View Full Version : Vatican: Abortion for rape -victim worse than raping a 9-year old
Kellydancer
03-13-2009, 01:38 PM
PETA has supported ELF. So what if the CC supports anti-abortion groups, do you not think that PP supports pro-abortion groups. Why is one wrong and not the other?
There's many things wrong. For one, people for abortion aren't "pro abortion". No, they believe in a woman to exercise her right to an abortion. These pro life organizations oppose abortion even in cases of rape, incest, and health. Abortion is legal, and whether someone supports it or not, it's legal. Plus, the Catholic Church is ruled by men, men who can't ever get pregnant. Do you think the church would be against abortion if men got pregnant? Of course not. It's part of a plan to hurt women. Ever notice that most of these "pro-life" organizations are mostly ruled by men and these same people don't support welfare? It's not coincidence. PP doesn't use religion to push their agenda.
So what if PETA supports ELF? They aren't using religion for their beliefs. If you don't support PETA, don't give money to them. I happen to support animal rights, but I don't give to PETA.
glambman
03-13-2009, 01:54 PM
There's many things wrong. For one, people for abortion aren't "pro abortion". No, they believe in a woman to exercise her right to an abortion. These pro life organizations oppose abortion even in cases of rape, incest, and health. Abortion is legal, and whether someone supports it or not, it's legal. Plus, the Catholic Church is ruled by men, men who can't ever get pregnant. Do you think the church would be against abortion if men got pregnant? Of course not. It's part of a plan to hurt women. Ever notice that most of these "pro-life" organizations are mostly ruled by men and these same people don't support welfare? It's not coincidence. PP doesn't use religion to push their agenda.
So what if PETA supports ELF? They aren't using religion for their beliefs. If you don't support PETA, don't give money to them. I happen to support animal rights, but I don't give to PETA.
I think it's nice (and telling) that you used the phrase pro-life. Normally, it would be anti-choice. Some on the right would use the label pro-death. But the issue is abortion, you are either pro- and anti-, the rest is sugar coating or insulting.
I don't think you have to be a man or a woman to believe in something or that it makes you any less capable of 'understanding'.
I don't think most anti-abortion groupd are ruled by men, I have seen group founders who started them because they got an abortion and after whatever experience, knew it was wrong.
There are still groups that are not trying to stop them due to incest, rape, etc.. I support those, as well as the ones that don't block entrances.
Whatever the reason, whatever ones belief, everone is trying to push their agenda. Religion is just an 'excuse' used to not listen to the right side (lol get the double meaning), or as an excuse so people don't have to think for themselves.
Kellydancer
03-13-2009, 02:17 PM
Many who claim to be prolife are anti-choice, because to me being pro-life means helping someone (them being pregnant women) get food, shelter, etc. However, the pro-choice people aren't "pro-abortion". I'm quite disgusted with the rightwingers who use that, because it's not true. No one is pro abortion. Abortion is and should be a matter of choice.
Studies show that the majority of those who started anti choice groups are in fact men. Operation Rescue was formed by Randall Terry, a person who thinks it's just fine to murder abortion doctors. He was later divorced by his first wife (probably because of abuse). His son later came out. Terry is a known chauvinist. Same things are known of James Dobson (founder of Focus on the Family), Jerry Falwell's group and all of these other thugs. These people aren't prolife, they are anti choice.
I have no problem with the groups that are truly pro-life. The ones that think abortion is wrong, but help pregnant women in need. These people don't protest at abortion clinics, and give time/money to help women. I don't agree with them, but I knew a few like this and their hearts was in the right place. Sadly, I don't think these people are the majority. The point is abortion is legal and should stay legal.
JayATee
03-13-2009, 02:27 PM
What they did was no different than what other groups had done, were doing, and doing after. So what if they had a different rationale. While we can all agree (I hope) that slavery is wrong, but it is unfair to condemn a society because society is different now.
Oh please, society is different now? You do know what's going on in Darfur right? I don't see anyone marching in there to save those ppl, or stop the genocide. It's barely news. And while I realize this isn't bc of the CC your idea that society is different or better now isn't true. We just like to think we are. There are all sorts of things going on that prove society hasn't changed a bit.
Does it being no different from what other groups are doing or have done make it ok?
And whether or not the CC has antiquated beliefs doesn't change the fact that the CC has helped many people (longer than PPs 100 years).
And regardless of the CC views and nonsense (OP) they have done more good too.
Yes, condemning ppl to death because they're a different religion certainly has done a lot of good in the world. As has condemning devout believers to the fiery depths of "hell" because they didn't say enough hail mary's. The OP does nothing but prove that. Excommunicating a 9 yr old girl for an abortion but not the father for the rape of that 9 yr old girl definitely does that little girl a lot of good. Not only does she no longer have a priest to help her through her time of need, she can now no longer feel that god loves her or wants her either. +1 to the CC for another satisfied customer.
