TerraPrime Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 I don't know why there's this outrage. The excommunication decision is perfectly in line with the doctrine that abortion is a grave sin that destroys the soul of a person. If you believe in that, and you do if you are the RCC, then it makes perfect sense to excommunicate someone who's willfully and deliberately destroying God's creation. Honestly, where else would the moral position on abortion such as the one held by the RCC lead to if there were to be any internal consistency? Me, I say we congratulate the RCC for standing firm on their principles, clap our hands, and move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-ahrairah Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 [quote name='TerraPrime' post='1712989' date='Mar 9 2009, 01.59']I don't know why there's this outrage. The excommunication decision is perfectly in line with the doctrine that abortion is a grave sin that destroys the soul of a person. If you believe in that, and you do if you are the RCC, then it makes perfect sense to excommunicate someone who's willfully and deliberately destroying God's creation. Honestly, where else would the moral position on abortion such as the one held by the RCC lead to if there were to be any internal consistency? Me, I say we congratulate the RCC for standing firm on their principles, clap our hands, and move on.[/quote] Though I quite agree with main point of your post, I think not the Church would say abortion "destroys the soul", as it does believe in immortality and all. Though some of course still hold the aborted soul must be fallen and lost to Limbo, there never being a doctrinal pronouncement on the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirius Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 [quote name='TerraPrime' post='1712989' date='Mar 8 2009, 23.59']I don't know why there's this outrage. The excommunication decision is perfectly in line with the doctrine that abortion is a grave sin that destroys the soul of a person. If you believe in that, and you do if you are the RCC, then it makes perfect sense to excommunicate someone who's willfully and deliberately destroying God's creation. Honestly, where else would the moral position on abortion such as the one held by the RCC lead to if there were to be any internal consistency? Me, I say we congratulate the RCC for standing firm on their principles, clap our hands, and move on.[/quote] [quote]It's things like this that tempt me into not being 100% pro-life. The life of the mother presents a high argument, but so does the life of the child. And the baby might not even survive the birth, killing them both. It is never well to play at God and pick which ought to be the greater, but as much as I hate it, I would be forced to uphold new life over that which has already lived. Also an abortion is a deliberate act, while to do else wise is only following nature and not killing the mother.[/quote] First off, this sickens me. I will admit I lean more towards pro-choice than not, but in this case I believe there is no choice. The girl is 9 fucking years old, how can you call that a life that has been lived. Secondly, it is not like this innocent girl made a poor decision (say, as a teenager) and had the abortion to negate the bad judgement earlier on her part, SHE WAS RAPED, how in hell can you hold her responsible for that. This same thing happens to girls in Africa, who cannot have an abortion, who then have there internal organs burst, and die, killing themselves and their unborn childs. I remember a specific case we talked about in school where a 12 year old had this happen, she had her rectum rupture, and she died from what was essentially internal poisoning. How is that a just end for a young girl that clearly had no say in the matter of the baby's conception? The fact that for even a moment you agree with the church in this instance disgusts me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyrazer Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Yes there is a CLEAR difference between some pre-teen having sex with a boy and then having an abortion and this case where a girl not even in her teens is forcefully raped against her will. The idea that you churchies are applying the same logic to two clearly different cases is beyond me. This is verging on Sharia belief where females are punished for things they had no control over and as King said, it's pretty disgusting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 [quote name='TerraPrime' post='1712989' date='Mar 9 2009, 00.59']I don't know why there's this outrage. The excommunication decision is perfectly in line with the doctrine that abortion is a grave sin that destroys the soul of a person. If you believe in that, and you do if you are the RCC, then it makes perfect sense to excommunicate someone who's willfully and deliberately destroying God's creation. Honestly, where else would the moral position on abortion such as the one held by the RCC lead to if there were to be any internal consistency? Me, I say we congratulate the RCC for standing firm on their principles, clap our hands, and move on.[/quote] Thank you TP. I was about to come in a say this. This isn't about "punishement for being a slut" or whatever the fuck you think it's about. It's about the fact that, in the eyes of the RCC, Abortion is murder. It's that simple. Case shut. [quote]Yes there is a CLEAR difference between some pre-teen having sex with a boy and then having an abortion and this case where a girl not even in her teens is forcefully raped against her will. The idea that you churchies are applying the same logic to two clearly different cases is beyond me.[/quote] No, there isn't. To the RCC, that fetus is alive. Doesn't matter how it came about, it's a living person and killing it is murder. It's pretty simple. [quote]How is that a just end for a young girl that clearly had no say in the matter of the baby's conception?[/quote] How is abortion a just end for a young life that clearly had no say in the matter of it's own conception? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalThor Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 I saw this story last week and was disgusted by it. So. The mom and doctors are excommunicated while the step-father has to what? Go to confession? Absofreakinglutely brilliant. <adds his polite applause to TP's> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirius Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 [quote name='Shryke' post='1713032' date='Mar 9 2009, 01.43']How is abortion a just end for a young life that clearly had no say in the matter of it's own conception?[/quote] Are you saying that the mother did, and should therefore forfeit her life for being raped by a man who is likely 5 times her age? I'm not disputing that the church is doing what they think is right, and what follows their doctrine. I'm saying (and if I go to hell for this I don't care) that the RCC's views on this are, quite frankly stupid, given the circumstances. It's as simple as that, murdering an innocent young girl, who's life is gauranteed to carry on, for the possibility of some fetus to [b]maybe[/b] survive is simply absurd. As for the doctors, it is their legal right to do what they can to preserve the lives of their patients. They had no other choice but to act as they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 [quote name='King of the Wolf Pack' post='1713039' date='Mar 9 2009, 02.55']Are you saying that the mother did, and should therefore forfeit her life for being raped by a man who is likely 5 times her age? I'm not disputing that the church is doing what they think is right, and what follows their doctrine. I'm saying (and if I go to hell for this I don't care) that the RCC's views on this are, quite frankly stupid, given the circumstances. It's as simple as that, murdering an innocent young girl, who's life is gauranteed to carry on, for the possibility of some fetus to [b]maybe[/b] survive is simply absurd.