Suggested Answers to the Short Quiz

.
A very-readable text of Roe v. Wade is contained in a Microsoft Word file that is embedded in Q&A-10 of the Suggested Answers to the Short Quiz that are posted in this section.
Post Reply
johnkarls
Posts: 1709
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 8:43 pm

Suggested Answers to the Short Quiz

Post by johnkarls »

.
Question 1

Does the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) oppose abortion (as well as birth control)?

Answer 1

Yes.

Question 2

What is Liberation Theology?

Answer 2

Liberation Theology was a widespread movement among the Roman Catholic clergy in Latin America that began in the 1950’s. It tried to apply Christ’s teachings to the real world which resulted, inter alia, in actively opposing Latin American dictators.

In the 1980’s, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (who became Pope Benedict XVI – 2005-2013), as head of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith which has the power to proclaim doctrines as heresies, cracked down on RCC clergy practicing Liberation Theology and labeled many of their tenets as Communist.

This, of course, is ironic because history’s first practitioner of pure communism (from each according to her/his ability and to each according to her/his need) was Jesus Christ -- “Sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me” = Jesus Christ answering the question of what is necessary to “inherit eternal life” at Mark 10:21.

[People like Cardinal Ratzinger are often confused by the view of Karl Marx that “Religion Is The Opiate Of The Masses” because “the masses” are focused on The Next World -- which caused Marx to oppose religion even though most religions in general, and Christianity in particular, preach “from each according to her/his ability and to each according to her/his need.”]

Question 3

What is the irony of the RCC’s “crack down” on RCC clergy practicing Liberation Theology when contrasted with the RCC position on abortion (and birth control)?

Answer 3

The irony is that the RCC’s “crack down” on Liberation Theology is based on the principle that Civil Government trumps Christianity, and the RCC position on abortion and birth control is based on the principle that Christianity trumps Civil Government.

Question 4

Does the RCC speak for Protestant Denominations such as the United Methodist Church?

Answer 4

Of course not. After all, the term Protestant comes from all the Protests over RCC policies and doctrines.

Question 5

What is the position of the United Methodist Church on abortion?

Answer 5

It embraces Roe v. Wade beginning in 2012 with the “flip flop” in its “Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church” (the UMC’s most authoritative document or, in other words, its Constitution) that Civil Government trumps Christianity.

Prior to 2012, the UMC’s Book of Discipline had provided that Christianity trumps Civil Government -- and with respect to abortion specifically that the UMC condones abortion provided: (1) it is legal in the jurisdiction in which it occurs, (2) proper medical procedures are employed, (3) parental notification is required for minors, (4) abortion is not a means of gender selection, (5) abortion does not comprise “late-term abortion” (aka “partial birth abortion”); and (6) thoughtful and prayerful consideration is employed and is accompanied with medical, family, pastoral and other appropriate counsel.

Question 6

Does the reason for the semi-flip-flop of the United Methodist Church beginning in 2012 have broader implications?

Answer 6

Yes. (Please read on Q&A-7 thru Q&A-9.)

Question 7

In other words, does the 2012 change in the United Methodist Church from “Christianity trumps Civil Government” to “Civil Government trumps Christianity” line up with the RCC’s “crack down” on its liberation-theology clergy? [Even though the RCC does NOT believe that its position on abortion and birth control are trumped by Civil Government.]

Answer 7

So it would appear.

Question 8

And, in other words, does the 2012 change in the United Methodist Church mean that it would now disapprove of Methodists marching with the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King in a show of civil disobedience? Or disapprove of Methodists participating in the famous non-violent civil disobedience campaigns of Mahatma Ghandi?

Answer 8

So it would appear. (But please read on Q&A-9.)

Question 9

But isn’t the new position of the United Methodist Church regarding Civil Government trumping Christianity irrelevant for the individual Methodist because the essence of Methodism and many Protestant denominations is that everyone has personal responsibility for her/his actions and cannot hide behind the opinion of a clergy person who might be fallible (unlike, for example, the RCC Pope who is believed by Catholics to be infallible)?

Answer 9

Of course!!!

Question 10

Was the basis of the U.S. Supreme Court’s land-mark 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade that since affluent people could afford to travel to jurisdictions where abortion is legal while the nation’s poor were condemned to obtaining “back alley” abortions from often-unqualified practitioners, the “Equal Protection of the Law” provision of the U.S. Constitution required abortions to be available to everyone?

Answer 10

No.

[The text of Roe v. Wade involving a Texas abortion statute and the text of the companion case, Doe v. Bolton, involving a Georgia abortion statute, are contained in the following Microsoft Word file.]
RL-RoeVWade-Text.doc
(409 KiB) Downloaded 272 times
Notwithstanding attacks, the Roe v. Wade decision should be viewed as both “libertarian” and “strict constructionist”!!!

