I can understand why abortion seemed to be warranted here, but I don't think it was the right thing to do. All three lives should have been saved if possible, and if the mother's life was in immediate danger then whatever it took to save her should have been done.
I'm personally revolted by people's moral positions all the time - say people who believe that abortion access is a woman's right. Or euthanasia is another attitude that disgusts me.
And here's the point, doctors, (who know what they are doing) decided that she would not survive, they decided that saving the potential babies was not possible, if you can find evidence of a 9 yr old girl successfully having twins I'd be very surprised.
I have to say I'm very disappointed in your take on this, it shows at worst such a dogmatic adherence to "the rules" of your religion as to allow any atrocity that the church deemed acceptable and at best a callous "but the law states x therefore the church's position is acceptable" position.
I sorry but I don't think I like a religion that can't show common sense and compassion when it's obvious to all right thinking people that what the doctors have done is what should be done, hoping for the best when there is no best to wait and see about is just cruel and pointless.
I personally don't see why you're convinced that there is any chance whatsoever that she could carry these potential babies to term?
I guess excommunication does mean nothing to me, because I'm not a member of anything that's likely to excommunicate me. However, I do know that people who sign up for these things often do so because they feel a need to to be included in some kind of a spiritual community, to be part of something bigger, to help them cope. Does excommunication mean a lot to them? Or is it a bit like a parking ticket?
But regardles -- if, as in this case, that community chastises you at the time you need support most, ie your child is suffering and you've had to take some really hard, heart-breaking decision to prevent further suffering, then that does seem deeply morally wrong to me.
As I said, excommunication isn't permanent, nor does it stop people from coming to Church. What it does stop is the reception of the Eucharist.
From a Catholic teaching perspective abortion is the murder of innocent babies, I think people forget that Catholic teaching ascribes the same personhood value to the unborn as they do to the born.
This is from the Catechism of the Catholic Church
2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense.
The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae," "by the very commission of the offense," and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.
The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.
Catholic teaching ascribes the same personhood value to the unborn as they do to the born.
Forgive me, because I'm not really trying to change your beliefs or anything, but I think one of the points in this debate is that from a non-Catholic perspective, in this case, it appears that the Catholic church ascribes more personhood value to the unborn than to the born.
Honestly I don't see the justification for that critique. The Church would not agree to the mother being allowed to die, just that the twins be given a chance to survive. Yet somehow this is favouring the unborn.
There are three lives at stake, well not not anymore... But there were three lives. All were precious, all were important. Medically all three should have been cared for - and if the mother's life had to be saved and that resulted in the unborn babies death, then that would have been acceptable, albeit tragic.
The unborn however, weren't even offered that chance.
You're obviously a very intelligent person Tess but I think it's incredibly sad that you've obviously been brainwashed to such and extent that any genuine sense of right and wrong you might once have had has been thrown out the window and replaced with this arbitrary, conceited bullshit. Arguing that "it's canon law" is possibly one of the most feeble excuses I've ever heard, considering that it's the church that sets canon law in the first place.
You seem to habitually cast any disagreement with the Catholic church as the result of 'misunderstanding' - has it occured to you that anyone might actually genuinely understand Catholic doctrine and find it wanting, or would that be a contradiction in terms?
The first hospital the girl went to seems to have been prepared to help the babies be born. However I have only found this on one report, so I can't confirm that with certainty.
And yes, you're right about excommunication, in fact you said what I wanted to point out, "it's a formal acknowledgement that someone has diverged from the moral teachings of the Church, so that other believers can be clear that whatever happened shouldn't be confused with Catholic principles."
Comments 64
I can't think of anything you could say that would excuse this, so don't bother.
Reply
I can understand why abortion seemed to be warranted here, but I don't think it was the right thing to do. All three lives should have been saved if possible, and if the mother's life was in immediate danger then whatever it took to save her should have been done.
I'm personally revolted by people's moral positions all the time - say people who believe that abortion access is a woman's right. Or euthanasia is another attitude that disgusts me.
Reply
I have to say I'm very disappointed in your take on this, it shows at worst such a dogmatic adherence to "the rules" of your religion as to allow any atrocity that the church deemed acceptable and at best a callous "but the law states x therefore the church's position is acceptable" position.
I sorry but I don't think I like a religion that can't show common sense and compassion when it's obvious to all right thinking people that what the doctors have done is what should be done, hoping for the best when there is no best to wait and see about is just cruel and pointless.
I personally don't see why you're convinced that there is any chance whatsoever that she could carry these potential babies to term?
Reply
Reply
But regardles -- if, as in this case, that community chastises you at the time you need support most, ie your child is suffering and you've had to take some really hard, heart-breaking decision to prevent further suffering, then that does seem deeply morally wrong to me.
Reply
From a Catholic teaching perspective abortion is the murder of innocent babies, I think people forget that Catholic teaching ascribes the same personhood value to the unborn as they do to the born.
This is from the Catechism of the Catholic Church
2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense.
The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae," "by the very commission of the offense," and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.
The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.
Reply
Forgive me, because I'm not really trying to change your beliefs or anything, but I think one of the points in this debate is that from a non-Catholic perspective, in this case, it appears that the Catholic church ascribes more personhood value to the unborn than to the born.
Reply
Honestly I don't see the justification for that critique. The Church would not agree to the mother being allowed to die, just that the twins be given a chance to survive. Yet somehow this is favouring the unborn.
There are three lives at stake, well not not anymore... But there were three lives. All were precious, all were important. Medically all three should have been cared for - and if the mother's life had to be saved and that resulted in the unborn babies death, then that would have been acceptable, albeit tragic.
The unborn however, weren't even offered that chance.
Reply
You seem to habitually cast any disagreement with the Catholic church as the result of 'misunderstanding' - has it occured to you that anyone might actually genuinely understand Catholic doctrine and find it wanting, or would that be a contradiction in terms?
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
And yes, you're right about excommunication, in fact you said what I wanted to point out, "it's a formal acknowledgement that someone has diverged from the moral teachings of the Church, so that other believers can be clear that whatever happened shouldn't be confused with Catholic principles."
Reply
Leave a comment