[/quote] Murder is never justified is the RCCs basic position on this. It's not absurd, it's actually quite simple and follows directly from the core tenets of the Church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirius Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 [quote name='Shryke' post='1713045' date='Mar 9 2009, 02.03']Murder is never justified is the RCCs basic position on this. It's not absurd, it's actually quite simple and follows directly from the core tenets of the Church.[/quote] The fact that they are still essentially picking one life over the other, makes them just as bad as they are accusing the doctors of being, as "playing God". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 [quote name='King of the Wolf Pack' post='1713047' date='Mar 9 2009, 03.05']The fact that they are still essentially picking one life over the other, makes them just as bad as they are accusing the doctors of being, as "playing God".[/quote] Slippery slope. How far does one take the "Murder is ok under specific circumstances" philosophy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirius Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 [quote name='Shryke' post='1713050' date='Mar 9 2009, 02.10']Slippery slope. How far does one take the "Murder is ok under specific circumstances" philosophy?[/quote] True, I would not want to be the one making the decision, but at the same time I feel like the church has no right to condemn all involved such as they did. At the same time though, I'm not a Catholic, and I think I've clearly stated why :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seventh Pup Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Self defense in the pregnant child's case, or the preservation of another life (in the child's mother and doctor's case) doesn't seem like a particularly slippery slope to me. Telling someone they should die because they were raped (or counter to that telling someone they should let a child die because the child was raped)[b] does[/b] seem like a slippery slope though. ETA The more I think about this case the more I think it shows how much The Church hates women and children. Their stance on it is in excusable. They've added an extra heaping of things this child and her family is going to have to over come. It's disgusting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 [quote name='Seventh Pup' post='1713056' date='Mar 9 2009, 03.15']Self defense in the pregnant child’s case, or the preservation of another life (in the child's mother and doctor's case) doesn't seem like a particularly slippery slope to me. Telling someone they should die because they raped (or counter to that telling someone they should let a child die because the child was raped)[b] does[/b] seem like a slippery slope though.[/quote] Telling someone they should die because their mother was raped seems like more of one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirius Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 In the end none of this matters though, because it is the girl's guardians (parents) decision, and I hope to God that I will never meet a parent who would kill their 9-year-old, recently raped, daughter, for the sake of a criminal's unborn, unformed fetus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seventh Pup Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 [quote name='Shryke' post='1713057' date='Mar 9 2009, 01.18']Telling someone they should die because their mother was raped seems like more of one.[/quote] If they are killing her they should understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyrazer Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 [quote name='Shryke' post='1713032' date='Mar 9 2009, 18.43']No, there isn't. To the RCC, that fetus is alive. Doesn't matter how it came about, it's a living person and killing it is murder. It's pretty simple.[/quote] And on the other hand, withholding abortion means very likely death for the child/mother and her fetus. Now this wouldn't be considered murder and I'm not here to argue what is considered murder and at what stage a fetus is considered a living human or whatever, I'm argueing on a moral stage here and I believe the church is placing beliefs above morals with it's decision to excommunicate those involved in the abortion and what fucking good is an immoral religion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seventh Pup Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Triskele the anger in this post is being applied to the sentimant of this argument not you. :) [quote name='Triskele' post='1713058' date='Mar 9 2009, 01.18']It's a slippery slope because "abortion is murder" is much easier to say than "girl who most likely but not certainly will die if she does not receive a murderous abortion" is not so clear-cut. Again, I think the church is wrong but that is, I think, their reasoning.[/quote] Yes passively letting horrible things happen is so much better, and braver. The fact that this girl would literally be tortured to death is a small price to pay, hey the babies [b]might[/b] survive. They probably won't, and by being aloud to grow they will being tearing up a child from the inside out. But as Abraham taught us you need to be willing to sacrifice children every now and again for you god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exa Inova Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 The unborn child is leeching and parasiting on the 9 yr old. Her life is in serious danger and she will most likely die as a result of this unwanted and forced upon paraciting. Its her right to defend herself against this paraciting life form in the form of abortion. If the male dominated RCC wants to save the unborn life forms that the 9 yr old is carrying, they should grow uteruses of their own Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 [quote name='Skyrazer' post='1713063' date='Mar 9 2009, 03.26']And on the other hand, withholding abortion means very likely death for the child/mother and her fetus. Now this wouldn't be considered murder and I'm not here to argue what is considered murder and at what stage a fetus is considered a living human or whatever, I'm argueing on a moral stage here and I believe the church is placing beliefs above morals with it's decision to excommunicate those involved in the abortion and what fucking good is an immoral religion?[/quote] How is it "putting beliefs above morals"? The "morals" involved are that murder is wrong. Murdering the fetus is not justified because the mother might die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seventh Pup Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Seriously it is mind boggling to me, but I guess I do have to remember the RCC's stance on viewing children as sexual play things. It's not that bad until we have to pay for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.