Understanding abortion, the Catechism and voting

[JacktheCatholic]

Here is what the Catechism says:


Abortion
2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.72
Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.73 My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.74

2271 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:
You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.75 God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.76

2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,"77 "by the very commission of the offense,"78 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.79 The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.
2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:
"The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death."80
"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights."81
2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.
Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, "if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual. . . . It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence."82
2275 "One must hold as licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not involve disproportionate risks for it, but are directed toward its healing the improvement of its condition of health, or its individual survival."83
"It is immoral to produce human embryos intended for exploitation as disposable biological material."84 "Certain attempts to influence chromosomic or genetic inheritance are not therapeutic but are aimed at producing human beings selected according to sex or other predetermined qualities. Such manipulations are contrary to the personal dignity of the human being and his integrity and identity"85 which are unique and unrepeatable.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Can supporting a candidate for election that approves of abortion be considered a mortal sin?

Can supporting a candidate for election that approves of abortion be grounds for excommunication?

Is "Pro-Choice" considered an approval for abortion?

Is "Pro-Life" considered an approval for abortion?


Please advise.

 

[MikeK]

Can supporting a candidate for election that approves of abortion be considered a mortal sin?

Under some circumstances, yes, this could be a mortal sin. Under other circumstances not.

Can supporting a candidate for election that approves of abortion be grounds for excommunication?

Under some circumstances, yes. Under other circumstances not.

Is "Pro-Choice" considered an approval for abortion?

I think so.

Is "Pro-Life" considered an approval for abortion?

"Pro-life" is a term that sems less well defined that "pro-choice". A pro-choicer specifically supports the right of a woman to choose to procure an abortion. So-called "pro-lifers" are all over the map. Some contend that favoring making abortion illegal (or evem just making it a state's rights issue) is sufficient to call oneself pro-life.

The definition I would use (and I suspect most other Catholics agree with me on this) is that in order to be pro-life, one must:

Support the right to life for all people from conception to natural death.

Oppose the death penalty except where absolutely necesarry. Most agree that it is not necesarry in developed countries.

Oppose Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide.

Oppose abortion.

Oppose unjust war.

Oppose embrionic stem cell research.

Oppose the proliferation and needless stockpiling of weapons of mass destruction.

Feed the hungry.

Heal the sick.

 

[William Putnam]

Can supporting a candidate for election that approves of abortion be considered a mortal sin?

It could be, if you intentionally vote for the person because of his/her abortion stance. However, as I understand it, some overwhelming reason that has a greater consequence (which I find hard to conceive) may be permissible. (I heard Archbishiop Caput of Denver speak of that, but I am not sure I quote him correctly.)

Can supporting a candidate for election that approves of abortion be grounds for excommunication?

The Church bends over backwards to avoid excommunicating anyone, even one who is a candidate who supports abortion. However, if the individual is most outspoken in his/her beliefs concerning abortion, that person can, after many warnings from the bishop of he diocese one lives in, can be excommunicated.

This happened in Corpus Christi, TX, by my former bishop (who was the founding bishop of the Diocese of Pensacola-Tallahassee, my home town) actually excommunicated a candidate for office when all efforts to get the individual to recant failed.

Again, is is actually quite rare, done only when the individual is so vocal about his/her stance as to be a great scandal. But one who has a abortion, assists in an abortion or even advises one to have an abortion, including attending nurses, automatically incurs excommunication, which can be absolved by the bishop of the diocese. At one time, as I understand it, such an absolution was "reserved to Rome" the sin is considered so great.

Is "Pro-Choice" considered an approval for abortion?

"Pro-Choice" is a euphemism, for "Pro-abortion."

Is "Pro-Life" considered an approval for abortion?

No, is the term used for those who are against abortion.

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+


Christus Vincit! Christus Regnat! Christus Imperat!

 

[D'Ann]

Can supporting a candidate for election that approves of abortion be considered a mortal sin?

This is a good question to ponder. I would ask your priest this question because as a lay person, my own personal opinion will show itself and that wouldn't be fair in answering your question.

Personally, I believe that abortion is so intrinsically evil and horrific and very much a genocide against unborn helpless babies... babies that should be protected by their mother and yet, for whatever reasons, the baby is rejected and unwanted by it's mother to the point of the mother having her baby aborted. Of course, when I look at society and the values that are taught to young ones, how can a young mother or any age mother not truly understand the intrinsical evil part of abortion when society teaches them that it's their own body and therefore, it's their choice and that the baby is only a blub of tissue. We need to re-educate what abortion truly is in order for people to realize how horrible it is.

