BigSqwert Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 As usual, the Catholic church sets a new standard for hypocrisy.....they go to extremes protecting fetuses and molesters but show no respect for women and children. A senior Vatican cleric has defended the excommunication of the mother and doctors of a nine-year-old girl who had an abortion in Brazil after being raped. Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, head of the Catholic church's Congregation for Bishops, told the daily La Stampa on Saturday that the twins the girl had been carrying had a right to live. "It is a sad case but the real problem is that the twins conceived were two innocent persons, who had the right to live and could not be eliminated," he said. Re, who also heads the Pontifical Commission for Latin America, added: "Life must always be protected, the attack on the Brazilian church is unjustified." The row was triggered by the termination on Wednesday of twin foetuses carried by a nine-year-old allegedly raped by her stepfather in the Brazilian state of Pernambuco. The regional archbishop, Jose Cardoso Sobrinho, pronounced excommunication for the mother for authorising the operation and doctors who carried it out for fear that the slim girl would not survive carrying the foetuses to term. "God's law is above any human law. So when a human law ... is contrary to God's law, this human law has no value," Cardoso had said. He also said the accused stepfather would not be expelled from the church. Although the man allegedly committed "a heinous crime ... the abortion - the elimination of an innocent life - was more serious". Full article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 I really don't understand the Catholic Church and it's policies most of the time, so such oddness sadly makes sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish71 Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 They should start excommunicating priests who touch little boys. If anything deserves ex-communication these days, its that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 (edited) They are welcome to join the Lutheran Church... Sorry, I was just shown that video and it made my laugh... especially the Dana Carvey part. But in all seriousness, how irrational. No one ever said the Catholic church was a sane organization. Hypocritical in many ways. Edited March 9, 2009 by Athomeboy_2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 (edited) This time the Catholic Church in Brazil got it wrong. I'm just guessing here, but likely Religion is a whole lot bigger in Brazil and they are likely a whole lot more old school. I support abortion in only two forms. 1, in rape victims. 2, where the mother's life is in serious danger if she gives birth. Edited March 10, 2009 by BearSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 The exception for rape victims is a compelling case, but it somehow then places a lower value on the life based on how or why the person was conceived. And that doesn't seem right either. I disagree with their decision. The same reason that the rapist is allowed to stay, is why the mom and doctor should be allowed to stay in the Church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 QUOTE (Texsox @ Mar 13, 2009 -> 03:55 PM) The exception for rape victims is a compelling case, but it somehow then places a lower value on the life based on how or why the person was conceived. And that doesn't seem right either. I can't argue with your point here, but the way the church put this basically made it sound like they were poo pooing the rape and saying how awful the abortion was. That sounds like nothing more than making the case political and using it as a platform for your own beliefs, and that's not something the Catholic Church should be doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 13, 2009 -> 05:23 PM) I can't argue with your point here, but the way the church put this basically made it sound like they were poo pooing the rape and saying how awful the abortion was. That sounds like nothing more than making the case political and using it as a platform for your own beliefs, and that's not something the Catholic Church should be doing. The Church must stand up for what it believes in, that is the entire point of a Church. It's the only way to root out the individuals that need to be gotten gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 QUOTE (Texsox @ Mar 13, 2009 -> 03:55 PM) The exception for rape victims is a compelling case, but it somehow then places a lower value on the life based on how or why the person was conceived. And that doesn't seem right either. True, but you can't expect anyone to have to raise a child or even give birth to one when sex wasn't even wanted and have the mother reminded of the rape and the rapist every time she sees the child. If they want to keep the child, that's one thing, and more power to any mother who makes that choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 QUOTE (BearSox @ Mar 14, 2009 -> 08:53 PM) True, but you can't expect anyone to have to raise a child or even give birth to one when sex wasn't even wanted and have the mother reminded of the rape and the rapist every time she sees the child. If they want to keep the child, that's one thing, and more power to any mother who makes that choice. Like I said it is a compelling situation, however, if the underlying premise is the fetus is a human life, and should be protected, why should conception matter? This life will be protected, but this one will not, seems wrong also. What we are saying is if the mom does not wish to be reminded ( have the baby) she should have the right to abort. But now we'll tell the mom under what conditions she can feel that way? Tough call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clyons Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 Not to hijack or unfairly pile on the Church, but apparently the Pope said today that the distribution of condoms in Africa can actually contribute to and "aggravate" the spread of Aids there. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/1...ca-condoms-aids Perhaps because he's never used one, he doesn't understand how they work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (PlaySumFnJurny @ Mar 17, 2009 -> 01:48 PM) Not to hijack or unfairly pile on the Church, but apparently the Pope said today that the distribution of condoms in Africa can actually contribute to and "aggravate" the spread of Aids there. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/1...ca-condoms-aids Perhaps because he's never used one, he doesn't understand how they work. Well, i actually understand where he is coming from. Condoms would encourage sex because people would think... and be taught... this wont allow HIV through, so use it. However, the size of a sperm compared to the size of HIV is staggering. If a sperm can get through... HIV will get through MUCH easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 (edited) Yes, but condoms are still very effective in preventing the spread of HIV. There's no way around that. 100 people having sex using condoms are less likely to spread disease than 25 people having sex without condoms. And people are going to have sex. http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publicati...et/fscondom.htm Condom Effectiveness Also available in [PDF] format. When used consistently and correctly, latex condoms are highly effective in preventing the sexual transmission of HIV (during vaginal, oral, or anal intercourse).[1,2] Latex condoms are also effective in preventing pregnancy[3] and several sexually transmitted infections (STIs).