The Papists

Apologetics and Evengelization
  • April 7, 2013 12:24 am

    "

    [tw: abortion, violence]

    He “induced labor, forced the live birth of viable babies in the sixth, seventh, eighth month of pregnancy and then killed those babies by cutting into the back of the neck with scissors and severing their spinal cord,” District Attorney Seth Williams said.

    […]

    “A doctor who with scissors cuts into the necks, severing the spinal cords of living, breathing babies who would survive with proper medical attention commits murder under the law,” he said. “Regardless of one’s feelings about abortion, whatever one’s beliefs, that is the law.”

    "

    [source]

    I know this hasn’t been getting media attention, but-

    If you are pro-choice, you should be paying attention to this case.
    If you are pro-life, you should be paying attention to this case.

    (via boldaswellas-strong)

  • February 22, 2013 3:22 pm
    I agree. Man up and choose life.

    I agree. Man up and choose life.

    (Source: holymaurymotherofgod)

  • August 18, 2012 1:42 pm
    Anonymous:  My boyfriend and I have made mistakes. We are choosing to change, in the name of God. But my problem is that , the other night when we were talking he kind of 'confessed' that if I got pregnant , he would rather me get an abortion. We have chosen chastity, even though its hard. But in our past we have had pregnancy scares and he just told me he would want an abortion. I don't know how to respond to this. He said that the baby is a mass, and he will not love it if it ruins our lives. I'm hurt.

    Hello, dear sister. Thank you for coming to us and sharing your situation.

    First and foremost, praise God that you and your boyfriend are acknowledging your sinful past and actively choosing to pursue chastity. St. Philomena, pray for this couple in their journey.

    I can only imagine how you must have felt when he shared with you his views on abortion. Is your boyfriend aware of Catholic doctrine on abortion? Regardless of if he is or isn’t, maybe this is an opportunity to dive into learning about Church teaching on the preservation of life (Humanae Vitae is pretty amazing).

    Then, try to sit down and have a heart to heart with your boyfriend. Offer to walk and pray beside him in learning to accept this piece of Church teaching. Let him know you want to work through this snag in your relationship because you think he’s worth it.

    Also, be sure to make him aware that what he said hurt you. If he’s really worth keeping and being with (I hate to be blunt), then that alone will make him rethink what he said.

    Feel free to come back if you have any further questions. We’d be more than happy to help in any way we can.

    I hoped this helped!

    Grace be with you, sister.

    + Jordan

  • August 5, 2012 1:12 am

    "If we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill each other? any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want."

    — Mother Teresa Of Calcutta

  • June 21, 2012 1:01 am

    This guy is great, it’s pretty lengthy but a very good video. 

  • June 13, 2012 5:49 am
    Anonymous:  I read this somewhere: "We do not force individuals to donate fluids, tissues, or organs to sustain the lives of others, even when the potential recipients will die without a donation. We do not force individuals to serve as living dialysis machines or respirators for anyone after birth, so why are fetuses so special? You may say “but abortion destroys the fetus, it doesn’t just end the connection between the host and the recipient!” And that’s true because our current medical (Part 1)

    Part 2: “medical technology cannot sustain the life of an infant born before 24-ish weeks gestation (which means that more than 99% of aborted fetuses are not viable), so our current abortion techniques are not really designed to produce a whole embryo or fetus.Would it bother you less if we did remove a whole embryo and let it die from lack of sustenance?”

    It would still bother us because the preborn is being removed from its natural environment.

    If I took you into outer space and left you there, would I be guilty of killing you? Of course I would, because I took you out of the natural environment that you required to stay alive, and put you in a place where you could no longer sustain yourself. 

    Its mother’s uterus is a natural place for a preborn human to be in the same way that Earth’s atmosphere is a natural place for born humans to be. We should not be infringing on this concept for the sake of “less bothersome” abortions. Abortion is abortion if the intent is to kill the preborn. No euphemisms required. 

    -Olivier

  • June 9, 2012 5:09 am
    Anonymous:  Here's some food for thought: No one is forcing anyone to have an abortion, however you would like to force people to stay pregnant. If a woman doesn't have control over what happens to her own body (if she is FORCED to stay pregnant) what does she have control over? And this is what I am most curious about: If you are really for life, why don't you do something to help people who are actually ALIVE living in horrible conditions such as poverty or w/ illness, & why don't you complain about war?

    And this is what I am most curious about: If you are really for life, why don’t you do something to help people who are actually ALIVE living in horrible conditions such as poverty or w/ illness, & why don’t you complain about war?

    This is sort of a straw man. We are talking strictly about abortion. If you want to learn more about how Catholics are pro-life in every sense of the term, just Google things like “Catholic Charities” or “Catholics against Euthanasia” or “Catholics against Poverty.” I’m sure you will find things that accurately label the Catholic Church as a holistically “pro-life” community. 

    TL;DR Not only do we do the baby-saving, but we do people-saving in general, both spiritually and physically. And Popes have spoken against war.

    No one is forcing anyone to have an abortion, however you would like to force people to stay pregnant. If a woman doesn’t have control over what happens to her own body (if she is FORCED to stay pregnant) what does she have control over?

    Your argument appeals to emotion — you’re trying to make it seem like Catholics are cold-hearted jerks who force women to carry children to term. Believe me, I have a special branch of love for women who endure nine months of pain so that a unique life may make its way in the world. 

    No one is forcing anyone to have an abortion.

    Yes, and no one is forcing anyone to have sex. Oh wait, Hedonistic Hollywood is implying it.

