A) As far as I know Roe allows for some restriction
Yes, it does. And the Church even allows legislation that permits abortion if it also limits abortion. For instance, it would be permissible under Church teaching to vote in favor of a bill that allows abortion only for the first two trimesters as it would, at least in the US be disallowing third trimester abortions.
B) there is also the obligation to fight against more permissable laws.
I agree. That is why I said Catholic Republicans who did nothing when they controlled both houses shirked their responsibility.
C) that is some grade a semantic bullshittery
I'm not sure what you are referencing.
What about non-fetal stem cell lines?
Depending how they are produced, the Church is fine with it. In the past they were referred to as adult stem cells. However, there is now a procedure to turn adult stem cells back into the equivalent of fetal stem cells (I am uncertain as to whether or not they could grow into an actual fetus), but the Church is opposed to that procedure. Ironically, for fetal stem cells to be useful, they have to be differentiated into adult stem cells, otherwise bad things can happen like growing bone and hair in organs that aren't supposed to have bone and hair. There is now a lot of research about taking a person's own stem cells from fat cells and reprogramming them to be the type needed for the procedure. The upside is that there is no risk of rejection. The downside is that they still need fetal stem cells as part of the process (I think. I haven't kept up with the research to be positive on that).
Are you seriously suggesting that there is an obligation to do evil? That has nothing to do with Catholicism and is actually forbidden by the subreddits rules.
No. I am saying just the opposite. I should have phrased it "From the Church's perspective, any effort to make what society terms "useful" stem cell lines, requires research and procedures that the Church deems unethical like harvesting cells from aborted fetus' or frozen embryos." I was not condoning such research, I was condemning it. Thank you for the opportunity to clarify things.
Then why bring it up as an argument in defense of Biden?
I didn't bring it up as a defense of Biden. I was clarifying a misunderstanding of a prior comment.
Still better than the current situation.
I agree. But ultimately, changing the location where the abortion occurs does not stop abortions. It just makes them slightly less convenient.
why not both?
I'm fine with that.
And social services do not necessarily decrease abortion rates, see Sweden.
I just have research to what are given as the leading reasons for abortion in the US. I don't have data on Sweden so I can't really comment other than, data from the Pew Foundation does show when specific issues are addressed that are causing women to seek an abortion, they choose to keep the child. The problem is that there are different reasons for different women, so a one size fits all solution is likely not going to be as effective as a multi-pronged approach.
To signal that the pro- childmurder ideology has no place in the church and maybe to get some to change their mind.
Do your really think Biden and other pro-abortion politicians don't know their ideology is inconsistent with what the Church teaches? Actually, do you really think that anybody in the US doesn't know the Church's position? I am more interested in getting woman who are seeking an abortion to change their mind then Biden or Pelosi changing theirs.
The alternative is to let the cancer of the pro-childmurder ideology spread.
I've got news for you, according to polls the ideology has already taken over. There is no need for it to spread. Part of the problem with the notion of denying Communion to politicians is the though in stemming the spread of the abortion ideology. We have tried that approach for almost fifty years and it has allowed the ideology to grow unchecked so that now it is pervasive.
Oh yeah "dialogue", which means doing absolutely nothing.
Just the opposite. The Bishops were to meet to craft a statement that was consistent, effective and authoritative. Now we have different bishops issuing their own contradicting statements and it just reinforces in the mind of the public that we are a bunch of old men out of touch with reality. It has further hurt the credibility of the Church and is being used by those with agendas against us.
It never actually a possibility because bishops like McElroy do not want to do anything. Like ++Cupich objecting to the utterly tame commentary on Biden's inauguration.
I trust that the Holy Spirit knows what He is doing when a Bishop is chosen. I might not understand the selection, but I trust Jesus when He said the gates of Hell won't prevail against the Church.
As usual, we are going to end up agreeing to disagree. That is fine. I do appreciate the thought provoking discussion. Grace and peace to you and know that you and yours are in my prayers.