Absolute Prohibition of Abortion

[Diogenes]

One question for debate is whether Islam and the Roman Catholic church prohibit abortion in all cases.* They both appear to, even to save the mother's life. The RC view is nuanced, perhaps using disingenuous logic.#

Assuming these two major religions DO prohibit abortion even to save the life of the mother, as well as in the cases of rape and incest, how can this prohibition be morally justified?


_________________
*

"Never and in no case has the Church taught that the life of the child must be preferred to that of the mother. It is erroneous to put the question with this alternative: either the life of the child or that of the mother. No, neither the life of the mother nor that of the child can be subjected to direct suppression. In the one case as in the other, there can be but one obligation: to make every effort to save the lives of both, of the mother and the child." (Pope Pius XII, Allocution to the Association of Large Families, AAS (1951), XLIII, p. 855.)

#

The only ethically justified understanding of this much-celebrated exception shows that it is not an exception at all! The classical example of an ectopic pregnancy or the example of the cancerous uterus, which allow the surgeon, ethically, to remove the woman's damaged reproductive organs in order to save her life, should not be used as examples of abortion, even though a baby's life is terminated in the progress.

https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/librar ... ther-12052

[JehovahsWitness]

..When you use "I" in comments ...

When I used the word "I" or "myself "(in the context of this discussion), it was used by me to include all those that belong to me (my immediate family that is dependent on my decisions) . Please take note for future reference.

..if you could prevent such an attack on your family (not on you) you'd still step back and let it happen [?]

ANSWER: No. Please see post #93 for the reasons why my answer is no.
viewtopic.php?p=1100287#p1100287

JW


RELATED POSTS


Does reacting to the actions of others represent impeding on the exercise of their free will?
viewtopic.php?p=1100340#p1100340

Does the bible prohibit self defence?
viewtopic.php?p=1100287#p1100287

[Miles]

Miles wrote:
..if you could prevent such an attack on your family (not on you) you'd still step back and let it happen [?]

ANSWER: No. Please see post #93 for the reasons why my answer is no.

I see. Problem was that in post #95 you said "If someone used their free will to attack me or my family, they would have to face the consequences of my calling the police, trying to get away or in extreme cases defending myself." which up this point (p. 95) in our conversation you had not said your use of "myself" was used to include all those that belong to you. Hence, giving the impression that in extreme cases you would not be defending your family, only yourself.


However, you also say . . .

..When you use "I" in comments ...

When I used the word "I" or "myself "(in the context of this discussion), it was used by me to include all those that belong to me (my immediate family that is dependent on my decisions) . Please take note for future reference.

So when you say things such as

"I have already said I would never put my personal welfare above the life of any child, born or unborn." (p. 83) or

"I am not the master of anyone's will except my own." (p. 91), or

"I choose to always obey the law." (p. 95) or

"I use the expression "free will" to refer to the ability/ capacity to make a choice." (p. 97), or

"I have already addressed that point (see the last line in post #95) (p.99)

You also mean that . . .

They (your family) have already said they would never put their personal welfare above the life of any child, born or unborn.

They are not the master of anyone's will except their own.

They choose to always obey the law

They use the expression "free will" to refer to the ability/ capacity to make a choice.

They have already addressed that point (see the last line in post #95)

Is it common for you to speak for your entire family like this? And how can you be sure this is what they actually do or have done?


.

[JehovahsWitness]

Miles wrote:
..if you could prevent such an attack on your family (not on you) you'd still step back and let it happen [?]

ANSWER: No. Please see post #93 for the reasons why my answer is no.

I see. Problem was that in post #95 you said "If someone used their free will to attack me or my family, they would have to face the consequences of my calling the police, trying to get away or in extreme cases defending myself." which up this point (p. 95) in our conversation you had not said your use of "myself" was used to include all those that belong to you. Hence, giving the impression that in extreme cases you would not be defending your family, only yourself.

Well I hope my subsequent explaination has cleared up that misunderstanding.



JW

[Miles]

Miles wrote:
..if you could prevent such an attack on your family (not on you) you'd still step back and let it happen [?]

ANSWER: No. Please see post #93 for the reasons why my answer is no.

I see. Problem was that in post #95 you said "If someone used their free will to attack me or my family, they would have to face the consequences of my calling the police, trying to get away or in extreme cases defending myself." which up this point (p. 95) in our conversation you had not said your use of "myself" was used to include all those that belong to you. Hence, giving the impression that in extreme cases you would not be defending your family, only yourself.

Well I hope my subsequent explaination has cleared up that misunderstanding.

It has, except for answering my two questions:

.......Is it common for you to speak for your entire family like this?

.......And how can you be sure this is what they actually do or have done?

.

[JehovahsWitness]

...note here: 1) the price is not that "ultimate" if you are right about an afterlife.

Ultimate in the biblical sense

JOHN 15:13

Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends

JW

[Bust Nak]

I am not the master of anyone's will except my own. I believe others should be free to make their own choices and face the consequences thereof, whether that be befor the law of the land or their maker.

Okay, I understand that Jehovah's Witnesses tend to not get involved in politics. Do you vote? Point being that voting influences the law of the land, it can be argued that people are not free to make their choice if the law of the land forbids it.

[JehovahsWitness]

I am not the master of anyone's will except my own. I believe others should be free to make their own choices and face the consequences thereof, whether that be befor the law of the land or their maker.

Okay, I understand that Jehovah's Witnesses tend to not get involved in politics. Do you vote? Point being that voting influences the law of the land, it can be argued that people are not free to make their choice if the law of the land forbids it.

No, Jehovah's Witnesses do not vote and we remain strictly neutral when it comes to politics. We certainly will never be seen demonstrating to change abortion laws or any other laws for that matter. If we influence others hopefully it is by living lives in line with bible principles and sharing the good news with people during the course of our Christian ministry.

[Bust Nak]

No, Jehovah's Witnesses do not vote and we remain strictly neutral when it comes to politics. We certainly will never be seen demonstrating to change abortion laws or any other laws for that matter. If we influence others hopefully it is by living lives in line with bible principles and sharing the good news with people during the course of our Christian ministry.

I just thought I better check with each individual because the watch tower stated this when ask about voting, "as to whether they will personally vote for someone running in an election, each one of Jehovahs Witnesses makes a decision based on his Bible-trained conscience and an understanding of his responsibility to God and to the State..."

Good to see that regardless of your view on abortion itself, you are pro-choice. Double thumbs up, I mean it.