Elvia
03-13-2009, 03:06 PM
^^^ Well, he also said that my therapist respecting my confidentiality in regards to a consensual relationship is someone on par with, say, the CC locking me in up in a Magdalene Asylum on suspicion of pre-marital sex and forcing me to do backbreaking work for the rest of my life. He's not being rational.
glambman
03-13-2009, 06:59 PM
Oh please, society is different now?
The 14th, 15th, 16th and 17th Centuries called, they said you missed the Renaissance.
You do know what's going on in Darfur right? I don't see anyone marching in there to save those ppl, or stop the genocide. It's barely news. And while I realize this isn't bc of the CC your idea that society is different or better now isn't true. We just like to think we are. There are all sorts of things going on that prove society hasn't changed a bit.
Does it being no different from what other groups are doing or have done make it ok?
Darfur lolololol A cause celeb for the self righteous. Where were you to condemn the Northern Islamic Sudanese when they went into the Southern nonIslamic Sudan. The fight still goes on, almost 30 years in this latest round. Why no protest? How about Cambodia, Zimbabwe, and on and on. What about the Kurds?
We did improve but at a certain point IMO we started regressing. I suppose that's what happens when it's do what you want and lack of societal norms/ standards.
Yes, condemning ppl to death because they're a different religion certainly has done a lot of good in the world. As has condemning devout believers to the fiery depths of "hell" because they didn't say enough hail mary's. The OP does nothing but prove that. Excommunicating a 9 yr old girl for an abortion but not the father for the rape of that 9 yr old girl definitely does that little girl a lot of good. Not only does she no longer have a priest to help her through her time of need, she can now no longer feel that god loves her or wants her either. +1 to the CC for another satisfied customer.
It is not just the CC, you are making it seem as they are and have been the only ones to do this.
^^^ Well, he also said that my therapist respecting my confidentiality in regards to a consensual relationship is someone on par with, say, the CC locking me in up in a Magdalene Asylum on suspicion of pre-marital sex and forcing me to do backbreaking work for the rest of my life. He's not being rational.
By therapist I assume the PP person. If you were 17 and your b/f college age, IF IF IF it was illegal, it would have been a misdemeanor, but a felony if he was with a 13 y/o. You don't think he should be reported in that situation?
Where are you from, it sounds like the stuf the CC was doing in Ireland.
JayATee
03-13-2009, 10:41 PM
The 14th, 15th, 16th and 17th Centuries called, they said you missed the Renaissance.
^^^This is one of the stupidest statements I've ever heard.
You're right, mass genocide and religous persecution only happened BEFORE the Renaissance, afterwards society had been "enlightened" and everyone lived in peace and harmony....
Darfur lolololol A cause celeb for the self righteous. Where were you to condemn the Northern Islamic Sudanese when they went into the Southern nonIslamic Sudan. The fight still goes on, almost 30 years in this latest round. Why no protest? How about Cambodia, Zimbabwe, and on and on. What about the Kurds?
We did improve but at a certain point IMO we started regressing. I suppose that's what happens when it's do what you want and lack of societal norms/ standards.
LoL, you just proved my point for me. Ty.
Do what you want societal norms/standards? Who sets the standards? The same churches that are ok with pedophiles for clergyman and fathers that rape their children??
It is not just the CC, you are making it seem as they are and have been the only ones to do this.
No I never said they're the only ones, I asked if it was ok bc they're not the only ones. Answer? No, it doesn't make it anymore ok.
eagle2
03-14-2009, 02:02 AM
What they did was no different than what other groups had done, were doing, and doing after. So what if they had a different rationale. While we can all agree (I hope) that slavery is wrong, but it is unfair to condemn a society because society is different now.
Slaughtering innocent women and children is wrong no matter when it was done. Same with slavery.
But the thing is, is that PP was started because of racist views.
No, it was started to help women. How is providing contraception to women racist?
And whether or not the CC has antiquated beliefs doesn't change the fact that the CC has helped many people (longer than PPs 100 years).
And regardless of the CC views and nonsense (OP) they have done more good too.
The Catholic Church has harmed a lot more people than they've helped, and continues to harm people. They oppose contraception, including the use of condoms to prevent AID's. They protect priests who rape children. They have enslaved teenage girls. The Church's inquisition tortured and killed countless people. In addition, the inquisition would kidnap Jewish children and raise them as Catholics. The Church has burned countless people at the stake for "heresey". I've seen one estimate of over a million people.
pixierocksonthepole
03-14-2009, 02:15 AM
I am a Catholic but I have been looking more at Red Road instead. Seems to be more open which is what I like. This is very sad to read.
glambman
03-14-2009, 11:19 AM
Slaughtering innocent women and children is wrong no matter when it was done. Same with slavery.
