Brazil Church condemns abortion of twins

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

God executed half of his plan through the step-father. Then he executed the rest through the doctor.
I think you saw just half of his plan. He also planned the abortion of the child.

That is blasphemy!!! God never goes against His own laws. He does not create life for it to be murdered. That is blasphemy!!!

 

[Apryl]

Still, an admission that you were wrong and an apology would have been ok, too.

That would require some combination of guilt and remorse. Otherwise it would be fake, and I don’t make it a habit of doing ‘fake’.

You made a statement. I responded to it. If you don’t like that I made that statement, that’s fine, and that happens.

I still haven’t heard why you think any one needs to prove that this pregnancy WASN’T unsafe.

Unless you have some reason to think that it would be expected to be unsafe.

Got anything in that vein?

 

[Apryl]

Case: Your daughter, a minor, is raped. She becomes pregnant. She will die if the pregnancy is not terminated. According to many of the posters, her parents should let her die rather than terminate the pregnancy. Or am I missing something?

How you figger?

Please: just tell me, why you are making this STATEMENT.

How do you know she will die? Why do you believe she will die? Have you ever heard of anyone else dying because of her age during the pregnancy? Did she die because of the pregnancy or some infection?

You see, I’m very anti-abortion. However, if there is some reason to believe that we have to believe that the pregnancy will result in a death, then we can slow down and THINK about it.

I don’t see any reason to suspect that the pregnancy is any sort of a death sentence… but I keep hearing it.

Just like people would be amazed to know that my 100 year old grandmother died with her own teeth. Was she supposed to be dentured at come point prior to her death?

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

We obviously have differing views on this matter. I pulled back out of respect for the board and the fact that I find some grave inconsistencies with the notion that God is both all knowing, and all loving, and has a plan. To justify these things in my mind, I choose to belive that God is not all knowing…life is random, and God’s love is there for us if we choose to embrace it.

I will leave, not because I am a balker, but because we are indeed of topic.

I believe that the problem you are having is that you think of God as being a human being, and not God.

Who can fathom the mind of God? For His ways are not our ways, nor are His thoughts our thoughts.

Just because we, with our finite minds, cannot understand what God is doing…it doesn’t mean that His plan is any less perfect. That is where Faith comes in.

I shall pray for an increase of your faith.

 

[St_Francis]

Low age is no indication of ability to bear children, as Snopes shows in this article. A 5 year old girl gave birth via C-section in Peru.

Wikipedia also has a list of youngest birth mothers, with four age 9, and one age 8, as well as the little 5yo girl.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

I think the outcry is strongest at the lack of Church action against the step-father, who was not excommunicated, yet he was the instigator of the crime. But for him, that young girl would not have become pregnant in the first place.

That young girl was every much a victim as the aborted babies were. She is no less innocent than they. She was SIX YEARS OLD when the sexual abuse began. That is what I take issue with: that the Church seems to have YET AGAIN turned a blind eye to the sexual abuse of the youngest and most powerless members of Her Church. I honestly can’t see that Jesus would have been so charitable towards such a man, who repeatedly attacked a small child for his own sexual gratification for years on end.

The whole situation is heart-breaking and terrible. I don’t see how ex-communicating the mother and doctors is going to undo what happened. It certainly does make people, both inside and outside, question the rigidity of the Church.

The mother and doctors were excommunicated for executing the murder of the twins. The Church could not throw them into jail. It did what needed to be done to bring to light to the perpetrators of the murder what is needed in order to come back to the Truth in good standing.

The Church had no sayso in the legal matters of the Father. He was certainly in mortal sin…which would have kept him from recieving the Holy Eucharist until he had repented and gone to Confession. And he still has to deal with the consequences of his crimes in the legal stand. Hopefully he will never see the light of day again.

No one is excusing or undoing the need for punishment due the stepfather. Abortion is intrinsically evil…and anyone who participates in it in any way is automatically excommunicated.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Okay, so to make a public example of a woman and mother who is probably already in a great deal of anguish because of a situation she did not cause (betrayal by her spouse, the horrific and shocking pregnancy of her daughter) serves what purpose??? To publicly condemn her, but NOT the actions of the step-father smacks of a complete lack of compassion. Do you really think Jesus would have acted like the archbishop has done?

Has it occurred to the archbishop that the mother may also not be thinking clearly, given the circumstances? Where is the justice and mercy here? It just reminds people of the Church’s lack of action on the pedophile priests of the very recent past, who merely received a slap on the wrist despite the monstrous damage done to so many young victims in other sexual assault cases. Where is the justice and mercy?