    If pregnancy is such a life-changing, responsibility-charged consequence, then, according to the Causal Adequacy Principle, shouldn’t the action behind it be at least at life-changing and responsibility-charged? The problem with your argument is that you assume sex should automatically be without strings. On the contrary, Catholics, in accordance with natural law, believe that sex should be closely tied to pregnancy, because after all, one is the possible outcome of the other. 

    If the case is rape (and therefore non-consensual sex), then I don’t believe it would be fair to dismiss the human being caught in the fray as “my rapist’s face, and therefore moral grounds for abortion.” The human preborn is in no way morally culpable for the action the rapist took, and although rape itself is a tragedy (and rape culture seriously needs to be kicked out of society along with all adjacent misogyny), we do not want a second tragedy, that is, the abortion of an innocent life. 

    If a woman doesn’t have control over what happens to her own body (if she is FORCED to stay pregnant) what does she have control over?

    My right to punch ends where someone else’s nose begins. Likewise,  the woman’s right to her body ends where her body ends, and a new body begins. Biology tells us that indeed, the preborn is a unique human being with its own DNA code and often differing blood type from that of the mother. And once they form (according to various studies, at an early stage in development), their fingerprints are identical, too. In every sense of the term, the preborn is a unique human being. In a theological sense, the preborn is in the body, but not of it. 

    Pregnancy is not a disease.

    A preborn human is not a parasite.

    These are two truths that Catholics will never surrender.

    We look to the mother as a source of love and support for the child. We look to the father as a supporting source of love and support for the child. We will continue to support pregnant women. (Note: Birthright is not strictly Catholic, but everyone I know who volunteers there is. So it’s Catholic by nature because it is Pro-Life!)

    I hope you are able to see that what pregnant women need is love and (financial) support for them and their child, and not a quick-fix solution that may or may not scar them for the rest of their lives. Let us all work together to bring this radical of idea to the hearts of all who hear it. 

    -Olivier

  • June 8, 2012 2:35 pm

    Obamacare Mandate…it’s worse than you think

  • June 7, 2012 10:22 pm
    Anonymous:  In addition, I don't understand the "pro-life" side to abortion (although I am trying to.) At the time of almost all abortions in the first trimester, there is no baby. There is no child. There is just a mass of cells- no heart, no brain. I understand abortions are against your religious beliefs- so why don't we just leave it at "if you don't want one, get one."? What about cases of rape- would you really force the mom to have that child? What about health issues? Should the mom have to die?

    Ok, again, sorry for responding late, I saved this one for last.

    I want to thank you again for wanting to stay open minded, so I’ll do my best to answer your questions. 

    Here’s the deal: There is always a baby. The second a sperm enters the egg, it becomes it’s own separate organism. It is no longer a sperm or an egg. We know this for two reasons:

    1. It’s composition. Sperm has the male genetics from the father and the egg has the female genetics from the mother. When the two meet, the zygote then has it’s own separate genetic make up.
    2. It’s behavior. The behavior of sperm is to seek out and penetrate the egg. The behavior of the egg is to receive the sperm upon conception. The behavior of a zygote is totally different. It does neither penetrate, nor receive. As soon as conception happens, it’s behavior changes and restricts further penetration from any other sperm. It then continues to grow and mature into an adult; just as you and I are still maturing and growing. 

    So now that we’ve established it is separate being, how do we know if it is a person or not? Well ask yourself, what makes a person a person?

    I’ve heard many things on personhood, that they need to be cognitive or conscious. But these can’t determine whether or not someone is a person because someone can lose those attributes, so would they lose personhood?. Not only that, but a new born baby isn’t entirely cognitive, and yet they are still persons. 

    Because of all these variables of what makes a person a person, there has to be something much deeper than just appearance or abilities. That’s when we turn to science. I’m sure we can all agree that every person is a human. So that means every human belongs to the species Homo sapiens. Does a zygote belong to the Homo sapiens species? Yes, species are determined by their genetic make up. The genetic make up of each individual person is known right at the moment of conception, when it becomes it’s own person, it’s own very young person. 

    I would like to close with an example. Pretend you own a Polaroid camera, the ones where you take the picture, it comes out immediately, and you have to wait for it to develop by shaking it. Let’s say you’re with your friend and you took a picture of something, the picture would come out not fully developed. Your friend, who is not familiar with such a camera, snatches the picture and says “it’s just brown smudges, you’re camera must be broken”. They then proceed to crumble the picture and throw it away. You begin to get angry and your friend replies “but it’s just brown smudges, what do you care about that?” And you tell your friend “it wasn’t just brown smudges, everything about the picture was there, it just needed to develop!”.

    In the same way, at conception, everything about that person was there they just need time to develop. 

    -Javi

    P.S. All credit for this answer goes to Stephanie Gray from this talk. The first 10-15 minutes were what this was from. She’s totally awesome. 

  • June 5, 2012 11:50 pm
    fuckyeahabortions:  Hey, I typically don't submit questions, but I notice that you just endorsed the idea of termination of a pregnancy as part of an effort to save the life of a pregnant person. I'd like to get some specifics: what percent risk of death should there be for the pregnant person in carrying their pregnancy to term, before termination of pregnancy is an option? Does it change if it's a multiple pregnancy? Thanks.

    The only termination of the pregnancy that would be licit would be an indirect termination of the pregnancy.  Not a direct abortion.  It is licit if as a side-effect of treatment the mother receives the fetus dies.  It is illicit if killing the fetus is the ultimate goal of the treatment.

    The question is always, how can we best respect life.  Therefore, the treatment should be given to the mother in enough time that it can have its necessary effect to save her, but also give as much time as possible to see if there is any way both the mother and the child can pull through.

    The essential argument does not change if it is a multiple pregnancy.

    -Niko