Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Abortion’

The excerpt below was taken from a truly wonderful book I found online on EWTN's website.
I recommend it to all who want to learn what the Catholic Church teaches on marital sexual
relationship, birth-control,etc and why.
  

Contraception is commonly called birth-control; an unfortunate term, since birth-control as such obviously is a reasonable and necessary thing. Catholics would be the last to deny that the human reason should control as far as possible such an important matter as the coming of new life into the world, with its added responsibilities to the parents. In point of fact, the very institution of marriage is a method of birth-control, since it limits procreation to those conditions in which a child will be cared for. Married people are called upon to be unselfish and generous, sometimes even heroic. A child must be regarded as more important than the refinements and luxuries of a social class. But they are not bound to have a child, or children, if reasonable chances of proper education and upbringing are lacking. The health and reasonable comfort of the mother require the spacing of births at intervals to be sanely and sensibly decided, though for the sake of the children themselves there should not be too great a difference between their ages. Clearly procreation cannot be undertaken without thought and control; trust in Providence does not mean banking on a very doubtful future. Let this be made quite clear. The Catholic Church is not opposed to rational birth-control as an end. Catholics, of course, do not agree with the propaganda for birth-control based on the difficulties of present social and economic conditions. Blessings should not be surrendered when the causes making them difficult can be changed. It should be intolerable that in a world of plenty many parents are unable to have as many children as they would like and could have, were the social structure not so unjust. Nor can Catholics admit the disinclination to have children because they are tiresome and worrying. Marriage is not a perpetual honeymoon, but a serious responsibility, and none the less happy for that. The Catholic Church’s condemnation is directed at the means employed for birth-control. What is opposed is not birth-control or the regulation of births, but certain methods of ensuring this. They are generally without qualification called birth control, but more accurately they should be classed under the term of contraception. They consist in altering or interfering with the natural character of sex-intercourse, or its antecedent or consequent processes. They are species of injustice or of impurity: of injustice when the family and social quality of sex is affected; of impurity when the sex impulse itself is disorganized. All wrongful methods of birth-control fall under these heads. Unjust methods may be reduced to sterilization and abortion, impure methods to onanism. (See Fig. 2.) UNJUST MEANS Our bodies are not our own to do with just as we will, they belong completely to God alone who made them; we must take reasonable care of them and administer them according to their nature. As we may not destroy our bodies by suicide, so we may not mutilate them or deprive them of an essential function, unless it be for the health of the body itself, when the part must be removed for the sake of the whole. Leaving aside the question of punitive and curative operations, the Catholic Church teaches that it is unlawful directly to deprive oneself of a bodily power. Thus all methods of eugenic sterilization are ruled out. They include surgical operations on the male or female designed primarily to prevent their having fruitful intercourse; also all mechanical or chemical methods of sterilizing the female for a period. Birth may be prevented after conception by chemical or mechanical or surgical methods, all of which come under the head of injustice when the taking of life is directly intended. Either they go so far as to murder the child in the womb (and without baptism) or they destroy a living thing that is becoming a human being. The unlawfulness of the operation is intensified by the fact that, for all we know, an immortal soul may be present from the moment of conception or soon after. The direct destruction of a fetus is the sin of abortion. IMPURE MEANS Impure methods of birth-control, or those that alter the nature of the sex act itself, are classed under the sin of onanism. Before considering this attempt to secure sex satisfaction without proper intercourse, let us return to the distinction of deed and motive. Two aspects must be separately considered, sex intercourse itself, which is the means, and the generation of a child, which is an end. Two aspects in the action of the married couple correspond to this distinction, namely their deed and their motives respectively. First as regards motives. If a couple decide against the birth of a child at a given time, the rightness or wrongness of their decision must be tested by the question: ought they to try to have a child then? If their decision springs from timidity, selfishness, love of ease and so on, then it is wrong, whatever the means they adopt in carrying it into effect. If the reasons against the birth of a child outweigh those in favour, if they are prudent in a Christian sense, then