• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Abortion hypothetical

benedictaoo

Legend
Dec 1, 2007
34,418
7,261
✟72,332.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
OK.

It was my guess, being she had pulmanary hypertension. I didn't think she
could endure labor, but I didn't want to guess about it.

Jim

That means she had an abortion Jim... there is no double effect here.

Her treatment wasn't a pulmonary hypertension treatment that indirectly ended up with the death of her baby... it was an abortion.

Her treatment was to kill her baby. Her intent was to abort her child.

You can not kill a baby as a treatment for other illnesses... don't care what they are, what prognosis they have- YOU CAN NOT USE ABORTION TO TREAT AN ILLNESS.

Its plain sick to think you can. Its murder.. you can't murder ppl as a way to treat illness.

This is why the Nun was excommunicated.
 
Upvote 0

JimR-OCDS

God Cannot Be Grasped, Except Through Love
Oct 28, 2008
19,490
4,159
The Kingdom of Heaven
Visit site
✟238,558.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
benedictaoo


That means she had an abortion Jim... there is no double effect here.

Yeah I know, but even if she had delivered the fetus by being induced, it would still be an abortion. This is where you seem to have a difficult time.

My difficulty is accepting that in this particular case, it's considered a "direct abortion," verses an "indirect abortion." The intent wasn't to abort the child, but to save the mother's life where only she could be saved.



Her treatment wasn't a pulmonary hypertension treatment that indirectly ended up with the death of her baby... it was an abortion.

Termination of the pregnancy was the treatment to save her life.

Her intent was to abort her child.

No, that wasn't her intent. If it were, she would've just gone to an abortion clinic instead of a Catholic Hospital.


You can not kill a baby as a treatment for other illnesses... don't care what they are, what prognosis they have- YOU CAN NOT USE ABORTION TO TREAT AN ILLNESS.

Indirect abortion you can and this is where my problem lies. Seeing this as a direct abortion rather than an indirect abortion.

Look, I understand the teaching of the Bishop here, even though I'm having difficulty with it as even some well qualified canonist and theologians are having.

So, I'll leave it at that and pray for understanding.

Jim
 
Upvote 0

benedictaoo

Legend
Dec 1, 2007
34,418
7,261
✟72,332.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
and in all seriousness, I do not want to live if it means I have to kill anyone let alone my own child to live.

Then we'll both die if I don't... well, does not change a darn thing- I'm not killing anyone as the way I save me...

Its not right and nothing will ever make it right... if I had 10 kids at home with no Dad... I'm still not going to kill.
 
Upvote 0