What would you have had the Church do to the stepfather?
And how would that change the excommunication of those promoting and executing the abortion?

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

I understand the Church condemns abortion (and I applaud this) but why was it necessary to excommunicate (and publicly), considering the delicacy of the situation.

The bishop did what was correct. I pray that more bishops step up to the plate and begin catechizing the faithful…and upholding the laws of the Church in a much more public manner…beginning with so called Catholic pro abortion politicians.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

What a sad story.

I think, in this case, the Bishop should have kept his own council and declined to comment publically; the Church looks uncaring, unmerciful and incompassionate.

My heart goes out to the daughter and the mother - what a dreadful situation to find yourselves in. And the last thing you need is for your Church to add to your pains by making public proclaimations about what a dreadful person you are (worse, pointing out that they consider you worse than a man who rapes children). I pray they soon find the caring, compassionate and loving pastoral care they desperately need.

Where does it say anything about the Church considering the mother and her child being worse than the man who rapes children? Documentation would be required here.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

It is within his power to say that it is a matter that is is being dealt with privately with the family involved. A little discretion would not have gone amiss in this case, I think. Sadly, it demonstrates the lack of empathy that can just sometimes accompany the celebate life.

You are so totally off base. The public words of the Bishop were needed for the world to understand how intrinsically evil abortion is.

The Bishop’s celibate life had nothing to do with the upholding of Christ’s Laws.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

I wonder what those involved think?

Those involved may not want to be disciplined. What child who has acted in direct disobedience wants to be disciplined. What those involved think is TOTALLY irrelevant to the duties of the Church in upholing Christ’s laws, and protecting Christ’s flock.

To allow evil to protect someone’s emotions is never alright!!!

That is like saying that the rapist’s actions should be protected because his emotions wanted him to have sex with a child.

Nor was it alright to put those 2 babies to death because of someone’s (the grandmother’s) emotions.

There is never a time when this is alright. Evil is evil…and thank God that the Bishop got up there and said so. We need many more like him.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

"That scenario raises legitimate questions about the mother’s UN-involvement in “protecting” this child."

Since sexual abuse is done in secrecy, it is very hard to detect, isn’t it? Why was no one aware of pedophilic priests for all these years? Because of secrecy and cover-ups. This mother may very well not have been aware of the sexual abuse of her daughters. So why blame her for the actions of her deceitful spouse?

People here are saying that the step-father is automatically excommunicated by the abuse he committed. That is a bunch of baloney, because to follow that line of reasoning, the mother also automatically ex-communicated herself through her own actions as well, in which case there was no need for a public comment by the archbishop stating that he ex-communicated her.

The fact is, sexual assault of minor children is every bit as devastating as the abortions that came about because of it. Yet that sexual assault of a SIX YEAR OLD CHILD appears to be of little consequence. It is this kind of attitude that allows this kind of horror to be inflicted upon children in the first place.

I stand by my comments that the archbishop could have shown some compassion and mercy in this horrific case, yet did not. He behaved very much like the pharisees that Jesus was always condemning.

Btw, many saints of the past were known for criticizing the clergy of their day. To err is human, even if you are a leader of the Church!

No one here is without tremendeous compassion for this little girl. That does not mean that we condone the mutilation and murder of her twins. Why does the protection of the babies automatically make one think that we have no feelings for the girl/mother?
That is ridiculous. I believe that the 9 year old needs much love, care, sympathy and therapy to get through this. She would have needed it with or without the pregnancy. Now she will be even more destroyed because of the murder of her own children at the hand of her mother.

This poor little girl was victimized by more than her stepfather. She was also victimized in a very horrific manner by her mother and the doctors who murdered her children.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

This case is personally interesting because Jewish Halachic law would reach an opposite position from that of the Catholic Church. Under Jewish law the living breathing nine year old mother would not have to give her life in addition to being the victim of rape. The cessation of the pregnancy due to the danger to the mother would be allowed.

The mother’s life was not in danger…in case you haven’t been paying attention. The first hospital that the mother took her daughter to stated that they would not perform the abortion because of this fact. The mother went searching until she got the answer she wanted…the convenient one for herself.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

My understanding is that the Church allows for the removal of ectopic pregnancies, why isn’t this the same situation? How would it serve those babies to have all three die? If they can save the girl, that seems like the right thing to do, and similar to the what is done with ectopic pregnancies all the time.