That being said, I agree with Bill. I believe that if a candidate is proclaiming to be Catholic and then is actively involved in fighting for abortion and/or fighting for pro choice, which subsequently leads to abortion and like Bill said, if their bishop has given them many opportunities to recant, to develope a true conscience against abortion, if they continue on contradicting the very faith that they proclaim to be, then they can be excommunicated. But like Bill said, if the person comes to realize their error and truly with a remorseful heart in sincereness repents and confesses, there is always forgiveness and hope for a better tomorrow.

It is unusual though for a lay person to be excommunicated and it would only be done rarely and for an extremely good reason.

Can supporting a candidate for election that approves of abortion be grounds for excommunication?

This is a hard question because the real question is how much knowledge does an individual truly comprehend when it comes to abortion, how much culpability is there...

I believe that if I vote for a pro abortionist candidate, that I would be contradicting my Catholic faith and I believe that somehow that would be a grave and mortal sin for me because of what I know.

Like Bill said above, excommunicated a lay person does not happen very much at all and I don't believe it is grounds for a public excommunication.

Another good question would be, What does the word excommunication truly means?

I believe that we lay people excommunicate ourselves when we go against the fundamentals of the Catholic faith. So does the Church excommunicate people for voting for a pro abortion/pro choice candidate, most likely not, but I can't help but think that when a Catholic does this, that in a way, they have excommunicated themselves from one of the most basic Catholic teachings... All life is precious.

Is "Pro-Choice" considered an approval for abortion?

Indirectly, it is. That being said, pro-choice has other definitions as well. People who say they are pro-choice are truly saying that they believe that each individual has a right to make decisions about health issues in their own bodies. They are saying that a woman should have the right over her own body to decide what her own body should do or not do.

What they may not realize is by having this option, they are ignoring the rights of another human being that is apart of their body, but once a woman becomes pregnant, her body is NOT just her body anymore.

Also, in a way pro choice is a contradiction because while saying a person has a right over their own body, yet we are killing people in the hospices like the woman Teri. Michael, her husband, allowed her life support system to be pulled out and for weeks, they watched her starve to death and dehydrate to death and did nothing, and this is still going on, but much more rampantly than ever before and yet we do not hear about it on the news. I wonder why the media is ignoring this kind of issue. Why can a woman decide about her own body and yet others who are sick and on life support system have no rights over their own body? It's a contradiction.

All life is precious.

So in essence, the answer to the above question is an indirect yes.

Is "Pro-Life" considered an approval for abortion?


Please advise.

Now Jack, you know the answer to this one. Pro life is against abortion. Although, not everyone who claims to be pro life is completely pro life. Some are against abortion while they support pulling the plug on life support systems... we live in a world of contradictions and that is why we need to pray and pray and pray.

 

[TheCub]

As for me....On judgement day, I want to be able to say that I never knowingly voted or supported a pro-abortion politician.....which is why I will be writing in names this election.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

As for me....On judgement day, I want to be able to say that I never knowingly voted or supported a pro-abortion politician.....which is why I will be writing in names this election.

Vote for "JacktheCatholic" and vote Pro-Life. LOL

 

[Hooksta]

As for me....On judgement day, I want to be able to say that I never knowingly voted or supported a pro-abortion politician.....which is why I will be writing in names this election.

I'm not aware of any "pro-abortion" politicians. Why is term Pro-Choice so often mis-quoted has pro-abortion? What about voting for a politician that may be Pro-Life on abortion issues (and yet not actually do anything about it) but yet engage in voluntary wars like Iraq (as opposed to WWII), supports capital punishment, doesn't want to even discuss health care for all or take steps to help the homeless. I think the definition of being Pro-Life needs to revisited.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I'm not aware of any "pro-abortion" politicians. Why is term Pro-Choice so often mis-quoted has pro-abortion? What about voting for a politician that may be Pro-Life on abortion issues (and yet not actually do anything about it) but yet engage in voluntary wars like Iraq (as opposed to WWII), supports capital punishment, doesn't want to even discuss health care for all or take steps to help the homeless. I think the definition of being Pro-Life needs to revisited.

Pro-Choice means that the mother has the right to decide about the life of the baby. It should not be my mother's right or my father's right whether I live or die. That should be an exclusive right reserved for the individual. That is why Pro-Choice is not Pro-Life and it is Pro-Abortion.

 

[ukok]

Pro-Choice means that the mother has the right to decide about the life of the baby. It should not be my mother's right or my father's right whether I live or die. That should be an exclusive right reserved for the individual. That is why Pro-Choice is not Pro-Life and it is Pro-Abortion.

