Wednesday 15 August 2007
"Pro-life" movement
One branch of Catholic activism I take issue with is the "pro-life" movement. People who identify themselves as "pro-life" often take stances that I regard as anything but "pro-life". They would deny people the chance of preventing the transmission of deadly viruses, they would deny a mother the chance of life and having more children. I am pro-life in the real sense of the word, but I would not want to assoicate myself with the "pro-life" movement.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I'd be interested to hear more about your views. Are you for the use of stem cells from aborted babies? Is that what you meant by preventing the spread of deadly viruses or am I missing something.
You said "They would deny a mother the chance of life and having more children." I am curious as to what you mean by that. I too am a convert and found your blog through the Catholic Converts site. I too am a newbie there.
Blessings,
Heather
Hi Heather - when I mentioned about the spread of deadly viruses, I meant the use of condoms to prevent HIV transmission. Which do work, even though some pro-lifers argue they don't on very dubious grounds.
The other situation I referred to was the rare scenario where a mother has a life-threatening complication of pregnancy, where the only chance to save her life is to have an abortion. Incredibly rare admittedly, but on a point of principle I believe it is more authentically pro-life to try and save one life.
Thanks for clarifying. Condoms wouldn't be necessary for preventing HIV transmission if the Church's view of sexuality was practiced. Unfortunately, that is not the case.
In regards to the second situation, it is certainly a tough call and I understand your frustration. In those cases it is usually a late-term abortion and that is all the more heart breaking.
Blessings,
Heather
Re condoms - that doesn't help the women who are faithful but become victims of someone else's sins! Having looked after terminal HIV patients (in the days before effective treatment was available), I know what a dreadful disease AIDS is, and the Christian and compassionate thing is to avoid people suffering this disease.
Hi, i read your blog and agree with len and heather, If one obeys God's law and the laws of the church there would be no use for condoms in those that had premarital sex or who are married as married people are with one another exclusively, if they are not and cheat and feel the need to use a condom they should meet with a catholic marriage counsler as they or one of the partners is not keeping with gods laws one wife, one husband. I too have a background in medicine and have seen much but wh give peole a reson to no take responsibilities for thier actions if they did there would be no televison shows that make money off of "married" people who dont know who the father of the baby is "who babies daddy?" it is disgusting non responsibility makes money for talk shows, pharmacies, and forces young teens to have to grow up fast if the laws of our Lord were taught in the home early maybe we wouldnt have such amessed up society.
What an interesting comment on your blog!! I am a convert also.
You mention that people should be protected from the results that other people's sins can cause. I suppose an example would be the woman whose adulterous spouse infects her with HIV? The problem with this example is that in reality such a man would not openly admit to an affair so that the wife wouldn't know to protect herself in the first place. So condom use wouldn't really be an option.
Is there another scenario that I am missing?
Good Discussion point, though.
Have you looked up the exact Church teaching on life of the mother versus child? There is a teaching called "double effect" that might be the sort of circumstance that you are talking about.
A good example is ectopic pregnancy. A Catholic would not be able to take the medication (sorry, I forget the name) that "dissolves" the pregnancy. But removing the tube is allowed? Why? Because you aren't intending to kill the baby. You are removed a diseased organ. The unintended side effect is that the baby dies.
Try this link for a better explanation.
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/
2006/0609uan.asp
Kelly, I know the EXACT teaching of the Church, and why it is illogical and inconsistent. Double effect wouold actually mandate the mother dying in most cases of ectopic pregnancy. The church's position is a fudge.
As for people claiming that condoms won't save lives, or that condoms aren't necessary if people follow the church's teachings, try telling that to the many innocent victims of HIV who have not committed any sin. Saying condoms would not make any difference ignores the experience of the experts in the field. Trying to force people to obey the church's teachings by denying them condoms and increasing their chance of a horrible death from AIDS seems quite sadistic.
Post a Comment