S
St_Francis
Guest
I see what you are saying, but we are not doctors here
We are average Joes speaking everyday English, and need to have things spelled out clearly so as not to confuse us 
- Status
We are average Joes speaking everyday English, and need to have things spelled out clearly so as not to confuse us
B
bzkoss236
Guest
She’s on Wikipedia
To the original topic at hand, I’ve seen television specials (not the greatest source, I know) about child rape and those convicted of child rape, and one thing they said was that sexually abused young children tend to have puberty start earlier, but it is not always the case. It is a terrible thing, but I personally don’t think it justifies the killing of an unborn child, because no matter how you look at it, whether it was child rape, or adult rape, it’s never the child’s fault, and therefore, aggression should not be taken out on the child. A child is always a blessing, if not for you, it could be for someone else.
G
Giggly_Giraffe
Guest
ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/talking-about-rape-what-pro-life-politicians-desperately-need-to-know
Statistically, 00.7% of all abortions result from this scenario. Even with this small statistic, we need to mind the human dignity of all involved.
R
Regina_Love
Guest
I would ask, “Is it OK to kill a person for a crime done by another? Is it Ok for me to kill YOU for something your father did? Is that fair?” Is it right to pressure women to abort after they have just survived a brutal rape? All of society screams KILL THE KID! I think having to live with the fact that you felt coerced into aborting your own baby, is more horrific than being raped.
The women I know who conceived by rape, and still gave their babies life, found healing in their babies birth, and life! They were proud of themselves for NOT punishing the child, proud of themselves for sacraficing for their beautiful babies. They were proud that they chose well, faced their issues, and came out the other side thankful, and happy. They were proud that they chose LOVE to heal the hate that had been directed at them. As one proud momma said, “My rape was a horrible event. My baby is a blessing for a lifetime!”
G
Georgiana_X
Guest
To the original poster VoiceofTruth,
As someone who believes that abortion should not be legal for any reason, I find myself involved in these debates more often than I’m prepared to. I don’t start it, but I don’t need to, since my views are generally known which makes me something of a target.
My advice to you is to remain consistent when engaged in these debates. It seems that the opponent will invariably bring us these scenarios in order to throw you off track. When they cannot get at you from the standpoint of women’s rights, they will turn to female children. The goal is to make you appear inhumane. If you keep the focus of your argument on your not believing in murdering unborn children for any reason and not be persuaded to start defending perceived injustices, you won’t be sidetracked with either feminist or neo-gnostic agenda. Unless you wish to be, since many of these radicals make themselves ridiculous before too long.
I am the only female working in an office of men, all of whom claim to be Christians and all of whom are pro-choice. They take the path that I hear many men taking, which is to sit on the fence saying they personally find it repulsive but would not vote to take away a woman’s choice. My suspicion is that they don’t want to be perceived as a misogynist or something similar along those lines. I find this discouraging that they won’t speak up, but I am acquainted with their wives and mothers and can see where these views are actually coming from, or at least the reluctance to argue differently. Having said that, I know more men who are opposed to abortion than I do women.
My boss is a biologist and tries to sway me with the scientific facts of when life begins. Because I don’t have the scientific training to answer that, he does his best to convince me away from my views. People will find your intellectual Achilles‘ heel and try to weaken your arguments that way. They fail to understand that it’s about more than intelligence.
Anyway, good luck with your debates and God bless you for standing up against evil. As I said, I’ve found that being consistent in saying I don’t believe in abortion for any reason, not even the “exceptions” and not getting mired in digressions has been my best approach to these debates.
As someone who believes that abortion should not be legal for any reason, I find myself involved in these debates more often than I’m prepared to. I don’t start it, but I don’t need to, since my views are generally known which makes me something of a target.
My advice to you is to remain consistent when engaged in these debates. It seems that the opponent will invariably bring us these scenarios in order to throw you off track. When they cannot get at you from the standpoint of women’s rights, they will turn to female children. The goal is to make you appear inhumane. If you keep the focus of your argument on your not believing in murdering unborn children for any reason and not be persuaded to start defending perceived injustices, you won’t be sidetracked with either feminist or neo-gnostic agenda. Unless you wish to be, since many of these radicals make themselves ridiculous before too long.
I am the only female working in an office of men, all of whom claim to be Christians and all of whom are pro-choice. They take the path that I hear many men taking, which is to sit on the fence saying they personally find it repulsive but would not vote to take away a woman’s choice. My suspicion is that they don’t want to be perceived as a misogynist or something similar along those lines. I find this discouraging that they won’t speak up, but I am acquainted with their wives and mothers and can see where these views are actually coming from, or at least the reluctance to argue differently. Having said that, I know more men who are opposed to abortion than I do women.
My boss is a biologist and tries to sway me with the scientific facts of when life begins. Because I don’t have the scientific training to answer that, he does his best to convince me away from my views. People will find your intellectual Achilles‘ heel and try to weaken your arguments that way. They fail to understand that it’s about more than intelligence.
Anyway, good luck with your debates and God bless you for standing up against evil. As I said, I’ve found that being consistent in saying I don’t believe in abortion for any reason, not even the “exceptions” and not getting mired in digressions has been my best approach to these debates.
U
UNITE_MY_WILL
Guest
http://bdfund.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/wi_whitepaper_life_print.pdf
This is a very interesting “research” paper…When Does Life Begin, scientifically speaking.
Peace,
T
G
Geist
Guest
I’m sorry, this is not entirely correct. An ectopic pregnancy being the most common example; the destruction of the embryo is licit because the intended effect wasnt an abortion in and of itself but an unintended and unfortunate consequence of the intervention.
A hysterectomy for a uterus that is simultaneously pregnant and cancerous would be another example, though this is rather rare. Ectopics are more common.
I fully agree with doctine and wouldnt consider it licit in the case of rape or incest, but there are very narrow exceptions.
J
JimG
Guest
In the case of ectopic pregnancy, I believe that a distinction is made between removing the fallopian tube, which is not a direct attack on the embryo, and not an abortion, vs directly removing the embryo from the tube, which would be a direct abortion.
V
VoiceofTruth
Guest
Thank you and God bless you all for your responses so far, with particular thanks to RPRPsych and Georgiana X for their deeply insightful and thoughtful posts; they’ve all been very interesting to me. I’ll be sure to continue to meditate upon them…
For now, I just want to clarify that I am no way deterred from my position that abortion, no matter the circumstances, is morally evil. Many years ago, I was pro-choice, but I’ve come a long way since then (thank goodness!)…
Secondly, I also want to say that through this discussion, it has become especially clear to me that the consequential death of a child to save the life of the mother is not in itself bad because it’s not what was originally and deliberately intended, as compared to the direct attack to the life of the unborn child. It’s something I hadn’t clearly understood before, but thanks to some of the posters here, I do now
Anyway, carry on, everyone!
For now, I just want to clarify that I am no way deterred from my position that abortion, no matter the circumstances, is morally evil. Many years ago, I was pro-choice, but I’ve come a long way since then (thank goodness!)…
Secondly, I also want to say that through this discussion, it has become especially clear to me that the consequential death of a child to save the life of the mother is not in itself bad because it’s not what was originally and deliberately intended, as compared to the direct attack to the life of the unborn child. It’s something I hadn’t clearly understood before, but thanks to some of the posters here, I do now
Anyway, carry on, everyone!
B
Bill_7154
Guest
Ignatius,
Thank you for this post. I avoided reading this thread until now because the concept was scary for me. Your post was very helpful to me and I wanted to personally thank you for that.