Had they performed a cesarean section at 4 months of gestation, the babies would have stood a chance of survival. And there was no danger to the mother at 4 months gestation according to the specialists. So she could have carried the babies as long as she was physically able to healthwise…then had cesarean section. Then both babies and mother would have been alive and well. Had the babies not survived in this way, it would have been God’s decision…not a human beings.

This was told to the grandmother. She didn’t want this. She wanted the pregnancy terminated and her grandchildren murdered.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Let’s not change the facts. She had a life threatening pregnancy.It is your right to argue that it is moral, in those circumstances, that a nine year old mother, a rape victim, should die or at least be put at serious risk of death to protect two fetuses not yet viable outside of her. The girl’s doctors happened not to agree with your position and so she is still alive today.

You are the one changing the facts. The specialists agreed that her pregnancy was not life threatening.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

The fact is, we do not have access to the child’s medical chart, we don’t know much about the attitude of the first doctor and whether he/she was willing to risk the life of the child, we only know what the mass media is telling us. We know that she went for a second opinion, that’s all we know. For all we know the first doctor was wrong in his judgement.

As far as your incredibly cavalier attitude toward this poor little girl, unfortunately for her there is no easy way out. She is scarred for life. And she will probably not be raised within the Catholic Church after this excommunication of her poor mother, who is also probably a victim of abuse.

And so why do you take the side of murderers over the side of non murderers?

She was scarred for life due to the rape. Now she will be scarred to life because her children were ripped to pieces within her womb and then vaccuumed out of her. Now tell me, how was the abortion procedure less detrimental to her life than continuing for a short time longer with the pregnancy and then having an operation to deliver them from her?

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

I am relying like all of us on the media. For the sake of argument, let’s presume that the girl would have died if the pregnancy was not terminated. Would you then argue, as has been done here by some, that the moral action was to allow this to happen in order to possibly allow the birth of the twins? If this is your attitude, then the condemnation of the Brazilian church and the excommunications are also, in your opinion, moral acts. Jewish law and ethics are quite clear that in the case where the mother would die, the moral action would be to terminate the pregnancy.

Had the doctors said that the girl’s life was in danger, they could have performed an immediate cesarean section and then done all that was medically possible to save the lives of the twin babies.

This was not done, nor was it even attempted. The grandmother and shopped around for doctors chose to mutilate and suction out the unborn babies.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

you do everything you can to save the babies.

Plain and simple.

There are risks for certain things, but if the babies die, you were trying to save them.

If an evil act is done for good intentions, then its still evil.
If you give the children the chance to live, it becomes a good act done with good intentions. The end may be unfortunate, but its not evil.

Intent, method, and end. If any of these is evil, it becomes immoral.
(keep in mind, a bad end result that is unforeseen isn’t evil, it may be bad, and perhaps a venial sin, but i don’t believe its mortal)

exactly!!!

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

I can only envy your belief that this is “plain and simple”.

Why, given your opinion, is the life of a nine year old girl, a rape victim, less precious and expendable in relation to two four month non viable fetuses? Why should she be condemned to die when she can easily be saved through a medical procedure? Is it relevant that she did not desire to have relations or become pregnant? Would you feel this way if we were talking about your daughter? Is a doctor who refused to carry out the procedure to save the life of the nine year old girl guilty of malpractice? Should a doctor be allowed to not carry out the procedure to save the girl’s life and be exempt from a civil suit solely on the basis of personal religious or moral beliefs? Should the doctor have the right to decide based on personal beliefs? If the doctor is Jewish and therefore believes that morality demands saving the mother’s life should he be allowed to act according to his beliefs? Does it matter that the girl is carrying twins (two lives as opposed to one)?

What problem do you have with trying to save the life of both the mother and the twins? Why is it imperative to end the pregnancy by mutilating and then suctioning out pieces of the twins from the mother’s womb? Why not try to save the life of the twins…even if the pregnancy must end in an immediate cesarean section? Why is abortion the only answer for you?

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Ohh, I don’t know, my friend…I have been with you all along on all of your posts, and I agree that the abortions were absolutely wrong, but you have to admit, this is a more difficult case than most. I don’t think we’re dealing with desperate “excuses” on this thread so much as with honest attempts to grapple with the complexities of a rare, and horrific, situation…

No?

Peace,
+AMDG+

Yes, the fact that it is a 9 year old rape victim is horrific. But that does not justify murder. It is black and wife…irregardless of the emotions involved. We need to ensure that this little girl is well cared for.