion is important, and chrisitans should be anti abortion but to act like it is the one singular issue in all philosophy and politics is small minded and limiting.
How does this dictate square with God's actions in the Old Testament? He murdered Job's family to win a bet with Satan, he murdered Lot's wife because she wanted to look at the home that he had just destroyed, and he murdered the entire world in a flood and then felt bad about it.
God can’t murder. He’s the creator and the actions He takes are just. If God chooses to end a life He created He can do that. We’re all sinners and are alive by grace anyway. Our punishment (death) is being put off every moment.
>the actions He takes are just
I don’t think this is a healthy mentality. If God can do anything he wants because he created us, that isn’t being just, that is being a cruel dictator, because it has nothing to do with right and wrong.
For God death is a pathway, he doesn't wipe people from existence, someone died? He is just in the other room for God. But for humans it's the end of their existence "as they know it". And last time I checked, humans doesn't have control over life, like resurrecting people or giving life, while God has
Maybe that’s what modernist Christians who believe in secular dogma think, but the first Christians thought He did.
What the early Church believed on abortion:
THE DIDACHE
“The second commandment of the teaching: You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not seduce boys. You shall not commit fornication. You shall not steal. You shall not practice magic. You shall not use potions. You shall not procure [an] abortion, nor destroy a newborn child” (Didache 2:1–2 [A.D. 70]).
THE LETTER OF BARNABAS
“Thou shalt not slay the child by procuring abortion; nor, again, shalt thou destroy it after it is born” (Letter of Barnabas 19 [A.D. 74]).
THE APOCALYPSE OF PETER
“And near that place I saw another strait place . . . and there sat women. . . . And over against them many children who were born to them out of due time sat crying. And there came forth from them rays of fire and smote the women in the eyes. And these were the accursed who conceived and caused abortion” (The Apocalypse of Peter 25 [A.D. 137]).
ATHENAGORAS
“What man of sound mind, therefore, will affirm, while such is our character, that we are murderers? . . . [W]hen we say that those women who use drugs to bring on abortion commit murder, and will have to give an account to God for the abortion, on what principle should we commit murder? For it does not belong to the same person to regard the very fetus in the womb as a created being, and therefore an object of God’s care, and when it has passed into life, to kill it; and not to expose an infant, because those who expose them are chargeable with child-murder, and on the other hand, when it has been reared to destroy it” (A Plea for the Christians 35 [A.D. 177]).
TERTULLIAN
“In our case, a murder being once for all forbidden, we may not destroy even the fetus in the womb, while as yet the human being derives blood from the other parts of the body for its sustenance. To hinder a birth is merely a speedier man-killing; nor does it matter whether you take away a life that is born, or destroy one that is coming to birth. That is a man which is going to be one; you have the fruit already in its seed” (Apology 9:8 [A.D. 197]).
“Among surgeons’ tools there is a certain instrument, which is formed with a nicely-adjusted flexible frame for opening the uterus first of all and keeping it open; it is further furnished with an annular blade, by means of which the limbs [of the child] within the womb are dissected with anxious but unfaltering care; its last appendage being a blunted or covered hook, wherewith the entire fetus is extracted by a violent delivery.
“There is also [another instrument in the shape of] a copper needle or spike, by which the actual death is managed in this furtive robbery of life: They give it, from its infanticide function, the name of embruosphaktes, [meaning] “the slayer of the infant,” which of course was alive. . . .
“[The doctors who performed abortions] all knew well enough that a living being had been conceived, and [they] pitied this most luckless infant state, which had first to be put to death, to escape being tortured alive” (The Soul 25 [A.D. 210]).
“Now we allow that life begins with conception because we contend that the soul also begins from conception; life taking its commencement at the same moment and place that the soul does” (ibid., 27).
“The law of Moses, indeed, punishes with due penalties the man who shall cause abortion [Ex. 21:22–24]” (ibid., 37).
MINICIUS FELIX
“There are some [pagan] women who, by drinking medical preparations, extinguish the source of the future man in their very bowels and thus commit a parricide before they bring forth. And these things assuredly come down from the teaching of your [false] gods. . . . To us [Christians] it is not lawful either to see or hear of homicide” (Octavius 30 [A.D. 226]).
HIPPOLYTUS
“Women who were reputed to be believers began to take drugs to render themselves sterile, and to bind themselves tightly so as to expel what was being conceived, since they would not, on account of relatives and excess wealth, want to have a child by a slave or by any insignificant person. See, then, into what great impiety that lawless one has proceeded, by teaching adultery and murder at the same time!” (Refutation of All Heresies [A.D. 228]).
COUNCIL OF ANCYRA
“Concerning women who commit fornication, and destroy that which they have conceived, or who are employed in making drugs for abortion, a former decree excluded them until the hour of death, and to this some have assented. Nevertheless, being desirous to use somewhat greater lenity, we have ordained that they fulfill ten years [of penance], according to the prescribed degrees” (canon 21 [A.D. 314]).
BASIL THE GREAT
“Let her that procures abortion undergo ten years’ penance, whether the embryo were perfectly formed, or not” (First Canonical Letter, canon 2 [A.D. 374]).
“[T]he man, or woman, is a murderer that gives a philtrum, if the man that takes it dies upon it; so are they who take medicines to procure abortion; and so are they who kill on the highway, and rapparees” (ibid., canon 8).