Today, in most circumstances, yes. But geez, we're talking about hundreds and thousands of years..
No, it was started to help women. How is providing contraception to women racist?
This is like saying the Nazi movement was started to restore a little dignity to Germany.
The Catholic Church has harmed a lot more people than they've helped, and continues to harm people. They oppose contraception, including the use of condoms to prevent AID's. They protect priests who rape children. They have enslaved teenage girls. The Church's inquisition tortured and killed countless people. In addition, the inquisition would kidnap Jewish children and raise them as Catholics. The Church has burned countless people at the stake for "heresey". I've seen one estimate of over a million people.
blah blah blah blah blah You cannot judge a society that existed hundreds of years ago by the standards of today. Yes, they have done wrong things and things wrong. Get to today, the protection of priests is abysmal. The opposition to contraceptives is a choice based on what they believe. Who cares if it based on religion. Are you going to discount anyone who has opinions and morals beliefs based on religion.
..........................
Dirty Ernie
03-14-2009, 12:41 PM
You keep saying we shouldn't judge the CC on past acts within current society, but you are doing it for PP. PP, regardless of the founder's beliefs way back then, is now helping prevent unwanted pregnancies mostly for women in lower socio-economic standing, the very class of women you castigate for having more children than they can afford. So, uh, put down that rock, please.
As for PP protecting criminals, I can go confess all sorts of atrocities to a priest and he is bound by The Church to keep that in confidentiality, and The Church also has been known to provide sanctuary for many people wanted for crimes actively providing food and shelter for them.
hockeybobby
03-14-2009, 12:43 PM
In an age when we have the collective knowledge and wisdom of mankind available at the touch of a button, the ignorance being perpetuated by the worlds biggest organised religions is just....astonishing.
glambman
03-14-2009, 12:52 PM
DE, the CC wasn't organized in the way it became and is. A hundred years is still modern.
The 3rd evolution of the KKK (started in '46) is a kinder gentler klan. Maybe they only want basic human rights for caucasians.
Confessions (as the CC does) are not Biblical, just man's (or CC) procedures. Doesn't make it right.
Eric Stoner
03-14-2009, 02:57 PM
Like it or not, abortion removes (usually) healthy living tissue and kills it or lets it die. That is the reality. We don"t let doctors go around and remove healthy gallbladders. There has to be a sound MEDICAL reason to do it. So for me, there has to be a sound medical reason for an abortion . I include removal of the product of rape or incest as a "sound medical reason". Pregnancy should not be a "punishment" for an innocent victim.
But in this day and age of Sex Ed. and easy access to birth control, including "morning after" pills and "Plan B" how can abortion be otherwise justified ? Killing an innocent life just to exercise "dominion" over one's body ? Why stop there ? Why not let mothers kill their babies if they prove to be "inconvenient" ?
Eric Stoner
03-14-2009, 03:01 PM
Slaughtering innocent women and children is wrong no matter when it was done. Same with slavery.
No, it was started to help women. How is providing contraception to women racist?
The Catholic Church has harmed a lot more people than they've helped, and continues to harm people. They oppose contraception, including the use of condoms to prevent AID's. They protect priests who rape children. They have enslaved teenage girls. The Church's inquisition tortured and killed countless people. In addition, the inquisition would kidnap Jewish children and raise them as Catholics. The Church has burned countless people at the stake for "heresey". I've seen one estimate of over a million people.
Hmmmm. It's a close call whether the CC has helped more people than it has harmed. I'd expand it to include almost ALL religions.
JayATee
03-14-2009, 04:00 PM
Like it or not, abortion removes (usually) healthy living tissue and kills it or lets it die. That is the reality. We don"t let doctors go around and remove healthy gallbladders. There has to be a sound MEDICAL reason to do it. So for me, there has to be a sound medical reason for an abortion . I include removal of the product of rape or incest as a "sound medical reason". Pregnancy should not be a "punishment" for an innocent victim.
But in this day and age of Sex Ed. and easy access to birth control, including "morning after" pills and "Plan B" how can abortion be otherwise justified ? Killing an innocent life just to exercise "dominion" over one's body ? Why stop there ? Why not let mothers kill their babies if they prove to be "inconvenient" ?
