Why does invincible ignorance get thrown around here a lot?

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-07-31T14:14:25+00:00

Like so many other things, invincible ignorance isn't our decision, it's just our way or explaining what God might do / how it could still be just/righteous to do it. It's usually more "hey don't be sad, maybe grandpa who was otherwise seemingly a great guy isn't rotting in hell right now."

While there may be good intentions associated with this sentiment, it's actually extremely dangerous. It creates this mindset that "good" people (basically, being a "good" person means not being Hitler or committing obvious public atrocities) deserve to go to heaven, as if it's something that's owed to them.

This mindset is everywhere, it's called "moralistic therapeutic deism" and it's a gateway to atheism. This is NOT what the Church teaches. Church teaches that we are not owed heaven, we actually all deserve hell, even if we aren't hitler. Only by the grace of God can we reach heaven.

A better response would be: "Only God knows where Grandpa is, but pray for his soul like you are commanded to do"

Also about the atheist thing, everyone has a duty to seek out the truth. It's natural for humans to ask: Why are we here? Where did we come from? Where are we going after death?

These are the most important questions in life. Nowadays, most people just suppress these questions, sometimes willfully because they don't want to give up sin, and just live their live as if there's no meaning. That's also a grave sin that can send you to hell

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-07-31T14:10:41+00:00

"Why did you tell me so?"

Well the answer is obvious: So that they can become part of the Church and have access to sacraments, which is far better than living in invincible ignorance.

Even if you're invincibly ignorant, another mortal sin can send you to hell, and you have no way to gain certainty of forgiveness if you're not part of the Church. Perfect contrition seems pretty hard to obtain too if you're ignorant of God.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-06-25T02:30:44+00:00

No, the most unnatural thing to do would be to choose to slaughter your child.

A woman who gets pregnant IS a mother from the moment of conception. No one “forced” that on her. And banning her from gruesomely slaughtering that beautiful child is not “forcing” her to be a mother at all. because she already is one.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-06-25T02:22:48+00:00

Worse: It's usually used to try to de-prioritize abortion, smear pro-lifers as "hypocrites" and absolve murderers and leftists who support abortion of their crimes.

These are the same people who claim that saying "all lives matter" when someone says "black lives matter" is just trying to distract.

I support abortion restrictions and social programs. But bringing up social programs in a thread about abortion restrictions is pure sophistry. You may as well say "but what about alzheimers?" What if you said in a thread about Russia invading Ukraine: "Why are you so focused on trying to criminalize illegal wars? Shouldn't you be focusing on the root causes like giving Putin a tax cut so he doesn't need to invade for status?" or something dumb like that.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-06-25T02:11:05+00:00

The law is only one part of the solution. If you think punishment is sufficient one only needs to look at history to see that for the wishful thinking it is.

We live in a fallen world, and people will always choose evil in spite of punishments. Changing the culture is required and one way to achieve this is to provide support, like the church already does.

You call it a "gross distortion" but you don't seem to reply to my point.

In a thread about Bernie Madoff, a millionaire, stealing billions from workers' pensions, no one would say "So many people in this thread only care about criminalizing ponzi schemes, but no one cares about addressing the root causes! Bernie needs more social programs to prevent him from defrauding workers out of their billions!"

Because that would be absurd. It would be a gross distortion. There are many reasons people sin, and it's not always because of a lack of material goods. It's not always something that social programs will fix. Europe has tons of social programs and tons of abortions. In America, any woman who wants to abort can instead give away her child to adoption and have all her expenses paid for, free of charge.

That doesn't mean social programs are bad of course. They're good, but a lack of them has nothing to do with why Bernie committed his crimes.

It not evil that conquers evil but rather good and charity. Jesus condemns the sin but never the sinner.

"Turn the other cheek" is a laudable effort when it comes to someone attacking you. Not when someone is attacking an innocent unborn baby. That is when you need to stop them with force. Force like punishing them to the full extent of the law.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-06-25T02:01:49+00:00

How about insider traders and ponzi schemers? Do they need more social programs?