their decision is just. Up to the present it all hinges on the motives of the man and woman. In the first case, the motives are unworthy; in the second case, they are worthy. The question now narrows down to the nature of the means adopted. The couple may decide to abstain from intercourse. This means is not bad in itself; the moral colouring comes from the motives; bad in the first case, good in the second case. But complete abstinence from intercourse is not easy, nor is it honestly desirable in some cases from a Christian point of view. It is natural that a man and woman living together should strongly desire one another’s bodies, and though grace is always sufficient for proper self-control it does not blanket lawful desire, and the marriage act may be necessary for the real happiness of their lives together. Here is the real problem of contraception. How is it possible to combine the reasonable avoidance of pregnancy with the reasonable exercise of sex relations? The case of really selfish married people may be dismissed. We are concerned with those who decided against a child, not for unworthy motives, but because they feel they are not in a position to have one, for such reasons as ill- health or poverty. Quite decently they feel the need of intercourse. The rightness or wrongness of what they do turns on the means they adopt. If they commit onanism, then the Church judges that they do something wrong in itself, a bad kind of action, leaving aside the question of motives. It may be an act of self-indulgence, it may be an attempt to express human love. In either case, the means is wrong. The noblest end does not justify a bad means. Onanism is that action between the bodies of a man and woman which goes as closely as it can to proper sex union while at the same time attempting to prevent the joining of the male seed and the female ovum from which new human life begins. In old- fashioned onanism the act starts properly, but the man withdraws before his seed can enter the woman’s body. Modern research has invented methods by which the man can remain united to the woman, but his seed is either sterilized or prevented from joining the ovum. By this fact, the natural union of man and woman is not secured, and the climax of sex pleasure is reached without the appropriate act. They do not delight in one another as they really are, they do not commit themselves in confidence and happiness to sex as God has made it. The intercourse is bogus. They are not joined together immediately as man and woman, for an instrument or chemical interposes and destroys the life-giving character of the action. They have contrived to alter the situation and so use their sex powers in an act which is not the generative act of sex intercourse, but the reverse. The attempt to secure sex satisfaction without the complete sex act disorganizes the rational and natural arrangement of powers to their proper ends, the proper purpose of sex powers being the life-offering action of intercourse. With respect to the deed, there is little essential difference between contraceptive intercourse and mutual masturbation, though admittedly the surrounding psychological circumstances make for a different situation. Married people who use contraceptives may love one another decently and humanly apart from this, but whether they use them with an easy or uneasy conscience, the nature of the action in itself is not altered. According to Catholic teaching, moral standards do not entirely depend on individual judgement, and motives need not be considered for a kind of action to be condemned. Contraception is wrong in itself, and no motive can justify it; and it is gravely wrong, because of the importance of the action which is spoilt. It is worth noting that this attitude is not based principally on Revelation or on the supernatural authority of the Church. It is a matter of natural law. An instinctive repugnance to contraception which still exists is an echo of the case against it which can be worked out on purely rational grounds without appealing to doctrinal authority. There are also secondary, though considerable, arguments against contraception. It offers the occasion of sexual indiscipline; it can be responsible for serious bodily and mental disorders; it makes acquiescence easier in unjust social conditions; it is prejudicial to national life. Yet the problem remains unsolved of what is to be done when at the same time there are true and good reasons both against pregnancy and for sex-intercourse. We must go back and stress the necessity of making marriage a relationship of human friendship depending chiefly on the characters of the two persons, who enter the state to share their human lives together, to strengthen one another, to build up their characters together. Their lore is supported by the sacrament, which gives grace to all who try to live up to the ideal it sets. The couple, whether they are in a position to have a numerous family or whether they are not, must love one another with a love stronger and deeper than passion. But it is easier to preach than to practise. There are not a few cases when children cannot be welcomed and at the same time mutual love must be expressed through intercourse. It is possible that recent research has discovered a partial remedy, a providential arrangement existing for the benefit of such cases.