It's not only whether or not there's sex ed, or pills, or condoms, or any other pregnancy prevention out there to help someone not get pregnant. It's the circumstances to which a baby may be born. It's the quality of life that baby may have. It's weighing all options and knowing the outcome wont be good for mother or child if the pregnancy isn't terminanted. You as a male, can not possibly know what a female may go through during a pregnancy. Thank god there are still ppl out there who recognize a woman's right to choice. That is what it means to be pro-choice. It means, women get to choose, regardless of whether or not other ppl agree, I get to choose what happens to me, my body and my child. You have no idea what may constitute a woman's decision to end a pregnancy, and since you can't possibly ever know, you really can't pass judgement or even truly have an opinion. Until you walk in someone elses shoes you can never know their motivations, especially since you can't ever find yourself pregnant.
hockeybobby
03-14-2009, 04:15 PM
^^^That reminds me of an old saying: Before you judge or disagree with someone, walk a mile in their shoes. Then, if they get ugly about it, you'll be a mile away, and you'll have their shoes. hehe.
Elvia
03-14-2009, 04:25 PM
There has to be a sound MEDICAL reason to do it. So for me, there has to be a sound medical reason for an abortion . I include removal of the product of rape or incest as a "sound medical reason". Pregnancy should not be a "punishment" for an innocent victim.
When should pregnancy ever be a "punishment?"
Elvia
03-14-2009, 04:28 PM
Confessions (as the CC does) are not Biblical, just man's (or CC) procedures. Doesn't make it right.
How is this relevant? Where does the bible even enter into it? I thought we were discussing the CC and their actions, not what they should or shouldn't be doing according to the bible, but what they actually ARE doing. In which case, How do do you justify pointing the finger at PP, and excusing the CC for doing the exact same thing?
You seem confused as to what it is exactly you're trying to defend.
JayATee
03-14-2009, 07:07 PM
^^^That reminds me of an old saying: Before you judge or disagree with someone, walk a mile in their shoes. Then, if they get ugly about it, you'll be a mile away, and you'll have their shoes. hehe.
Hahahahaha! ;D
JayATee
03-14-2009, 07:53 PM
Slaughtering innocent women and children is wrong no matter when it was done. Same with slavery.
Today, in most circumstances, yes. But geez, we're talking about hundreds and thousands of years..
No dear, the 30's and 40's weren't hundreds and thousands of years ago. And the CC did nothing but look the other way as millions of innocents were slaughtered in the most unimaginable, ghastly ways.
eagle2
03-14-2009, 08:41 PM
The 3rd evolution of the KKK (started in '46) is a kinder gentler klan. Maybe they only want basic human rights for caucasians.
Do you know anything about recent American history? You're not aware of the civil rights workers murdered by the Klan in the 60's or the African-American churches that were blown up?
Elvia
03-14-2009, 09:42 PM
It's ridiculous comparisons anyway. Yeah, PP is just like the KKK. They are just like the Nazis. Please.
Henry Ford was incredibly racist and a Nazi sympathizer. Does that make the Ford Motors of today a "racist" company? Of course not, when all they're doing is selling cars.
glambman
03-14-2009, 09:53 PM
Like it or not, abortion removes (usually) healthy living tissue and kills it or lets it die. That is the reality. We don"t let doctors go around and remove healthy gallbladders. There has to be a sound MEDICAL reason to do it. So for me, there has to be a sound medical reason for an abortion . I include removal of the product of rape or incest as a "sound medical reason". Pregnancy should not be a "punishment" for an innocent victim.
But in this day and age of Sex Ed. and easy access to birth control, including "morning after" pills and "Plan B" how can abortion be otherwise justified ? Killing an innocent life just to exercise "dominion" over one's body ? Why stop there ? Why not let mothers kill their babies if they prove to be "inconvenient" ?
I have heard the pro-abortion side use the term tissue mass before, but this is the first time I have heard it used in the other way. WOW and a big +1
When should pregnancy ever be a "punishment?"
Why should a developing child be punished when they haven't done anything worthy of punishment?
How is this relevant? Where does the bible even enter into it? I thought we were discussing the CC and their actions, not what they should or shouldn't be doing according to the bible, but what they actually ARE doing. In which case, How do do you justify pointing the finger at PP, and excusing the CC for doing the exact same thing?
You seem confused as to what it is exactly you're trying to defend.
There is a difference between the priest scandal of today and the Inquisition, don't you think. While both are wrong, the Inquisition ended in the mid1800's.
This is the reason why there will never be peace in the Middle East, people hold on to things that happened long ago.
No dear, the 30's and 40's weren't hundreds and thousands of years ago. And the CC did nothing but look the other way as millions of innocents were slaughtered in the most unimaginable, ghastly ways.
I didn't say the 30's and 40's were not modern. Germany in WW2? Is that what you are referring to. What about the Japanese atrocities? Where is the condemnation of Shinto and Buddhism? Will you condemn those two religions just as you condemn the CC for looking the other way?