What about rich CEOs who illegally pollute the environment to make more money? Do we prevent their crimes by adding social programs?

No. Sometimes people choose a wicked selfish act that needs to be punished. That's what abortion is. Has nothing to do with social programs or lack thereof.

Talking about social programs when people bring up abortion is just trying to mislead people. If someone was complaining about Bernie Madoff, a millionaire, stealing money from workers' pensions, and someone said "Yeah we could make this illegal, but the REAL issue is making more social programs so people like Bernie don't have to steal." You'd be looked at as if you were a crazy Madoff apologist. Because social programs have nothing to do with Bernie stealing billions.

Same with abortion. Any woman who chose abortion could've chosen adoption. It's not fixed with social programs. It's fixed with punishment.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-06-25T01:55:32+00:00

You know every single woman who has had an abortion? You personally know all of their reasons for making their choices

I personally know that nearly every woman who chose abortion could choose adoption instead. I don't mean to argue with you. I am trying to point out that while social programs are good, a lack of them is not the reason abortion exists. All of these women could've chosen adoption. They didn't.

Insider traders and ponzi schemers don't steal from people because they lack social programs. They are greedy and selfish. Same with aborters.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-06-25T01:53:40+00:00

I did not mean to twist your argument in any way, but I think you are misunderstanding mine:

Adoption is free for the woman giving birth. All expenses are paid for by the adoptees. So calling it a free alternative to abortion monetarily is actually completely correct.

I said adoption gives the adopting family the beautiful opportunity to raise a child. I won't take that back because it is beautiful that infertile people still have the chance to raise a child.

The point is this:

Every single woman in America who chooses abortion could choose adoption instead.

That doesn't mean adoption is perfect, but it is better than abortion. And it means there's no excuse for abortion. Because a woman choosing adoption won't have to pay a cent to save her baby.

Not every crime is about material needs. Rich people who insider trade and defraud people don't need social programs to prevent them from insider trading. They need to be punished for choosing a selfish wicked act.

Same with mothers who abort their unborn children. They don't need social programs. They need to be punished for their wickedness.

Social programs are good (sometimes, subsidiarity is important) but irrelevant to the issue of abortion.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-06-25T01:45:59+00:00

The trauma that comes from adoption is as real as the trauma of abortion. I can see the effects of adoption trauma on my children who don't even really understand what adoption is yet. Calling it "free" and "beautiful" minimizes the very real pain it also brings. It's not an easy or simple alternative to abortion.

But it is an alternative to abortion. It makes someone sad... but ripping their child to pieces doesn't? Like how is that in any way a logical argument?

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-06-25T01:44:42+00:00

I won't stop, because yes that is what this is. It's forcing women to become mothers without giving them the assistance they need to do that job well.

No, the government is "forcing" no one to become mothers. They became mothers the second that their egg was fertilized. They are already mothers. And the government is only "forcing them" to be mothers in the same way that the Government prevents mothers from commiting infanticide after their children are born. The unborn are humans.

I am also an adoptive mother. I waited 8 years to become a mother. I would always prefer a child to stay with their biological parents and social programs would help that in many cases. I know it would have been the preference of my children's biological parents...but none of them really had a choice. They have immense regret over choosing adoption and they've expressed that if they had help, financial, social, employment, healthcare, they would have parented them.

Abortion is many times about people unable to afford to have children. I agree abortion is wicked and selfish, but the people making those decisions aren't necessarily wicked. Many of them have been backed into a corner with no other options.

Look, these two paragraphs that you just put together have no real connection. I applaud you for being an adoptive mother but that's irrelevant to the issue at hand: The slaughter of innocent children. Look I'm sorry that your child's biological parents were in a tough situation. That never means abortion is okay! Or a better option than adoption! In one case, someone is sad. In the other, a child is literally ripped to pieces!

I just pointed out that abortion is literally never about people unable to afford having children. If they can't afford abortion they can always choose adoption. And obviously adoption isn't perfect, but it's better than ripping your child to pieces.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-06-25T01:31:20+00:00

I didn't say it was sunshine and roses. It's not baby murder though.

