In an effort to expand the population of Romania, abortion was illegal under the dictatorship of Nikolai Ceaucesceau. In 1989 Romania executed Ceaucesceau and set up a new democratic form of government whose very first act was to legalize abortion. Now more than half the pregnancies in Romania end in abortion.

This leads to 3 questions that would seem to pose an interesting dilemma. From the orthodox Catholic perspective, which would be considered worse?

Communism and the cruel dictatorship of Ceaucesceau, but without (legal) abortion? Or

Today's free society in which it's estimated that 70% of all pregnancies end in (legal) abortion?

Also,

Assuming hypothetically that (meaningful) elections had been held in Romania during the Ceaucesceau years, would Catholic citizens have been expected to vote for him if his opponent wanted to democratize the country but also wanted to legalize abortion?

Ray Hance (Unitarian)

-- Ray Hance (hances4@usamail.net), April 21, 2004

Answers

Send this thread to the “New Answers” section of the forum to invite further discussion by posting this comment.

-- The Bumper! (Bump@bumpitybump.bump), April 21, 2004.

You know, you can have a free state that poutlaws Abortion.

either case you gave is bad, and I woiudl prefer to live in a free state where Abortion, murderign the innocent babies, is illegal.

their is an old saying "Two wrogns don't make a right."

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), April 21, 2004.

Ray,
It is hard to immagine something as vile to God as the intentional murdering of innocent babies with the help of their mothers. I suppose you can immagine something worse, but, again it will take some immagination. What is reality, today, as you point out is a terrible tragity and whatever we can do to stop this intentional murdering of innocent babies we should do.

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), April 21, 2004.

I have my own queatsion for our Unitarian friend.

What woufl you prefer to live in, a Communist IDctarorship with no rights, or a free society similar to ours, but wirth Legalised Rape?

Yoiur attemtp to lessen Abortion by rendering it less of a matter when in contrast to dictatorship is itsself appauling. You want us to accpet Abrotion as Morally right, so you contrast it to a real evil so we will see. The only priblem is, it doesnt work. Their both evil. Its liek comparign Hitler and stalin. If you where a Jew, whihc woudl you prefer to lve under?

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), April 21, 2004.

Zarove wrote: Yoiur attemtp to lessen Abortion by rendering it less of a matter when in contrast to dictatorship is itsself appauling.

If I translated that correctly, Zarove, you are putting words in my mouth. If you saw the question as an attempt to lessen (the evil of) abortion, that's your faulty perception. Many would like to live in a free state where abortion is not sanctioned by the government. The point is that's not possible for everyone, leading to a host of dilemmas and contradictions we Americans don't face.

Ray

-- Ray Hance (hances4@usamail.net), April 21, 2004.

"WE" arent all Americans.

Nevertheless, the faxt remains, we are NOT offered the choiice of dictatorship over Abortion, both are evil, and neither should ne supported.

Also, as I have said a million times already, I am dyslexic, no cracks over my spelling, OK?

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), April 21, 2004.

We are not a free state altogether when judges can distort the meaning of our Constitution to allow the killing of our own offspring. No one ever voted for it, it was forced on our society by stealth. There are no dilemmas about aborting an innocent baby. Whatever few social or economic problems are involved, they do not amount to dilemmas or dead ends. A newborn child can be given up for adoption. It is a mortal sin to support the taking of innocent life. Jesus Christ put this bluntly: ''What you do to even the least of my brethren you do it to me.'' Are you comfortable aborting Jesus? You are doing it today, every day, when you settle for inevitable ''choice'' to kill an unborn baby.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), April 21, 2004.

So you people think its not okay to have an abortion. Let me ask you this: If you were a 14 year old girl, you were raped and that resulted in getting you pregnant you think its not okay to get an abortion? Why should it be the governments right to tell a woman what she can and cannot do with HER body? What if you don't have enough money to support a baby?? You should just give birth and put it it up for adoption? Do you have any idea what its like to live in an adoption agency? And how could you say its a "sin" how the hell would you know, have you met God? And Jesus said that 2000 YEARS AGO. Look I think you need to get your head out of your ass and understand what your saying and stop bullshitting that aboution is "evil".