Do you know anything about recent American history? You're not aware of the civil rights workers murdered by the Klan in the 60's or the African-American churches that were blown up?
The 3rd evolution has not been anywhere as violent as the first. And as their pathetic existence has gone on (in the 3rd evolution), they have been further sissified.
JayATee
03-14-2009, 10:04 PM
Why should a developing child be punished when they haven't done anything worthy of punishment?
Oh please. Bottom line, not your body, not your choice. You have no right to choose what circumstances a woman may or may not have her baby under. It is completely and totally ridiculous for you to assume anything about a woman's circumstances especially considering the fact that you're not a woman so you could never even remotely understand.
This is the reason why there will never be peace in the Middle East, people hold on to things that happened long ago.
Bull. The bombs raining down in the middle east right now have NOTHING to do with ppl holding grudges from long ago. Another completely mis-informed statement.
I didn't say the 30's and 40's were not modern. Germany in WW2? Is that what you are referring to. What about the Japanese atrocities? Where is the condemnation of Shinto and Buddhism? Will you condemn those two religions just as you condemn the CC for looking the other way?
Yup. But since the topic is about the Catholic Church I'm keeping to the things the CC has done, or not done, or the things they've looked the other way for, or the ways in which they've failed or hurt society altogether.
However, all you've done, by continuously bringing up the injustices to other groups is prove my point over and over that society hasn't changed one bit. Not to mention that your constant "they're not the only ones" statements really don't do much to help your case. Just bc lots of other religions are guilty of the same sins, doesn't make it anymore ok.
Your historical accounts and comparisons are way off. Do some research.
Elvia
03-14-2009, 10:06 PM
There is a difference between the priest scandal of today and the Inquisition, don't you think. While both are wrong, the Inquisition ended in the mid1800's.
This is the reason why there will never be peace in the Middle East, people hold on to things that happened long ago.
That didn't answer my question at all, or really seem to have anything to do with it. I'll repeat-why do you so vehemently attack planned parenthood for supposedly not reporting crimes, while excusing the catholic church for doing the same thing? This isn't something that happened long in the past, it's true today- a priest doesn't have to report crimes revealed to him in confession. Why are you excusing the CC for a policy that you condemn PP for?
Elvia
03-14-2009, 10:16 PM
Why should a developing child be punished when they haven't done anything worthy of punishment?
I asked "why should a pregnancy ever be a punishment? in response to what Eric said. The context is important, so I'll include it:
"Like it or not, abortion removes (usually) healthy living tissue and kills it or lets it die. That is the reality. We don"t let doctors go around and remove healthy gallbladders. There has to be a sound MEDICAL reason to do it. So for me, there has to be a sound medical reason for an abortion . I include removal of the product of rape or incest as a "sound medical reason". Pregnancy should not be a "punishment" for an innocent victim. "
I was inquiring as to whether he meant to imply that in some cases, going through with a pregnancy when an abortion is not "justified" can be considered a "punishment" that the woman must endure. Doesn't seem like a good reason to bring a child into the world to me, as a "punishment." Besides, no "pro-lifer" has ever adequately explained to me how you would ensure that a woman who doesn't want to be pregnant and resents being forced to go through with it is going to go through all the various things one must tend to to ensure a healthy pregnancy-but that's just the practical aspect of why it doesn't work to force people to go through with pregnancies.
The idea of pregnancy and childbirth being a "punishment" reeks of chauvinism, and never seems to consider what becomes of a child who's only on this Earth because the world felt it was a punishment the mother deserved. Who really ends up suffering from this "punishment?"
glambman
03-14-2009, 10:36 PM
'll repeat-why do you so vehemently attack planned parenthood for supposedly not reporting crimes, while excusing the catholic church for doing the same thing? This isn't something that happened long in the past, it's true today- a priest doesn't have to report crimes revealed to him in confession. Why are you excusing the CC for a policy that you condemn PP for?
I already answered this in a post, but will do it again just for you: It is equally abysmal that the CC does not report crimes, covered up for the priests, etc..
Now, to the first point, the CC was not founded by a racist bigot. PP was.
EDIT:: I also have to say that there is a difference between felonies and (most) misdemeanors, Why report a B&E when it is confessed, as long as he is repentant and ceases that activity. In the other posters example, she was 17 and he was college age, so I don't see the problem if she was in a consentual relationship. Were she 13, 14, etc., then yes.
glambman
03-14-2009, 10:41 PM
I asked "why should a pregnancy ever be a punishment? in response to what Eric said. The context is important, so I'll include it:
"Like it or not, abortion removes (usually) healthy living tissue and kills it or lets it die. That is the reality. We don"t let doctors go around and remove healthy gallbladders. There has to be a sound MEDICAL reason to do it. So for me, there has to be a sound medical reason for an abortion . I include removal of the product of rape or incest as a "sound medical reason". Pregnancy should not be a "punishment" for an innocent victim. "
I was inquiring as to whether he meant to imply that in some cases, going through with a pregnancy when an abortion is not "justified" can be considered a "punishment" that the woman must endure. Doesn't seem like a good reason to bring a child into the world to me, as a "punishment." Besides, no "pro-lifer" has ever adequately explained to me how you would ensure that a woman who doesn't want to be pregnant and resents being forced to go through with it is going to go through all the various things one must tend to to ensure a healthy pregnancy.