That's what makes the Pro-Choice brigade so laughable. They remove all choice from the baby. The baby doesn't get a say, has no rights, according to Pro-Choicers.

 

[Hooksta]

Point taken. The unborn doesn't have a choice...but that surely doesn't translate that everyone is for killing babies either. That seems to be a pretty broad brush your painting with. For me, Pro-Life should have a much greater definition and apply to more areas that soley of that of the unborn.

I know the normal drill, Republican's pander to the pro-life crowd to get votes but then never do all that much about it. Case in point, there has 20 years of Republican rule in the last 28 years and amazingly little to nothing has happened to overturn Roe v Wade. (Why should they fix an issue that gets them elected?)

What has happened instead is we elected a pro-life President who is really a pro-war President that has bankrupted our country in an unnecessary invasion of a country that was of no threat to us. This war has cost us precious human life and alienated us from nearly all of our allies around the world. He (and his advisors) have been asleep at the wheel with our economy, he supports capital punishment, is pro guns, has bared false witness on many occasions (WMD's in Iraq, Iraq is an "imminent" threat to us, "mission accomplished", Iraqi oil will pay for the war, we will be in and out). He does nothing towards providing health care to all or in caring for the homeless.

I don't know about you, but as a Chrisitan I believe going to war should be a last action. Iraq is certainly no WWII. What choice did the innocent Iraqi citizens have when we invaded? Surely you don't believe there have been no "innocent" causualties there.

We don't live in a vacuum. We can't just look with blinders on to protect the unborn and ignore the innocents that are alive with us. From the statistics I have seen abortion rates actually peaked under Reagan and Bush Sr and have declined steadily ever since. My point is not that the rate is more acceptable now, just that it was highest under the so-called Pro-Life guys we voted into office.

I can't post links yet...but if you google NRLC (dot) org/abortion/facts you will see the numbers.

Anyhow, surely abortion isn't the ONLY Christian principle we are challenged to uphold. I do not support abortion, but just because an elected leader does not want to overturn a decision made by our court system in a Democratic society does not mean that he wants to encourage (PRO) mothers to kill their babies. On the flip side, any person that decides to have an abortion will be judged by God, not by me. Just as Bush will be judged for his unnecessary slaughter of human life.

I agree with Mike K's response on page 1. It takes a lot more to be Pro-Life than just opposing abortion.

 

[Gwendolyn]

That's what makes the Pro-Choice brigade so laughable. They remove all choice from the baby. The baby doesn't get a say, has no rights, according to Pro-Choicers.

Because they don't consider it a person. They call it a "blob of cells". It doesn't have a developed brain to think, lungs to breathe, nervous system to feel pain... at least, not usually when they seek an abortion. It is easier for them to pretend that it is not a baby and that they are committing no evil, because removing a "blob of cells" is no different than excising an abscess in the abdominal cavity.

It makes me really, really sad.

 

[Rhamiel]

Gwendolyn

Because they don't consider it a person. They call it a "blob of cells". It doesn't have a developed brain to think, lungs to breathe, nervous system to feel pain... at least, not usually when they seek an abortion. It is easier for them to pretend that it is not a baby and that they are committing no evil, because removing a "blob of cells" is no different than excising an abscess in the abdominal cavity.

It makes me really, really sad.

that is the whole debate, when is a person a person. Science can not really help us with that, that is what is getting all these modern people in a fuss, we are used to just letting the scientific method do all the "heavy lifting" for us mentally, let those egghead geeks in white lab coats figure it out, but now the question is not how to split an atom or how to make a better car, now the question is "when is a person a person" and science aint got nothing on that.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Pro-Choice means that the mother has the right to decide about the life of the baby. It should not be my mother's right or my father's right whether I live or die. That should be an exclusive right reserved for the individual. That is why Pro-Choice is not Pro-Life and it is Pro-Abortion.

When it comes to her health, the mother along with the advice of the doctor, should have the right to chose what the best thing to do is. Not some government bureaucrat.

Too often, when we think of the term abortion, we think of a women who got pregnant without being ready to raise a child, deciding to terminate the pregnancy.

This is true for many abortions done in abortion clinics like Planned Parenthood, but its not the case of many other women, who find themselves in a hospital, having to terminate a pregnancy for a baby they very much desired to have. This decision should absolutely be left up to the woman and her doctor.



Jim

 

[JacktheCatholic]

When it comes to her health, the mother along with the advice of the doctor, should have the right to chose what the best thing to do is. Not some government bureaucrat.