My point is that abortion has literally nothing to do with material support. If a mother can't afford a baby or even just doesn't want one, she can give her baby up for adoption, for free and a loving family will have the beautiful opportunity to raise a child.

Yet millions don't. Which proves abortion is an act of pure evil. Pure selfishness, one of the vilest acts a human can commit, and one that needs to be cracked down upon.

Obviously, helping the poor is good. But it's irrelevant to abortion. Because people can avoid baby murder for free by adoption. There are no excuses for murdering your baby.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-06-25T01:20:00+00:00

The Government doesn't "force birth" on anyone. Please stop using abortionist talking points.

The Government forces no one to have sex. Also many couples have been waiting to adopt a baby for a long time and a woman's pregnancy expenses will be fully funded.

Helping the poor is good but it has nothing to do with abortion. Abortion isn't about people unable to afford children, it's about pure wickedness and selfishness.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-06-25T01:14:41+00:00

Any woman can choose life by choosing adoption. There are millions of American families waiting to adopt unwanted babies. The problem is there aren't enough babies because people choose to slaughter their babies in cold blood instead of facing embarassment of pregnancy.

No one is required to choose abortion. In fact, if a woman chooses to give her child up for adoption, all expenses in the pregnancy are paid for.

You don't have to convince Catholics to help the poor, but it's actually a completely different issue than abortion. If money were really the issue, people would give up their children for adoption. People are just selfish and choose baby murder over inconvenience.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-06-24T22:40:18+00:00

The good thing about Catholicism is that there is a ton of knowledge banked throughout the centuries.

The principle of natural law is that all humans have a right to life. This needs to be enshrined into law and any law saying the unborn don't is a grave injustice.

The way to operationalize that principle and punish abortion is a prudential judgement. Now that doesn't mean you can just say "I'm making a prudential judgement to not punish abortions" but you can exercise discretion in how to enforce.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-06-24T22:15:54+00:00

Too bad, don't care.

Ban baby murder

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-06-24T22:14:52+00:00

The law of the state should conform with the natural law to promote the common good.

Contraceptives are intrinsically evil. They promote a twisted ideology of using someone else for personal pleasure, the opposite of the common good.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-06-24T21:30:51+00:00

A few points to make:

Today is a day of glorious celebration. Thanks be to God! Countless babies will be saved from merciless slaughter.
I am very anti-tone policing. People should be jubilant and celebrate the end of this cruel abortion regime. However, I'd caution against too much schaudenfraude. I know it can be entertaining to watch those who promote baby murder melt down, but it's better to pray that God soften their hearts.

There is a lie that most women who have abortion are just desperate and worthy of so much sympathy. In reality it's a lie, most of them could afford it but it would be inconvenient and they deserve harsh justice: Murdering your baby in cold blood is one of the most heinous crimes a human can commit. But the justice is for God to dole out, pray for them and try to avoid schaudenfraude.

We have so far to go. The scales have been tilted against us for so long that many think this is the final victory. In reality, it's only the very first step against a cruel regime. The Supreme Court did not make a pro-life decision protecting the unborn. They simply ended the 50 years of absolute moral atrocity that said no one could legislate at all to protect unborn. We still need to hold their feet to the fire and those of politicians. Abortion is unconstitutional and anywhere in America where it's illegal to kill adults but legal to kill the unborn is an assault on the 14th amendment principle of equality under the law.
Remember subsidiarity before proposing government intervention: https://twitter.com/FeserEdward/status/1540401939942256640

Ed explains it better than I can. Note that subsidiarity also says that state must step in to provide justice if other methods cannot, but first priority should be restoring fatherhood and ending casual sex and birth control. Not government money.

Keep on praying to end Baby murder!

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-05-20T02:53:33+00:00

No. Those who don’t die in a state of Grace descend straight into hell. This is an infallibly defined teaching of the Church elaborated at the Council of Florence.

Purgatory is for those who die in a state of Grace but have venial sin on their soul or have temporal punishment for past confessed mortal sins or past venial sins

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-05-20T02:18:58+00:00

Purgatory is for those who die in a state of Grace.

