The consistant life ethic is one of the most evil ideologies of the modern era

[worldexploder]

It's based on Catholic Social Teachings. Oh these people hide behind being "progressive" on social and economic issues but they ultimately believe in a theocracy. They are against abortion and euthanasia under ALL circumstances.

THE RESULT IS THIS - 9 year old girl raped and impregnated in Brazil. Church excommunicated the mother and doctors for helping her get an abortion. The rapist however was not excommunicated.


THESE ARE SOME OF THE EVIL FACES THAT SUPPORT IT

 

[Threads]

'all life is sacred until it gets out of the womb, then it doesn't deserve basic rights.'

- catholic church

 

[invisiblycrippled]

Just yet another suffering-promoting ideology...

 

[Schopenhauer]

It's not only a perverse philosophy, it also makes people feel good about themselves. That's why it's so self-perpetuating.

 

[worldexploder]

It's not only a perverse philosophy, it also makes people feel good about themselves. That's why it's so self-perpetuating.

Right on! They feel good by promoting policies that will make other people feel bad. We must suffer because of their faith. How evil and sick can these people get!

 

[Circles]

Religion is an ideology full of hypocrisy and rotten mischievousness. I just can't believe most people believe in this shit. Like believing in something will actually make it real? Wtf. Lifers are too afraid to look behind the lies, the deceit and bullshit they follow because they want to feel a sense of worth and a security blanket. Lost in the dark and people are so gullible in choosing the first thing that comes easy. God did it! No more questions. Obey.

 

[Severen]

'all life is sacred until it gets out of the womb, then it doesn't deserve basic rights.'

- catholic church

That is more like the Protestants. The Catholics give a shit about life more after it gets out of the womb. Protestants are a lot more evil than Catholics.

 

[Threads]

That is more like the Protestants. The Catholics give a shit about life more after it gets out of the womb.

By and large most politically right and centrists members of Christian denominations in the United States don't give nearly the same amount of fucks about living children compared to the unborn.

We can argue who is the bigger bad guy (Catholics, Protestants, etc) in a different thread, son.

 

[Severen]

By and large most politically right and centrists members of Christian denominations in the United States don't give nearly the same amount of fucks about living children compared to the unborn.

We can argue who is the bigger bad guy (Catholics, Protestants, etc) in a different thread, son.

There is nothing to argue about. Fuck Protestants.

 

[Maravillosa]

As a practicing Catholic who (mostly) admires the consistent life ethic (I consider myself progressive on economic issues: I oppose abortion, war and the death penalty, because the person does not consent to dying [or in the case of the unborn, is incapable of consenting to dying]: I would have to favor euthanasia and ctb, because the person consents to dying), I hesitate to say a few words in this thread.

I do think that the rapist in the case referred to in the first post in this thread should have also been excommunicated, in addition to the mother and doctors. However, excommunication only lasts as long as the person does not want to repent of the sin that caused it. It does not mean that the excommunicated person is kicked out of the Catholic Church for life. In fact, excommunicated people are still expected to attend Mass every Sunday and Holy Day of Obligation: they are not allowed to receive Communion, however. The sacrament of Reconciliation -- confession of one's sins to a priest -- is always available to people who have been excommunicated as long as they are sincerely sorry for the sin(s) that caused the excommunication. And if the excommunicated person who confesses his or her sins to a priest and is absolved of those sins, the person is no longer excommunicated.

 

[worldexploder]

As a practicing Catholic who (mostly) admires the consistent life ethic (I consider myself progressive on economic issues: I oppose abortion, war and the death penalty, because the person does not consent to dying [or in the case of the unborn, is incapable of consenting to dying]: I would have to favor euthanasia and ctb, because the person consents to dying), I hesitate to say a few words in this thread.

I do think the rapist in the case referred to in the first post in this thread should have also been excommunicated, in addition to the mother and doctors. However, excommunication only lasts as long as the person does not want to repent of the sin that caused it. It does not mean that the excommunicated person is kicked out of the Catholic Church for life. In fact, excommunicated people are still expected to attend Mass every Sunday and Holy Day of Obligation: they are not allowed to receive Communion, however. The sacrament of Reconciliation -- confession of one's sins to a priest -- is always available to people who have been excommunicated as long as they are sincerely sorry for the sin(s) that caused the excommunication. And if the excommunicated person who confesses his or her sins to a priest and is absolved of those sins, the person is no longer excommunicated.

Do you believe that the 9 year old should have been forced to carry the baby to term? Or would you have been ok with her getting the abortion?

 

[Maravillosa]

Do you believe that the 9 year old should have been forced to carry the bsby to term? Or would you have been ok with her getting the abortion?

I think that the girl should have had a Caesarian as soon as the baby was viable (beginning of third trimester), and after the baby was baptized, I would not have gone out of my way to prolong the baby's life. Then I would have provided the girl with free psychological help for the rest of her life: she will need it.

