No it isn’t. This is fun. Nope. All murders are mortal sins. It’s irrelevant whether the murderer thinks the victim is “guilty” of something. Humans are forbidden by Christ to make judgements on who should live or die except when it’s necessary to protect the lives of one’s self or others.
I think this is a distinction basically without a difference, The Pope is the official spokesperson for the Church and is Christ’s own delegated mouthpiece on Earth. By the way, Pope digs Obama, Obama won the majority of the Catholic vote in the election and his current approval rating among Catholics is a gaudy 67%. The small group of whinging, hypocritical, grandstanding, children who protested the President’s appearance today are out of step with their own Pope (Christ’s personal representative under the very doctrine they say they care so much about), and with the vast majority of their own co-believers.
Most people who are pro-choice say they are not pro-abortion. I am the exception, not the rule. I think there should be a lot more abortions, and I think, in some cases, women should be rewarded with cash for terminating pregnancies (I’m talking about crackheads and the like, and I’d also require that they get their tubes tied).
I agree, and also believe that forcible tube-tying would save the government a fuck of a lot of money in certain instances. The government pays for the procedure, you reap the benefits (keep on fucking). Win win.
Although this idea would never fly. Waaaaay too controversial and…like China.
Edit: I don’t think there should be MORE abortions, nor should there ever be FORCED abortions, but regulating pregnancies with proven welfare abusers is something I could get behind, if it could (unlikely ) ever be implemented properly.
No, the difference is that a fetus will certainly become a person and cannot commit a crime, while the convicted mass-murderer is already a person and deserves the forfeiture of his/hers life if convicted of heinous crimes.
Basically, I’m with you, Diogenes, and I think the Catholic Church’s all-but-explicit endorsement of the Republican Party under cover of being “pro-life” is cowardly and contrary to everything the Church teaches. I say this as an observant Catholic.
That said, there is a difference between the Pope and some (or even most) bishops condemning the war in Iraq and it being official Church teaching that this war is wrong. It is true that there is an “official” Church position on what constitutes a just war, and that this war doesn’t meet the criteria, but that has nothing to do with anything this Pope said.
The Pope may be “Christ’s own delegated mouthpiece on Earth” (not entirely sure what you understand that to mean, but OK, for the sake of argument), but that doesn’t mean that everything he says is infallible, is binding Church teaching, or even, for that matter, makes much sense.
Sorry, I’m a bit incoherent – I’ve been working 14 hours straight. Just taking a break.
So where were all the good Catholics in 2001 when George W. Bush gave the commencement speech and received an honorary degree? Bush was and is an enthusiastic proponent of the death penalty, which is officially condemned by the Pope and the Catholic church. Why was the integrity of Catholic doctrine not in danger when a death penalty proponent was given an honorary degree? Why is that any different from the abortion issue and Obama?
I’m in favor of abortion whenever and wherever the pregnant woman wants it and/or the treating physician deems it medically necessary, which is exactly the position of all good and decent people. Without exception.
No, it isn’t.