Abortion and Risk of the Mother Life

[Hans_W]

My scenario is only “bizarre” for those who don’t wish to acknowledge that an abortion is an intentional taking of an innocent human life. The only difference between what the police officer in my scenario did and what the doctor does during an abortion is the tool in which he intentionally causes the death of an innocent human life.

I disagree. Your scenario is a textbook example for a 101 philosophy course on ethics. You might have heard about the guy who can choose between killing one person, or letting five people been killed by changing the path of an out-of-control trolley.

These abstract examples might be useful for shocking people. Maybe they are handy in psychological tests. But they are not real life.

I also believe that life starts at conception, but there are situations where we should be guided by common sense and compassion. It’s always simple and easy to stick to the rules. The case of the 9-year-old girl has caused a division even within the clergy. Let’s hope that Pope Francis will consider such situations in the Extraordinary Synod, planned for later this year.

 

[devonsams]

So, we should just treat this 9-year-old girl as a breading machine?!

Some earlier poster even suggested to keep the thing going as ‘evidence’ that she was raped. Perhaps we could have paraded this little child around as a showcase to demonstrate to the world how the Catholic Church sticks to its principles.

You write: " … without putting the girl in jeopardy …"
Obviously, we only need to keep her alive. What about her emotional life? Can anybody imagine the trauma, pain, fear, shame, anguish and guilt that little girl would have had to endure for another few months.

Two days ago I would have thought this situation was a no-brainer. I would love to know what percentage of the 1.2 billion Catholics world-wide would be on the side of compassion for a 9-year-old girl who was raped. I am sure it would be the vast majority.

How is it possible for a catholic anyway defend the abortion in this case? Unless the church could change this teaching (I have doubts she will) then a catholic cannot defend her abortion.

Abortion is excommunion Latea Sentetia according to the Church, and Catholics believe the church is infallible in its moral doctrine, so… is there a choice?

 

[Bruised_Reed]

So, we should just treat this 9-year-old girl as a breading machine?!

Some earlier poster even suggested to keep the thing going as ‘evidence’ that she was raped. Perhaps we could have paraded this little child around as a showcase to demonstrate to the world how the Catholic Church sticks to its principles.

You write: " … without putting the girl in jeopardy …"
Obviously, we only need to keep her alive. What about her emotional life? Can anybody imagine the trauma, pain, fear, shame, anguish and guilt that little girl would have had to endure for another few months.

Two days ago I would have thought this situation was a no-brainer. I would love to know what percentage of the 1.2 billion Catholics world-wide would be on the side of compassion for a 9-year-old girl who was raped. I am sure it would be the vast majority.

Why should she feel shame or guilt? Any trauma or anguish due to the rape is not going to go away because the child is aborted.

Unfortunately, I do think that many Catholics, along with others, would be okay with abortion in a case like this. I’m not sure they are thinking about the victim, however. I think they are thinking of themselves and the discomfort of looking a victim of rape in the eye or noticing her growing belly and not knowing how to deal with that. There is still an undercurrent of thinking that rape is the victim’s fault or that she could have done something (and I I’ve read as much on this forum) and that the assault being of a sexual nature suggests something intimate or private happened, that the victim did something shameful. Kind of like what happens in certain cultures. If we keep sending this message that rape victims need to get rid of the baby because we don’t want her to feel shame we perpetuate the notion that there is something shameful about her pregnancy whenever we suggest that rape victims “deserve” an abortion.

 

[SoMissCatholic]

Two days ago I would have thought this situation was a no-brainer. I would love to know what percentage of the 1.2 billion Catholics world-wide would be on the side of compassion for a 9-year-old girl who was raped. I am sure it would be the vast majority.