Too often, when we think of the term abortion, we think of a women who got pregnant without being ready to raise a child, deciding to terminate the pregnancy.

This is true for many abortions done in abortion clinics like Planned Parenthood, but its not the case of many other women, who find themselves in a hospital, having to terminate a pregnancy for a baby they very much desired to have. This decision should absolutely be left up to the woman and her doctor.



Jim

Jim,

I think it is important to remind everyone that the Catholic Church has the right and obligation to advise in things of moral and ethics. Abortion is one of these areas. The Catholic Church has declared abortion to be a grave sin and one that involves excommunication. So it is nothing of small interest.

I agree that Politicians should not base this on personal opinion. Instead they should look to God for guidance and this means the Catholic Church which is the voice of God.

So, with 95% of the abortions in the USA being for social reasons I see this topic (as do Bishops and Cardinals) to be of paramount importance in the coming election. It is considered a grave sin to vote for abortion and pro-choice is for abortion. Need I say more?

In Christ,

Jack

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Gwendolyn
that is the whole debate, when is a person a person. Science can not really help us with that, that is what is getting all these modern people in a fuss, we are used to just letting the scientific method do all the "heavy lifting" for us mentally, let those egghead geeks in white lab coats figure it out, but now the question is not how to split an atom or how to make a better car, now the question is "when is a person a person" and science aint got nothing on that.

We as Catholics believe that a person becomes a person at conception.

However, not all religions believe this. Jews believe that pre-viable fetuses are not persons yet.

Others, believe that a baby doesn't become person until it could survive outside the womb, without requiring extreme medical procedures.

Its why, the abortion issue will never be solved in the political arena. It must be solved by placing the morality of abortion, into the conscience of women and men. Until a woman understands what an abortion is, she will not make a decision based on a well-formed conscience.

Jim

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Jim,

I think it is important to remind everyone that the Catholic Church has the right and obligation to advise in things of moral and ethics. Abortion is one of these areas. The Catholic Church has declared abortion to be a grave sin and one that involves excommunication. So it is nothing of small interest.

I agree that Politicians should not base this on personal opinion. Instead they should look to God for guidance and this means the Catholic Church which is the voice of God.

So, with 95% of the abortions in the USA being for social reasons I see this topic (as do Bishops and Cardinals) to be of paramount importance in the coming election. It is considered a grave sin to vote for abortion and pro-choice is for abortion. Need I say more?

In Christ,

Jack

\


The problem is, the Church is using the term "Abortion," in narrow terms, and from a historical perspective where the term was used at a time, when a woman could not abort a baby, regardless of the stage of pregnancy, even to save her own life. The Church at one time, treated a woman's life was secondary to the life of the baby. Heck, in those days, a woman's life was secondary to the sexual desires of her husband and abuse was accepted.

Jim

 

[JacktheCatholic]

\


The problem is, the Church is using the term "Abortion," in narrow terms, and from a historical perspective where the term was used at a time, when a woman could not abort a baby, regardless of the stage of pregnancy, even to save her own life. The Church at one time, treated a woman's life was secondary to the life of the baby. Heck, in those days, a woman's life was secondary to the sexual desires of her husband and abuse was accepted.

Jim

Jim,

In the early church and when the Didache was written there were abortions as we know them today. Women could eat a herb that would induce a miscarriage or abortion. So, abortion is nothing new. Only the methods have changed.

God Bless,

Jack

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Jim,

In the early church and when the Didache was written there were abortions as we know them today. Women could eat a herb that would induce a miscarriage or abortion. So, abortion is nothing new. Only the methods have changed.

God Bless,

Jack

I understand that, and the term "abortion" was used to describe the termination of an unwanted pregnancy, not those that are used for medical reasons, which science was pretty limited on.

As I said, the Church today, uses the term abortion narrowly, in the construct as described above, not in the actual terms used by doctors and lawyers.

Until very recently, if a woman went into labor and there were complications, killing the mother in order to save the life of the baby, was not only acceptable, but preferable.

Jim

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I understand that, and the term "abortion" was used to describe the termination of an unwanted pregnancy, not those that are used for medical reasons, which science was pretty limited on.

As I said, the Church today, uses the term abortion narrowly, in the construct as described above, not in the actual terms used by doctors and lawyers.

Until very recently, if a woman went into labor and there were complications, killing the mother in order to save the life of the baby, was not only acceptable, but preferable.

Jim

Jim,

The Catholic Church has not been narrow minded about abortion. The cases where a mother's life is at risk has been stated and addressed numerous times. You are now making something out of nothing.

Forgive me,

Jack