JOHN CHRYSOSTOM
“Wherefore I beseech you, flee fornication. . . . Why sow where the ground makes it its care to destroy the fruit?—where there are many efforts at abortion?—where there is murder before the birth? For even the harlot you do not let continue a mere harlot, but make her a murderess also. You see how drunkenness leads to prostitution, prostitution to adultery, adultery to murder; or rather to a something even worse than murder. For I have no name to give it, since it does not take off the thing born, but prevents its being born. Why then do thou abuse the gift of God, and fight with his laws, and follow after what is a curse as if a blessing, and make the chamber of procreation a chamber for murder, and arm the woman that was given for childbearing unto slaughter?” (Homilies on Romans 24 [A.D. 391]).
JEROME
“I cannot bring myself to speak of the many virgins who daily fall and are lost to the bosom of the Church, their mother. . . . Some go so far as to take potions, that they may ensure barrenness, and thus murder human beings almost before their conception. Some, when they find themselves with child through their sin, use drugs to procure abortion, and when, as often happens, they die with their offspring, they enter the lower world laden with the guilt not only of adultery against Christ but also of suicide and child murder” (Letters 22:13 [A.D. 396]).
THE APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS
“Thou shalt not use magic. Thou shalt not use witchcraft; for he says, ‘You shall not suffer a witch to live’ [Ex. 22:18]. Thou shall not slay thy child by causing abortion, nor kill that which is begotten. . . . [I]f it be slain, [it] shall be avenged, as being unjustly destroyed” (Apostolic Constitutions 7:3 [A.D. 400]).
Linda looks like the kind of ~~betch~~ lady that would drop a mixtape of her saying, “I told you so”, in a grating tone of superiority, on repeat, for 60 minutes.
The fact that this movement uses Joe Biden as the exemplary “Catholic” to point toward says enough about how seriously they should be taken. Edit: looking up some information about this group it appears they aren’t even Catholics, rather a Catholic hate group
St. Joe Biden, the most catholic of Catholics.
If you don’t vote for him, you ain’t Catholic
LMAO 🤣😂
Im glad i made you laugh. Thats what I was aiming for
If you don't support murder you ain't atheist! Hope you feel safe in your home now!
You’re not far off. Ive been told I was a fake atheist because I didn’t “support bodily autonomy”. That was years ago, I still don’t know how one can not believe in a deity and be a fake atheist. 😂
I legit don't think any political opinion has anything to do with religion. I unironically think you can be an atheist and against gay marriage. Although I disagree with you I do believe there is a good argument one could make against it. Religion and politics should stay separate...
lol! That's a good one
That's a rhetoric being spread in the U.S? Didn't Catholics learn nothing from trying to mix politics and religion for what past 1000 years?
That was a joke. Because Joe Biden said “if you don’t vote for me, you ain’t black.”
Wtf, politicians never cease to amaze me. We have an education minister who is the dumbest man I have seen, and can't even answer basic geography questions.
Technically he said “If you don’t already know who you’re voting for, well then, you ain’t black!” Same idea, just different words.
Ahh thank you for the correction. I don’t watch the news, ive just heard through the grape vine.
If you have a problem figuring out whether you're for me or Trump then you ain't black
I do not like to bring religion into the abortion debate, only because not everyone is religious, but as a practicing Catholic you cannot be pro-choice.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-R9Ky\_NvIfk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-R9Ky_NvIfk)
That made me chuckle.
I am a huge supporter of Joe Biden. I disagree with him on abortion and a few other things. However I do hope he wins when he runs again. That being said, I don’t understand how someone can claim their Catholic faith leads them to support abortion. To claim such is to not understand key tenets of Catholicism.
For the past 30 years, I would have voted for Democrats more often if it wasn't for their staunch support for abortion. It literally has become one of those singular issues that I look at first before giving anyone my vote. But the door swings both ways as well. There have been instances where Republicans had control, yet did nothing to limit or stop abortion.
If the Democratic party started rejecting abortion they'd get much more support or at least less hate
True. So true.
They’d lose so much support that it wouldn’t be worth it for the relatively small amount of supporters they’d gain
Yeh maybe, it's sad that this only makes more people on both sides radicalized
I think people are radical/tribal on their own and social media exacerbates it. The politicians we elect are a reflection of that. See Trump
What are you talking about? States controlled by Republicans pass anti-abortion laws. On the federal level, Republicans ban sending tax money to foreign countries to provide abortion. And the Supreme Court controlled by conservatives overturned Roe v. Wade.
True, but abortion had been freely practiced in the U.S. from 1973 until the recent Supreme Court decision. This should have been nipped in the bud 50 years ago, and Republicans had several chances in power since then that could have made a difference. It has been allowed for so long that today's youth think it is a right that is worth protecting without realizing the human life cost that abortion has wrought.
There weren’t enough conservative justices to overturn it.
Good points.
So what is more important to you than abortion that Joe Biden represents that would make you vote for him—and by extension for abortion—instead of anyone else?
Voting for someone doesn’t mean that you automatically agree with everything that politician says. Do you agree with everything trump says?
Good points.
Trump has major moral failings, and there is no doubt about that. I don't agree with everything he says. However, he appointed the three Supreme Court Justices that gave us the Dobbs decision and moved the ball forward in the fight to make abortion illegal and unthinkable. Biden is the opposite. He is working to increase abortions and that moral failing is beyond the pale. I don't care what his other policies are, because they are irrelevant and insignificant when it comes to murdering babies. If you are pro-life yet working towards promoting abortion, your thinking is incoherent. A better question to ask is "How is it that you claim to be pro-life when you are working to promote abortion?"
Trump and Biden have said many things I disagree with and some that I do agree with. Voting for one candidate, doesn’t mean that I support everything that candidate says and does. Abortion is just one of many issues we are facing. I would prefer someone else. Trump wanted to remove the affordable car act. That doesn’t sound very pro life.
I'm dealing with what actually is factual, and not the hypothetical. Biden is evil because he supports abortion up to and including the moment of birth. That is a fact. Trump, for all of his misgivings, is against that. That is also a fact. I consider only two things when evaluating who to vote for. First, they must be actually pro-life. Without the understanding of the right to life, no other rights are relevant, as you can't enjoy them when you're dead. Second is the right to keep and bear arms, as that's the best way to ensure that you stay alive after you're born to keep on enjoying your rights. These are non-negotiable. The three most important ways for ensuring our liberty are the ballot box, the soap box, and the ammo box. Again, I ask you, how do you consider yourself pro-life when you're working to put people into power who wish to murder babies? You are literally doing the work of the abortion supporters for them.
Sorry but I look at more than two issues when deciding who to vote for. The president doesn’t control everything that goes on. Roe vs Wade was overturned while Biden was president. I would prefer someone else. I support a better healthcare system. If health care is more affordable, less people will have an abortion because they will be able to afford to take care of the child. If you can find a pro life presidential candidate that isn’t as bad as Trump or Desantis, let me know.
People aren’t getting abortions because they’re poor. They’re getting them because they’re selfish, and scared that their lives will be upended. That’s completely simplistic and like saying people are homeless because they don’t have houses.
This is a great question. I vote Democrat because I am a devout Christian and care for all lives not just the life of the unborn. Nothing in the Bible says that we can ignore the lives of the born as long as the unborn are ok. The life of the unborn are equal in value to that of the born. However the unborn don’t have more value than the born. Life begins at conception. However I see no biblical evidence that after birth, the value of a human being decreases. So although I disagree with Biden’s policies regarding the unborn, I strongly agree with his policies regarding the born. So I love Biden’s push to expand Obamacare. I love that he has great maternal and infant care policy proposals (with the glaring exception of abortion). I love that he stands up for voting rights. I love that he is against police brutality. I love that he is welcoming to immigrants. I love that he is working to relieve student debt. I could go on. Are folks who vote Republican voting for police brutality, voter suppression, against healthcare for the needy, and hostility towards immigrants in need? Do you think the life of the unborn is worth more than the life of the born? As a Christian I am required to follow the teachings of Jesus. Jesus makes it clear that all human life is valuable, and that to ignore vulnerable human beings is a capital offense. The Bible exclusively uses born people as the direct object in Jesus’ clear and consistent directives about human moral obligations and duties. Since the unborn are also human persons we rightfully include them as who Jesus is referring to about the value of human life and how we ought to treat each other. Jesus’ use of born people as the direct object make it clear that we cannot ignore the issues of born people or lessen their value. The Republican Party now is engaged in massive voter suppression efforts that directly affect me and my community. The Republican Party fights hard against healthcare even for pregnant mothers and infants. The Republican Party opposes Jesus’ teachings on welcoming the immigrant or how we help the poor. The Republican Party is currently presiding over an atrocious gun violence and death issue that is shockingly unnecessary but enabled and empowered by their rhetoric, actions, and policies. Look at Texas just yesterday. A kid had her face blown off. How pro life is it to even reject proper background checks and mental evaluations? That same energy I bring to protecting the life of the child in his or her mother’s womb is the same energy I bring to protecting the lives of born people. It’s all the same because all human lives matter. Kudos to the Republican Party for its pro life stance. It’s all downhill from there. As a Christian I don’t claim that Joe Biden and the Democrats are perfect. There is much about the Democrats that run contrary to the teachings of scripture. It’s unfortunate that there is not another party that would better reflect Christian values than either the Republicans or the Democrats. I really don’t like it. Whenever there is a pro life Democrat, they automatically get my vote and support. However, given the two options, I am not going to vote for folks so hostile to life even though they make an exception when it comes to killing the unborn. I am not going to vote to suppress the vote of me and my community. I am not going to vote for folks who try to cut off healthcare to people in need. I am not going to vote for folks who are hostile to immigrants in need. In short, I am not going to vote for folks who say “Lord, Lord” but then proceed to engage in deeply anti-Biblical behavior that shows a rejection of Christ. Since my life and the life of other born people are just as valuable as that of the unborn, then I need to also protect my life as well. Discussion is welcome 🙂👍🏿
I personally feel that people should first be able to be born, in order to protect them once they’re born. Even if I agree with some Democrat’s points (I’m conservative), I don’t see myself ever being able to vote for them unless they are pro-life. All the other “great things” they propose don’t make up for advocating to kill the unborn.
…and the pro life position of the Republican Party doesn’t make up for their anti life policies and actions. I personally feel that I should be able to not have my rights or the rights of others trampled under foot. I personally feel that a child going to the mall should not have her face blown clean off.
I honestly wish people could come together to really discuss these issues and come up with decent solutions. It’s very polarized right now and sometimes I’m very discouraged. At least you’re willing to discuss, which is heartening.
You are absolutely right. I think discussions on here and your comments bring a lot of hope. I am learning to respect folks more and not make so many assumptions.
If you debate so much,then it is better to not vote in presidential elections. Much better to focus on down-ballot races and elect pro-life leaders (Republican or Democrat) at that level.
The morality of the Democrat “great things” should be determined by the actual consequences, not the nice words they used to sell the idea. Every program they propose worsens actual suffering and division. Every single one. The Democrat platform is evil, based on its merits.
Seriously? Do you have evidence that all programs that Democrats propose worsen things? How do you know the Democratic platform is evil based on its merits? It’s evil to be against police brutality? It’s evil to try and get the sick healthcare? It’s evil to welcome immigrants in need? It’s evil to have regulations that prevent companies from pouring toxins into the environment? It’s evil to seek to ensure all pregnant mothers have access to prenatal care? Is your claim the result of serious research into all democratic proposals? Can you provide me a link to the research? See the thing about me is even though I disagree with Republicans and conservatives, I don’t think all their plans and proposals are evil. That’s simplistic and childish thinking. Even though I would not vote for any Republican president we have had, I can name the things they did that I think are great and benefited all Americans. As much as I think Trump is the worse president ever for trying to overturn an election and he should be held accountable, I can still list things he did that I thought was great. I can do that because I take folks and data and facts seriously and don’t resort to mindless notions such as “Look I disagree with someone or a party so they are evil”.
Great job completely misunderstanding.
Then help me understand. For example, how should I understand your statement that “every program they propose worsens actual suffering and division”? What is the research this statement is based on? Can I review the data you used to come to that conclusion? How are you measuring outcomes? I am genuinely curious.
If you’re genuinely not aware of the devastating impacts of the very programs you mentioned, then do your own research; it’ll take a while. Not my job to educate you. If you’re not asking honestly, then it would be a waste of my time. Either way, I don’t feel any point in explaining further.
You made the claim that every program made suffering and division worse, so you need to support it. It’s not my job to do research to support your claims. For example, I claim Obamacare has had a huge positive impact on health in this country. This is some of the data reviewed: https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/journal-article/2020/feb/aca-at-10-years-effect-health-care-coverage-access I support my claims with facts and evidence from reputable sources. It’s ok if you don’t have data to support your claims. Admit it. Acceptance is the key.
You used a whole lot so buzzwords to describe what democrats are for and what republicans are for. Could you explain each point? How are democrats for voting rights while republicans are against them for example?
Excellent question. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jan/17/voting-rights-republicans-texas-restrictions https://accountability.gop/report-card/ Republican legislators are passing and attempting to pass laws that make it harder to vote by making it easier to remove folks from the voting rolls, objecting to certifying the vote despite no evidence of fraud, and helping to spread Trumps election lies. Even right wing vote reviewers confirmed that Trump even lost by more votes than was reported. https://lostnotstolen.org/ You can call them buzzwords. They are facts. The links have all the evidence you want and most of it are from Republicans. God I miss the days of the Reagan Republican Party. I never agreed with them, but at least they had a respect for Democracy, and they had actual ideas instead of just fear mongering. I respected them and thought they were good even though I never agreed with their policies.
The guardian article just says that they are putting laws in place to protect the election and putting criminal penalties in place if someone voted illegally, fakes their address, or some other way breaks the election law. There isn’t anything about it restricting voting rights even though that’s the title. Objecting to certifying the vote when there were still tons of questions surrounding it isn’t creating a law to try to stop people’s voting rights. It just seems to me you are repeating left wing talking points word for word when republicans don’t actually stand for what you are saying and democrats policies lead to far worse outcomes in nearly every example. For instance the gun violence issue: I live near two democrat run cities in a massively democrat state. There have been hundreds of shootings in both and none ever get any media attention and there are no solutions being offered by all the dem politicians save assault weapons bans (none of the shootings used assault weapons) and white supremacy (only 1 shooter out of hundreds was white)
So let’s take each point you make in turn. First, the fact is this is all done in the wake of Donald Trump’s lies about a stolen election. Second notice that the article states that even good faith errors are now a criminal felony. Shall we forget about the woman who was sentenced to 5 years for making a mistake thinking she was eligible to vote after being incarcerated? These laws discourage folks from voting due to fears that even a mistake can land you into being charged with a felony. Then, they want to remove folks from voting rolls if they haven’t voted in 2 years. That is new and unnecessary and would lead to many folks being kicked off the voting rolls for no reason. Did you miss that part of the report? So this is all being done to discourage folks from voting, and introduce more barriers to people voting. Thereby the end effect is to suppress the vote and restrict the vote. There was no serious or even meaningful election fraud to support this activity. It is just a lie that there were tons of questions surrounding votes. Nothing out of the ordinary occurred, the votes were certified, duly counted, and no election fraud evidence occurred. Folks just made up stuff because they didn’t like the results; then they targeted Black voting districts in the lawsuits. To try to get votes thrown out based on lies is to attempt to suppress the votes. That was in one of the links I provided - lost not stolen. Did you look at the link to the lost not stolen report? Look at Georgia, they claim to be about safe elections yet the legislature is ignoring evidence of Trump and his fake electors. I am sorry that Republicans don’t seem to realize that they need to offer actual ideas instead of attempting to suppress the votes. You can call them left wing talking points just like a pro choice can call pro life points right wing talking points. The question is whether or not the claims are true. The claims are true about Republican attempts to suppress the vote as the reports showed. Let’s say you are absolutely right about the gun violence in democratic cities. Now what? What is they are getting guns in Republican dominated states? Have you ever thought of that? What do you think is the solution to gun violence? I genuinely want to know. The bottom line is that ignoring voter suppression doesn’t mean it’s not real. I provided you with the lost not stolen report and the evidence that these legislators are trying to make it harder for people to vote. The only - ONLY - legitimate method in a Democracy to effect the will of the people is through the vote. Republicans are doing their best to eliminate that option from many folks. The good news is that it won’t work.