What about being on the side of compassion for two innocent babies who did not ask to be created as the product of abhorrent circumstances, yet here they are just the same? What you describe as compassion for a “9-year-old girl who was raped” could just as easily be characterized as cold-hearted indifference for two innocent babies who are in the most real sense possible completely and utterly incapable of defending themselves or having their own voice be heard. If you truly believe that life begins at conception, why is it more compassionate to pre-emptively kill two innocent babies for the sake of the life of an equally innocent 9 year old based on the possibility that a life threatening situation may arise than it would be to allow the pregnancy to progress and only address the life threatening situation if and when it presents itself? If we believe God is a worker of miracles why do we take the possibility of a miracle occuring off the table? Who are we to judge God? Whose to say that if the parents, instead of going forward with an abortion for their 9-year-old daughter (a traumatic experience in its own right), had allowed the pregnancy to progress and prayed fervently for God to protect their daughter and the babies and asked for others to pray for the same, that God would not have answered those prayers and used this situation as an example of how He can make good (healthy mother and babies) come from evil (rape)?

 

[oldcatholicguy]

I disagree. Your scenario is a textbook example for a 101 philosophy course on ethics. You might have heard about the guy who can choose between killing one person, or letting five people been killed by changing the path of an out-of-control trolley.

These abstract examples might be useful for shocking people. Maybe they are handy in psychological tests. But they are not real life.

I also believe that life starts at conception, but there are situations where we should be guided by common sense and compassion. It’s always simple and easy to stick to the rules. The case of the 9-year-old girl has caused a division even within the clergy. Let’s hope that Pope Francis will consider such situations in the Extraordinary Synod, planned for later this year.

The case we are talking about- 2 innocents (the mother and child), the actor (the doctor), action 1- attempt to save both lives without intentionally causing the death of one in order to save the other (i.e. the non-abortion route), action 2-intentionally causing the death of one in order to save the other (i.e. the abortion route)

My scenario- 2 innocents (the mother and the child), the actor (the police officer), action 1- attempt to save both lives without intentionally causing the death of one in order to save the other (i.e. the non-shooting them route), action 2- intentionally causing the death of one in order to save the other (i.e. the shooting route)

Pray tell, how exactly is my scenario different than the case we are talking about?

As for the “trolley problem”-

There is a runaway trolley barrelling down the railway tracks. Ahead, on the tracks, there are five people tied up and unable to move. The trolley is headed straight for them. You are standing some distance off in the train yard, next to a lever. If you pull this lever, the trolley will switch to a different set of tracks. Unfortunately, you notice that there is one person on the side track. You do not have the ability to operate the lever in a way that would cause the trolley to derail without loss of life (for example, holding the lever in an intermediate position so that the trolley goes between the two sets of tracks, or pulling the lever after the front wheels pass the switch, but before the rear wheels do). You have two options: (1) Do nothing, and the trolley kills the five people on the main track. (2) Pull the lever, diverting the trolley onto the side track where it will kill one person. Which is the correct choice?

The option you are looking for would be the actor given the option of throwing an innocent bystander in front of the trolley in order to save the others (i.e. intentionally and actively causing the death of one innocent person to save another innocent person, i.e. shooting one in order to save the other from drowning, i.e. aborting the child in order to save the mother). This, my friend, would be immoral.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Why should she feel shame or guilt? Any trauma or anguish due to the rape is not going to go away because the child is aborted.

Unfortunately, I do think that many Catholics, along with others, would be okay with abortion in a case like this. I’m not sure they are thinking about the victim, however. I think they are thinking of themselves and the discomfort of looking a victim of rape in the eye or noticing her growing belly and not knowing how to deal with that. There is still an undercurrent of thinking that rape is the victim’s fault or that she could have done something (and I I’ve read as much on this forum) and that the assault being of a sexual nature suggests something intimate or private happened, that the victim did something shameful. Kind of like what happens in certain cultures. If we keep sending this message that rape victims need to get rid of the baby because we don’t want her to feel shame we perpetuate the notion that there is something shameful about her pregnancy whenever we suggest that rape victims “deserve” an abortion.

 

[Hans_W]

1ke, Brused Reed, devonsams, oldcatholicguy and SoMissCatholic (I tried to get you guys in alphabetical order. No favorites) … thank you for your moral lessons.

