Liberal catholics are a cult, just like liberals themselves. In fact, many liberal catholics have been excommunicated recently.
There is only one magisterium of the Holy See. That magisterium is Humanae Vitae. Freedom of conscience, even if it exists, does not allow a layman to create his own dogma, his own doctrine, his own teaching, his own magisterium.
Contraception does NOT prevent abortion because Abortion ultimately becomes used as a form of contraception in itself. This way, the principle utterly defeats its own goals by feeding into social phenomena, a kind of sub-culture of onanistic ”mis-reproduction”.

This is so simple it is ridiculous.
Use of contraceptives = less abortions. If there is no contraception, then yes, Spirit of the World, abortion might be used to stop the pregnancy…which if birth control (condoms for instance) were easily available…and encouraged…wouldn’t be necessary.
There is nothing cult like about liberals…whether they are Catholics (former perhaps) or anyone else. The fact is that with the forbidding of artificial birth control by the RCC, Catholic women in many poor countries are being infected with Aids, and STD’s. They continue to give birth to children who die in infancy or their early years because the mothers can’t feed them or get medical care for them. But the RCC continues to tell these women that they are not to use anything, except the “natural method” of birth control. How many poor women have a calendar to keep track of those “safe days” or understand what those are anyhow?
Liberal Catholics have been excommunicated? Expect that is what happens when a Catholic thinks differently from what he/she is supposed to. No freedom of thought. Personally, my Catholic friends have no problem with artificial birth control methods. It’s called planning. It’s better to be able to feed, clothe and educate the children like they want to do. BTW, they are still practicing Catholics. They just happen to not fall for the “continue to reproduce” whether you can afford it or not stuff.
contraception = less abortions. easy.

Steve, your asking “wouldn’t the strongest argument be that promoting contraception would reduce the number of abortions?” shows that you don’t know official Catholic thinking very well. It is based on the idea that human personhood begins at CONCEPTION. And since many methods of birth-control involve terminating the life of a “conceived” embryo, what you are expecting the pope to accept is one form of abortion (early) in order to avoid another form (later). That’s why it wont work. See my http://CatholicArrogance.Org/ChristianChoice .

Like most pro-lifers, Spirit of the World would rather save none of the unborn children if he cannot save them all. And besides, fewer abortions means that there is less imperative behind the pro-life plank of the GOP.
And after all, electing Republicans is more important than saving babies.

Asks Steve:
Have liberal Catholics become so allied with progressives in general that they couldn’t go there less [sic] they anger pro-choice allies? Or have liberal Catholics become so pro-choice themselves that were uncomfortable including this powerful argument?”
You mean you’re that out of touch with Catholics (in general, not just the “progressives” (spit) or the “liberals” (ditto)?
According to a May, 2004 CBS News poll, 34% of all Catholics think that abortion should be generally available to those who want it, and a further 37% of all Catholics thik it should be available, but wit stricter limits than it is now. Only 28% of all Catholics think it should not be permitted.
From a January 2, 2008 article in Clergy matters:
“During a recent broadcast of WPRI/WNAC-TV’s Newsmakers, Bishop Thomas J. Tobin of the Diocese of Providence indicated he could not explain why about 65 percent of his flock — in the most Catholic state in the union — is pro-choice on abortion rights.”
Apparently, also very out of touch. And, I conjecture, quite a lot more such Bishops are similarly out of touch with Catholic opinion. Not to mention reality in general.

Unfair generalization DonF. I am pro-life and understand and accept the merits of contraception. Do you really think Repubs want high level of abortions to give greater weight to a pro-life plank? About 700,000 to 800,000 babies are aborted each year in the U.S. You actually think pro-life advocates would be LESS committed to the plank if there were, say, ONLY 500,000 abortions per year?

“…trying to convince the Pope…”
But that’s where we differ from other churches: We don’t try to convince the Pope of anything, because we believe that in matters of faith and morals, the Holy Spirit leads the Church, not the man in the tall hat. That’s why we don’t take votes on doctrinal issues like the Anglicans do.
These badly catechized “Catholic” groups can talk all they want, but it’s in vain. If they want a church where the popular vote rules, they should convert to Protestantism.