As an aside, I’m assuming that specialized counseling would be necessary for the child as this situation would be much more complicated (I don’t even want to think about it, hense the ‘would be’) than an adult female being impregnated as a result of a rape. I’m hoping that there are counselors who have the training to provide the specialized counseling that would be necessary to help a child in this position. And I hope I’m correct in assuming that we would all as a society, or at least all of us Christians, be willing to donate all of the money necessary to provide the specialized couseling and care for a child in this situation whose parents make the decision for their child that she will carry the baby to full term (or to when it would be medically appropriate to do the c-section). This would include possibly flying the specialized couselor to wherever the child lived in the world, and provide for all of their living expenses as well as pay to be available to provide the needed couseling and support for the child and the child’s family. I hope I am not wrong in assuming that every Christian who became aware of such a situation would reach into their pockets to donate monies to provide for all of the care and treatment needed, whatever those expenses might be- even possibly pay for the family if both parents needed to not work for however long that might be. I know I would certainly donate and I am a poor person but would put myself even deeper in debt to help such a cause.
God Bless You All,
Bill
G
Georgiana_X
Guest
Bill,
You mention the “parents making the decision.” My understanding is that the girl doesn’t need permission from her parents in this day and age, and maybe (if this rape wasn’t reported) they wouldn’t ever know about the pregnancy in the first place.
I repeat my belief that abortion should not be performed for any reason,regardless of circumstances.
You mention the “parents making the decision.” My understanding is that the girl doesn’t need permission from her parents in this day and age, and maybe (if this rape wasn’t reported) they wouldn’t ever know about the pregnancy in the first place.
I repeat my belief that abortion should not be performed for any reason,regardless of circumstances.
B
BobCatholic
Guest
I’d tell the pro-death person that I am all for the death penalty for the rapist, not the victim.
I’d also ask the pro-death person: There is a horrendous, horrible, unspeakably cruel crime that occurs. Please choose the number of victims: 1 or 2.
I’d also ask the pro-death person: There is a horrendous, horrible, unspeakably cruel crime that occurs. Please choose the number of victims: 1 or 2.
A
AbbaDabba
Guest
None of what you posted is true.
The reason the average age was so low was because so many children died in the first few years of life. When you excluded those who died in infancy and early childhood, the average person in, say, the Middle ages, could expect to live to their mid 40s.
Childbirth is much, much more dangerous for teen girls than for adult women, because their bodies simply aren’t developed enough to handle the physical strain of childbirth. This is why the #1 cause of death for teenage girls age 15-19 world wide is childbirth. Teens are much more likely than adult women to have complications in their pregnancies that either kill them or leave serious lifelong medical complications. They are much more likely to miscarry and the baby is much more likely to have disabilities.
Until the modern era, most women didn’t even receive their first periods until the age of 16. Even hundreds of years ago, in the early colonial days, women were typically married in their early twenties. Mariage of young teens was extremely rare. Sometimes aristocratic women were married at younger ages simply because her well being was not valued. Thus even though in the 1400s, a 14 year old girl was very much considered a child and pregnancy was known to be especially dangerous to her, but her family may have still married her because they only cared about the advantages her marriage or her bearing of a son could bring in terms of money or political alliances or power. Their marriage of their very young daughters often brought about scathing criticism by more sympathetic members of society.
It is not just the process of childbirth which is dangerous. Even before delivery, the woman is at much greater risk for dangerous or deadly complications (for instance, her uterus rupturing because her body is simply to small to carry a fetus). Also, C sections themselves are dangerous, they have more risk of complications than a vaginal birth which is why many medical doctors will avoid them unless aboslutely necessary. When talking about a country without modern medicine and sanitation, the risks of c section are obviously even greater.
One thing I have noticed about this web page is that I have not seen one single topic in which Catholics argue honestly. For instance, in this thread they claim that childbearing is no more dangerous for a 12 year old than a 22 year old and so the only reason to want to end a pregnancy of a child is to keep her from emotional harm, which is a lie.
Personally, I feel Catholics do not love their children the way other people do. If my 11 year old was raped, the first thing I would do is seek out a morning after pill. I would not force my young daughter to risk her life rather than prevent a fertilized egg (seen below) from implanting in her uterine lining.
A woman isn’t even pregnant before a fertilized egg implants. MOST fertilized eggs do not implant. To value a sperm and an egg more than your own living, breathing, frightened child’s life is simply beyond me. I would no more make my child risk her life than I would force her into a burning building to try and save someone trapped inside.
What is most shocking to me is the number of posters simply saying such girls’ lives do not matter because they are statistically rare. People here are literally saying that these children’s well being shouldn’t even be considered solely because they not statistically significant.
Of course, they ignore the fact these numbers are far higher in other parts of the world.
Let’s say someone broke into your home. They had with them a vial in which a fertilized egg was containted. They put this vial into your hand and tell you that if you do not destroy the vile, they will torture and murder your 9 year old daughter in front of you. According to Catholics here, they would not destroy the vial. You would let your begging, pleading, suffering child be killed instead.
Again, I simply do not believe anyone can hold that opinion and genuinely love their children.
I also think it is interesting that for most of the history of the Catholic Church, abortion was completely legal and endorced because the child was not considered ensouled until either the quickening or in some cases even in birth. St Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, and many of the most prominant Catholic scholars and thinkers who have ever lived emphatically supported a woman’s right to abortion and absolutely rejected the idea that life begins at conception. If anything, abortion was considered a rather minor sin that should involve some religious penance but no legal ramifications.
Considering the Catholic Church spent over a millenia spreading the idea that life does not begin at conception and abortion should be permitted (at least in the first trimester), then the Catholic Church has no one else to blame but itself that their very modern claim that life begins before a woman is even pregnant is an idea many reject.
A
AbbaDabba
Guest
It is shocking to me how many people like you honestly believe that rape pregnancies only occur in comfortable, Western countries where social support services and adoption is available.
The fact is most rape pregnancies occur in places like Haiti, or Africa, where the most common response for a woman impregnated by rape is to be abandoned by her husband and exiled from her community.
Let me give you an all too common example: a woman in Liberia is raped. Her husband abandons her because of the rape. She becomes pregnant. She is exiled from her community due to her rape and pregnancy and no one will help her. She and her existing children spend the next several months homeless and starving, with her health ever dwindling. She ultimately dies in childbirth, along with her rape baby. Of her 3 children, 2 die of starvation because of their mother’s death. The third is picked up by sex traffickers and forced into child prostitution, dying from a sexually transmitted disease before they reach their 12th birthday.
But yes, go right ahead and tell that orphaned, enslaved child as she’s dying of AIDS that that baby who didn’t even survive childbirth was a real gift and blessing to her mother and family. Tell her how grateful she should be that her raped mother became pregnant.
I am very sympathetic to the pro life point of view that abortion itself is wrong no matter the circumstances, even if not aborting can create horrible consequences for the mother and family, because “two wrongs don’t make a right.” But I think it is simply the most unsympathetic and terrible thing to tell women who become pregnant from rape that it is a “blessing” even if they die, the rape baby dies, and all her other children die directly as a result of her pregnancy.
I also cannot comprehend people who value egg and sperm that haven’t even implanted yet (thus causing pregnancy) more than their own child and would prevent their daughter even from having the morning after pill.
Why do you guys focus so much on abortion? Why aren’t you spending just as much time and resources into lobbying for medical research that ensures a fertilized egg implants, or at least heightens its chances of implantin?. Natural non implantation is far more common than implantation and pregnancy, and far more common than abortion. If all those non implanted beings are just as valuable as children and their deaths are the same as abortion or a child dying, then it’s illogical to put so much effort into ending abortion and none into ending this massive loss of life. Medical technology and therapies are advancing at a breathtaking rate. If you actually believe every incidence of non implantation is just as bad as a 10 year old child dying, why do you do nothing to stop this natural process, in the way we seek to prevent other childhood deaths from other causes?
G
Georgiana_X
Guest
Your use of the word “illogical” is irrelevant in a discussion about faith-based beliefs dictated by religion.
Sorry if I messed up the quotes since I am new at posting on a forum.
A
aragonjohn1
Guest
A
aragonjohn1
Guest
you are incorrect in assumeing much of this
a higher percantage of young native american girls and girls influenced by relativism and non-social teachings in school are way higher
- washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/25/AR2007042502778.html
- ministryoftofu.com/2012/06/shanghai-metro-blames-sexual-harassment-on-womens-immodest-clothing-netizens-reaction/
- aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/08/sr/statelaws/summary.shtml
Shalom
God Bless
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
- Viewing a child as a blessing- The status of a child being a blessing is inherent. It has nothing to do with how that child came about, physical handicaps, mental handicaps, or the impact the child will have on the economic or social standing of the family. My children aren’t a blessing because my wife and I can afford them, they aren’t a blessing because they are healthy, they aren’t a blessing because they bring joy to my wife and I; they are a blessing because they are. The idea that a child’s value and status as a blessing is dependent on something other than their mere existence is horrid.
- Liberia- Very nice appeal to emotions, but a horrible argument. Before going into that, though, I’d like to know why you picked Liberia (other than for the obvious emotional impact). The very same set of circumstances could very easily take place in the US or Europe. In both locations (as in the majority of the world) a stigma is attached to rape victims, in both locations the social services are poorly equipped to deal with the ever increasing need of the populaces, and in both locations sex trafficking exists (and if memory serves to a far greater degree than in most African countries).
Even so, if she “got rid of” the child she would have one less mouth to feed and her health would be better. Sounds reasonable, that is until you realize that that pretty much boils down to- the way to fix a lack of basic social service systems (food, shelter, health care) is to not fix the systems themselves but to limit the number of people using them. “If it’s broke, don’t fix it, just kill off the people using it.”
Lastly, please explain what crime or sin this child has done to warrant death. Is it responsible for the rape? Is it responsible for the husband’s failure to fulfill his role as a man and as a husband? Is it responsible for the cruel stigma placed on rape victims by pretty much every society? Is it responsible for the lack of basic social services in his mother’s country? Is it responsible for the death of the mother caused by the lack of said services? Is it responsible for the actions of the sex traffickers who enslave his sister? Is it responsible for the men who abuse her? Is it even responsible for his or her own existence? Please tell me because I have seen more mercy shown to vile individuals responsible for horrible crimes than what you want given to this child. So the child must be guilty of something.
- I also cannot comprehend people who value egg and sperm that haven’t even implanted yet (thus causing pregnancy) more than their own child and would prevent their daughter even from having the morning after pill.
But it would take having a baby out of the picture. Of course that really only works if one continues to empower the rapist by calling it a “rape baby” and claiming the child will be a constant reminder of being raped (as if rape victims who don’t get pregnant somehow forget they were raped).
- Natural non-implantation- Illogical would be viewing a natural occurrence (non-implantation) as the same as an unnatural act (abortion).
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
Let’s say someone broke into your home. They had with them a vial in which a fertilized egg was containted. They put this vial into your hand and tell you that if you do not destroy the vile, they will torture and murder your 9 year old daughter in front of you. According to Catholics here, they would not destroy the vial. You would let your begging, pleading, suffering child be killed instead.
That’s the “would you let a runaway trolley kill a child or 10 people” argument. It’s been covered, a lot, and is basically garbage. A Catholic would have no issue destroying the vial because doing so would not be a sin under the criteria you gave.
Again, I simply do not believe anyone can hold that opinion and genuinely love their children.
I also think it is interesting that for most of the history of the Catholic Church, abortion was completely legal and endorced because the child was not considered ensouled until either the quickening or in some cases even in birth. St Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, and many of the most prominant Catholic scholars and thinkers who have ever lived emphatically supported a woman’s right to abortion and absolutely rejected the idea that life begins at conception. If anything, abortion was considered a rather minor sin that should involve some religious penance but no legal ramifications.
Considering the Catholic Church spent over a millenia spreading the idea that life does not begin at conception and abortion should be permitted (at least in the first trimester), then the Catholic Church has no one else to blame but itself that their very modern claim that life begins before a woman is even pregnant is an idea many reject.
You must be a fan of CSI. I say that because I remember the lead female actress’s character pretty much preaching that same spiel in one of it’s episodes. Wasn’t true then, isn’t true now.