Critics claim that the Supreme Court invented a “Right to Privacy” even though it is nothing more than the libertarian view that government has no business interfering with individual liberty absent a “state interest” such as “law and order” or “public health.” For example (John Karls’ examples, not the Court’s), government has no business passing a law requiring everyone to part her/his hair on the left side, though government might be able to successfully argue “public health” concerns in sustaining the constitutionality of a law requiring everyone to trim her/his toe nails at least once a week.

And “strict constructionist” critics should have been pleased that the Supreme Court honored the “original intent” of the Constitution’s “Framers” (as its five draftsmen and 39 signers are often called). This is because abortion was NOT even a misdemeanor under English common law and, indeed, abortion under any circumstances was NOT criminalized until the late 1800’s and then by statute. [Please see the attached text of Roe v. Wade at Microsoft Word pp. 12-14.]

But back to the question asked.

There had been widespread speculation in the media leading up to the publication of Roe v. Wade (and Doe v. Bolton) that the decision would be based on the “Equal Protection of the Law” provision of the U.S. Constitution because affluent people could afford to travel to jurisdictions where abortion is legal while the nation’s poor were condemned to obtaining “back alley” abortions from often-unqualified practitioners.

However, Roe v. Wade does not mention “Equal Protection of the Law.”

And although Doe v. Bolton does do so (Microsoft Word pp. 61-62) -- (1) it only addressed “Equal Protection” insofar as only affluent people allegedly could obtain abortions in accredited Georgia hospitals after approval by licensed Georgia physicians (vs. travel to jurisdictions in which abortion was permitted), and (2) the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on this point that since it was striking down Georgia’s requirement that abortions be performed only in accredited Georgia hospitals and striking down Georgia’s requirement of approval by licensed Georgia physicians, the “Equal Protection” issue was moot.

Question 11

Did Roe v. Wade permit states to ban abortion in the third trimester and, if so, subject to what limitations?

Answer 11

Quoting Roe v. Wade at Microsoft Word pp. 29-30:

“A state criminal abortion statute of the current Texas type, that excepts from criminality only a life-saving procedure on behalf of the mother, without regard to pregnancy stage and without recognition of the other interests involved, is violative of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

“(a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician.

“(b) For the stage subsequent to approximately the end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, may, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health.

“(c) For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life [410 U.S. 113, 165] may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.

“The State may define the term "physician," as it has been employed in the preceding paragraphs of this Part XI of this opinion, to mean only a physician currently licensed by the State, and may proscribe any abortion by a person who is not a physician as so defined.”

Question 12

How many states ban abortion in the third trimester?

Answer 12

The third trimester is generally considered to commence with the 24th week of pregnancy.

41 states prohibit abortion after a certain point in the pregnancy -- 21 at fetal viability, 4 in the third trimester, 8 after a certain number of weeks (generally 24 or during the third trimester), and 8 after 20 weeks post-fertilization (or 22 weeks after the last menstrual cycle) on the grounds that the fetus can feel pain after that point.

Question 13

How many states ban abortion after 20 weeks (vs. after 24 weeks which is generally recognized as the beginning of the third trimester)?

Answer 13

8.

Question 14

What is the basis for banning abortion after 20 weeks?

Answer 14

The fetus can feel pain after that point.

Question 15

Are we likely to see an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court in the near future involving one or more of the 8 states that ban abortion after 20 weeks?

Answer 15

Yes, even though Roe v. Wade states (as quoted above) -- “For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life [410 U.S. 113, 165] may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.”

Question 16

What are the three main methods of birth control?

Answer 16

Prophylactics, IUD’s (Intra-Uterine Devices), and The Pill

Question 17

Which of these three main methods of birth control is the abortion-method-of-choice for first trimester abortions?

Answer 17

IUD’s.

Question 18

Is a first trimester abortion using an Intra-Uterine Device (IUD) as safe as using an IUD as the primary method of birth control?

Answer 18

Yes, because IUD’s, though most web-site descriptions will dance around the issue, were/are the equivalent of today’s “Morning After Pill” -- both of which are usually classified as birth-control methods but both of which, in fact, are methods for killing newly-conceived fetuses.

For those of you who can’t find the information after hours of Googling which usually produce some vague assertions about how IUD’s are designed to kill sperm, the unvarnished truth is that IUD’s are designed so that normal body movement will cause the IUD, like a sentry on patrol, to scrape 100% of the uterine walls so that no newly-fertilized egg can attach itself to the uterine walls and begin to grow. Or if the woman is already pregnant, to scrape the uterine walls and cause the young fetus to become detached.

So other than psychological scars, a first-term abortion using an IUD is no more dangerous than using IUD’s as your primary birth-control method.

Question 19

In the 9 states that still permit third trimester abortions, how many practitioners actually perform such abortions openly per the movie, After Tiller?

Answer 19

4.

Question 20

What is the first step in performing a third trimester abortion per the movie, After Tiller?

Answer 20

A lethal injection to the heart of the fetus.