-- pro choice (pro-choice@pro-choice.com), April 21, 2004.

she can and cannot do with HER body?

It's not just HER body. We are saying she can't kill her innocent child. She does not have a right to kill her innocent baby.

How about I just sit on my 3 year old's face until he dies of suffication? Don't I have a right to put MY body where I want to? OF COURSE NOT! Where do people get this nonsense anyway?

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), April 21, 2004.

So you people think its not okay to have an abortion. Let me ask you this: If you were a 14 year old girl, you were raped and that resulted in getting you pregnant you think its not okay to get an abortion?

{Yes emptionalism, the standard for the aboriton lobby and liberals in general. We shoud feel ashamed, because we hurt that poor 14 year old Rape Victim. Sorry, most aboritons are colage aged girls who had secx with their Boyfriends, or career women. 90% aren't rapes.

Even those that are shouldnt abort. yes I know, I am a monster, i am forcing the woman to give birth to her rapists child. But the fac thtat this is a child, no matter who his paretns where, is why I do that.}-Zarove

Why should it be the governments right to tell a woman what she can and cannot do with HER body?

{As bill said, its not her Body, its her babies that we ar eocncenred with.}-Zarove

What if you don't have enough money to support a baby?? You should just give birth and put it it up for adoption?

{Yes. Why is this so wrong? Is murderign the child a whole lot better?

Imagine if you had a five year old whose father just died and the mother cant pay the bills, she has two options. Send him to his grandparetns, or shoot him in the head. Abortion is the second option.}-Zarove

Do you have any idea what its like to live in an adoption agency?

{No one lives in an agency. They live in porphanages. However, I know people who where adopted and they did fine. I even know a couple children wihtout a hoe who live in those conditions. They seem to like it. Granted, they want a family, but that cannot be helped. This isnt the 19th century and the keepers of parentless children don feed them gruel. Its a lot better than beign murdered.}-Zarove

And how could you say its a "sin" how the hell would you know, have you met God?

{Thou shalt not Murder comes to mind...By the way, all Chrisasn have met, and talk to , God.}-Zarove

And Jesus said that 2000 YEARS AGO.

{This has no baring on anything. Pl,ato expounded morals 2500 years ago. This doesn't change much. Supposing things are ld theirfore poutdated is a false premise, as truth does ot get old.}-Zarove

Look I think you need to get your head out of your ass and understand what your saying and stop bullshitting that aboution is "evil".

{I thin you shoudl take the time to learn manners, and understand posiitons you do not share. You seem to think that its 100% about the womans body, its not, its about the babys life. And yes, I DO know what almost dying is like, I was shot through a major arterty.

Stop making vapid emotionalistic arguments, and comments like "Jesus said this 2000 years ago" like it matters when somethign was spoken, and learn abouthte facts.}-Zarove

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), April 21, 2004.

Pro-Choice,

I ask you to do one thing. Prove to me that it is the woman's body.

Is the baby a splean? How about an extra heart? Maybe a liver? What is your liver, splean, and heart all have in common? Guess what, it's not that they are just inside of you. They all have the same exact DNA. Ever hear of that? Dioxiribos Nucleic Acid. Guess what your baby has it too. However your babies is completely different for yours. It is in fact so unique that the world has never, ever seen it before. That is saying a lot.

And then there is the stupid arguement about the 14 year old girl. Is the baby a cancer? A tumor? An STD? AIDS?

Then there is the argument that it is just a bunch of cells. Sure it's cells, but at week 4 the baby's heart starts to beat. That is before most women even know they are pregnant. Also calling it a bunch of cells makes it non-human. But do you remember that DNA thing? Well that stuff is what makes us human and not monkeys. Monkeys share 98% of DNA. So 2% of our DNA makes us humans and not monkeys. That's amazing. So it is DNA that makes us humans and not the ability to walk, talk, see, read, type, breath.... If those were requirements to be human, my grandmother wouldn't have been human when she before she died because she couldn't talk anymore. ARe people in wheelchairs human? The answer is yes. Why becuase of DNA.

Then there is the word fetus. This is an amazing word becuase it is used by people who don't think that an unborn baby is a baby. Guess what, fetus in latin means baby.

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), April 21, 2004.