Reply With Quote
I'm amazed there are people in here defending this decision.
Nicely put.
I'm amazed there are people in here defending this decision.
I'm not defending it, I'm actually torn by it.
I'm amazed other people are not torn by it too.
Had the girl's health not been in danger, had she been older, I would be more torn by it Smeagol. But in this case - physically alone, I believe 100% it was the right decision. And if it makes any difference, I'm not devaluing human life or what an embryo is or isn't. I've had 2 failed pregnancies in the last 6 months. I wasn't callous about them because they were early or not sentient or anything. I've wept for my children. But I still think this was the right call.
There's nothing to be torn about a church turning its back on people in need.
I understand where you are coming from. I'm obviously pro-life and feel abortion is only warranted when the mother's life is in danger. Given the mother's age, and although I have not read any medical report confirming this, I believe this is the case (mother's life in danger).
Nevertheless, I still feel for the two lives that are being destroyed. No matter what the situation or the cir stance of a pregnancy, chosing to abort kills a life. And that makes me sad. Even in this case.
I'm talking about the decision to abort, not the excomuniaction.
She was 80 pounds, and 9 years old. Her life was in danger with twins, no doubt about it. Very likely with only one baby, because of the weight, her size and the fact that most teenage mothers (and she wasn't even a teenager) run higher risks for certain pregnancy complications.
And this ignores the fact she had no prenatal care prior to the discovery of the pregnancy at 15 weeks and that with twins, it was unlikely she was receiving adequate nutrition for all of their development.
Eh, probably not if the individual isn't suffering. I assume you know we have legalized physician assisted suicide here in Oregon. I'm on board with that.
Your sense of smell is dead on. The Catholic religion is one big hypocritical joke.
Just when this family needs thier church more than ever, they "suspend" them. Classic. When will people learn?
Care to expand, you Catholic expert you?
So if these two babys were aborted,killed (for argument sake) do they go to or Heaven?The babys had no clue who Jesus was. Will they become lil Angels or Satans pets?
Not really.
Not surprised coming from you.
Through the stone, hide the hand kind of guy.
The adherence to the Catholic Church is still voluntary, right? I mean this decision is strictly between the Church and those individuals, correct? There's no repercussion whatsoever in the legal sphere, am I correct? Churches and religions have rules and faithfuls are supposed to follow them, as long as they don't impact with their civil rights, correct?
So, what's the ing problem with this? It's a private relationship between the hierarchy of the church and some of their members! Nobody was hurt. What do you people want to do? Force a church to accept members that break the rules? Do you understand how ing totalitarian that is? Freedom of religion is a basic right of every human being. That includes allowing Churches to set their own rules and say "hey mate, if you don't want to follow our rules, just find another church that suits you better". That's what happened here. Stop being so over-emotional and reactionary.
I don't think that anyone here is suggesting that the state get involved - there are, however, several people expressing incredulity at the church rejecting some of their members at a time when they probably need the church most. A mother and doctors probably saved that girl's life and the church turned their back on what is a heartwrenchingly difficult situation. The church is a private en y and can do what it wants in that regard, but I don't see this as a way for the ministry of the church to be the supportive and uplifting influence that it could be.
I also still have a huge problem with no mention of excommunication for the stepfather who was the perpetrator, and if we're going to talk about this in terms of "breaking the rules", then is aggravated sexual assault of a child not "against the rules" enough for excommunication? Should not all murderers be excommunicated if they are going to do this for an abortion?
They don't want to lose so many priests.
i guess since manu doesnt believe in god he would have no problem con un aborto
I did not believe in God in my 20s and still was against abortion.
It all depends what you it is you are aborting. Is it a human life or a thing?
i think a fetus is a fetus, not a human
the abortion issue is just used to divide the patriots up
going to catholic school and church and ccd for years really does make you sympathetic to the cause
but if abortion wasnt legal here in the states you would have dumb chicks kicking themselves in the stomach and other horrific things
I'm going to assume you meant throw. Obviously you've never been an altar boy.
Meh, the Catholic church has had enough of its skeletons dragged out of the closet (or put on public display). Whether that mean the entire, modern, Catholic church should be dismissed outright is up to the individual, but there's enough common-knowledge evidence, that it's easy to understand why some individuals would do so.
Well, I mean no offense, but stay away from that church then if you "don't see this as a way for the ministry of the church to be the supportive and uplifting influence that it could be". The Roman Catholic Church has been around for a few centuries now, like 21, so they probably know what they are doing. These issues have been discussed by hundreds of years, with some of the most brilliant minds ever produced by the man kind, from Augustine to Aquinas. Still, I can't understand what's your problem with it if you're not a Catholic. I suspect that's because you don't fully understand what an excommunication is. Or even partially.
I mean, turned their back? Why do you say that? It seems to me that you're confusing excommunication with some kind of ostracism. It has nothing to do with that, quite the opposite. An excommunication is an invitation to repentance, reflection and a deeper involvement with the Church. People are not forbidden of going to the Mass, for example; quite the opposite, they're encouraged to go more. And it's not exactly some kind of perpetual punishment either (it's not even a punishment, in a doctrinal sense): an excommunication is quickly resolved with a confession, there are tons of excommunication being sentenced and resolved a few minutes later in concessionaires every freaking day. I'm pretty sure thousands of Catholic priests have given absolutions to excommunications for the practice of abortions at least once in their life. So, turning their back my ass. I'm positively sure that the girl and her mother are receiving plenty of support from Catholics and from their priesthood. Where exactly are you seeing the "rejection"?
Answering your questions: Catholic doctrine is a product of a perpetual and non-stop philosophical, moral and theological conversation. Unfortunately, the tendency (from the last few decades, even from the last century) is, from my point of view, to exaggerate the value of life in an absolutist conceptualization and equate all type of killing, blurring very important differences. The traditional understanding was that the killing of an innocent life was more serious than, say, a tyrannicide - and therefore was treated differently. Nowadays the doctrine is getting very close of what it seems to be your understanding of what it should be: life is a supreme and absolute value and any kind of offence against it is regarded as an act of equal demerit.
Anyway, here's a link with some explanation on this issue:
http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/Abortio2.htm
My problem with it actually has less to do the concept of excommunication as it does with the simple concepts of empathy, tolerance, forgiveness, and love - all of which are teachings of Jesus Christ, and none of which, I feel, were displayed by the church in this decision.
Because I'm sure that this family has been completely free of ostracism since the Catholic church publicly called them out on this and said they had sinned, with the Vatican publicly backing up the decision. Excommunication may a less malevolent option when carried out privately, but it is a whole other case being in the public sphere now. Its effects are different, and I think more harmful to both the affected individuals and the church.It seems to me that you're confusing excommunication with some kind of ostracism.
But I think you misunderstand my point - it was not to try and change anyone's mind, or have any affect on the church (as if it could), this was part of a discussion, and I fail to see where your condescension was productive.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions