Some conversations stay with us a long time. I vividly remember a conversation from college. I was in a group of students who had been put together to work on a project. In the course of our first meeting one of the young women in the group mentioned that she was a vegetarian. Immediately, some of the other students began to ask her questions.

One student asked rather bluntly, “Don’t you ever miss eating meat?” This young woman responded by saying that she still eats meat all the time — especially chicken. As it turns out she had only given up eating beef.

With this revelation someone then asked, “So you’re not really a vegetarian then?” To which this young woman replied quite emphatically, “Oh yes I am! In fact, I’m a very strict vegetarian!”

Realizing that this young woman was neither kidding nor grasping the inherent contradiction in her two claims, the rest of us awkwardly changed the subject and went about the task at hand.

I’ve thought about that conversation often, largely because of the boldness with which this young woman insisted that two obviously mutually exclusive realities somehow were not mutually exclusive at all. Was her claim caused by a lapse in logic? Or was it caused by a blindness born of the desire to have a certain identity — even if our choices exclude us from actually possessing that identity? I don’t know. Clearly though, she wanted to claim the identity without actually upholding the basic principles it requires.

I was reminded of this experience recently when I was shown a full page ad that ran in the Chicago Tribune on Sept. 12, 2016. The add was sponsored by a group which calls itself “Catholics for Choice.”

Although this group is in no way sanctioned, approved or affiliated with the Catholic Church, the name causes no little confusion.

The ad made the incomprehensible and nonsensical claim that supporting “public funding of abortion is a Catholic social justice value.” Similar ads appeared in major newspapers around the country.

Since then, pro-life groups and the U.S. bishops have stated what should be clear already — that support for abortion is diametrically opposed to Catholic social and moral teaching. There is no gray area. There is no “maybe.”

Advocacy for abortion has never, nor will it ever, be something tolerable for Catholics. To claim otherwise is simply a denial of an obvious contradiction.

A Catholic can certainly be forgiven for any sin for which they’re truly sorry, including abortion. But when one advocates for a moral evil, like abortion, it is not only an extremely grave sin in itself, but one which persists as long as the advocacy does. Being in such a state would exclude a Catholic from participation in the sacraments, until it is sincerely repented.

“Catholics for Choice,” by their own admission, is a group of people who are ardent supporters of abortion and other issues opposed to Catholic moral teaching. As such, there is nothing “Catholic” about them, despite the name.

Calling oneself “Catholic” necessitates a particular set of beliefs that one adheres to, and that includes certain moral beliefs. Choices have consequences. One cannot both reject and oppose the Catholic faith and claim to be an adherent of it. To make such a claim is akin to someone calling themselves a vegetarian while continuing to eat meat. The freely chosen behavior is ultimately a renunciation of the identity claimed.

While people may at times struggle with certain teachings of the Church, advocacy against Church teaching is another matter altogether. From the time of the Apostles, Christians have understood that supporting certain immoral practices was to make a choice — to choose to separate oneself from the Christian identity.

What is strikingly ironic about a group like “Catholics for Choice” is that they seem incapable of actually “choosing” between the name itself and the faith intrinsic to the name.