The idea of pregnancy and childbirth being a "punishment" reeks of chauvinism, and never seems to consider what becomes of a child who's only on this Earth because the world felt it was a punishment the mother deserved. Who really ends up suffering from this "punishment?"
We read differently, I did not see any implication of pregnancy being punishment.
rayna
03-14-2009, 10:42 PM
i would take the pro life movement a lot more seriously if it adressed the causes and consequences of uwanted pregnancy in a constructive way instead of constantly criticizing women for getting pregnant.
within the pro life movement their tends to be a huge issue with sex ed and birth control and we all know how effective "abstinence only" sex ed is, lol. the ones who pay for this are the women who accidentally get pregnant, not the men they had sex with.
also, as said before in this thread there is an almost total lack of concern for the baby once it is born. maybe instead of picketing abortion clinics and lecturing women, pro-lifers should put that energy into creating group homes for unwanted babies, organising adoption programs or actually adopting themselves.
Elvia
03-14-2009, 10:45 PM
I already answered this in a post, but will do it again just for you: It is equally abysmal that the CC does not report crimes, covered up for the priests, etc..
Now, to the first point, the CC was not founded by a racist bigot. PP was.
I can't really tell what your position is anymore. You seem to be defending the CC, but then you turn around again and again and say that this and that is "abysmal."
As for who founded PP, it seems clear that you dislike PP for different reasons entirely- you're against abortion. And that's fine, but this "racism" argument is pretty weak. It would be just as ridiculous to shout that Ford Motors is racist and can forever be labeled as such, because Henry was a kook.
Dirty Ernie
03-14-2009, 10:48 PM
I include removal of the product of rape or incest as a "sound medical reason". Pregnancy should not be a "punishment" for an innocent victim."
I think we've strayed a bit here.
I believe Eric meant that an act of rape or incest resulting in a pregnancy met his standard of a sound medical reason to allow an abortion as not to provide further damage ie "punishment" to the victim (a physical reminder, the child), who was an innocent and unwilling party to the conception.
Elvia
03-14-2009, 10:56 PM
But see, it's that kind of logic that makes me question it's really about the "sanctity of life." If that's true...well...the fetus conceived in rape is just as much "alive"as the one who was conceived with consent. It's arguments like this that make it sound like it's more to do with issues of women and sex and morality- especially when you throw in words like "punishment." It suggests that an unwanted pregnancy IS a punishment...one that certain women deserve, and other's don't.
But I do agree we've gotten a little off track. It would be nice if we were talking more the event at hand, not just having the abortion debate again.
glambman
03-14-2009, 10:58 PM
I can't really tell what your position is anymore. You seem to be defending the CC, but then you turn around again and again and say that this and that is "abysmal."
I am not defending them. Things they've done in the past were wrong, but you can't condemn something that happened hundreds+ years ago by the standards of today.
As for who founded PP, it seems clear that you dislike PP for different reasons entirely- you're against abortion. And that's fine, but this "racism" argument is pretty weak. It would be just as ridiculous to shout that Ford Motors is racist and can forever be labeled as such, because Henry was a kook.
hahaha I already mentioned Ford in another thread. He also tried to halt the publication of his book in the 40's, and apologized in the late 20's.
glambman
03-14-2009, 11:02 PM
But see, it's that kind of logic that makes me question it's really about the "sanctity of life." If that's true...well...the fetus conceived in rape is just as much "alive"as the one who was conceived with consent. It's arguments like this that make it sound like it's more to do with issues of women and sex and morality- especially when you throw in words like "punishment." It suggests that an unwanted pregnancy IS a punishment...one that certain women deserve, and other's don't.
But I do agree we've gotten a little off track. It would be nice if we were talking more the event at hand, not just having the abortion debate again.
IMO a product of rape or incest did not happen with the woman's choice, so for me, it would be understandable.
However, when it comes to unwanted, why engage in actions that could lead to it. Cause and effect, personal responsibility. Did you know all divorces have one thing in common.....marriage.
Elvia
03-14-2009, 11:26 PM
So for me, there has to be a sound medical reason for an abortion . I include removal of the product of rape or incest as a "sound medical reason".