 

[worldexploder]

I think that the girl should have had a Caesarian as soon as the baby was viable (beginning of third trimester), and after the baby was baptized, I would not have gone out of my way to prolong the baby's life. Then I would have provided the girl with free psychological help for the rest of her life: she will need it.

What? SHE WAS 9! You talk about consent but the 9 year old didn't consent to being raped and impregnated. The 9 year old would have ether died or had lifelong complications. A little child's body is not meant to carry a child. Could you imagine the agony and psychological problems she would have gone though if she actually had to wait to get a c-section in the third trimester? She was raped so make her suffer more!

I know that you're against abortion. But don't you think you're taking it way to far?

 

[Maravillosa]

What? SHE WAS 9! You talk about consent but the 9 year old didn't consent to being raped and impregnated. The 9 year old would have ether died or had lifelong complications. A little child's body is not meant to carry a child. Could you imagine the agony and psychological problems she would have gone though if she actually had to wait to get a c-section in the third trimester?

Yes, I understand that the girl was only 9 years old, and that she did not consent to her rape and impregnation. However, the unborn she was carrying could neither consent to be conceived or aborted. Of course the body of a 9-year-old girl is not meant to carry a child. Of course she would have had agony and psychological problems if she had to deliver her child. But I think she would have had agony and psychological problems had she had an abortion. There is no good remedy here. It is a hard case, and as the saying goes, hard cases make bad law.

 

[Maravillosa]

What? SHE WAS 9! You talk about consent but the 9 year old didn't consent to being raped and impregnated. The 9 year old would have ether died or had lifelong complications. A little child's body is not meant to carry a child. Could you imagine the agony and psychological problems she would have gone though if she actually had to wait to get a c-section in the third trimester? She was raped so make her suffer more!

I know that you're against abortion. But don't you think you're taking it way to far?

And if I am taking my opposition to abortion too far, so be it. Despite my wish to ctb someday, I aim to comply with the Catholic Church in all other matters as much as possible.

 

[worldexploder]

Yes, I understand that the girl was only 9 years old, and that she did not consent to her rape and impregnation. However, the unborn she was carrying could neither consent to be conceived or aborted. Of course the body of a 9-year-old girl is not meant to carry a child. Of course she would have had agony and psychological problems if she had to deliver her child. But I think she would have had agony and psychological problems had she had an abortion. There is no good remedy here. It is a hard case, and as the saying goes, hard cases make bad law.

I'm shocked by your stance. Most pro-life individuals at least condede that abortion is ok in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother. I may not agree with their pro-life stance, but I can eat at the same table with them. But your belief that a 9 year old rape victim should be forced to carry a child to term is inexcusable and quite frankly repulsive.

How can you call yourself a practicing Catholic to the point of believing that a 9 year old impregnated rape victim should be forced to carry the child yet be ok with CTB? If that ain't hypocracy.

 

[Maravillosa]

I'm shocked by your stance. Most pro-life individuals at least condede that abortion is ok in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother. I may not agree with their pro-life stance, but I can eat at the same table with them. But your belief that a 9 year old rape victim should be forced to carry a child to term is inexcusable and quite frankly repulsive.

How can you call yourself a practicing Catholic to the point of believing that a 9 year old impregnated rape victim should be forced to carry the child yet be ok with CTB? If that ain't hypocracy.

If it were a case of an ectopic pregnancy, where the unborn is developing in a Fallopian tube and is incapable of being viable, an operation is necessary to save the life of the mother. But if an operation is meant to save the life of the mother and the death of the unborn is not directly intended, then technically speaking, it is not abortion. The girl did not have an ectopic pregnancy or similar: the unborn she was carrying was apparently in good physical health and developing normally. And as I have written, I do not think that the girl should have been forced to carry the child the full nine-month term: just to the beginning of viability for the child.

I admit that I am a hypocrite. I am a sinner. I contain contradictions. I confess my hypocrisy regularly. May God forgive me.

 

[worldexploder]

If it were a case of an ectopic pregnancy, where the unborn is developing in a Fallopian tube and is incapable of being viable, an operation is necessary to save the life of the mother. But if an operation is meant to save the life of the mother and the death of the unborn is not directly intended, then technically speaking, it is not abortion. The girl did not have an ectopic pregnancy or similar: the unborn she was carrying was apparently in good physical health and developing normally. And as I have written, I do not think that the girl should have been forced to carry the child the full nine-month term: just to the beginning of viability for the child.

I admit that I am a hypocrite. I am a sinner. I contain contradictions. I confess my hypocrisy regularly. May God forgive me.

Apparently you value a microscopic embryo over a 9 year old child with a nervous system. Believe in what you wish. Doctrine over dignity. Religion over reason. Lies over logic.