Something to Ponder . .

[Chris_LaRock]

Let’s suppose I have a conjoined twin. He’s mentally retarded and under developed. He doesn’t have a heart or kidneys, and is using mine to live. He isn’t viable.

I want to dispose of him, so I go down to the Planned Siblinghood clinic to have a sibling abortion. It’s my body, my choice. I don’t consider him to be human, since he is using my body to live.

Would I be a murderer for killing him off for my own benefit?

Let’s suppose the Supreme court ruled that I could kill him and I was able to find a doctor willing to do it. Would the doctor and I technically be murderers for killing him??

 

[06convert]

Would I be a murderer for killing him off for my own benefit?

Lets see. . . Would you be a murderer for killing him off? I think the answer is an easy yes. Typically people who kill other people are called murderers.

We can’t kill someone even if the outcome appears to be favorable. The ends do not justify the means.

Taking another life isn’t your choice. It’s not your life to take.

Is this a hypothetical situation or is this real?

 

[Chris_LaRock]

Lets see. . . Would you be a murderer for killing him off? I think the answer is an easy yes. Typically people who kill other people are called murderers.

We can’t kill someone even if the outcome appears to be favorable. The ends do not justify the means.

Taking another life isn’t your choice. It’s not your life to take.

Is this a hypothetical situation or is this real?

hypothetical.

 

[bookgirl32]

Let’s suppose I have a conjoined twin. He’s mentally retarded and under developed. He doesn’t have a heart or kidneys, and is using mine to live. He isn’t viable.

I want to dispose of him, so I go down to the Planned Siblinghood clinic to have a sibling abortion. It’s my body, my choice. I don’t consider him to be human, since he is using my body to live.

Would I be a murderer for killing him off for my own benefit?

Let’s suppose the Supreme court ruled that I could kill him and I was able to find a doctor willing to do it. Would the doctor and I technically be murderers for killing him??

I think that the Church would consider this “twin” it’s own separate person with a soul, correct?

 

[JReducation]

Let’s suppose I have a conjoined twin. He’s mentally retarded and under developed. He doesn’t have a heart or kidneys, and is using mine to live. He isn’t viable.

I want to dispose of him, so I go down to the Planned Siblinghood clinic to have a sibling abortion. It’s my body, my choice. I don’t consider him to be human, since he is using my body to live.

Would I be a murderer for killing him off for my own benefit?

Let’s suppose the Supreme court ruled that I could kill him and I was able to find a doctor willing to do it. Would the doctor and I technically be murderers for killing him??

1. That kind of case does not come under the word “abortion”. You’re not pregnant. That’s the first thing.
2. This comes under medical ethics, which cannot be in conflict with Catholic moral teachings.
3. Several questions have to be answered before one can reach a moral decision.
   
   a. Is the other person sentient?
   
   b. Is the surgery necessary or are both in danger if you remain attached?
   
   c. Is the evidence that you are sharing YOUR vital organs conclusive or are you just sharing vital organs?
   
   d. Is this person viable without the surgery?
   
   e. Is remaining attached considered extraordinary means of keeping another person alive?

Those are questions that can only be answered with the help of a moral theologian who specializes medical ethics. Almost every diocese has one. Professional hospital chaplains are specifically trained in this area of morality.

JR

 

[Chris_LaRock]

1. That kind of case does not come under the word “abortion”. You’re not pregnant. That’s the first thing.
2. This comes under medical ethics, which cannot be in conflict with Catholic moral teachings.
3. Several questions have to be answered before one can reach a moral decision.
   
   a. Is the other person sentient?
   
   b. Is the surgery necessary or are both in danger if you remain attached?
   
   c. Is the evidence that you are sharing YOUR vital organs conclusive or are you just sharing vital organs?
   
   d. Is this person viable without the surgery?
   
   e. Is remaining attached considered extraordinary means of keeping another person alive?

Those are questions that can only be answered with the help of a moral theologian who specializes medical ethics. Almost every diocese has one. Professional hospital chaplains are specifically trained in this area of morality.

JR

You really like to split hairs, don’t you?

The point is, it’s wrong to kill another person. Even if the choice includes a decision with one’s own body. It is still murder.

 

[JReducation]

You really like to split hairs, don’t you?

The point is, it’s wrong to kill another person. Even if the choice includes a decision with one’s own body. It is still murder.

I’m sorry. But that’s the way that moral theology is done in every Pontifical classroom around the world.

JR