Vatican criticizes lifting of “global gag rule”

 Posted by on 26 January 2009  Modern Life
Jan 262009
 

Obama, in the first few days of his presidency, has been busy. He has made a point of changing some of Bush’s more controversial policies. His most recent act making the news is his decision to overturn the “global gag rule” which bans funding for international groups that perform abortions and help in family planning.

This decision has Vatican officials speaking out. From the Times Online:

Archbishop Rino Fisichella, president of the Pontifical Academy for Life, said that with “the arrogance of someone who believes they are right”, Mr Obama had signed a decree which would “open the door to abortion and thus to the destruction of human life”.

What has me so bothered, is that Fisichella says Obama is “arrogant” in believing he is right. Excuse me, but doesn’t the Vatican think it is right in deciding that abortions should be illegal, and even worse, a sin? Doesn’t this arrogance cost women their lives? Doesn’t this arrogance make women, who already have a difficult decision to make, believe themselves morally condemned for doing what is possibly best for their situation?

Fisichella goes on:

“What is important is to know how to listen, without locking oneself into ideological visions with the arrogance of a person who, having the power, thinks they can decide on life and death.

I don’t think the Archbishop is aware of how truly ironic this statement is. The Catholic stance on abortion is purely ideological. And by claiming power of the holy kind, power over the immortal souls of women, the Catholic Church has the arrogance to assert that their position is the right one.

Maybe if the Vatican changed it’s stance on contraception, abortion wouldn’t be such a problem.

Obama isn’t saying abortion is right or wrong; instead he is allowing the decision to be the woman’s, and is allowing the family planning organizations to benefit from funding, so they can give women the proper information and resources concerning abortion.

Good for Obama.

Amy Breen

  • Trent
  • http://www.absurdintellectual.com/ Amy Breen

    Thanks for the link Trent. It’s the best thing I’ve seen all day.

    The circular logic of the one woman astounds me. It’s not okay to murder a full-grown person, and doing so results in jail time and possible death, and yet to those who feel that abortion is murder, they can’t think of a punishment for women. If murder is murder, as it is to these people, then there should be a punishment. But they just can’t bring themselves to say such a thing.

    Wow.

  • http://youcannotwin-ston.blogspot.com/ Wynston

    Abortion Rules.

  • Determinator

    Hmmmm. To be honest, I think this is an inaccurate conclusion by Daniel Florien:

    “They know it’s absurd and unfair — which means they know abortion is not really murder.”

    How could anyone answer his question with “they should all be in jail, man” without coming off like a complete jackass? It’s inane for Florien to say that that they “know” abortion is not really murder. They obviously believe it is. The question comes down to this – does the punishment fit the crime? And like any thinking person, it’s impossible to give a black and white answer when the reality is so many shades of gray. I mean, it’s a debate for a reason right? (and yes I know some people think the debate’s over).

    Is it the same thing to give an abortion to a woman who’s life is in jeopardy, as to a career woman who simply doesn’t want to have a child at that point in her life? How about a 16-year-old who made a mistake and has a very real concern that she’s on her own when her parents flip out? How about a rape victim?

    I’d argue that while the act of abortion is the same, the consequences in each person’s life are quite different, as are the basic intentions.

    To argue that an anti-abortionist is easily stumped by a question like that is a fallacy. It’s a bit like saying this: Well yes the courts allow abortion now, but they also used to allow slavery.

    What he was trying to get the protester to say was that they should all be thrown in jail. Any thinking person (on either side of the issue), would pause to consider such a question.

    I have my own beliefs on this issue, and I will keep them to myself. I just don’t care for erroneous conclusions.

  • determinator

    Just to clarify, “does the punishment fit the crime”, I’m not suggesting that abortion is or is not a criminal offense. A person who is anti-abortionist would believe so – that’s my assumption.

  • http://www.absurdintellectual.com/ Amy Breen

    I think the point Florien was trying to make is that those anti-abortionists, who believe it is *murder* and who believe it should be illegal, can’t bring themselves to figure out a punishment for it. And no, I don’t really agree that it’s because they know deep down inside that it isn’t murder, but why call it murder and call for it to be illegal if there will be no punishment?

    There’s so many varying shades of gray in murder cases. Was it self-defence? Was it an accident, like a car crash, was it a crime of passion, or was it premeditated? Just like the varying degrees of murder 1/manslaughter/what have you, if you want abortion to be illegal and call it murder, than the law has to recognize that, and the law could decide based on rape/career woman/16 year old. You can’t say that it will be between “her and her god” because you can’t use the secular legal system to stop these women from having abortions on a moral level, and than just ask that no charges be laid.

  • http://www.absurdintellectual.com/ Amy Breen

    Anyway, my post was more about the hypocrisy of the Vatican, calling Obama arrogant when they have their own arrogance about it. That link was an interesting sidebar.

  • http://www.absurdintellectual.com/ Amy Breen

    Futhermore (and this is the last!) if someone thinks abortions are between the woman and her god, then just leave it alone. If that’s punishment enough in their eyes, then I say stop crying for it to be illegal.

  • http://www.absurdintellectual.com/ Grant Hamilton

    I’ll bet most of these people have clear(er) ideas of what punishment they would envision for the doctor who would perform the abortion, but I found it really interesting that they had seemingly never considered punishment for the women procuring them.

    I, too, think the conclusion drawn isn’t supportable by his interviews. But interesting nonetheless.

  • determinator

    I had no problem with the post you had Amy. I was simply taking issue with Florien’s single line pronouncement, regardless of what other points he was making. That’s all.

    Such a conclusion simply weakens the strength of his other arguments. His point about anti-abortionists not being able to come up with an appropriate punishment is fair comment. I would refer back to my earlier point, however. If anti-abortionists came out with a black and white “convict them all” statement, they would be equally villified. And frankly, this is not a black and white issue. It’s belief vs. belief, values pitted against values. There is no winner in these things. And when values have layers, and shades of gray, it becomes much more difficult.

    As Barack has stated, perhaps we can all agree that less unwanted pregnancies — period — would be best for all involved.

  • http://www.absurdintellectual.com/ Amy Breen

    I know, it’s all good :)

    He makes a good point, though, that if something were to be illegal, then there would need to be some kind of punishment.

    I guess I just hate that it is a debate based on beliefs. It should lie with the woman. No one else. It’s her body.

    Like I said before: “Maybe if the Vatican changed its stance on contraception, abortion wouldn’t be such a problem.”