Alas, Abortion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Marc_Anthony
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LilyM said:
Trust me, the world (and these threads) are FULL of women who were told, by their doctors, as the poor pregnant woman in this situation was told, that they and their babies would certainly or almost certainly die if they proceeded with pregnancy, who nonetheless proceeded and successfully both gave birth and themselves survived.
Click to expand...
That’s what gets me about this whole situation. According to teh info I’ve seen abut this case teh woman was 11 weeks pregnant and had hypertension and was critically ill as a result of the hypertension.

An 11 week pregnancy is not large enough, nor is it significant enough to increase BP in a woman to the point of making the mother critically ill. Yes, hypertension can start early in pregnancy but it usually doesn’t reach “critical” until later in second and thrid trimester.

I would love to see teh patient’s notes, but quite frankly, from the info available the abortion was completely unnecessary to save the mother’s life. They could have easily have treated the woman with anti-hypertensives and other medical interventions and the woman could have made it to the point of viability.

Frankly, there is something very, very fishy with this case.
 
I find it interesting that this thread has gone totally away from its original intention. Not that this is a bad thing necessarily. Just interesting.
 
tjm190 said:
So though shalt not kill is not a hard and fast rule, as you applied before? There can be mitigating factors?

yes. We aren’t choosing some to live and some to die, we’re minimizing the number of innocent lives lost. It seems like we have a responsibility to do so. **

To kill the innocent to spare other innocents? Ahhhh - NO.
I can see why you call yourself dissident, but why do you call yourself Catholic?**
Click to expand...
 
jmcrae said:
None of which include the killing of innocent bystanders. 🙂
Click to expand...
“bystanders” and “hostages” are not the same thing.
Who is this “we”? :confused:
Click to expand...
I am not aware of any government that has authorized the direct killing of innocent people, in order to save the lives of other innocent people. If they ever did, believe me, there would be rioting in the streets.
Click to expand...
So had the US shot down one of the planes prior to it reaching its target, you believe there would have been rioting?
I believe had the government had such an opportunity, failure to take it would have been a failure of the highest degree. The loss of life should always be minimized.
 
To kill the innocent to spare other innocents? Ahhhh - NO.
I can see why you call yourself dissident, but why do you call yourself Catholic?
Click to expand...
It’s never allowed? So if the worst had happened in the Cold War and Russian bombers (their missiles were broken) were en route to American cities, and the Russians had placed on American hostage in each bomber, you would recommend no action be taken to intercept those bombers?
 
As a parent, I would NEVER, under ANY circumstances, kill my own child to save my life. For a mother to do this is perverse.
 
E.E.N.S said:
As a parent, I would NEVER, under ANY circumstances, kill my own child to save my life. For a mother to do this is perverse.
Click to expand...
Excellent choice of words.
Yes, a mother killing her child is PERVERSE.
 
tjm190 said:
It’s never allowed? So if the worst had happened in the Cold War and Russian bombers (their missiles were broken) were en route to American cities, and the Russians had placed on American hostage in each bomber, you would recommend no action be taken to intercept those bombers?
Click to expand...
Excuse me, fella. I know you’re into your rant,
but TWO posters have asked questions you are ignoring:
  1. jmcrae asked and I second the question:
    "Who is this “we”? :confused:
  2. I asked and now ask again:
    "Why do you call yourself Catholic?
Can you interrupt your rant to ANSWER?
 
Reminds of a scene in Poseidon, the remake of The Poseidon Adventure.

In the scene, two men were hanging down an elevator shaft, with an elevator rushing upwards toward them. One man hanging down the shaft was clinging to the leg of the other man for survival. The MC yelled (paraphrased), “I can’t pull you both up! Shake him off or you’ll both die!” The man who was at the top of the shaft said, “I’m really sorry,” and kicked the man off. The man on top, the one who kicked the man into the shaft, survived. The other man, the one who was kicked off, died.

My question: Was what the man in the elevator shaft did a mortal sin, and why or why not? And if you conclude it was a mortal sin, is that reasonable?
 
Marc_Anthony said:
Reminds of a scene in Poseidon, the remake of The Poseidon Adventure.

In the scene, two men were hanging down an elevator shaft, with an elevator rushing upwards toward them. One man hanging down the shaft was clinging to the leg of the other man for survival. The MC yelled (paraphrased), “I can’t pull you both up! Shake him off or you’ll both die!” The man who was at the top of the shaft said, “I’m really sorry,” and kicked the man off. The man on top, the one who kicked the man into the shaft, survived,. The other man, the one who was kicked off, died.

My question: Was what the man in the elevator shaft did a mortal sin, and why or why not? And if you conclude it was a mortal sin, is that reasonable?
Click to expand...
You now seem to be officially out of control. Re-group and respond to Post # 65.
 
catharina said:
Excuse me, fella. I know you’re into your rant,
but TWO posters have asked questions you are ignoring:
  1. jmcrae asked and I second the question:
    "Who is this “we”? :confused:
  2. I asked and now ask again:
    "Why do you call yourself Catholic?
Can you interrupt your rant to ANSWER?
Click to expand...
  1. A hypothetical we- aka a group of people making this decision. Not a specific group of people.
  2. Because I believe the Catholic faith best represents the message of Christ but no not adhere to all of its tenants.
Now- you were just about to tell me whether or not we can shoot down a nuclear armed bomber known to be seeking to kill tens of millions if there was a innocent person on board.
 
tjm190 said:
  1. A hypothetical we- aka a group of people making this decision.
  2. Because I believe the Catholic faith best represents the message of Christ but no not adhere to all of its tenants.
Now- you were just about to tell me whether or not we can shoot down a nuclear armed bomber known to be seeking to kill tens of millions if there was a innocent person on board.
Click to expand...
I’ll answer. Yes, you can. You are shooting down the bomber not to kill the one innocent on board, but to save the potentially millions of innocents who would be killed. The death of the innocent on board is merely an unfortunate effect of saving the other innocents by killing the people aboard the nuclear armed bomber. Which, BTW, should also be a last (reasonable) resort.
 
Marc_Anthony said:
I’ll answer. Yes, you can. You are shooting down the bomber not to kill the one innocent on board, but to save the potentially millions of innocents who would be killed. The death of the innocent on board is merely an unfortunate effect of saving the other innocents by killing the people aboard the nuclear armed bomber. Which, BTW, should also be a last (reasonable) resort.
Click to expand...
Alright, so shooting down one of the planes bound for NYC/DC on 9/11 would have been fine by you? Others, or rather one other person, has taken issue with that.
 
Yeah of course. It’s unfortunate, but it’s the lesser of two evils, which is different from the ends justifying the means. You’re causing one or two murders, but preventing many others. Or something. I have it right in my head, anyway. :o
 
tjm190 said:
  1. A hypothetical we- aka a group of people making this decision. Not a specific group of people.
  2. Because I believe the Catholic faith best represents the message of Christ but no not adhere to all of its tenants.
Now- you were just about to tell me whether or not we can shoot down a nuclear armed bomber known to be seeking to kill tens of millions if there was a innocent person on board.
Click to expand...
  1. OK. The typical power-laden (but imaginary) “we.”
  2. There is nothing pick-and-choose about the Catholic Faith; iIt’s all or nothing, ya’ know?
 
catharina said:
  1. OK. The typical power-laden (but imaginary) “we.”
  2. There is nothing pick-and-choose about the Catholic Faith; iIt’s all or nothing, ya’ know?
Click to expand...
Nice to know your position on my faith- your answer to my question is pending I presume?
 
Marc_Anthony said:
Don’t worry, I take no offense at all. Clearly an honest mistake.

I AM curious to see what you make of the “Poseidon dilemma”.
Click to expand...
For me, no dilemma. Kill another to save myself? NOPE.

Admit I HATE movie references.
(I don’t watch movies very much.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top