Question 21

Is the reason for a lethal injection to the heart of the fetus comprising the first step of a third trimester abortion that the safest way to preserve the life of the mother and to preserve her ability to have children in the future is for the mother to give birth to the fetus (even though the fetus is now dead) rather than ripping the fetus to pieces and pulling out the fetal parts?

Answer 21

Yes.

Question 22

Who was Dr. Kermit Gosnell?

Answer 22

Dr. Gosnell was a Philadelphia physician who was well known for performing third trimester abortions prior to his trial and criminal conviction in May 2013.

Question 23

Was Dr. Kermit Gosnell and his abortion clinic in Philadelphia performing third trimester abortions in violation of Pennsylvania law?

Answer 23

Yes.

Question 24

Was that the basis for 24 of the felony counts with which he was charged, 21 of which resulted in conviction?

Answer 24

Yes.

Question 25

Instead of killing the third trimester fetuses with a lethal injection to the heart, was Dr. Gosnell having his patients give birth to live babies whose spinal cords he would then snip after birth? Was this the basis for the 8 murder charges against Dr. Gosnell, 3 of which resulted in conviction?

Answer 25

Yes. Yes.

Question 26

The movie After Tiller focuses on mothers seeking third trimester abortions from the 4 remaining practitioners who openly perform them in the 9 states in which they are still legal -- do you think that if the mothers’ reasons had only emerged after their babies had reached the age of, say, three years, the mothers would be justified in having someone like Dr. Gosnell snip their spinal cords at that point?

Answer 26

Hopefully not!!! Because if you did, you might have trouble if your own mother is still alive, explaining why she does not still have the right to have your spinal cord snipped!!!

Question 27

At what point between conception and the age of 3 do you think the right to life should commence? What is the reason for your opinion?

Answer 27

Please come to our meeting on December 11th prepared to discuss this.

Pat
Site Admin
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:11 pm

Q&A-2 and Christ’s Command To Give Away Everything

Post by Pat »

.
“‘Sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me’ = Jesus Christ answering the question of what is necessary to “inherit eternal life” at Mark 10:21.”

So says Q&A-2 in concluding that Jesus Christ was “history’s first practitioner of pure communism (from each according to her/his ability and to each according to her/his need).”

I don’t know what the position of the Roman Catholic Church is with respect to the injunction to give away all your worldly goods, but every Protestant minister seems to give a sermon on this text at least once a year.

And the standard sermon seems to call Christ a liar!!!

He didn’t mean what he said!!! It is only necessary to be WILLING to give up all your worldly possessions and THEN IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO DO SO!!!

But is this true???

Or are ministers simply trying to market a product that is difficult to sell???

Our examinations of Christianity have also noted that on another occasion Christ said that there were TWO requirements in order to “inherit eternal life” = “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbor as thyself” at Luke 10:27 -- whereupon immediately follows the parable of The Good Samaritan to illustrate that EVERYONE is your neighbor.

How is this reconcilable with the requirement to give away all your worldly goods???

Simple!!!

If you really do “love thy neighbor as thyself” then you will give away all your worldly goods!!!

Which does achieve the pure communist ideal of “from each according to her/his ability and to each according to her/his need”!!!

And what about the “Grace Alone” crowd???

Aka Christianity Lite???

They love to cite St. Paul’s statement in Ephesians 2:8-9 – “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.”

There are two problems with Christianity Lite.

First, Christ said on two occasions (the “suffer the little children to come onto me” episode and the “Nicodemus by Night” episode) that to “inherit eternal life” you “must be born again”!!! (More about this requirement in a moment.)

Second, if you are quoting St. Paul in order to call Christ a Liar, then there has to be something wrong!!!

So what does it mean to “be born again”???

And why all the seeming confusion about Christ’s requirements to “inherit eternal life”???

Simple!!!

The reason why Christ did NOT say there were THREE requirements (Love God, Love Your Neighbor AND Be Born Again) is that loving God and loving your neighbor is his definition of what it means to be Born Again!!!

And, as previously noted, if you really do love your neighbor (and you really are Born Again), then you will give away all your worldly goods -- NOT just be willing to do so!!!

So what was St. Paul really trying to say???

And what is really wrong with Christianity Lite???

In this regard, it is important to consider WHAT CHRIST SAID in the Sermon on the Mount immediately following the Beatitudes -- “Let thy light so shine before men, that THEY MAY SEE YOUR GOOD WORKS, and glorify your Father which is in heaven” at Matthew 5:16.

If Paul’s statement to the Ephesians is compared to Christ’s Sermon on the Mount, it is readily apparent that the key to reconciling them is the motivation of the good works – Is it for purposes of boasting??? Or is it for purposes of glorifying God???

So where does all this leave us???

With the conclusion that it is difficult, if not impossible, to find fault with Christianity as preached by Christ!!!

And all of the criticisms relate to false interpretations of clergy trying to market a product that is difficult to sell!!!

Post Reply

Return to “Participant Comments – Third-Trimester Abortions – Dec. 11th”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest