Francis, you asked

>>In what part of his mind did KRS1 concoct the idiocy of "a particular circle of hell reserved for the aborted"?<<

Under the doctrine of necessitate medii, baptism is so critical to achieving entry to heaven, that "if [baptism is] lacking (though inculpably), salvation can not be attained"

By definition then, if infants are not excused, the same must apply to a foetus. All are bound for hell.

Which creates an interesting slant on the nature of hell - and, by definition, heaven.

I suppose that if on the one hand you threaten people with eternal damnation, eternal fires and whatnot, balance demands a carrot to go alongside the stick. Ergo heaven. But while eternal torment is a simple concept to explain, especially to the weak and intimidated, I have yet to hear a convincing description of heaven.

Is it going to be full of unborn foetuses as well as the halt, lame and geriatric? What do they do all day? And if the geriatrics sit around playing harps, what do the foetuses do?

Or do they "become music" as one poster said on another thread? But if heaven is merely populated by spirits, how do we get to send corporeal beings to hell, so that they can actually feel the heat? Even the babies? Come on...

This is too important a discussion, about a human being's right to take control over the way they conduct their life, to introduce childish fantasies such as heaven and hell.

Pericles,

A little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing. (I notice you have not identified where your quote comes from)....but the Catechism of the Catholic Church makes it quite clear that you're very wrong. Perhaps because this is what you want to believe. You're references re heaven and hell are really childish.

Francis, I'm always willing to learn.

The source I used was called the Catholic Encyclopaedia, but I guess it could have been some Proddy misinformation.

As far as I can tell, they relied upon John iii, quoting "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he can not enter into the kingdom of God." which seems clear enough.

This was apparently reinforced by the Council of Trent in 1546 from which the catechism of Trent was derived...

"If any one denies, that infants, newly born from their mothers' wombs, even though they be sprung from baptized parents, are to be baptized; or says that they are baptized indeed for the remission of sins, but that they derive nothing of original sin from Adam, which has need of being expiated by the laver of regeneration for the obtaining life everlasting,-whence it follows as a consequence, that in them the form of baptism, for the remission of sins, is understood to be not true, but false, -let him be anathema."

It's a bit obscure, but once you have crossed out all the double negatives it basically says 'don't fool yourselves, guys, kids must be baptized, or they go straight to hell'

Well, Francis, those are my sources, what are yours?

And if you believe my references to heaven and hell are childish, answer them as you would a child.

"Francis, do foetuses burn when they go to hell?"

I wish to ignore most of what has been said above by all parties, but to add this thought.

Shouldn't abortion be considered a societal sin if we as a society encourage through a permissive sexual ethic our members to engage in actions which will lead them to create new life in situations in which abortions are bound to occur?

The encourager of free love has a lot to answer for when they are the cause of most abortions.

I actually think that a whole lot of society's problems could be reduced, if we start to accept that the world has changed and act accordingly.

People today, especially through the powers of the internet, are better and better informed. The more informed they are, the more they question. They simply won't accept traditional authority anymore, unquestioningly, as they used to. Fair enough.

I really believe that the days where people can be threatened as I was a child by the nuns, of burning forever etc if I didn't behave,
are over. The old stick and carrot approaches that religion used for centuries, are ending. Anyone can Google "Inquisition" and read how say Giordano Bruno was held in a Vatican prison for years and then burnt at the stake for being a heretic. So much for the claims of the sanctity of human life. This was a thinking, feeling, human person, being burnt alive by the Church!

These days we need to educate and reason, not threaten. If I had my way, every school would forget religious instruction and introduce the basics of conflict resolution/ ethics/ morality/philosophy etc,
to get kids thinking about these things, including the roles of things like relationships, love, sex, commitment etc. in our lives.

Knowledge is power, reason is power. The days of proclaiming that sex is evil, masturbation is evil etc. simply because so called authorities claim it to be, are over for most of us but the small
% of the religiously obsessed.

Pericles,

My source is the Catechism of the Catholic Church which makes it absolutely clear that your interpretation is wrong. If you want to refer to John's Gospel Jesus was talking to an adult.....not about children. In Mark's Gospel he says that the kingdom of God belongs to children.