UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting

is central to the abortion issue...i.e. If a woman is Forced or Coerced into a pregnancy she never wanted, MUST she carry it to term and be denied the option of an abortion by our government?...Yes or No?...and if No, explain why...expect a reply.

Note:...As I've documented previously...at any point in time, there are on the order of 6M women who have been Forced or Coerced into a pregnancy at sometime during their reproductive lives...

(no message)

(no message)

denouncing him for his charitably "Shoddy" work months before I joined the UHND OF...Should they ever change their minds, let me know and I'll consider reading that as of now, totally worthless Opinion piece.

I know that your feelings are hurt...get over it...Dr. Risch seems to have.

sure that if you had a good answer to the question you'd be all over it in a heartbeat...but that's not happening, so I have to assume that you're the one who's "Bugged" by that query.

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

Americans believe that abortion should be illegal in ALL cases…this puts you in very small minority.

Given that overwhelming evidence it behooves you to understand why you are so out of step with the clear moral judgement on this issue…I’m trying to help you get that understanding, so that we can ALL move forward in the effort to REDUCE the number of abortions…without denying women control of their own reproductive decision making.

IMO, the way to do that is through widespread Sex and Sexuality Education for all ages…widespread access to Contraceptives…and widespread programs that make it tenable for women to carry their pregnancies to term.

In an moral world, we would not solve our problems by killing innocent children. So, yes, abortion would not be an option in a moral world, and the law would not condone or allow it. The woman would instead receive the loving support of all those around her, as Catholic doctrine requires.

Now, answer the complementary question which is even more central to abortion: If a woman engages in voluntary sex and gets pregnant, should she be able to kill the baby? Yes or no?...and if yes, explain why...and then explain why you always ask your question since your question ceases to be a special case if you support abortion in all other cases.

While we share the Catholic faith, the nation has many other faiths…or none at all…that do not believe Personhood begins at conception…and in fact the RCC, as I’ve documented, has never taught that it did. Therefore, the accusation killing is not valid prior to that Personhood.

Next, in order to establish pregnancy from consensual sex it would be necessary to legally “process” ALL women seeking abortion….unacceptable and impractical.

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.

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you."

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."

Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.

2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. ... The Church ... 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."

"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."

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.


Link: https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resource/55003/abortion-catechism-of-the-catholic-church

Then we don't have to listen to you try to lead people astray, and after all, my legal position on abortion is not based on religion. I don't try to have the state regulate purely religious matters; for example, I would oppose any legislation requiring you to attend church on Sunday. That is a religious issue, and it would be improper for the state to regulate such behavior. But homicide is a type of behavior which is properly regulated by the state.

Science demonstrates that a new human has been created, one with a unique set of DNA. So, abortion ends the life of a human being. That is not a question or an opinion or a religious viewpoint. We know this to be true, objectively.

Now, two basic premises of our laws as a civilized society. Let me know if you disagree with one or both:
- The law should not strip individual humans of their individual human rights.
- The law should not transfer harm from one individual to an innocent individual. If harm can be transferred, it can only be transferred to a guilty individual. Otherwise, it must remain with the first victim, to avoid creating additional victims.

Homicide is properly regulated by the State. Science shows us that abortion is just one type of homicide. Any moral legal system should prevent society from killing innocent people as an intended goal. Just like first degree murder is not left to individual beliefs (because the state wants to stop innocent people from being killed), the same is true for abortion (assuming the state wants to stop innocent people from being killed).

special cases…especially given that rapes and coerced pregnancies in marriage are significantly under reported. I suspect you recognize the need for “Prudential Judgment” and Justice for women in those all too frequent situations, which immediately brings the option of abortion into play…but instead of acknowledging it you jump to accidental pregnancies, leaving a huge hole in the decision making process.

That hole allows the government to enter the picture and subject all women to scrutiny including the “Forced and Coerced”…a scrutiny that cannot possibly be resolved in the limited time available…and even women who are enduring miscarriages get caught up in this unjustified intrusion…you’ve already seen how bizarre this can get.

I’ll stop here for the moment and hope you internalize what I’ve said thus far…feel free to question any of it …there’s much more to discuss …just stay with me for some backup reasoning.

The law does not allow transferring a harm from one innocent person to another innocent person. That is what abortion does, which is why abortion is an improper use of government force to victimize innocent people. Harm must be addressed at the point it is first visited on the first victim; we should not create more victims, thereby expanding the harm.

I'll pause and let you internalize that.

(no message)

Don't tell me you are going to pull your usual tactic of pretending I don't respond, even though I respond directly, just so you can avoid answering my question. So tedious and disingenuous.

involves the one un-debated Person you never mention...The Woman.

(no message)

recognize someone who did so much to make that happen. Plus, Dickie is a stalwart against taking away health tax credits from families with a combined household income of $300k per year. Social justice!

Interestingly, Illinois hides racial data when it releases abortion statistics. I guess they are trying to hide this fact. But, nationally, black unborn children are killed at higher rates than unborn children of other races...more than double that of other racial subsets of society.

I tell the pope, my bishop, and in some cases my pastor, thanks for the ride but I'll take it from here.