For the full work, please visit EWTN’s page here

Read Full Post »

What is the impact of demographic decline on a country’s economy and social security system?  Does abortion cause cities to decline? For instance, Diana Schaub suggests this in a Baltimore Sun article titled: “A hidden cause of Baltimore’s population loss: abortion”.

Is that an overstatement? What is for sure, is that with an 86% abortion rate, there is no way Baltimore can recover.

As western governments seek solutions to the problems created by falling birth rates, Schaub suggests that Baltimore “should look within” for a solution, rather than trying to attract immigration.

Perhaps European countries should do the same before they become unrecognizable.

Rick Santorum has been criticized for recently blaming the European financial crisis on the demographic winter on the old continent. Mark Steyn comments on this in The Corner:

Is it remotely likely that the debts run up by 100 Mediterranean deadbeats will be repaid by 42 Mediterranean deadbeats?

The Germans, French and Dutch have healthier trend lines, but only because, as you note, they’ve imported huge populations that will inflict profound transformational changes. That, too, threatens the basic social compact: A decade or two on, is it likely that Ahmed and Mohammed will agree to be ever more punitively taxed to maintain the lavish retirements of Fritz and François?

When 100 grandparents have 42 grandchildren, how do you grow your economy in an ever shrinking market? Where once were 100 babies for your diaper business, now there are only 42. And, fifteen years on, where once were 100 teens for your caterwauling gangsta rap record company, now a mere 42. And then only 42 potential car buyers, and maybe 21 home owners… You need a hell of an export market to beat back the arithmetic of a remorselessly withering customer base.

Read Full Post »

Overpopulation is a myth. This myth has caused human rights abuses around the world, forced population control, denied medicines to the poor, and targeted attacks on ethnic minorities and women.

Read Full Post »

Short Prayer For Unborn Children

Heavenly Father, we request your help for the unborn.

Holy Mary, pray for us sinners, save our unborn infants from abortion.

Lord, we pray for all mankind to have the grace to understand that each and every life has the right-to-life.

Most Rev. Loius E. Gelineau, D.D

Then he took a little child and put it among them; and taking it in his arms, he said to them: “Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me.” (Mk 9:36-37)

 

Read Full Post »

Catholics should speak-up and be aware of the dangers involved in keeping a low-profile in the debates about important topics such as abortion. In the recent times there  has been a fierce disposition by some members of the media in trying to portray erroneous catholic views on various topics. A recent article, first publicized on Catholics Online, which I am partially quoting here, illustrates this very well.

The pro-abortion discussions carried out by groups such as  Catholics for the Right to Decide in Europe  (counterpart of the U.S. Catholics for Choice)  are a good example of the problem, as they seem to have been misleadingly divulged as the official teaching or view of the Church; rather than a separate  movement that actually contradicts the official views of the Catholic Church.

It may seem superfluous to point out that the Catholic doctrine opposes strongly and vehemently to the very notion of any crime against life, including the life on the unborn. However, we should never assume that even a fundamental teaching such as the one concerning abortion are free from  misinterpretation or even manipulation by interest groups. 

When any basic teachings of a doctrine begin to be publically challenged such as in this instance, society’s perceptions could become confused by a notion that there may be an internal conflict within the institution’s leadership, which in turn could lead to unjustified and unnecessary negative criticism.

WASHINGTON, DC (Catholic Online) – A tale of two women…and life, love and faith.One preaches the “obligation to self” The other preaches the call to give ourselves away in love to the other, out of love for the Lord who gave Himself away in love for each one of us. One preaches a false “gospel”, the other preaches the true Gospel which alone brings life and freedom.

Once again last week the Church was maligned by a false “feminist” who believes that a woman has the right to kill her unborn child if she chooses and such a “choice” is not contrary to Catholic teaching. Elfriede Harth is the Secretariat of European Parliament Study Group on Religion and Secularity, and a Spanish member of Catholics for the Right to Decide (their counterpart in the U.S. is Catholics for Choice).  She made her insane remarks at the Women Deliver conference in Washington, D.C. this month.

She aims to promote what passes for “liberal” or “progressive” doctrines within the Church these days. They do not liberate and they do not promote true progress. However, they are being promoted by the media as somehow reflective of a “Catholic” position. They are anything but. They are heretical and anti-life.There are no ‘abortion rights’, only human persons have rights. In fact, every intentional abortion KILLS a human person. There is only the Right to Life and Harth fails to recognize this preeminent and fundamental right upon which all other rights rest. .

Harth says, “Religious feminists play a crucial role in organizing resistance to religious fundamentalism.”  Her mission, in my opinion, is to redesign the Church to suit the pro-abortion, anti-male, anti-tradition, anti-calling-anything-sinful philosophy she preaches.  In short, she is working to destroy the Church from within.She is an advocate of the “Dictatorship of Relativism” the Holy father warned of.

She knows the Church doesn’t approve of her endorsement of baby-killing while calling herself Catholic, but naturally, she says the problem isn’t her total misunderstanding of Church teaching or her errant definition of being Catholic – it’s the Magisterium that’s all screwed up. 

“They’re always trying to say we’re not real Catholics, which is wrong, because the criterion to say you’re Catholic is that you’re baptized.  That’s all.” she said.  “And I don’t accept that other people pretend that they define what is Catholicism.  You know?  The way the Vatican presents Catholicism is incomplete.”

Thousands of years of Church leaders, starting with the Apostles, are simply “other people” to Ms. Harth, and since she doesn’t like what they say about abortion and her other favorite liberal “feminist” doctrines, well, it just means the faith is incomplete.  All this time, we’ve been waiting for Ms. Harth to fill in the holes those “other people” left behind!

