REACTION PAPER

BPM 103 (A) Overview of Moral Theology

Fr. Abundio R. Babor, Jr., MSC, STD
Thursday 9:00 – 11:50 am

As a Catholic moralist, make a reply(10-15 pages, double space)to the letter writer below.Be
creative in your arguments by citing sources of Catholic moral tradition, pastoral teachings/by
basingyour argumentsfrom yourconcrete experiences/by citing situations/people that you know
or have encountered.

Dear Catholic moralist,

I got tired of moral arguments in public debates. So, I decided to just write you. I'm pro-choice,
and at the heart of that argument is accepting that other people have a right to choose whether
you think their choice is right or not. Even if I thought fetuses should count as full-fledged
human beings, I believe that other people would still have the right to make that determination
for themselves.You say that abortion is murder. Can you define life? For me, life is an organism
that can reproduce itself using DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid). But when does life begin in the
development of said organism? No one can say. Sure, your Bible or other religious text can say,
but why accept what is written in the past? To those of us who do not accept that said religious
text, you judge that we are wrong (fundamentalism has so many logical flaws it boggles the
mind). The mere fact that someone a long time ago wrote down something that could be
interpreted to mean that abortion is murder is no basis whatsoever for a modern interpretation
of morality. What, after all, is alive? Is a fetus alive? Is cancer alive? Are viruses alive? All
different views, all subjective answers.

Life is a tricky thing, often defined only by our culture and personal opinion. Some cultures
don't think infants are alive until they've survived a few months. Some cultures believe life starts
with sex. Who is right? Can anyone be right where the definition is a purely human opinion? I
think we can do better than saying life only begins months after birth, but who's to say? The
potential to become a human being does not make something alive. If it is potential life, it is no
more so than a sperm or egg. Is every egg that flushes out with the menstrual cycle, every sperm
caught in a condom a murder? Is every miscarriage manslaughter? I hardly think so. Even if
you think so, you cannot prove it in logical argument, and as such has no basis for what other
people should do.

We shouldn't interfere with the natural process? Look at what is happening to the world today.
We've mastered the world that nothing is natural anymore, and no one can say exactly what is
natural, e.g. genetically modified organisms, climate change, etc. Besides, if we abide by the
natural process as the argument suggests that we should, then there would be overpopulation,
and there would be more people who are poor, homeless, starving, etc. We might be headed for
that anyway. Contraception and reproductive freedom are essential to the wellbeing of the
planet and the wellbeing of our species. And if you're going to argue that such wellbeing is
wrong, you're quite welcome to go live in the forest, clad in rotting animal skins and hide
underneath a leaf when it rains.

People shouldn't have sex unless they want a child? Sex is not just for procreation. It's an action
of love, of bonding, and of joy. You can be ready for sex without being ready to have kids, or
ever wanting to have kids. Sex, as part of life, contributes to many people's emotional
development and life experiences, before they want to become parents. And some people never
want to be parents, anyway. They shouldn't be condemned to abstinence their entire lives. Sex is
a very personal, very private thing, and one person's sexual morals and hang-ups have no place
in another person's bedroom. If you want to hold off until marriage or until you're ready to be a
parent, great! If you want to play the field and experience sex with many different partners,
great! - but please be safe and use protection, for yourself and for your partners. At any rate,
just like abortion, the decision to be sexually active is yours and no one else's. And if you face
pregnancy because of your choice, at least it's not the end of the world. Parenthood needs to be
chosen - the consequences of that choice are much dire than the consequences of the choice to
have sex.

As what you have said that medical evidence indicates those brainwaves/pain reception/etc. are
present in fetuses, that may be so. But do brainwaves make a life? Do they equal
consciousness? Not one person has yet to definitively define when, before birth something can
be considered a human life. At one point in its development, the fetus looks like a pig. Pigs have
brainwaves. Is the fetus then at the same status as a pig? Very well then; why, if the fetus
resembles a human, and has brainwaves, should it be considered a human? If fetuses can
register pain, that is a cause for concern. Human life or not, few conscientious people want to
cause undue pain to any life formexceptdoing euthanasia to a suffering person. But what about
the pain of a woman forced to go through birth? And is it not more painfulto have more children
(if you’re not rich) in this unjust world where there is so much inequality and social injustice?

Everyone should be given a choice for what he/she wants to do with his/her life. What good is
morality if there is no choice made? Not good at all. The person must choose for oneself or the
value of the choice one makes is meaningless.

- Elaine, the Moral Crusader