I am happy to inform you that you are on the minority side of Catholics on this issue - and I am grateful to side with the majority.

I would have thought that a large forum like this one would foster some interesting and balanced discussion on such a topic, which obviously is not as clear-cut as you make out. I had the same experience last week when I chipped into threads discussing questions about fossils and on global warming. The whole thing quickly got drowned out by anti-science, ultra-conservative voices.

After being a practicing (and I think sincere) Catholic for more than six decades, three of them in English-speaking countries, I am really surprised. The atmosphere in many of the discussions here reminds me much of friends of ours, members of the Brethren Church. Everything is based on rules and regulations and if it’s not in the Bible, it must be false. I always thought that Catholics are the flag bearers for Christianity, strict on moral issues, but flexible if necessary, warm and open and full of compassion. Well, at least here in New Zealand the Catholic Church has beaten the Anglicans into second place (first time!).

I think I’ll start a thread on Fr. Robert Barron. He is my favorite and for me the representative for modern Catholicism. And he is American. We’ll see how that goes.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

1ke, Brused Reed, devonsams, oldcatholicguy and SoMissCatholic (I tried to get you guys in alphabetical order. No favorites) … thank you for your moral lessons.

I am happy to inform you that you are on the minority side of Catholics on this issue - and I am grateful to side with the majority.

I would have thought that a large forum like this one would foster some interesting and balanced discussion on such a topic, which obviously is not as clear-cut as you make out. I had the same experience last week when I chipped into threads discussing questions about fossils and on global warming. The whole thing quickly got drowned out by anti-science, ultra-conservative voices.

After being a practicing (and I think sincere) Catholic for more than six decades, three of them in English-speaking countries, I am really surprised. The atmosphere in many of the discussions here reminds me much of friends of ours, members of the Brethren Church. Everything is based on rules and regulations and if it’s not in the Bible, it must be false. I always thought that Catholics are the flag bearers for Christianity, strict on moral issues, but flexible if necessary, warm and open and full of compassion. Well, at least here in New Zealand the Catholic Church has beaten the Anglicans into second place (first time!).

I think I’ll start a thread on Fr. Robert Barron. He is my favorite and for me the representative for modern Catholicism. And he is American. We’ll see how that goes.

Given that Father holds the same view as all of us you listed in regards to abortion I don’t think you’ll find too many of us objecting to you starting a thread about an orthodox priest who upholds the teachings of the Church.

“The direct killing of the innocent is, like slavery or racial discrimination, one of those absolute intrinsic evils, the avoidance of which constitutes the moral framework of any decent human society.” wordonfire.org/Written-Word/articles-commentaries/March-2009/Ends-and-Means-and-the-Audacity-to-Hope.aspx

 

[devonsams]

Hans W

Read this:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_youngest_birth_mothers

 

[Hans_W]

Hans W

Read this:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_youngest_birth_mothers

What does that prove? That it is physically possible for a 5-year-old to have a child?
It doesn’t list the hundreds, or thousands who have died, most likely an agonizing death.

 

[1ke]

I am happy to inform you that you are on the minority side of Catholics on this issue - and I am grateful to side with the majority.

On what basis do you oppose abortion if not on the basis that it is wrong to kill babies. If it is wrong to kill babies, it is always wrong. If it is not wrong to kill babies, then on what grounds do you oppose abortion? You say you are against abortion, but here you are asserting you are not against it “in this case”. How are the babies any different “in this case” as opposed to any other “case”? How is it these babies can be killed but not other babies?

I would have thought that a large forum like this one would foster some interesting and balanced discussion on such a topic

If by balanced, you were hoping to find people to agree with you that killing babies is an OK thing to do, then no you will likely not find that sort of balance at a site that is faithful to the teachings of the Church. The Church teaches that it is not OK to kill babies, ever.

Everything is based on rules and regulations and if it’s not in the Bible, it must be false.

The Church does not teach “sola scriptura” so I am not sure where you have come across such an agrument put forth as authentic Church teaching.

The grave evil of abortion is neither a “rule” nor “regulation”. It is a moral truth divinely revealed by God. It is not up for discussion because there is nothing to “discuss”. It is Truth, capital T. Abortion is murder, always. It is never moral, ever.

I always thought that Catholics are the flag bearers for Christianity, strict on moral issues, but flexible if necessary, warm and open and full of compassion.

You attempt to misplace compassion, wrapping false compassion in an abortion wrapper. One can never do evil even to bring about a good. Authentic compassion is, as I have said multiple times already, to treat ALL the patients involved with their God given dignity as human beings.

I think I’ll start a thread on Fr. Robert Barron. He is my favorite and for me the representative for modern Catholicism. And he is American. We’ll see how that goes.

You think your favorite priest is in favor of killing babies?

 

[zz912]

I am happy to inform you that you are on the minority side of Catholics on this issue - and I am grateful to side with the majority…

So now morals are decided by majority vote?

After being a practicing (and I think sincere) Catholic for more than six decades, three of them in English-speaking countries, I am really surprised. The atmosphere in many of the discussions here reminds me much of friends of ours, members of the Brethren Church. Everything is based on rules and regulations and if it’s not in the Bible, it must be false. I always thought that Catholics are the flag bearers for Christianity, strict on moral issues, but flexible if necessary, warm and open and full of compassion. Well, at least here in New Zealand the Catholic Church has beaten the Anglicans into second place (first time!).

I find it sad you view yourself compassionate. You are sorely mistaken. Your “compassion” involves killing two innocent babies and making a young girl the mother of two dead babies. You’ll excuse me while I ignore your claims to hold the moral high ground or the biggest compassion. You have been deluded by evil.

I think I’ll start a thread on Fr. Robert Barron. He is my favorite and for me the representative for modern Catholicism. And he is American. We’ll see how that goes.

You’ll be greatly surprised when you find out he disagrees with you on abortion.

 

[Hans_W]

On what basis do you oppose abortion if not on the basis that it is wrong to kill babies. If it is wrong to kill babies, it is always wrong. If it is not wrong to kill babies, then on what grounds do you oppose abortion? You say you are against abortion, but here you are asserting you are not against it “in this case”. How are the babies any different “in this case” as opposed to any other “case”? How is it these babies can be killed but not other babies?

On what basis??

I think we have made that clear right at the beginning of this thread. “This case” is obviously different to the average abortion clinic “case”, where a mother gets rid of her fetus because it doesn’t suit her lifestyle, or for whatever other reason.
In “this case” the life of the mother is in danger. In “this case” the mother happens to be an innocent 9-year-old girl who got raped.

You ask: How are the babies any different “in this case” as opposed to any other “case”?

That’s not the right question to ask. Obviously, there is no difference between the unborn babies. But, if I may point out, the situations are not quite the same. Do we just consider the unborn person, or may we also take the mother into account?

Somebody sent me a list of all the children who managed to give birth aged down to five-year-olds. I wonder how many thousands have lost their lives.

Look people, I haven’t got so much time. I’m off this thread. There is obviously more agreement among yourselves than among the clergy in the Catholic Church. Concerning Fr. Robert Barron, I agree 100% of what he says about abortion. I very much doubt that he is on your side in this particular case.

 

[1ke]

On what basis??

I think we have made that clear right at the beginning of this thread.

You haven’t made it clear at all on what basis you oppose abortion.

I oppose abortion because killing an unborn baby is a moral evil that God tells us we must never do.

“This case” is obviously different to the average abortion clinic “case”, where a mother gets rid of her fetus because it doesn’t suit her lifestyle, or for whatever other reason.

The basis upon which I reject abortion is not the **circumstances **of the mother. The circumstances of the mother may be difficult, but the baby is still a human being, with equal dignity and we cannot kill him or her.

It is the **humanity **of the baby upon which I base my opposition to abortion. It is ALWAYS wrong to kill babies. Do you disagree with that statement?

These babies are no **different **than any other babies.

So, if you do not reject abortion based on the humanity of the child, on what basis do you reject it?

In “this case” the life of the mother is in danger. In “this case” the mother happens to be an innocent 9-year-old girl who got raped.

How are the BABIES different from other babies?

You ask: How are the babies any different “in this case” as opposed to any other “case”?

That’s not the right question to ask.

yes, it is the right question to ask. If they are human beings, we **cannot **kill them.

Obviously, there is no difference between the unborn babies. But, if I may point out, the situations are not quite the

We love and treat them BOTH. We cannot KILL any of them. It is not a situation of either/or, because we may never do evil in pursuit of good. It is BOTH/AND. Our moral obligation is to BOTH patients.

Somebody sent me a list of all the children who managed to give birth aged down to five-year-olds. I wonder how many thousands have lost their lives.

We can never kill children. It is murder, a grave evil against the fifth commandment.

Look people, I haven’t got so much time. I’m off this thread. There is obviously more agreement among yourselves than among the clergy in the Catholic Church. Concerning Fr. Robert Barron, I agree 100% of what he says about abortion. I very much doubt that he is on your side in this particular case.

I hope you will be able to see the inconsistency in your position.

They are babies deserving of life unless they’re not and don’t. That is your position.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

On what basis??

I think we have made that clear right at the beginning of this thread. “This case” is obviously different to the average abortion clinic “case”, where a mother gets rid of her fetus because it doesn’t suit her lifestyle, or for whatever other reason.
In “this case” the life of the mother is in danger. In “this case” the mother happens to be an innocent 9-year-old girl who got raped.

You ask: How are the babies any different “in this case” as opposed to any other “case”?

That’s not the right question to ask. Obviously, there is no difference between the unborn babies. But, if I may point out, the situations are not quite the same. Do we just consider the unborn person, or may we also take the mother into account?

Somebody sent me a list of all the children who managed to give birth aged down to five-year-olds. I wonder how many thousands have lost their lives.

Look people, I haven’t got so much time. I’m off this thread. There is obviously more agreement among yourselves than among the clergy in the Catholic Church. Concerning Fr. Robert Barron, I agree 100% of what he says about abortion. I very much doubt that he is on your side in this particular case.

If you agreed 100% with Father, we wouldn’t be having this discussion because your stance would be the same as ours.

 

[Hans_W]

Sorry, I am breaking my promise not to follow this thread anymore. It really intrigues me.
Not sure about how many of the original participants are still listening.

Interesting is that the original poster, devonsams, who asked the question in the first place, later so vehemently defends his/her one-sided view. What did you expect? Everybody agreeing? Why ask the question?

Just out of interest I am planning a survey in my diocese. I also asked friends of mine in Australia, Austria and Germany to do the same. They are keen to do a similar survey in their churches/dioceses. Only church-going Catholics are invited to participate.

Two simple questions:

(1) Are you anti-abortion (pro-life)
(2) Should an abortion be allowed in the following case: A 9-year old girl is pregnant with twins. The pregnancy resulted from a rape. The girl weighs 80 ponds (36 kg) and medical doctors declared that her life is in danger if she continues with her pregnancy.

Only Catholics who attend church every week are allowed to respond. No names are required, just personal opinions. Clergy is invited to participate.
I hope to get more than 1000 responses over this coming weekend. Not a scientific project, but it should give us some idea of how the general Catholic judges this case.

My guess is that more than 90% of Catholics who are pro-life will be in favor of an abortion in this particular case.

Any suggestions on how to improve the layout/questions to skew the results in your favour? I will post the results next week.

Another recent case comes to mind. An Indian woman in Ireland had to loose her life because an abortion on her was refused. She was told that she was in a Catholic country. I wonder how much damage this case has done to our Church, not to mention the anguish for her husband and family. And a great news item for the pro-choice crowd!

