Found on twitter....
- Thread starter unbound
- Start date
Temujin
Well-known member
Not a ditch that I, a profound believer in pro choice and the right to free abortion, would choose to die in.
Isn’t that kinda like saying, “how can homicide be murder or even killing if the person gets to go to heaven and live forever?”
mikeT
Well-known member
Close, but not quite, no.
The vast majority of Christians believe aborted babies go directly to heaven, because the fetuses couldn't have done anything to offend God (aka. sin). Born children and adults, however, almost certainly need to repent and accept Christ as their savior before they get thru the pearly gates - which means they can be murdered before that's taken place.
Too much speculation and guesswork going down on both sides.
How do they know ALL aborted people end up in heaven?
How do you know ALL “Born children and adults...need to repent and accept Christ...”? —For example mentally handicapped children and adults—-they’re obviously intellectually incapable?
Furthermore, what about the intellectually incapable destroyed by God in the worldwide flood? Did God send them to hell or heaven?
I would like to know how mere earthlings determine the mind of God ?
mikeT
Well-known member
All valid questions - for Christians. As an atheist, I don't believe any of these things; all I can do is reason from the claims Christians make.
And if we're talking about a God other than the one in Christian scripture, my arguments obviously don't hold.
Ok, so you agree with me this is no argument for abortion?
In regard to your atheism, we’ve discussed your aspirations to be an atheist before. But are you sure you’ve achieved true independence from God?
MikeT⁉️
romishpopishorganist
Well-known member
From the Catholic perspective, we do not know that. We believe baptism is necessary for salvation. Thus, the fate of anyone who is unbaptized is not clear. We certainly believe in a merciful God and hope in the salvation of those who die through no fault of their own without baptism, we do not despair for their salvation, but we cannot pronounce with certainty on the fate of the unbaptized. We commend them to the arms of a loving and merciful God.
Because God revealed this. Everyone who has ever been born is born in Original Sin. In other words---we are all born in our natural state. This means we are not part of God's family. This is due to the sin of Adam and Eve. Then there is Personal Sin. Personal Sin is sin one commits freely. They choose to do it. While everyone is guilty of Original Sin, one's ability to be held accountable for Personal Sin depends on their mental capacity and faculties. Obviously someone who with a mental handicap, or children who have not reached the age of reason are not as culpable for wrong actions as one who has the full use of their faculties and can reason.
The point is that everyone is guilty of Original Sin. Not everyone has the ability to commit Personal Sin. But in order to be saved we must be born again--that is--born into the family of God. For Catholics, this comes through Baptism.
The Bible does not tell us where they went. I would speculate that they went to heaven, but the Bible does not tell us.
We do not determine the mind of God. God reveals to us His mind.
romishpopishorganist
Well-known member
One's eternal destiny has nothing to do with the morality of murder. Salvation is uniquely in God's hands.
Murder is morally abhorrent becasue it takes away an innocent person's right to life. Murder is not morally abhorrent becasue they haven't had a chance to repent of their sin and come to Jesus. Murder does not become morally right if someone has repented and come to Jesus.
Abortion, then, is morally abhorrent becasue it murders a person. Abortion takes away the right to life that an innocent person enjoys. Whether that person is or is not going to heaven has nothing to do with morality of abortion.
romishpopishorganist
Well-known member
Becasue whether something constitutes murder has nothing to do with one's eternal destiny.
The reason abortion is murder is becasue a innocent life is taken. The right to life--at least in America is seen as innate. The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is inalienable. Those rights do not come from government. As a fetus is an innocent person, a fetus has the right to life.
mikeT
Well-known member
How can it NOT be relevant?
If - in killing someone - you shorten their life in this fallen world and secure their eternal place in the Christian Heaven, you've done them the greatest favor one human can possibly do for another. You've even done God a favor, by preventing one of His Creations from having been corrupted by sin.
Temujin
Well-known member
I've avoided this thread because frankly the eternal fate of the unborn is not my area of interest. However, this post is such egregious nonsense that I have to say something.
Murder has absolutely nothing to do with the moral status of the victim. Frequent victims of murder are criminals, often murderers themselves. This doesn't make it not murder, nor does it necessarily reduce any sentence. Therefore the sentence "Murder is morally abhorrent becasue it takes away an innocent person's right to life", is untrue. Murder is morally abhorrent ( in my view) because it takes away a person's life illegally.
What is more, there are circumstances when totally innocent people can be killed without it being murder. It doesn't take much thought to think of examples. Innocence or guilt in the victim is irrelevant. This is enough to disprove your post , but there are other assumptions that you make that I would dispute.
Is the foetus innocent? It has no opportunity to commit any sins. It also has no concept of moral judgement, having no cognitive function. It is in fact no more innocent than a tree or a rock.
Is the foetus a person? Not according to law. Not according to any sensible definition of person. Certainly not in my opinion, or that of a great many other people in mainstream politics or medicine, or even established church dogma.
You said, “From the Catholic perspective...”, in other words, you gave your Catholic opinion. I’m rather looking for something that is compellingly theological or like you said later below, something clearly “revealed” by God
Yes, the part about original sin has been clearly “revealed”. The rest is opinion
Please don’t misunderstand, I’m not trying to be disrespectful, but the above is more opinion than theological.
The part about baptism for Catholics don’t compute. Why does God require baptism for Catholics but not for others? Where’s the theology?
If all people were destroyed because all except Noah, were sinfully and consistently all the time wicked, then how does that imply the children of the extreme wicked went to heaven? Not saying they didn’t, just wondering
True, but it doesn’t appear that God has comprehensively revealed his mind to us about everything.
Maybe somethings we must admit ignorance.
That’s not necessarily a bad thing. In fact even atheists, despite all their self-promotion and their braggingly proclaiming themselves “wise”, are inherently the most ignorant of all people, especially on matters that count the most
romishpopishorganist
Well-known member
Your ontology for what makes murder morally abhorrent is merely that it is illegal? Seriously dude? It was legal to torture, imprison, and kill Jewish people in Germany under Hitler. Was the torture, imprisonment and murder of Jews not morally abhorrent merely because it was legal?
Murder has EVERYTHING to do with the moral status of the victim. All innocent people have an absolute right to life. We do not get to murder people becasue they are an inconvenience, or becasue we do not like their skin color, or because we do not like their religion, ethnicity, etc.
Yet you provide no examples. Give examples, please. When it is morally justifiable to kill innocent people and it not be morally abhorrent?
Sins? Sir, once again, it is the atheist who is bringing God into this, not the theist. For the purposes of this post, sin is not relevant.
Yes, the foetus is innocent. It committed no crime, much less a capital crime.
What does that have to do with anything? The issue is what the fetus IS, not its properties or attributes. The fetus is a human being regardless of its properties or attributes.
Except that it is--becasue its nature is human. There is an eternity of difference between a tree and a rock. A rock is not even alive. A tree is alive but does not have the potential for rational thought.
Correct. Black people were also not persons according to the law at one time in America. We fought war over that--and won. The law was changed. The law now recognizes the humanity of black people.
And----popular sentiment is relevant in this discussion how? Popular sentiment once denied the humanity of black people. Once again, we fought a war over that---and---black people now enjoy the protections of law that all people do--becasue--it turns out--that--the people denying the humanity of blacks---were WRONG!
romishpopishorganist
Well-known member
The main point I was making is that the eternal destiny of a fetus has nothing to do with why abortion is morally abhorrent. Even if it WERE the case that all aborted fetuses go to heaven, it would not mean abortion is morally justifiable. The ontology of abortion has nothing to do with the eternal fate of aborted fetuses.
What difference does it make on these boards? If you want to debate the merits and demerits of Catholicism go to the Catholic boards. These boards are for debating abortion. I did not bring up Catholicism becasue I wanted to discuss or debate Catholicism, but only in answer to a question.
I am not sure it does imply they went to heaven. But it does not imply they went to Hell. The passage doesn't tell us. I personally believe the children went to heaven, but that is opinion. I cannot say that for certain.
True. For example: God has not told us why there is cancer, or why there are black holes, or why time flows in only one direction, etc. God told us about the most important thing: how to gain eternal life.
Agreed.
Agreed.
Temujin
Well-known member
No it wasn't. That's why the Nazis were tried after the war. Also, murder is a legal, not a moral term. It means illegal killing. Any killing that's not illegal, whatever it's morality, is not murder by definition.
and yet all such people, and indeed anyone else, can in some circumstances be killed, even though innocent, without the killing being murder. So no, murder is any illegal killing, irrespective of the innocence or status of the victim. All people have a right to life. Even heinous criminals.
The obvious example is when they ask for it. I believe that euthanasia for adults with capacity is perfectly moral. Then there's accident, such as a sincere belief on the part of a police officer that the innocent party is in fact a serious threat to life and warrants deadly force. Then there's the case of conjoined twins, where the life of one must be sacrificed to save the other. Wrongful execution of an innocent person is another example. Did you know that the last man hanged in the UK was innocent?
You are using the term in a more technical manner than I. I merely meant anything immoral, illicit or illegal.
. No-one is suggesting that this is not the case.
Sure, the issue is indeed what the foetus is, and is not. Nevertheless, in considering the property of innocence, which you are keen to promote, the inability of the foetus to possess that attribute is worthy of comment.
As is the foetus. So not so much difference after all.
No such war has been fought on behalf of the foetus, or the tree for that matter. There are some people who have tried to claim that some sentient animals should be treated as people. Would you agree with them on the grounds of the black people example? Or would you say, not relevant since unlike the black person, animals are not human. Wel I say, unlike vthe black person, the foetus is not born.
Popular opinion is not particularly relevant, except insofar as to show that my opinion, like yours is not some fantastic outlier, but mainstream thinking. As I said. That doesn't make it right or wrong, especially since morality is personal opinion anyway. And as I have also said, the experience of the blacks and the Jews are not relevant. Not indeed is their humanity.
mikeT
Well-known member
It's telling that neither of the Christians posting to this thread are willing to engage the simple truth I wrote.
By all means, please go one to talk about something other than what I wrote. There's no chance the evasion will be visible to everyone reading this thread
...
By all means, please go one to talk about something other than what I wrote. There's no chance the evasion will be visible to everyone reading this thread
...
Temujin
Well-known member
Yeah, sorry to go off piste, but I couldn't let the usual bollocks about innocent babies being murdered go without comment. I won't say more unless the other poster comes back, yet again.
mikeT
Well-known member
No no, don't stop on account of me. I was simply pointing out the obvious.
Threads rarely stick to the initial topic, and though I frequently disagree with him, I recognize this thread's author as sincere; if he wants to discuss something other then the subject he initiated, that's perfectly fine.
Have at it.