- Mar 3, 2006
- 33,112
- 11,338
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-American-Solidarity
And no one is discounting that these are difficult, horrifying and wrenching decisions for all involved.
Upvote
0
no, you are just not murdering a child.If you can save her life but refuse to you're killing her.
That's not relevant. Regardless of the circumstances, she had no right to have her baby killed so that she might live.Will someone please share the other procedures that could have been done?
Morally for many it seems that it is relevant.That's not relevant. Regardless of the circumstances, she had no right to have her baby killed so that she might live.
Saint Gianna Beretta Molla | St. Gianna | Catholic Pro-Life Saint
only if the baby is not a human person with rights, question is, is it?
no, you are just not murdering a child.
Your premise only works if the baby is not a baby... and it's a baby and last I knew... babies are people too and last I knew, we can't kill ppl to save our own lives.
We get sick and die- it happens, it sucks and it's life... Murder is not life. murder is murder and what God told us we can not do.
We can not kill our baby so we may live.
What we can do is to just do our best.
Would you kill your born child to save you? Why would you kill your unborn child to save you.
What I would do is go as far as I could, deliver the baby and then hope for the best.
If the baby is not viable when the mother dies, the baby will die, too. There are, therefore, cases where insuring the baby's survival means treating the mother.
But in this case, it sounds as if the growing fetus was the direct cause of the woman's heart problems.
Of course, in ectopic pregnancies, the growing embryo, who has absolutely no chance of survival using current technologies (I suppose in the future it might be possible to move and reimplant the embryo in the uterus, but that isn't possible yet) is removed from the ovary (or with the ovary) so that the mother doesn't die, too.
I guess the question in this situation is whether, like in an ectopic pregnancy, the fetus would have absolutely no chance of survival no matter what was done.
And the hospital and its director might have made one medical judgment and the bishop's advisors might have made another judgment.
I don't know, but I really don't believe the Sister of Mercy would have made the decision unless she honestly believed the fetus had no chance of surviving no matter what.
The thing is it still is relevant to this specific situation if more could have been done. And it is a relevant conversation to see if there are really as many life or death situations as people think. Because according to a number of doctors there are not.
David, your posts, logic, and understanding is certainly not lost on me.Now it might not change the bottom line of what the teaching says, but it matters in practical application.
But at the end of the day, as you have said, we can not kill someone to save ourselves.
Let's say there are two people in a room, one person can get out of the door, but when that one person does the door shuts and the room fills with gas. There is no way to get both out. There is a timer and if no one leaves in 5 min both will die.
Is it moral for one person to kill the other to get to the door because both will die if no one leaves in 5 minutes? What is the moral act in that situation?
Amen. I could have said it better myself.
I'll repeat this, because I think it bears repeating. I'm grateful to the Catholic Church for its firm stand against abortion. I do wish that more Protestant churches would follow its example. Abortion is murder of unborn children, no matter what the circumstances are. If this were to happen, abortion would be outlawed, as it should be. But the truth of the matter is that if more Protestant churches had followed the example of the Catholic Church with its strong stance against abortion, I don't think abortion would be have legalized in the first place.
David, your posts, logic, and understanding is certainly not lost on me.
Why doesn't the church take the same position to war then? It is absolutely no different if you can't take a life to save another no matter what.
what if that other person is your kid! Would you kill it to save yourself?