One more point: oldcatholicguy managed to retrieve my theoretical example of somebody having the choice of killing one person by saving five. I remembered that example from my second-year study on ethics, 10 years ago. It was supposed to illustrate that these silly abstract examples (including oldcatholicguy’s shooting policeman) don’t shed any light on the real problem: are there situations when an abortion is justified?

 

[devonsams]

Hans W and everybody

She was on the FIFTH month of pregnancy.

She didn’t even know she was pregnant for months.

She could very well have endured the pregnancy

 

[jaimeleglise]

Abortion is never right, it is a grave evil. It is murder. The Catholic Church teaches this as it is revealed to us by God. Even if many people vote for an abortion in this case in a poll, that still wouldn’t make it right. Truth isn’t decided by popular vote. As my spiritual director, a good, holy priest once said, a hundred people could take a vote to determine the sex of a kitten. Ninety-nine people could swear he is a male. If the kitten is a female, one million people saying it is a male won’t change things.

I doubt extremely that Pope Francis or Fr. Barron would ever condone abortion, no matter what the circumstances.

 

[Hans_W]

Hans W and everybody

She was on the FIFTH month of pregnancy.

She didn’t even know she was pregnant for months.

She could very well have endured the pregnancy

The medical report says that she was 15 weeks pregnant. A lot happens after 15 weeks of pregnancy with twins, to a 36 kg body of a 9-year-old. If the (Catholic) doctors said that her life was in danger, that should be good enough.

Your original question was:

Hello, I would like to ask what about the cases of abortion when it puts in risk the life of the mother?

There was a famous case here in Brazil of a 9 years old who got pregnant, the doctors said she could die because her uterus was not ready to receieve a baby and it could break.

I understand all the arguments against abortion, but when it is about to save a Mother Life? and when it is a child of 9 years old? The church can change this or it will never do?

In your subsequent posts you made your position very clear. So, what did you intend to accomplish with your question?

 

[Hans_W]

Thank you jaimeleglise for chipping in here. I value your (name removed by moderator)ut. I also love the Church. I am proud to be Catholic. But that shouldn’t prevent us from using common sense, and compassion.

You write:

Abortion is never right, it is a grave evil. It is murder. The Catholic Church teaches this as it is revealed to us by God.

What about the Indian woman dying in Ireland, two years ago? She repeatedly asked for an abortion. Do you think she wanted to ‘murder’ her unborn child? She desperately wanted to live. Was this not her right as well?

Even if many people vote for an abortion in this case in a poll, that still wouldn’t make it right. Truth isn’t decided by popular vote. As my spiritual director, a good, holy priest once said, a hundred people could take a vote to determine the sex of a kitten. Ninety-nine people could swear he is a male. If the kitten is a female, one million people saying it is a male won’t change things.

What on earth is that supposed to mean?
Yes, I agree, a popular vote does not decide the truth. Thousand years ago a popular vote would have confirmed the common belief that the sun goes round the earth, which is wrong. In the present situation we are weighing the life of a mother against the life of her unborn baby.
(I still can’t get the story with the kittens )

I agree, it is a complex issue. And it is so easy to say “abortion is always wrong - no exceptions”. It makes it very simple, just black and white. Very easy to police. If we allow exceptions, then we have all the trouble of checking, looking at all the surrounding factors and deciding if it is fair or not. And people will try to get around and find loopholes. Look at Brazil which allows women to have an abortion in the case of rape. Lots of women will try and claim to have been raped (am I right devonsams?). Very difficult to check and verify.

But there should be a fairly clear line when, say, three doctors decide that the mother’s life is at risk. In such an exceptional case it should be permitted.
That takes us back to the original case: a 9-year-old girl, weighing 36 kg, 15-weeks pregnant with twins, and doctors having decided that her life is in danger.

There really shouldn’t be any question in that case. I guess that 98% of Catholics would agree. Strange that I seem to be alone here with >400,000 members on this forum.