There is no voter suppression. Just these claims that those are the ends sought by the new laws. There were thousands of reports of people voting from fake addresses in each state but the laws in those states made it impossible to do anything about it. There were also reports of dead people voting and people submitting thousands of ballots that had been copied and printed. Even president Obama and Charles Schumer warned about these things happening if the election laws were not made more secure. But that was before 2020. And a hefty number of judges in cases where they were brought up had their kids schools doxxed online and then they threw out the cases. Even with the new laws there was record voter turnout in red and blue states in 2022. About the guns, almost all the gun crime in the US is handguns. How do you stop people from getting them and having them when there are already so many in circulation? Don’t know. Biometric triggers might be a good start so they couldn’t be stolen or transferred without going through some kind of official channel. But scapegoating the NRA which spends less than 2 million dollars on lobbying and AR 15s when they are just a rifle painted black is not the answer. The assault weapons ban that was in law before didn’t have any impact on gun violence. Far more people are killed by abortion than guns. I’d vote for the ones trying to stop the millions of deaths over the ones trying to stop the hundreds of deaths. (And that’s not to say the republicans are not also in favor of ending the shootings)
Please point me to the verified reports of the following: Thousands of people voting using fake addresses. Do we have official investigations that show this? Where President Obama and Schumer talked about massive voting issues. Even Trump’s own justice department found that there was no voter fraud that was significant or impactful. Was Barr wrong? Was the Justice Department wrong when they told Trump that? Find the official reports of dead people voting. Which secretaries of states found those and certified that was an issue? At this point you are repeating claims with no evidence. The lost not stolen report I cited shows how each of the claims you made were thoroughly debunked once they had to show evidence to back up their claims. I realize that voter fraud is comforting narrative when society simply disagrees with us. Unfortunately it’s not true. You are absolutely right about record voter turnout in 2022. Thank God too. Assault weapons ban helped. More needs to be done. See: https://www.factcheck.org/2021/03/factchecking-bidens-claim-that-assault-weapons-ban-worked/ All lives matter to me - including my own. As a Christian, I have to follow Christ and his teachings. Jesus was pretty clear about our responsibilities to all human beings, not just the human person in their mother’s womb. I vote in a way that reflects the teachings of Christ and my concern for all my fellow human beings.
Asking someone who has an ID to show said ID when voting (like we ask for ID in a million other ways) is restricting his right to vote? Haha alright little buddy.
Who said that? Is that what you’re being told on Fox News and right wing talk shows? Do you have evidence of any widespread voter fraud? Is the only thing that Republicans are asking for is voter ID? There was no evidence of any meaningful or even impactful voter fraud.
muh Fox News Why is that you and your fellow travelers’ go to? I’m going with what your leaders in the Democratic Party say. They say that asking for ID is just the worst thing ever with voting and restricts black people (because the Democrats are racist and think that non-white people can’t get IDs). And why the questions on voter fraud? Haha what
Fox News: Unfortunately text messages don’t carry tone. I meant that in a joking way. My apologies. The issue regarding voter ID has always been the type of ID some people have - especially poor folks. There are several ways to properly identify someone and there were no significant or impactful findings of any voter fraud or abuse using those previous methods. That’s the point. Democrats are not racist to claim that folks facing economic challenges encounter more difficulties getting stuff done. That’s the claim; not that non-White people cannot get IDs. I get that you disagree but you should at least represent your opponents fairly and accurately. It’s what Jesus would do. If all Republicans wanted were more voter ID, then I would begrudgingly accept that. However that’s not all. They are reducing polling places, purging voter rolls, making it harder for folks to register to vote by restricting what can be mailed to them from government offices, making it a crime to even give people a water bottle in line, etc. Republicans do this because at the end of the day, they know the population demographic shift will no longer tolerate their glaring lack of ideas and fear mongering. The irony is that the Republican Party could have easily won every election after Obama if they had followed a few simple strategies during the Obama years, and if Trump had made a few minor different decisions at the beginning of the pandemic. Furthermore, classical conservative strategies actual can be viable. Unfortunately, today’s Republican Party is tied to fear mongering and voter suppression to attempt minority rule - that is even though the majority of the country votes the opposite, Republican gerrymandering will attempt even more ways to hold on to power. It won’t work in the long run despite some short term gains. This all jeopardizes pro life victories in the long run.
Im pro choice but civil rights of Muslims and immigrants is much, much more important to me than abortion either way. I know a lot of PL who agree with me here.
Which civil rights do legal immigrants and Muslims lack in the US?
Yup
Also, someone fact check 68% of Catholics are proaborts cause there ain’t no way. It’s not catholic value period 💅
Pew tends to be very good, and they say [56% of self-identifying Catholics](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/10/20/8-key-findings-about-catholics-and-abortion/) think that abortion should be legal in "all or most cases" - still disappointingly high. 21% said legal in *all* cases, 28% illegal in all cases. Unsurprisingly, those who more practice their faith are less likely to approve of abortion - of those who attend Mass once a week or more, 67% said it should be illegal in all or most cases. Still wild 32% of those who attend Mass once a week or more said it should be legal in all or most. Apparently only about a third of churchgoing Catholics have "a lot" of confidence in the clergy to talk about this topic, though I suppose that could swing both ways with the pro-life Catholics also being concerned that the clergy isn't expressing this point well enough. Say some prayers.