“quite a lot more such Bishops are similarly out of touch with Catholic opinion”
Actually, “Catholic opinion” is out of touch with the Catholic doctrine. People always assume the shepherds have strayed from the flock, but no one seems to ever realize it’s the flock that has strayed from the shepherd.

Steve: Those are important points but if you’re trying to convince the Pope (or traditional Catholics in general) wouldn’t the strongest argument be that promoting contraception would reduce the number of abortions?
Judging from some of the responses to your post, I’m not sure that it would. The most “conservative” seem to argue that you must simply accept what the church says. No dissent allowed. The open letter rightly points out that there was support for rejecting “artificial” contraception. I think the group wanted to focus on only one issue and not muddy the waters with abortion, especially since some would say it’s a form of “artificial” contraception. But, you don’t have to be a liberal Catholic to support “artificial” contraception…almost 80% favor a lifting of the ban.

When the Bishops in the RCC and Benny16 are all sitting in their Ivory Towers, they have no clue about life for women in any economic group (since they are supposed to be celibate, but I doubt that all are). How can any man, much less a celibate priest have any clue what it would be like to be pregnant by accident and not be able to feed or clothe the future child. As aside, how can priests give marital advice!!?? The whole idea that there should be no contraception (except natural..a joke) just makes no sense.
Guess the spread of STD’s and Aids (which can be mostly prevented by condoms) is not a problem for those Ivory Tower guys. American Catholics at least, for the most part, use their own brains when it comes to birth control. Again I say, contraception=fewer pregnancys= fewer abortions. Too bad the Ivory Tower guys don’t understand that. Where is it stated that just because something has been written for centuries that it can’t be changed?

It doesn’t make any sense to me that allowing contraception would reduce abortion. If someone believes enough in Catholic Doctrine to not use contraceptives what are the chances that they would go against the Doctrine and get an abortion?

anon: If indeed a woman is a believer hook, line and sinker, in the Catholic doctrine and isn’t using contraceptives, then she gets pregnant…probably as often as is possible. She wouldn’t consider an abortion. Would make Benny proud. However if a woman is a Catholic who thinks for herself, but really doesn’t want to be barefoot and pregnant her whole reproductive life, then she will use contraception…and if there is an accidental pregnancy might or might not have an abortion. An interesting point…Italians use artificial birth control…and Benny is in Italy. Smart women.
The article however was aimed at poor women in poor countries, who have been convinced that the RCC is THE WAY to believe and they are the ones who are getting Aids, and STD’s and having children they can’t afford. By allowing “artificial” birth control, (condoms) there wouldn’t be children or as much spreading of STD’s and Aids. Thus: contraception=fewer unwanted pregnancys (and STD’s)= fewer abortions.

“Do you really think Repubs want high level of abortions to give greater weight to a pro-life plank? About 700,000 to 800,000 babies are aborted each year in the U.S. You actually think pro-life advocates would be LESS committed to the plank if there were, say, ONLY 500,000 abortions per year?”
Republicans want the pro-life issue to be firmly in the minds of their grass-roots voters every two years. Why else would they have failed to even make an effort to push the Human Life Amendment when they had control of both Houses of Congress?
The record is clear. The GOP would rather have an issue come election day than live babies.

One reason may be that many of the most common methods of contraception are classified as abortion by the Church, including the pill and any sort of implant or injection. The idea is that those methods may possibly (Russell’s golden teapot comes to mind.) prevent a fertilized egg from implanting. So if you’re talking to the Vatican nincompoopocracy, arguing that contraception prevents abortions won’t convince anybody.

they won’t site abortion because it is just not important when compared to the scourge of infectious disease, and the deepening poverty incurred by unwanted pregnancies. this is a non-issue.

There are now 5.8 billion human beings on the planet according to the United Nations.In a world that currently wrestles with such serious problems as global warming, the thinning of the ozone layer, increasing crime rates, toxic chemicals in our food, and starvation in developing nations, each of which is at least partially due to growing world population, it’s hard to imagine anyone opposing restraints on population controls.

If you’re in not good state and have no money to get out from that point, you will have to take the loans. Just because it should aid you definitely. I take car loan every single year and feel OK because of that.