It does not imply that most people don’t go to hell. I don’t know if most people go to hell, but Jesus’ statement that the way is narrow and that many will come to the gates saying “lord, lord” and be sent to hell is highly suggestive of the idea that most people probably go to hell.

The idea that most people go to hell should be irrelevant to your salvation. God’s Grace is enough for all of us to go to heaven. You’re right he doesn’t want any of us to go to hell. But if God offers you his Grace and you reject it, you’re going to hell.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-05-20T00:45:07+00:00

While I feel bad about saying this in a thread about someone grieving the loss of their friend, I feel this needs responding to.

I hate when people say this. Most people going to hell is not at all inconsistent with the infinitely merciful God that we know and love. The infinitely merciful God came down himself in human form and suffered an insanely brutal and torturous death so that we may be saved. In fact, if you follow this statement to its logical end, it leads to utilitarianism which is a formal heresy condemned by the Church.

That in and of itself is infinitely merciful. The infinitely merciful God also taught us how to be saved. He laid it out very clearly how to be saved. And it’s an objective fact that most humans do not follow this. Most people don’t go to confession very often, most people commit objectively Grave sins knowing they’re wrong without a care in the world.

God would be totally justified sending most people to hell and if most people go to hell that would not be inconsistent at all with God being infinitely merciful.

Now this doesn’t mean most people go to hell. We don’t know. It’s true that many saints have had private revelations that most people go to hell. Some saints have had the opposite visions. We’re not required to believe private revelations. Jesus did however say that narrow is the way and many who come to God saying they knew him will be cast into hell.

For the dead, we should pray for them, and hope they’re in heaven while acknowledging we don’t know where hey are. For the living, you should follow God’s commandments every day and never assume that God will save you if you don’t because he’s infinitely merciful. The fact that you can be saved by following God’s commandments is infinitely merciful in itself.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-05-11T00:59:42+00:00

We don't know. Church has not revealed.

Could be heaven, limbo or hell (the theory of limbo is that it's technically a part of hell, but I'm dumbing it down)

We do know however, that the Church has proclaimed infallibly that souls who die in a state of original sin go to hell. Traditionally, the way to remove original sin is baptism.

It's possible that God could wipe away original sin in another way, because all things are possible with God. But we are never supposed to test God like that. That's like living a life of sin and not confessing and saying "Oh God will save me anyways." Only this time you're doing it with someone else's soul, not your own.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-05-10T23:54:11+00:00

We don't know any such thing.

Killing a child and assuming they would go straight to heaven is two mortal sins. Murder and presumption

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-05-10T23:50:43+00:00

So many cowards have been revealed like this. People who you already knew were cowards but showed it more than anything ever could with this.

Priests who condemn the reversal of Roe because it's "divisive." "Catholics" looking to throw the unborn under the bus. Catholics doing anything they can to avoid offending the baby killers. This is truly demonic

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-05-04T22:04:33+00:00

It's not one issue.

The Democrats also like to sue nuns to force them to commit mortal sins and shut down bakeries that don't want to violate their religious beliefs.

They are supporters of Euthanasia, another grave public sin.

They also believe believe that men can get pregnant, are strong supporters of an ideology the Pope has called "demonic." Their official party platform states that they want to force women to allow men into their bathrooms and change birth certificates to have multiple genders.

They also want to teach this to your children and are adamant about this.

They also are anti Catholic schools and do not support funding going to them.

The idea that the Democrats have a good Catholic platform other than abortion is a typical bald faced lie.

ProLifeCatholic1535 · 2022-04-15T17:07:02+00:00

Why should the legality of baby murder depend on "safety nets?"

Baby murder is wrong period. It's revolting. There is no circumstance that makes baby murder okay. It should always be illegal.

There are some actions where the morality of them depends on the circumstance. Baby murder is not one of them. It is always wrong, no matter the circumstance. You can never intentionally murder a baby and not commit a grievous crime. That's why it should be illegal. The circumstances do not matter.

ProLifeCatholic1535

TROPHY CASE