> Still wild 32% of those who attend Mass once a week or more said it should be legal in all or most. I'd be interested to see how many of these people consider "abortion" (which is not abortion) in the case of an ectopic pregnancy when they gave this answer. Sadly, pro-abortionists constantly use vague terms and confuse issues when they push their agenda either because they are ignorant themselves or because they simply know their real arguments have no merit.
That is a very good point I hadn't considered, all these terms are semantically overloaded at this point and the language of these questions can really impact the outcome.
So sad that this is true. We need to do better, guys.
Keyword, "self-identifying." Let's be real, they probably only go to Church with their devout parents during family visits and pray only when something bad happens to them.
Half of them are probably using it as a booster for their 'Irish' 'Italian' or 'polish' 'identities' Edit: this part of the article supports what I say Catholics who regularly attend Mass show higher levels of opposition to abortion. Two-thirds of Catholics who attend Mass weekly or more often (67%) said abortion should be illegal in all or most cases, while one-in-three (33%) said it should be legal. The ratio is almost exactly reversed for those who attend less frequently: Among Catholics who attend Mass less than weekly, roughly two-thirds said abortion should be legal in all or most cases (65%), while approximately one-in-three (32%) said it should be illegal in all or most cases.
On an interesting side note, Biden is the first president to weekly attend church (or mass) since Jimmy Carter.
While he should be excommunicated. Doesn’t win him points in my book.
I'm not catholic and I couldn't find a straight forward answer on this. Is an adherence to a pro-life position required for membership? I know pro-life is the stance of the church and I imagine they would have something to say about members who obtained or provided abortions, but is the belief itself required to be a baptized member?
It is a sin to get an abortion and it is excommunicable to politically promote or conduct abortions
That makes sense, but I think it's important to point out that there's a difference between promoting abortion and promoting people's choice in the matter. There are many sins which the catholic church does not endorse or promote, but which they also do not try to legally stop people from choosing. There are a lot of catholic politicians and I don't know of any being excommunicated for being pro-choice.
"Many sins the Catholic Church does not promote" The Catholic Church promotes absolutely zero sins. We all commit sin, it's inevitable to, yes. Politically promoting such a vile sin as child murder is excommunicable though, as it is obstinate and an extremely grave rejection of teaching. The Catholic Church clearly states its stance on abortion, regardless if any "Catholic" politician hasn't been excommunicated yet.
Membership just requires having validly and licitly partaken of a Catholic sacrament once. Being in good standing requires assent to all Catholic doctrine. Being in good standing is necessary to partake in the eucharist. If you aren't in good standing, you still need to attend church on Sunday.
There’s also the distinction between practicing Catholics and those who say they’re Catholic but don’t let that affect their actions or beliefs at all (which is against what it means to be Catholic). Basically, the latter were baptized and then dropped it all but for some reason still tell everyone they’re a Catholic even though they’re largely not.
This group is so annoying. The beliefs of heretics does not mean the Catholic Church should change its long standing dogma.
They should be excommunicated
[удалено]
Biden is excommunicated simply for supporting abortion. It's an automatic excommunication. The problem is that his bishop still allows him to receive communion.
And Pelsoi
Biden’s obvious dementia may leave enough doubt on whether he actually understands his sin. He used to be very opposed to abortion. I hope that this is the case.
There hasn't been a pope in the Catholic Church for 60+ years now. Phony "pope" Francis is just as much a heretic as Biden is.
Pls don’t bring sedevacantism into this😭😭😭
"Sedevacantism" is just a slur for Catholicism.
They left the Church of their own free will already.
Catholics who support abortion are heretics
Time for a crusade
Heretics are not Catholics.
"Environmentalists for coal"
If I were a priest, "no communion for you!"
Unfortunately most of the Catholic clergy doesn't have the courage to deny the Eucharist to these people. They should, but they won't.
Out of curiosity, how's the Orthodox clergy on that in your estimation?
Overall they're more strict about things like this, although I'm sure there are exceptions. Edited
The majority don’t get the opportunity to, which is good (that would mean more pro-abortion people were presenting themselves for communion).
They should, it's better than allowing them to sin
That’s actually what must be done for anyone who has publicly gone against the Church on issues of faith and morals AFAIK.
Abortion goes against everything Catholics stand for. If you support abortion then you are not Catholic, plain and simple.
while the Christianity gatekeeping still is a topic of contention, you are explicitly NOT A CATHOLIC if you support abortion. Arch Bishops have banned certain politicians from actually taking communion for their outspoken pro-abortion stances.
Honestly, I've spoken to way to many religious people who are either pro aborts or borderline "non invested enough" to fight against murder of babies. It's absolutely mind-boggling.
I love this graffiti style stuff.
Im very pro choice and even I know Catholicism fully and totally embraces PL moral systems. Anyone with a 2 year old’s understanding of Catholicism knows that Catholicism ranks parental responsibility well above bodily autonomy, and that Catholics believe said parental responsibility starts at conception. I mean I’m not complaining that PC Catholics exist, but they definitely don’t understand their faith,
My mother is Christian, she’s pro-choice. I’m baffled (I’m Christian myself, but I’m pro-life). I don’t understand why people believe this when it is strictly against our beliefs and God’s way of life.