And by the way, as a friend of mine who came over to visit just pointed out...what exactly is "medical" about this? The fetus that is conceived in rape is not necessarily any less healthy, or any more of a strain on the woman's body, than the fetus that was conceived during consensual sex. You're making a judgement, and that's fine, but there's nothing "medical" about it.
Elvia
03-14-2009, 11:32 PM
I am not defending them. Things they've done in the past were wrong, but you can't condemn something that happened hundreds+ years ago by the standards of today.
Quit pretending every criticism that has been made here against the catholic church happened "100+ years ago." Perhaps you should read the title of this thread again to remind yourself what brought up this discussion in the first place. I've been talking about very recent things. Once again, the Magdalene Asylums were open until 1996 (!!!) And the church has completely turned a blind eye and a deaf ear to the outrage and is silently and stubbornly ignoring it, while it's victims continue to suffer. You admit these things are atrocious...what exactly are you arguing about again?
JayATee
03-14-2009, 11:40 PM
I am not defending them. Things they've done in the past were wrong, but you can't condemn something that happened hundreds+ years ago by the standards of today.
What hundreds of years ago dude? The OP is about something that happened THIS MONTH.
This is something the CC is guilty of, right now, today.
eagle2
03-14-2009, 11:47 PM
However, when it comes to unwanted, why engage in actions that could lead to it. Cause and effect, personal responsibility. Did you know all divorces have one thing in common.....marriage.
Because it's pleasurable. There is nothing wrong with having sex for pleasure. If you have a problem with women having sex for pleasure because of some backward beliefs, that's your problem, not theirs.
Dirty Ernie
03-14-2009, 11:51 PM
And by the way, as a friend of mine who came over to visit just pointed out...what exactly is "medical" about this? The fetus that is conceived in rape is not necessarily any less healthy, or any more of a strain on the woman's body, than the fetus that was conceived during consensual sex. You're making a judgement, and that's fine, but there's nothing "medical" about it.
First I should apologize to Eric for responding here. I do not mean to speak for him. However the psychological effects on the victim are well documented, and particularly in this case the victim being 9 years old, and those medical considerations should trump any "rights" attempted to be given a rapidly dividing mass of cells.
This is not the Church's opinion, obviously, even in this case, nor mine, just a contextual response to your post.
JayATee
03-15-2009, 12:55 AM
Because it's pleasurable. There is nothing wrong with having sex for pleasure. If you have a problem with women having sex for pleasure because of some backward beliefs, that's your problem, not theirs.
^+1
And it also doesn't mean that you have the right to impose your beliefs on other ppl. You want to believe that abortion isn't an option for the women in YOUR life fine, but don't bring that into my life.
glambman
03-15-2009, 09:38 AM
Quit pretending every criticism that has been made here against the catholic church happened "100+ years ago." Perhaps you should read the title of this thread again to remind yourself what brought up this discussion in the first place. I've been talking about very recent things. Once again, the Magdalene Asylums were open until 1996 (!!!) And the church has completely turned a blind eye and a deaf ear to the outrage and is silently and stubbornly ignoring it, while it's victims continue to suffer. You admit these things are atrocious...what exactly are you arguing about again?
You must be in LalaLand if you think the first sentence.
What hundreds of years ago dude? The OP is about something that happened THIS MONTH.
This is something the CC is guilty of, right now, today.
I already responded about the OP, and then other accusations came forth.
glambman
03-15-2009, 09:40 AM
Because it's pleasurable. There is nothing wrong with having sex for pleasure. If you have a problem with women having sex for pleasure because of some backward beliefs, that's your problem, not theirs.
Who said it's not, or anything against it. If you do have sex, then accept the responsibility for your actions.
PleasureVictim
03-15-2009, 11:04 AM
i would take the pro life movement a lot more seriously if it adressed the causes and consequences of uwanted pregnancy in a constructive way instead of constantly criticizing women for getting pregnant.
within the pro life movement their tends to be a huge issue with sex ed and birth control and we all know how effective "abstinence only" sex ed is, lol. the ones who pay for this are the women who accidentally get pregnant, not the men they had sex with.
also, as said before in this thread there is an almost total lack of concern for the baby once it is born. maybe instead of picketing abortion clinics and lecturing women, pro-lifers should put that energy into creating group homes for unwanted babies, organising adoption programs or actually adopting themselves.