That’s the “would you let a runaway trolley kill a child or 10 people” argument. It’s been covered, a lot, and is basically garbage. A Catholic would have no issue destroying the vial because doing so would not be a sin under the criteria you gave.
Again, I simply do not believe anyone can hold that opinion and genuinely love their children.
I also think it is interesting that for most of the history of the Catholic Church, abortion was completely legal and endorced because the child was not considered ensouled until either the quickening or in some cases even in birth. St Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, and many of the most prominant Catholic scholars and thinkers who have ever lived emphatically supported a woman’s right to abortion and absolutely rejected the idea that life begins at conception. If anything, abortion was considered a rather minor sin that should involve some religious penance but no legal ramifications.
Considering the Catholic Church spent over a millenia spreading the idea that life does not begin at conception and abortion should be permitted (at least in the first trimester), then the Catholic Church has no one else to blame but itself that their very modern claim that life begins before a woman is even pregnant is an idea many reject.
You must be a fan of CSI. I say that because I remember the lead female actress’s character pretty much preaching that same spiel in one of it’s episodes. Wasn’t true then, isn’t true now.
A
aragonjohn1
Guest
very true,
but a few things though
From earliest times, Christians sharply distinguished themselves from surrounding pagan cultures by rejecting abortion and infanticide. The earliest widely used documents of Christian teaching and practice after the New Testament in the 1st and 2nd centuries, the Didache (Teaching of the Twelve Apostles) and Letter of Barnabas, condemned both practices, as did early regional and particular Church councils.
To be sure, knowledge of human embryology was very limited until recent times. Many Christian thinkers accepted the biological theories of their time, based on the writings of Aristotle (4th century BC) and other philosophers. Aristotle assumed a process was needed over time to turn the matter from a woman’s womb into a being that could receive a specifically human form or soul. The active formative power for this process was thought to come entirely from the man – the existence of the human ovum (egg), like so much of basic biology, was unknown.
However, such mistaken biological theories never changed the Church’s common conviction that abortion is gravely wrong at every stage. At the very least, early abortion was seen as attacking a being with a human destiny, being prepared by God to receive an immortal soul (cf. Jeremiah 1:5: “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you”).
In the 5th century AD this rejection of abortion at every stage was affirmed by the great bishop-theologian St. Augustine. He knew of theories about the human soul not being present until some weeks into pregnancy. Because he used the Greek Septuagint translation of the Old Testament, he also thought the ancient Israelites had imposed a more severe penalty for accidentally causing a miscarriage if the fetus was “fully formed” (Exodus 21: 22-23), language not found in any known Hebrew version of this passage. But he also held that human knowledge of biology was very limited, and he wisely warned against misusing such theories to risk committing homicide. He added that God has the power to make up all human deficiencies or lack of development in the Resurrection, so we cannot assume that the earliest aborted children will be excluded from enjoying eternal life with God.
In the 13th century, St. Thomas Aquinas made extensive use of Aristotle’s thought, including his theory that the rational human soul is not present in the first few weeks of pregnancy. But he also rejected abortion as gravely wrong at every stage, observing that it is a sin “against nature” to reject God’s gift of a new life.
During these centuries, theories derived from Aristotle and others influenced the grading of penalties for abortion in Church law. Some canonical penalties were more severe for a direct abortion after the stage when the human soul was thought to be present. However, abortion at all stages continued to be seen as a grave moral evil.
From the 13th to 19th centuries, some theologians speculated about rare and difficult cases where they thought an abortion before “formation” or “ensoulment” might be morally justified. But these theories were discussed and then always rejected, as the Church refined and reaffirmed its understanding of abortion as an intrinsically evil act that can never be morally right.
- For more information: Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration on Procured Abortion (1974), nos. 6-7; John R. Connery, S.J., Abortion: The Development of the Roman Catholic Perspective (1977); Germain Grisez, Abortion: The Myths, the Realities, and the Arguments (1970), Chapter IV; U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, On Embryonic Stem Cell Research (2008); Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae (1995), nos. 61-2.
- ewtn.com/library/PROLENC/APPENDA.HTM
Shalom
God bless
- Status