A reiteration from another conversation:

God is not a syllogism; why, then, do so many approach so many realities regarding the imago Dei, a human person, that way?

Especially regarding gender, sex & life issues, where essentialistic, substantialistic, a prioristic, rationalistic, deductivistic, physicalistic, biologistic, infallibilistic & a litany of other pejorative -istics too often end up comprising - rather than an affirmation - an affront on the human person!

People of goodwill can reasonably dis/agree as to whether or not concepts like intrinsic evil even cohere and principles like moral probabilism & prudential judgment should apply.

Even the pastoral accommodations to mothers who've aborted & others in "irregular" relationships (divorced-remarried, contracepting & LGBTQ couples) can be experienced as condescending, when their moral calculus differs & consciences are clear, due to neither invincible ignorance nor poor formation.