At the risk of sounding like a raving feminist, are men who are caught in flagrante immune from civil punishment?

You certainly do sound like a raving feminist to say such a thing, because it has nothing to do with anything.  When did I ever say anything about men not being punished for adultery?  I have quoted St. Thomas Aquinas, who explains that the adultery of a wife is graver than that of a husband because of the possibility of fraud of paternity.

As another poster has dubbed you, "The Queen of Straw"

Perhaps we don't want to be part of any pressure to abort that a woman might be under.

As others have said, the fact that abortion is evil doesn't make bastardy something to be praised, but the way people act these days, you'd think it should be praised.

The laxity of parents is the reason this situation so frequently arises.

Abortion is a far bigger scandal, but unlike a baby, it is invisible.

Yes, and the reason it's legal is that the Vatican II Church gave up its resistance to modern culture, just as the liberalized SSPX is giving up.

Babies are always blessings from God.

So a parent should be grateful then, if their child has a daughter out of wedlock?

You are the "queen of straw" - no one ever said a baby isn't a blessing.

Quote from: Sigismund

Not because the Old Law was wrong or immoral.

What did Our Lord say to the men who were planning to stone her?

He certainly didn't say "Moses was wrong."
 

I know what He didn't do.  You are evading the question.  Whey did Our Lord do what He did?

Quote from: Telesphorus

Quote from: Sigismund

Not because the Old Law was wrong or immoral.

What did Our Lord say to the men who were planning to stone her?

He certainly didn't say "Moses was wrong."
 

I know what He didn't do.  You are evading the question.  Whey did Our Lord do what He did?

Nicholas of Lyra OFM states in his commentary on John 7:54-8:11, if there was this adulterous woman, then were was the man with whom she had committed adultery? The old law required that both the adulterous woman and the man she committed adultery with to be put to death (Deut. 22:22). Thus, the pharisees were not following the law, and would have condemned themselves to death.

Quote from: clare

Babies are always blessings from God.

So a parent should be grateful then, if their child has a daughter out of wedlock?

Aren't we supposed to give thanks for everything that befalls us? God brings good out of evil.

Quote from: Sigismund

Quote from: Telesphorus

Quote from: Sigismund

Not because the Old Law was wrong or immoral.

What did Our Lord say to the men who were planning to stone her?

He certainly didn't say "Moses was wrong."
 

I know what He didn't do.  You are evading the question.  Whey did Our Lord do what He did?

Nicholas of Lyra OFM states in his commentary on John 7:54-8:11, if there was this adulterous woman, then were was the man with whom she had committed adultery? The old law required that both the adulterous woman and the man she committed adultery with to be put to death (Deut. 22:22). Thus, the pharisees were not following the law, and would have condemned themselves to death.

Thank you!  That is a very helpful citation.  I am not convinced that Our Lord would have continued the prescription of the Old Law.  He certainly didn't always do so.  This is an excellent point, however.

Quote from: Sigismund

Why is that not certain, or at least possible?

It is certain.  I've already quoted St. Thomas about it.

St. Thomas lived in a world far different from ours. His summa is not dogma. St. Thomas More wrote utopia, does that mean we as Catholics should embrace it as how the worlds societies should be? Use of logic and common sense would tell you that the summa is not the law on these matters. However the summa has many good rules and lessons that all peoples of this earth should follow.

Quote from: egoveritas

Quote from: Telesphorus

Quote from: Sigismund

Why is that not certain, or at least possible?

It is certain.  I've already quoted St. Thomas about it.

St. Thomas lived in a world far different from ours. His summa is not dogma. St. Thomas More wrote utopia, does that mean we as Catholics should embrace it as how the worlds societies should be? Use of logic and common sense would tell you that the summa is not the law on these matters. However the summa has many good rules and lessons that all peoples of this earth should follow.

So according to you, St. Thomas was wrong?  

Truth doesn't change.  Adultery is a capital crime, as St. Thomas says.

I am not say st. Thomas is wrong I'm saying your interpretation of his summa is wrong. You interpret it as a person would have in the old testament, void and with no mercy.
God in his infinite goodness and wisdom can be nothing but just so stoning a woman for adultery is a just punishment. Any sin is worthy of death just by the mere fact that it directly goes against God's nature. However our Lord came down, died, and opened the gates of heaven... By doing so He attained Gods mercy through His death and our Ladies intercession. We being made in the image and likeness of God should try to be more patient and have compassion for our fellow beings. You and I are both just as weak as anyone else.
My point is that you would have no problem killing that girl for her sin. I warn you again let God be the judge.  

I am not say st. Thomas is wrong I'm saying your interpretation of his summa is wrong. You interpret it as a person would have in the old testament, void and with no mercy.

The Old Testament makes the body obedient to the mind and raises it towards the soul by means of the virtues, preventing the mind from being dragged down towards the body.  The New Testament fires the Mind with love and unites it to God.  Thus the Old Testament makes the body one in its activity with the mind; the New Testament makes the mind one with God through the state of grace.  So close is the likeness to God which the mind acquires, that God, who is not known as He is by nature in Himself to anyone in any way at all, is known through it just as an archetype is know from an image.

Since the Old Testament is a symbol of the practice of the virtues, it brings the body's activity into harmony with that of the mind.  Since the New Testament confers contemplation and spiritual knowledge, it illumines with divine intellections and gifts of grace the mind that cleaves to it mystically.  The Old Testament supplies the man of spiritual knowledge with the qualities of virtue; the New Testament endows the man practicing the virtues with the principles of true knowledge.

EV, your statement is the error of Marcion in the early Church. The God of the Old Testament is merciful and just, just as he is in the New Testament. After all, in the OT he spared King David's life when he could taken his life.

God in his infinite goodness and wisdom can be nothing but just so stoning a woman for adultery is a just punishment. Any sin is worthy of death just by the mere fact that it directly goes against God's nature. However our Lord came down, died, and opened the gates of heaven... By doing so He attained Gods mercy through His death and our Ladies intercession. We being made in the image and likeness of God should try to be more patient and have compassion for our fellow beings. You and I are both just as weak as anyone else.
My point is that you would have no problem killing that girl for her sin. I warn you again let God be the judge.  

I don't think anyone here would deny that the spiritual penalty matters more than the civil penalty, especially more so since the Incarnation of Christ, but that doesn't mean that the civil penalty can be tossed out the window. If we take that idea to its logical conclusion, murderers who say they are sorry can go free. That would in essence turn Christ into a political revolutionary.