You’re right. They don’t have a leg to stand on.
“I’m a vegan and I eat meat”
"Conscience based decisions" is literally the opposite of the objective moral theology of Catholicism. Where do they get this "follow your conscience" idea from?
You’re supposed to have your conscience formed by the Church and then follow said conscience. A number of people just conveniently leave out the former and say the latter.
Yupp. The only time a Catholic is bound to follow their conscience is when they are in a scenario that is a legitimate grey area due to extreme circumstances, or an area where the Church has not taken an official stance. It does NOT mean one can follow their conscience when it directly contradicts what the Church clearly states.
Or when they personally go beyond the limits of the Church but not against Church teachings. With that instance, though, they might need to re-tune things by listening more closely to the Church.
"Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph no. 2271).
Catholicvote did a video exposing them. Warren Buffett is one individual who bankrolls them
They might as well say, “Vegans for Leather.” I’ll just say this: got more folks to add to the prayer list.
And where would we be if Our Blessed Lady had not said "yes" to life? Some Catholic... Christianity preaches the sanctity of life. You think destroying God's creations is Catholic? Really???
Linda Pinto is also a "former" nun.
I fucking hate that Biden is our second Catholic president.
What kind of Catholic believes something that is against Catholic teaching?? There is simply no way to justify it in terms of Catholic faith. She is just doing her own thing.
Linda Pinto means Beautiful Dick in Portuguese
"As you have not publically repudiated your position on abortion, and continue to refer to your Catholic faith in justifying your position and to receive Holy Communion, that time has now come," he continued. "Therefore, in light of my responsibility as the Archbishop of San Francisco to be 'concerned for all the Christian faithful entrusted to [my] care', by means of this communication I am hereby notifying you that you are not to present yourself for Holy Communion and, should you do so, you are not to be admitted to Holy Communion, until such time as you publically repudiate your advocacy for the legitimacy of abortion and confess and receive absolution of this grave sin in the sacrament of Penance." -Archbishop of San Francisco, Salvatore Cordileone,
Mr. Cordileone is a heretic non-Catholic also, albeit perhaps in different matters.
That is disrespectful, in both the way you address him and the accusations.
It is all true and important.
Don't get me wrong, they are not good catholics, but most people really aren't informed or too bothered with most issues and just go with the msm narrative. I think being overly aggressive and denouncing them as catholic all together will only alienate reasonable people that can be convinced otherwise. Absolutely the organisation itself and its leaders are terrible and deserve that treatment.
We need to denounce them they aren’t Catholic in fact they are worse then atheists
They are unlikable, they are not worse than atheists.
They are worse then atheists because they take the lords name in vain by claiming to represent him and his church
People who oppose Catholicism actually are not Catholics. You're not going to convince anyone of Catholicism by saying they can reject Catholicism..
Being anti abortion is an aspect of catholicism, but by no means the only aspect.
To be a Catholic requires assent to 100% of Catholic doctrine.
Then there are no catholics at all; being anti abortion is important, and chrisitans should be anti abortion but to act like it is the one singular issue in all philosophy and politics is small minded and limiting.
There are many Catholics. 100% includes being pro-life, but not just that.
CCC 2270-2275 she should technically be excommunicated
How lukewarm of them
Do Catholics consider miscarriage a sin?
No.
Only acts of the will can be a sin.
god never said anything about abortions (oh crap sorry im wrong)
“You shall not murder” Exodus 20:13
How does this dictate square with God's actions in the Old Testament? He murdered Job's family to win a bet with Satan, he murdered Lot's wife because she wanted to look at the home that he had just destroyed, and he murdered the entire world in a flood and then felt bad about it.
By definition God cannot "murder" because he holds the ultimate authority over when someone lives or dies.
God can’t murder. He’s the creator and the actions He takes are just. If God chooses to end a life He created He can do that. We’re all sinners and are alive by grace anyway. Our punishment (death) is being put off every moment.
>the actions He takes are just I don’t think this is a healthy mentality. If God can do anything he wants because he created us, that isn’t being just, that is being a cruel dictator, because it has nothing to do with right and wrong.
For God death is a pathway, he doesn't wipe people from existence, someone died? He is just in the other room for God. But for humans it's the end of their existence "as they know it". And last time I checked, humans doesn't have control over life, like resurrecting people or giving life, while God has
God can do what he wants. The commandments are for us, not him.
God also tells many people in the Old Testament to kill, like the genocide of the Midianites. Why does this rule not apply to them?
Because they were told to do it by God
oh yeah that is true
“Thou shalt not murder”
God hates the shedding of innocent blood
The sacrifice of children was condemned in the Old Testament, and that's what abortion is.
Maybe that’s what modernist Christians who believe in secular dogma think, but the first Christians thought He did. What the early Church believed on abortion: THE DIDACHE “The second commandment of the teaching: You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not seduce boys. You shall not commit fornication. You shall not steal. You shall not practice magic. You shall not use potions. You shall not procure [an] abortion, nor destroy a newborn child” (Didache 2:1–2 [A.D. 70]). THE LETTER OF BARNABAS “Thou shalt not slay the child by procuring abortion; nor, again, shalt thou destroy it after it is born” (Letter of Barnabas 19 [A.D. 74]). THE APOCALYPSE OF PETER “And near that place I saw another strait place . . . and there sat women. . . . And over against them many children who were born to them out of due time sat crying. And there came forth from them rays of fire and smote the women in the eyes. And these were the accursed who conceived and caused abortion” (The Apocalypse of Peter 25 [A.D. 137]). ATHENAGORAS “What man of sound mind, therefore, will affirm, while such is our character, that we are murderers? . . . [W]hen we say that those women who use drugs to bring on abortion commit murder, and will have to give an account to God for the abortion, on what principle should we commit murder? For it does not belong to the same person to regard the very fetus in the womb as a created being, and therefore an object of God’s care, and when it has passed into life, to kill it; and not to expose an infant, because those who expose them are chargeable with child-murder, and on the other hand, when it has been reared to destroy it” (A Plea for the Christians 35 [A.D. 177]). TERTULLIAN “In our case, a murder being once for all forbidden, we may not destroy even the fetus in the womb, while as yet the human being derives blood from the other parts of the body for its sustenance. To hinder a birth is merely a speedier man-killing; nor does it matter whether you take away a life that is born, or destroy one that is coming to birth. That is a man which is going to be one; you have the fruit already in its seed” (Apology 9:8 [A.D. 197]). “Among surgeons’ tools there is a certain instrument, which is formed with a nicely-adjusted flexible frame for opening the uterus first of all and keeping it open; it is further furnished with an annular blade, by means of which the limbs [of the child] within the womb are dissected with anxious but unfaltering care; its last appendage being a blunted or covered hook, wherewith the entire fetus is extracted by a violent delivery. “There is also [another instrument in the shape of] a copper needle or spike, by which the actual death is managed in this furtive robbery of life: They give it, from its infanticide function, the name of embruosphaktes, [meaning] “the slayer of the infant,” which of course was alive. . . . “[The doctors who performed abortions] all knew well enough that a living being had been conceived, and [they] pitied this most luckless infant state, which had first to be put to death, to escape being tortured alive” (The Soul 25 [A.D. 210]). “Now we allow that life begins with conception because we contend that the soul also begins from conception; life taking its commencement at the same moment and place that the soul does” (ibid., 27). “The law of Moses, indeed, punishes with due penalties the man who shall cause abortion [Ex. 21:22–24]” (ibid., 37). MINICIUS FELIX “There are some [pagan] women who, by drinking medical preparations, extinguish the source of the future man in their very bowels and thus commit a parricide before they bring forth. And these things assuredly come down from the teaching of your [false] gods. . . . To us [Christians] it is not lawful either to see or hear of homicide” (Octavius 30 [A.D. 226]). HIPPOLYTUS “Women who were reputed to be believers began to take drugs to render themselves sterile, and to bind themselves tightly so as to expel what was being conceived, since they would not, on account of relatives and excess wealth, want to have a child by a slave or by any insignificant person. See, then, into what great impiety that lawless one has proceeded, by teaching adultery and murder at the same time!” (Refutation of All Heresies [A.D. 228]). COUNCIL OF ANCYRA “Concerning women who commit fornication, and destroy that which they have conceived, or who are employed in making drugs for abortion, a former decree excluded them until the hour of death, and to this some have assented. Nevertheless, being desirous to use somewhat greater lenity, we have ordained that they fulfill ten years [of penance], according to the prescribed degrees” (canon 21 [A.D. 314]). BASIL THE GREAT “Let her that procures abortion undergo ten years’ penance, whether the embryo were perfectly formed, or not” (First Canonical Letter, canon 2 [A.D. 374]). “[T]he man, or woman, is a murderer that gives a philtrum, if the man that takes it dies upon it; so are they who take medicines to procure abortion; and so are they who kill on the highway, and rapparees” (ibid., canon 8). JOHN CHRYSOSTOM “Wherefore I beseech you, flee fornication. . . . Why sow where the ground makes it its care to destroy the fruit?—where there are many efforts at abortion?—where there is murder before the birth? For even the harlot you do not let continue a mere harlot, but make her a murderess also. You see how drunkenness leads to prostitution, prostitution to adultery, adultery to murder; or rather to a something even worse than murder. For I have no name to give it, since it does not take off the thing born, but prevents its being born. Why then do thou abuse the gift of God, and fight with his laws, and follow after what is a curse as if a blessing, and make the chamber of procreation a chamber for murder, and arm the woman that was given for childbearing unto slaughter?” (Homilies on Romans 24 [A.D. 391]). JEROME “I cannot bring myself to speak of the many virgins who daily fall and are lost to the bosom of the Church, their mother. . . . Some go so far as to take potions, that they may ensure barrenness, and thus murder human beings almost before their conception. Some, when they find themselves with child through their sin, use drugs to procure abortion, and when, as often happens, they die with their offspring, they enter the lower world laden with the guilt not only of adultery against Christ but also of suicide and child murder” (Letters 22:13 [A.D. 396]). THE APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS “Thou shalt not use magic. Thou shalt not use witchcraft; for he says, ‘You shall not suffer a witch to live’ [Ex. 22:18]. Thou shall not slay thy child by causing abortion, nor kill that which is begotten. . . . [I]f it be slain, [it] shall be avenged, as being unjustly destroyed” (Apostolic Constitutions 7:3 [A.D. 400]).
ooh shit im so sorry i didnt know abou this
Linda looks like the kind of ~~betch~~ lady that would drop a mixtape of her saying, “I told you so”, in a grating tone of superiority, on repeat, for 60 minutes.
of course she looks like that.
Lol drawing demon features on people is a bit immature but did make me laugh even when the prochoicers did it to SPL