[2,4] Using condoms lowers women's risk of developing cervical cancer, a disease associated with HPV.[2] Consistent use of condoms can also help people clear HPV infection and/or reduce their risk of re-infection.[4,5] Condoms Are Highly Effective in Preventing HIV Infection. * Sexual transmission of HIV occurs when infected semen, vaginal, or other body fluids contact mucosal surfaces, such as the male urethra, the vagina, or cervix.[2] According to the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC), a number of carefully conducted studies, employing rigorous methods and measures, have demonstrated that consistent condom use is highly effective in preventing HIV transmission.[1,2] * In a two-year study of sero-discordant couples (in which one partner was HIV-positive and one was HIV-negative), no uninfected partner became infected among couples using condoms correctly and consistently at every act of vaginal or anal sex versus 10 percent of those using condoms inconsistently.[1,6] * In a similar two-year study, two percent of uninfected partners who used condoms consistently became HIV-infected versus 12 percent among those who used condoms inconsistently or not at all.[1] * A recent study of declining HIV prevalence in Uganda found no evidence that abstinence or monogamy had contributed to the decline. Findings identified the increased use of condoms in casual relationships as important in Uganda's declining HIV infection rates.[7] "Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are highly effective in preventing the sexual transmission of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS." —CDC. Male Latex Condoms and Sexually Transmitted Diseases. Atlanta, GA: CDC, 2002 Edited March 17, 2009 by StrangeSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scenario Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 For those that are interested... here is a little background on the church's rules regarding excommunication. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Mar 17, 2009 -> 03:19 PM) Yes, but condoms are still very effective in preventing the spread of HIV. There's no way around that. 100 people having sex using condoms are less likely to spread disease than 25 people having sex without condoms. And people are going to have sex. http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publicati...et/fscondom.htm Very interesting. I stand corrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish71 Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 (edited) QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Mar 17, 2009 -> 03:08 PM) Well, i actually understand where he is coming from. Condoms would encourage sex because people would think... and be taught... this wont allow HIV through, so use it. However, the size of a sperm compared to the size of HIV is staggering. If a sperm can get through... HIV will get through MUCH easier. Its not that at all. If you are a catholic, and have gone through the Pre-Cana process you have went through a Natural Family Planning class. Or as I call it, birth control that keeps women pregnant all the time. This is why for example, my mother in law is one of 12 children her mother had. My wife's Grandpa liked the nookie, but couldn't go to the pharmacy. Contraception is wrong because it’s a deliberate violation of the design God built into the human race, often referred to as "natural law." The natural law purpose of sex is procreation. The pleasure that sexual intercourse provides is an additional blessing from God, intended to offer the possibility of new life while strengthening the bond of intimacy, respect, and love between husband and wife. The loving environment this bond creates is the perfect setting for nurturing children. But sexual pleasure within marriage becomes unnatural, and even harmful to the spouses, when it is used in a way that deliberately excludes the basic purpose of sex, which is procreation. God’s gift of the sex act, along with its pleasure and intimacy, must not be abused by deliberately frustrating its natural end—procreation. Edited March 17, 2009 by southsideirish71 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Mar 17, 2009 -> 03:35 PM) Its not that at all. If you are a catholic, and have gone through the Pre-Cana process you have went through a Natural Family Planning class. Or as I call it, birth control that keeps women pregnant all the time. Luckily, I was raised lutheran and birth control is allowed. not only that, but one of my pastors once said something along the lines of... "sex feels good. enjoy it. As long as it's in the confines of marriage, do it all you want".... I like him. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish71 Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Mar 17, 2009 -> 03:41 PM) Luckily, I was raised lutheran and birth control is allowed. not only that, but one of my pastors once said something along the lines of... "sex feels good. enjoy it. As long as it's in the confines of marriage, do it all you want".... I like him. lol The percentage of catholics who spray and pray as a practice for birth control ( non-alchohol related ). 1% The rest, use several methods to either confuse the tadpoles on their journey, capture them, or kill them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Mar 17, 2009 -> 03:08 PM) Am I the only one somewhat disturbed by what sperm looks like magnified? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longshot7 Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 QUOTE (BearSox @ Mar 9, 2009 -> 07:13 PM) This time the Catholic Church in Brazil got it wrong. I'm just guessing here, but likely Religion is a whole lot bigger in Brazil and they are likely a whole lot more old school. I support abortion in only two forms. 1, in rape victims. 2, where the mother's life is in serious danger if she gives birth. And this falls into category #2. Abortion is illegal in Brazil as well except in these cases, and the doctors in this case felt that the girl's life was in danger. What burns me is the church removing any chance of "salvation" for the girl for making a choice to save her own life. The cardinals who made this decision deserve to burn in hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 QUOTE (longshot7 @ Mar 19, 2009 -> 10:36 AM) And this falls into category #2. Abortion is illegal in Brazil as well except in these cases, and the doctors in this case felt that the girl's life was in danger. What burns me is the church removing any chance of "salvation" for the girl for making a choice to save her own life. The cardinals who made this decision deserve to burn in hell. I'm going to a cold hell, (it must be really cold there today) because I agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Mar 17, 2009 -> 03:41 PM) Luckily, I was raised lutheran and birth control is allowed. not only that, but one of my pastors once said something along the lines of... "sex feels good. enjoy it. As long as it's in the confines of marriage, do it all you want".... I like him. lol Same deal here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MexSoxFan#1 Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Thats why I am no longer a Catholic... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 The Catholic Church is really a mess. I'm still a Catholic and will remain one, faithfully, but the Catholic Church needs a lot of change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clyons Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 An international medical journal has called out the Pope for his "condoms help spread AIDS" remark. http://uk.reuters.com/article/homepageCris...10752._CH_.2420 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts