Jump to content

Roe v. Wade is dead

Subzwari1987
 Share

Recommended Posts

Nokra

Nokra

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, skillzdadirecta said:

My mother was 14 when she got pregnant with me and I was born just shy of her 15th birthday.  Roe was already established at that point and if she wanted, she could have aborted me but she didn't.  I'm glad she didn't because I wouldn't be here otherwise, but I'm also glad the decision was ultimately up to her. Fuck this person.

Right. They're all about "freedumb", until it comes to someone else's freedom to choose something they don't like. :/ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
crispy4000

crispy4000

Posted
Posted
On 5/6/2022 at 8:23 AM, SuperSpreader said:

Catholics view all contraception as an abortion-lite.

 

Saw this and figured I'd clarify, so you all know our actual definitions. ;)

Most methods of contraception are viewed by the Catholic Church as just that, contraception.  Basically, if you take a medicine or use a condom in effort to keep a new human life forming from sex, you've tried to contracept.  According to Catholic teaching, if you did something in attempt to kill it just in case, or to give it almost no chance to keep living, you've aborted it if it dies in consequence.

It's possible for this to happen unintentionally - typically if someone doesn't know it's a fail-safe feature of whatever contraception was used.  There's thought to be much less culpability in that.  Though the church would still say an abortion happened: because the drug's fail-safe is the cause of death, by design.  Technically someone could use the same drug and it ends up working contraceptively, in which case, they contracepted.

A woman who is raped could receive a contraceptive licitly according to Catholic ethics.  As long as whatever is done doesn't have a post conception fail-safe, it's kosher (ie: killing sperm, preventing ovulation and/or fertilization).  When sex isn't consensual, contraception is considered a moral option.

Catholic teaching also allows for a person to take birth control licitly if it's to principally address other health issues such as endo, and its the best option for it.  There's also cases of ectopic pregnancies, where surgeries are okay if they attempt to save the mother's life, even if the unborn dies as a secondary result.  Same with chemotherapy, etc.

Last thing: Most Catholics aren't well versed on this.  I wouldn't blame anyone here for disagreeing with the principles of any of it, we're all entitled to our own.  But if you hear a Catholic saying all contraceptives should be banned, they're speaking from personal bias and poor catechesis.

 

On 5/6/2022 at 7:50 PM, Massdriver said:

If I understand and remember Roman Catholicism, contraception and masturbation are on the same list of grave sins as abortion and murder. Not going to mass on a day of obligation is also on there. Keep in mind being on this list coupled with another two conditions makes such acts a mortal sin, as in if you don’t get to confession before you die, you’re going to hell, not purgatory.  Not many people in the pews believe this stuff but it’s there. 

 

Whew, most of that is off the mark in a game of telephone kind of way.

There's mortal and venial sins, but it has more to do with how much on a whim you decide to do it.  Mortal sins are worse, but not all are equal, by any means. (see: Judas)  Only in that it's taught you should confess them directly.

Catholic teaching isn't that having mortal sin when you die means you go straight to hell.  Purgatory would be the process of rectifying that before you go to Heaven.  Hell is for the unrepentant.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Uaarkson

Uaarkson

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

 

Saw this and figured I'd clarify, so you all know our actual definitions. ;)

Most methods of contraception are viewed by the Catholic Church as just that, contraception.  Basically, if you take a medicine or use a condom in effort to keep a new human life forming from sex, you've tried to contracept.  According to Catholic teaching, if you did something in attempt to kill it just in case, or to give it almost no chance to keep living, you've aborted it if it dies in consequence.

It's possible for this to happen unintentionally - typically if someone doesn't know it's a fail-safe feature of whatever contraception was used.  There's thought to be much less culpability in that.  Though the church would still say an abortion happened: because the drug's fail-safe is the cause of death, by design.  Technically someone could use the same drug and it ends up working contraceptively, in which case, they contracepted.

A woman who is raped could receive a contraceptive licitly according to Catholic ethics.  As long as whatever is done doesn't have a post conception fail-safe, it's kosher (ie: killing sperm, preventing ovulation and/or fertilization).  When sex isn't consensual, contraception is considered a moral option.

Catholic teaching also allows for a person to take birth control licitly if it's to principally address other health issues such as endo, and its the best option for it.  There's also cases of ectopic pregnancies, where surgeries are okay if they attempt to save the mother's life, even if the unborn dies as a secondary result.  Same with chemotherapy, etc.

Last thing: Most Catholics aren't well versed on this.  I wouldn't blame anyone here for disagreeing with the principles of any of it, we're all entitled to our own.  But if you hear a Catholic saying all contraceptives should be banned, they're speaking from personal bias and poor catechesis.

 

 

Whew, most of that is off the mark in a game of telephone kind of way.

There's mortal and venial sins, but it has more to do with how much on a whim you decide to do it.  Mortal sins are worse, but not all are equal, by any means. (see: Judas)  Only in that it's taught you should confess them directly.

Catholic teaching isn't that having mortal sin when you die means you go straight to hell.  Purgatory would be the process of rectifying that before you go to Heaven.  Hell is for the unrepentant.


What a bunch of horseshit. Religion is cancer 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • True 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites
crispy4000

crispy4000

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Uaarkson said:


What a bunch of horseshit. Religion is cancer 

 

Not trying to convince anyone otherwise. Just clarifying the misconceptions here, as there is.
 

I’d be surprised if you all didn’t hate it regardless.  It’s a pro-life religion in the wake of Roe being likely overturned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Massdriver

Massdriver

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

 

Saw this and figured I'd clarify, so you all know our actual definitions. ;)

Most methods of contraception are viewed by the Catholic Church as just that, contraception.  Basically, if you take a medicine or use a condom in effort to keep a new human life forming from sex, you've tried to contracept.  According to Catholic teaching, if you did something in attempt to kill it just in case, or to give it almost no chance to keep living, you've aborted it if it dies in consequence.

It's possible for this to happen unintentionally - typically if someone doesn't know it's a fail-safe feature of whatever contraception was used.  There's thought to be much less culpability in that.  Though the church would still say an abortion happened: because the drug's fail-safe is the cause of death, by design.  Technically someone could use the same drug and it ends up working contraceptively, in which case, they contracepted.

A woman who is raped could receive a contraceptive licitly according to Catholic ethics.  As long as whatever is done doesn't have a post conception fail-safe, it's kosher (ie: killing sperm, preventing ovulation and/or fertilization).  When sex isn't consensual, contraception is considered a moral option.

Catholic teaching also allows for a person to take birth control licitly if it's to principally address other health issues such as endo, and its the best option for it.  There's also cases of ectopic pregnancies, where surgeries are okay if they attempt to save the mother's life, even if the unborn dies as a secondary result.  Same with chemotherapy, etc.

Last thing: Most Catholics aren't well versed on this.  I wouldn't blame anyone here for disagreeing with the principles of any of it, we're all entitled to our own.  But if you hear a Catholic saying all contraceptives should be banned, they're speaking from personal bias and poor catechesis.

 

 

Whew, most of that is off the mark in a game of telephone kind of way.

There's mortal and venial sins, but it has more to do with how much on a whim you decide to do it.  Mortal sins are worse, but not all are equal, by any means. (see: Judas)  Only in that it's taught you should confess them directly.

Catholic teaching isn't that having mortal sin when you die means you go straight to hell.  Purgatory would be the process of rectifying that before you go to Heaven.  Hell is for the unrepentant.

Where am I going wrong? It must be a grave sin and two other conditions must be met, that is full knowledge and complete consent. Once a sin is mortal, the only way to repent is through confessing. Venial sins do not require confession. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
crispy4000

crispy4000

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Massdriver said:

Where am I going wrong? It must be a grave sin and two other conditions must be met, that is full knowledge and complete consent. Once a sin is mortal, the only way to repent is through confessing. Venial sins do not require confession. 


I already said it.  You can go to purgatory with mortal sin, receive absolution, and reach heaven thereafter.  Mortal sins are absolved in confession, as you say, but are not all weighted equally in their degree of offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Massdriver

Massdriver

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:


I already said it.  You can go to purgatory with mortal sin.  Mortal sins are absolved in confession, as you say, but are not weighted equally in their degree of offense.  Christ spoke of some sins being greater offenses, and stealing a toothbrush does not make you Judas.

I guess I was taught catechism incorrectly. I was taught purgatory was for purification, not for repentance.   
 

To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God's merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. 


Can you point me to a source from the RCC that states you can go to purgatory with a mortal sin without repenting? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
crispy4000

crispy4000

Posted
Posted
Just now, Massdriver said:

I guess I was taught catechism incorrectly. I was taught purgatory was for purification, not for repentance.   
 

To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God's merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. 


Can you point me to a source from the RCC that states you can go to purgatory with a mortal sin without repenting? 

 

Without being repentant?  No.  I actually do think you’re right here, will concede that.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Massdriver

Massdriver

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

 

Without being repentant?  No.  I actually do think you’re right here, will concede that.

 

Then the question is do you have to go to confession to properly repent a mortal sin. I believe the RCC would say yes unless it’s not physically or mentally possible for one to get to confession. 
 

Quote

1456 Confession to a priest is an essential part of the sacrament of Penance: "All mortal sins of which penitents after a diligent self-examination are conscious must be recounted by them in confession, even if they are most secret and have been committed against the last two precepts of the Decalogue; for these sins sometimes wound the soul more grievously and are more dangerous than those which are committed openly."54

 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
crispy4000

crispy4000

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, Massdriver said:

Then the question is do you have to go to confession to properly repent a mortal sin. I believe the RCC would say yes unless it’s not physically or mentally possible for one to get to confession. 
 

 


 


Not mentally or physically able, yes.  (cc 1452) That has been argued to include those who aren’t Catholic, if they make a “perfect” contrition in whatever way God may accept.

  • True 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Massdriver

Massdriver

Posted
Posted
220506202633-02-republicans-roe-v-wade-m

GOP still favored in midterms, despite possible overturning of Roe v. Wade - CNNPolitics

AMP.CNN.COM
The recent leak of a draft US Supreme Court opinion that would overturn Roe v. Wade seemed to give Democrats a winning issue to rally base and swing voters in the midterm elections. But...

The early evidence seems to indicate that there won’t be a polling bump from this for Democrats. I think it’s plausible that this will improve turnout and fundraising over the next few years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chairslinger

Chairslinger

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Jason said:

Threaten them early and often, actually. 

 

 

 

 

If not for a bit of timing the ruling would be almost completely male vs. female.

 

If Breyer had retired just a bit quicker it would have been 3 women in dissent vs. 5 men and 1 woman in the decision(depending on whatever meaningless concurrence or dissent Roberts decides to do).

 

I mean, the Alito decision is truly despicable, but I understand if there is a unique dislike for Justice I Like Beer deciding the bodily autonomy for every woman in the country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SaysWho?

SaysWho?

Posted
Posted
FEDXX2GMWAI6ZN7OOTYJ3AT4UY.jpg&w=1440

Opinion | The Supreme Court’s anti-democratic actions extend far beyond Roe - The Washington Post

WWW.WASHINGTONPOST.COM
The high court’s conservative majority has sabotaged all manner of democratically enacted laws.

 

Quote

Conservatives hate it when anyone points out this truth: Three of the five reportedly anti-Roe justices were named by a president who lost the popular vote by 2.9 million and were confirmed by senators representing a minority of the nation’s population.

 

Or that one of the vacancies was created by then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s blockade against Merrick Garland’s nomination in the final year of Barack Obama’s presidency. And then came McConnell’s reversal on the issue of letting an election happen before a justice was confirmed. He rushed Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination through in 2020 just days before the voters chose Joe Biden.


The import of this seizure of the court was already obvious in decisions involving voting rights, religion, the environment and more. 

 

Quote

Thus the problem with the question posed by Alito’s defenders: Can it be anti-democratic to throw the abortion issue back to state legislatures? It’s not just that most people plainly disagree with ending Roe. It’s also the extreme selectivity of the judicial right where democracy is concerned.

The court’s conservative majority has sabotaged all manner of democratically enacted laws: environmental and labor regulations, limits on the role of money in politics. The court’s decisions on voting rights and gerrymandering are anti-democratic on their face since they enable minority rule in the states that would be legislating on abortion. And the justices’ refusal to be candid about their designs on Roe matters. They prioritized their own confirmations over the imperative of a necessary national dialogue on the flaws and virtues of a controversial ruling they apparently intended to scrap.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Comet

Comet

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

Joe, go fuck yourself - you out of touch, older-than-dirt, upper-class, heterosexual, white man.

 

_124651740_protest.jpg

President Biden criticises abortion protests at judges' houses

WWW.BBC.COM
Pro-choice activists marched to the homes of two conservative Supreme Court justices this weekend.

 

Never had to fight to defend himself, it clearly shows 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Commissar SFLUFAN

Commissar SFLUFAN

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Comet said:

Never had to fight to defend himself, it clearly shows 

 

Absolutely clearly.

 

Yes, he's experienced significant tragedy in his life -- no one should diminish or take that away from him -- but this response is so goddamned tone deaf beyond all reasonable expectation.

 

This is why "liberals" lose - they just can't comprehend righteous anger, fury, and indignation.

  • Like 1
  • True 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...