THANK YOU! I had mentioned this same thing on another board full of Christians. No one responded to it. Basically I said that they put the unborn child and monther on a pedestal, then after the baby is born and mom can't afford a comfortable living, being possibly forced to get on welfare- then the tables turn. She goes from being a woman who made the right choose (keeping the baby) to a fuck up who is most likely a welfare queen. (Very few people bother to make the distinction between someone who needs help temporarily and someone who depends on the gov't to fund their lifestyle).
sorsi
03-15-2009, 12:27 PM
Btw, if the world, particularly Palestine was so fucked up back around 6 B.C. or so that God had to send his only begotten son to come to Earth and straighten things out; where the hell has he been lately ? Why not NOW ? Where has he been ? What has he been doing ? He's been too busy ? If he spoke to all those folks in the Bible - Abraham, Noah, Daniel, Joseph, Mary, Elizabeth etc. etc.; why hasn't he chatted with anyone for the last 2,000 years or so ? Except for Bernadette and Jean D'Arc of course. How did the French get to be the new "chosen people" ? He can't get a dial tone ? Just wondering.
This is just my belief, so feel free to take it or leave it. :) But IMHO God is still available and communicating with people today, as He always has and always will. He hasn't gone anywhere or gone silent...anyone who wants to experience God directly, can. But the Church has always done its best to convince people that direct contact with God is a thing of the distant past and is not possible for ordinary people in this day and age. According to the Church, you need a mediator (priests, confessionals, pre-written formulaic prayers, sacraments and other Church rituals, etc) in order to interpret God's words, communicate with Him, receive revelations/advice/messages, etc.
This is one of my biggest peeves with organized religion. It's in direct opposition to what the Bible actually says...which is that anyone can come to God and experience Him directly, anytime, without the need for interpreters or mediators.
There are numerous people alive today who have written books about their experiences and communication with God as well. But most traditional churches will try to convince you that every spiritual text other than the Bible is useless 'new-age' drivel at best and trickery from Satan at worst...rather than contemporary accounts of the same God that was revealed in the Bible.
eagle2
03-15-2009, 12:37 PM
Who said it's not, or anything against it. If you do have sex, then accept the responsibility for your actions.
Why should a women be forced to give birth to a child she doesn't want, and in many cases, cannot afford to support, just because she decided to have sex one time?
The whole issue is, you want to punish women who have sex. You obviously don't care about the child. The fact that you're against everyone having access to healthcare shows you're not concerned about human life. You compare an organization to Nazi Germany that helps many poor women gain access to contraception, to prevent unwanted births.
JayATee
03-15-2009, 12:44 PM
I already responded about the OP, and then other accusations came forth.
Yeah, and your defense of the CC is to say that they're not the only ones who are guilty of humanitarian crimes, or to stop judging them bc of things that happened hundreds of yrs ago. Or the fact that similar groups are guilty of the same things, as if that suddenly makes what they're still doing ok.
Who said it's not, or anything against it. If you do have sex, then accept the responsibility for your actions.
Sometimes accepting responsibility for your actions means terminating a pregnancy because it the RESPONSIBLE thing to do. Again abortion may be a wrong for YOU, but don't impose your beliefs on ME.
Elvia
03-15-2009, 02:38 PM
First I should apologize to Eric for responding here. I do not mean to speak for him. However the psychological effects on the victim are well documented, and particularly in this case the victim being 9 years old, and those medical considerations should trump any "rights" attempted to be given a rapidly dividing mass of cells.
This is not the Church's opinion, obviously, even in this case, nor mine, just a contextual response to your post.
I was wondering if anyone wanted to open the door to questions regarding "emotional/mental" health. In which case, I would object to the assumption that only rape victims can suffer mentally/emotionally from having to go through with a pregnancy. But then, I suppose it doesn't matter since the implication around here seems to be the slut that spread her legs willingly deserves whatever she gets.
glambman
03-15-2009, 03:03 PM
How about opening the door on how only the woman has the right to choose whether or not she carries the child to term. The guy has no say, even if he will keep it (happened to my friend, tore him up). But, if she decides to keep it, and the guy doesn't really want it, he's stuck paying for it.
Elvia
03-15-2009, 03:23 PM
^^ Most child support is only supplementary. They say the average child support payment in the US is $250 a month. I've never had a child, but I lived with my ex and his child, and $250 wouldn't even cover half a months day care. The man isn't usually being ordered to pay an amount that totals half of the child expenses, and he's not obligated to provide any hands on care for the child. So let's not pretend it's all on the poor fathers.
It's funny you should pick up this argument. Usually when I hear men make this argument, they justify that the reason they should be allowed to "opt out" and have no responsibility for the child is because the woman has the option of "opting out" via abortion. Seems like a strange crusade for someone who doesn't believe in abortion. So...you would deny women the right to an abortion, and place all the financial burden on them as well?
And by the way- the reason you don't get a say when it comes to pregnancy is because YOU DON'T HAVE TO EXPERIENCE THE PREGNANCY. When you play an equal role in pregnancy, maybe then you can demand to have equal say.