Harth insisted that a woman has the right to abort because she “has a right to have a good life” and she does not have “the right to ruin it.”  “And if a pregnancy is going to ruin her life in any way, she has a right to get the abortion.  She has the right.  She has an obligation to protect her life from being ruined… Because you owe this respect to yourself because you’re a child of God.  You should feel guilty if you don’t.” she said.

Read that again:  Catholic women should feel guilty if they do not abort a child they feel might “ruin their lives.”  To not do so would be disrespectful toward themselves as a child of God. 

And what about the baby, Ms. Harth?  Is the baby also a child of God?  “If you have an abortion, there is a fetus that will be killed.  This is true.  But… for us, death is not the end of the story.  And this unborn child or fetus or whatever you want to call it is… well, we don’t know what God is going to do with this creature.  God has a lot of mercy, maybe… we don’t know.”

Incredibly, Harth is actually justifying the murder of the child in the womb by pointing to our belief in eternal life!?!  Hey, death is not the end of the story!  So, really, abortion’s not a bad thing.  It’s just sending the baby on to Gloryland a little early – no harm done!  This, according to pro-abort heretic Elfriede Harth is real, complete Catholic teaching.  Wrong.

The tragedy only grows worse as Harth collects more confused, uncatechized souls and leads them astray.  She’ll scowl at me for saying this, but Ms. Harth – you’re not really Catholic.  Not even close.

Read Full Post »

Amazing abortion survivor story. A wake-up call for the end of the horror of abortion.

Gloria TV features Gianna Jessen – Go to Video

Read Full Post »

I found this very good article that I would like to share with you. The link to the full content is posted below.

In the cruel old China, baby girls were often left to die in the gutters. In the cruel modern China, they are aborted by the tens of millions, using all the latest technology.

There is an ugly new word for this mass slaughter: gendercide.

Thanks to a state policy which has limited many families to one child since 1979, combined with an ancient and ruthless prejudice in favour of sons, the world’s new superpower is beginning the century of its supremacy with an alarming surplus of males.

By the year 2020, there will be 30 million more men than women of marriageable age in this giant empire, so large and so different (its current population is 1,336,410,000) that it often feels more like a separate planet than just another country. Nothing like this has ever happened to any civilisation before.

The nearest we can come to it is the sad shortage of men after the First World War in Britain, France, Russia and Germany, and the many women denied the chance of family life and motherhood as a result.

It is possible that the effects of that imbalance are still with us, in the shape of the radical feminist movement which found ready recruits among the husbandless teachers and other professionals of the Twenties and Thirties.

But men without women are altogether more troublesome than women without men, especially when they are young.

All kinds of speculation is now seething about what might happen; a war to cull the surplus males, a rise in crime, a huge expansion in the prostitution that is already a major industry in every Chinese city, a rise in homosexuality.”

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1265068/China-The-worlds-new-superpower-beginning-century-supremacy-alarming-surplus-males.html#ixzz0kq1ak6DE

American feminist pro-aborts have always been silent on this topic, perhaps because attacking the Chinese Government on its abortion policies would show up the weak philosophical and moral underpinnings of the pro-abortion crowd in America, really libertines at heart.

Read Full Post »

‘Havenly Father, Your love is eternal. In Your ocean of love, You saved the world through Your only-beggoten Son, Jesus Christ. Now look at Your Son on the Cross Who is constantly bleeding for love of His people, and forgive Your world. Purify and baptize aborted children with the Precious Blood and water from the Sacred Side of Your Son, Jesus Christ, Who hung dead on the Cross for their salvation; in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. May they, through the holy death of Jesus Christ, gain everlasting life, through His wounds be healed and throught His precious Blood be freed. There to rejoice with the saints in heaven. Amen.

There are many reasons that can cause an expectant mother to have an abortion; a closer look at the US abortion statistics may give us some clues as to why so many abortions are performed every year. Nearly 24% of pregnancies in the US end up in abortion, and 80% of abortions are performed on unmarried women, where the great majority of women who undergo an abortion procedure is African-American.   In 2005 alone 1.22 million babies were aborted in the US, while the current number worldwide ranges 46 million babies per year!

These numbers may testify to how abortions are intrinsically related to social economic facts. In the case of the United States, black women groups are the most vulnerable  ones, as they  face more challenging social and economic circumstances in life.

(more…)

Read Full Post »