Catholic Hospital Argues Fetus is NOT a person in lawsuit

  • Thread starter Thread starter iowegian3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
twoshoes said:
With this argument you may win in the court of Law, but how would this argument work in God’s court. Just a thought.
Click to expand...
This argument wouldn’t work in God’s court. But the family of the woman and unborn children who died is not trying to win an award for money damages from God’s court, either.

They are trying to obtain financial compensation for their loss, from a civil court, which possibly may not recognize their right to do so when the victim is unborn. There are not attempting to consign the hospital and medical personnel responsible to Hell.
 
JaMc said:
This argument wouldn’t work in God’s court. But the family of the woman and unborn children who died is not trying to win an award for money damages from God’s court, either.

They are trying to obtain financial compensation for their loss, from a civil court, which possibly may not recognize their right to do so when the victim is unborn. There are not attempting to consign the hospital and medical personnel responsible to Hell.
Click to expand...
I agree with your last sentence, and never thought otherwise. I have never stated in any of my post that the family didnot,or should not receive compensation. My argument is only to the defense offered by the Churches attorney.

A previous post stated it wasn’t a Catholic Hospital. Then I ask why are the Bishops investigating the matter, Why is it called St Thomas More Hosiptal.

We all answer in God’s court, myself included, and how we answer is also important.
 
twoshoes said:
I agree with your last sentence, and never thought otherwise. I have never stated in any of my post that the family didnot,or should not receive compensation. My argument is only to the defense offered by the Churches attorney.

A previous post stated it wasn’t a Catholic Hospital. Then I ask why are the Bishops investigating the matter, Why is it called St Thomas More Hosiptal.

We all answer in God’s court, myself included, and how we answer is also important.
Click to expand...
Church affiliated does not equal Church owned.
 
oldcatholicguy said:
Why stop at just what the Church teaches (and for clarification the hospital isn’t owned by the Church)? The non-Catholic gentleman who is suing for malpractice has in a past interview indicated that he does not have a real opinion on abortion or when a person is a person. If what a person or institution holds to be true overrules actual law does that not then mean one can only sue for the death of a fetus if one’s faith or moral system holds that a fetus is a person? What if this gentleman held the belief that a person only becomes a person after birth? Would he still be entitled to sue the hospital for the deaths of his children even though he himself does not hold them to have been people yet?

Let’s take it further. What if I owned a law firm sanctioned by the Church in a similar manner to the hospital. Would I therefore be able to file suit against my local DA to force them to charge abortion doctors in my area with murder? Would I be able to file malpractice lawsuits against these doctors on behalf of women and men who have had their children aborted?
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what your hypothetical situations have to do with the Church being invoved in a defense that a fetus has no rights until birth. My aguments again speak only to the defense by the churches attorney’s. You seem to put great importance on the church winning. I think it is more important for the church to be consistent in it’s moral position than it is to win. I say to the attorney you need another argument. What if’s won’t reenforce the churches position that life begins at conception, a different agument will.
 
twoshoes said:
Love your neighbor as yourself. Do not covet your neightbors goods. Do not bear false witness against your neightbor. These are the basis I’m talking about. Thou shall not kill. Thou shall not steal. I wrote basis, not the finished product. What does building codes, employment law, or for that matter lawsuits have to do with an attorney that builds his defense against the moral, and ethical fiber of his client, the Catholic Church. That is what the orginal post was about. The lawyer does no service for their client by speaking opposite 2000 years of Catholic moral teachings. The lawyer is cutting the legs out from in under his client to win.

There has to be more than one way for the church to defend against this suit beside saying a fetus is not a person, Granted it may be the best defense legally, but morally it’s not. The last time I checked the church was in the moral and spiritual business, not the business of winning. Win at any cost, even to the point of damaging the client.

It is hypocritical the for the Catholic Church to have a teaching that life begins at conception, then argue, to win a lawsuit that it doesn’t. The think in your argument you are forgetting who the client is. It’s the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Once again…the attorney is not arguing that children are not people…they are arguing that the CIVIL LAW does not not recognize those children for purposes of malpractice compensation.

If you don’t like the law…then work to change it.
 
Dawnia said:
Wow…don’t like lawyers huh?

I’m curious…what lies do you think they told? Because saying civil law doesn’t recognize the rights of the unborn is the truth.
Click to expand...
Are you saying Catholics are not entitled to equal protection under the law
 
Nope, we are Catholic we believe in the inherent value and sanctity of unborn life… If the hospital was negligent and killed those baby’s, they should pay the family… I don’t care about state law, it is the integrity of our beliefs that are important… It’s hard to do the right thing especially when society gives you an out, we are Catholic we lead by example… They should pay for the loss if they are at fault…
 
twoshoes said:
If the church doesn’t own it or has no liability in the matter, why are the Bishops investigating it. Our name is on it.
Click to expand...
The Bishops are investigating it because an organization has to agree to and meet certain criteria in order to be affiliated with the Church. They’re investigating to see if the hospital and the actual owners of it have violated this criteria (and I would imagine that this is probably the first they have heard of this and are trying to figure what the blank is going on).

An easy way to determine if the Church actually owns the hospital is to see if it is named in the lawsuit (as in the father is suing the Church). I have yet to see where that is the case. I’m not a lawyer, but it seems idiotic to me to sue the doctors, the hospital, and Catholic Health Initiatives but not sue the Church if the Church was the actual owner.
 
Dawnia said:
Once again…the attorney is not arguing that children are not people…they are arguing that the CIVIL LAW does not not recognize those children for purposes of malpractice compensation.

If you don’t like the law…then work to change it.
Click to expand...
I’m not speaking to the civil law, you are. I’m speaking to a defense that is harmful to the client, the Church. Thank you for the all capital, civil law. I understand what you are saying, I just done agree with it as a defense for the church. Would you please tell me how this defense benefits, or enhances the churches moral position on right to life.
 
oldcatholicguy said:
The Bishops are investigating it because an organization has to agree to and meet certain criteria in order to be affiliated with the Church. They’re investigating to see if the hospital and the actual owners of it have violated this criteria (and I would imagine that this is probably the first they have heard of this and are trying to figure what the blank is going on).

An easy way to determine if the Church actually owns the hospital is to see if it is named in the lawsuit (as in the father is suing the Church). I have yet to see where that is the case. I’m not a lawyer, but it seems idiotic to me to sue the doctors, the hospital, and Catholic Health Initiatives but not sue the Church if the Church was the actual owner.
Click to expand...
Thank you, I hope you are right.
 
twoshoes said:
Thank you, I hope you are right.
Click to expand...
A visit to CHI’s web site leads me to believe that if not a Catholic organization now it has deep roots in catholic congregations. Every hospital, every nursing home, every clinic is or was catholic in it’s founding, and still carries the names of Saints. It’s mission statement, it’s support is all catholic based. Catholic’s still advice the board, and sit on it’s board of trustee’s. It has Catholic written all over it. Any average Joe, and I include myself, would believe this is a Catholic Institution.
 
twoshoes said:
A visit to CHI’s web site leads me to believe that if not a Catholic organization now it has deep roots in catholic congregations. Every hospital, every nursing home, every clinic is or was catholic in it’s founding, and still carries the names of Saints. It’s mission statement, it’s support is all catholic based. Catholic’s still advice the board, and sit on it’s board of trustee’s. It has Catholic written all over it. Any average Joe, and I include myself, would believe this is a Catholic Institution.
Click to expand...
I suspect that many organizations appear this way.
 
Catholic health group affirms Church teaching on unborn
Catholic Health Initiatives has joined Colorado’s bishops in calling for protection of unborn children after the group’s lawyers argued in a wrongful-death lawsuit that human fetuses are not persons.
Click to expand...
“The bishops are disappointed by what happened, without a doubt…but Catholic Health Initatives has recognized an error and has committed to moving forward and to changing their course, and that really does deserve to be commended,” J.D. Flynn, chancellor of the Archdiocese of Denver, told CNA Feb. 4.
Click to expand...
“Institutions and people make errors, but the Christian life is to take responsibility for what we’ve done and move forward, and so we’re thankful for that.”
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
“CHI representatives acknowledged that it was morally wrong for attorneys representing St. Thomas More Hospital to cite the state’s Wrongful Death Act in defense of this lawsuit,” Catholic Health Initiatives stated Feb. 4.
Click to expand...
Catholic Health Initiatives called Colorado’s Wrongful Death Act “unjust” and said that they will not use it in potential future litigation of the Stodghill case.
Click to expand...
In addition, Catholic Health Initiatives “unequivocally affirmed CHI’s strict adherence to one of the Church’s most basic moral commitments – that every person is created in the image and likeness of God and that life begins at the moment of conception.”
Click to expand...
“It is an unfortunate and regrettable point of fact that Colorado law, as it now stands, fails to adequately protect the rights of the unborn,” Catholic Health Initiatives said.
Click to expand...
Colorado’s bishops affirmed that the Stodghill’s received “exceptional care” at St. Thomas More Hospital. Two courts have found that nothing done by the hospital’s staff could have saved the lives of Lori and her sons.
Click to expand...
catholicnewsagency.com/news/catholic-health-group-affirms-church-teaching-on-unborn
 
So the hospital’s actions in the lawsuit were wrong because the law is unjust? I’m asking because my position was contrary to what the Bishops concluded and I’m trying to figure out where my thinking went wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top