1. Donationbuckky
    Filthy sinner
    Outskirts of bliss
    Joined
    24 Sep '02
    Moves
    96652
    10 Mar '09 23:36
    How come you never hear of a funeral for a miscarriage ?
  2. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    11 Mar '09 10:20
    Originally posted by buckky
    How come you never hear of a funeral for a miscarriage ?
    i am guessing it is a lapse on religious doodz part.

    if abortion is a sin, then they consider the fetus a person. so when a person dies, one should have a funeral.
  3. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    11 Mar '09 10:312 edits
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    i am guessing it is a lapse on religious doodz part.

    if abortion is a sin, then they consider the fetus a person. so when a person dies, one should have a funeral.
    That's logical.

    In Brazil a young girl, 9 years of age, abused by her stepfather several years, became pregnant with a pair of twins. The doctors decide that her life was in danger if she was to give birth to the children, so they perfomed an abortion to save her life. By the high cardinals she is now excommunicated from the catholic church for life. The step farther was not punished though.

    So the church punish the little girl for an action she had no saying in, but saved her life. Is this in the spirit of love of Christ? If so, christianity is nothing for me, no thanks.

    The story didn't tell if the fetuses had a proper religious funeral. However, the girl has not understood much about the fuzz. But when she is going to be married in the future, when she is einied the holy communion, when she cannot find a cemetary with a spot for her when she plan for her funeral, then someone perhaps will explain to her the logic of religion.

    http://article.wn.com/view/WNATA662E404245944406050F858572E9B71/
  4. Standard memberPalynka
    Upward Spiral
    Halfway
    Joined
    02 Aug '04
    Moves
    8702
    11 Mar '09 10:52
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    That's logical.

    In Brazil a young girl, 9 years of age, abused by her stepfather several years, became pregnant with a pair of twins. The doctors decide that her life was in danger if she was to give birth to the children, so they perfomed an abortion to save her life. By the high cardinals she is now excommunicated from the catholic church for life. T ...[text shortened]... her the logic of religion.

    http://article.wn.com/view/WNATA662E404245944406050F858572E9B71/
    She was not excommunicated. The doctors and her mother were.
  5. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    11 Mar '09 11:01
    Originally posted by Palynka
    She was not excommunicated. The doctors and her mother were.
    Sorry, yes.

    But still, if the doctors hadn't performed the abortion, and without the mother's approval, then the girl would have died. The church gave the litttle girl a death sentence. Where's the respect of life in the church?

    Either the feutses was concidered f ull worthe life, and then they would be properly buried, and their souls go to heven. Or the fetuses was nothing more than a bunch of meat, not worthy of anything but thrown away. But they didn't even think so far. Abortion is a sin, therefore people are excommunicated from church. The step farthe had no guilt. Logical? No.

    Is the christian church a good healthy place to develope a warm peronal belief in a loving god, represented by cardinals who punish the wrong people? I say no. That's not my kind of religion. This kind of religion is bad.
  6. Standard memberPalynka
    Upward Spiral
    Halfway
    Joined
    02 Aug '04
    Moves
    8702
    11 Mar '09 11:15
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    Is the christian church a good healthy place to develope a warm peronal belief in a loving god, represented by cardinals who punish the wrong people? I say no. That's not my kind of religion. This kind of religion is bad.
    I agree, but this is the case of an over-zealous bishop and not the whole religion. Abortions made with (some) regularity in Brazil and other Catholic countries and still such (rare) excommunications are rare enough to be world news.

    As for the vatican support, the vatican senior said nothing about the excommunication (as far as I know) and purely commented on how he felt that the abortion was wrong.
  7. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    11 Mar '09 11:39
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    Is the christian church a good healthy place to develope a warm peronal belief in a loving god, represented by cardinals who punish the wrong people? I say no. That's not my kind of religion. This kind of religion is bad.
    Christianity often faces difficulties in such situations. The real issue is whether or not you believe God had any part in the whole situation.
    Some Christians believe that if everything was done to save both mother and child then it is up to God to decide who dies (if one must die) and not a human being.

    On the issue of punishment by the Church, I think it can cause major problems when a religious leader decides that he has the authority to make judgments about which sins are the worst and what the punishments should be. Especially if the Church preaches forgiveness.
  8. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    11 Mar '09 11:591 edit
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    Christianity often faces difficulties in such situations. The real issue is whether or not you believe God had any part in the whole situation.
    Some Christians believe that if everything was done to save both mother and child then it is up to God to decide who dies (if one must die) and not a human being.

    On the issue of punishment by the Church, I th ...[text shortened]... are the worst and what the punishments should be. Especially if the Church preaches forgiveness.
    As the cardinal and preaches do, they say "You do wrong, therefore you go to hell" as if they, the s.c. holy people, are judges, and the god himselves?

    Some religious people says, "I have the right to do this in the name of god", and "the laws of god is higher than the laws of the people", and leave death and destruction in their path.

    Practical, isn't it? Like I say "This girl should die", and the girl dies and I get away with it? Like the cardinals in Brazil did, and was proteccted by the Vatican. That's how much a life is worth. I'm glad I'm not a christian.
  9. Standard memberPalynka
    Upward Spiral
    Halfway
    Joined
    02 Aug '04
    Moves
    8702
    11 Mar '09 12:05
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    Like I say "This girl should die", and the girl dies and I get away with it? Like the cardinals in Brazil did, and was proteccted by the Vatican.
    Why do you keep misrepresenting their stance? I also disagree with them, but there's no need to beat such strawmen.
  10. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    11 Mar '09 12:08
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    As the cardinal and preaches do, they say "You do wrong, therefore you go to hell" as if they, the s.c. holy people, are judges, and the god himselves?

    Some religious people says, "I have the right to do this in the name of god", and "the laws of god is higher than the laws of the people", and leave death and destruction in their path.

    Practical, is ...[text shortened]... ccted by the Vatican. That's how much a life is worth. I'm glad I'm not a christian.
    they are a special kind of christians. they refuse any responsibilities, refuse to make decisions for themselves because those decisions have already been made by people who were supposed to speak through divine grace. as such they do not see any case in which they can say "i am making this decision because it is right and if god chooses to punish me, i will accept the responsibility". this kind of christians have decided humanity doesn't need to make anymore decisions because god has given us the ultimate rulebook of right and wrong. anything that contradicts is simply sin on humanity's part.
  11. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    11 Mar '09 12:16
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    they are a special kind of christians. they refuse any responsibilities, refuse to make decisions for themselves because those decisions have already been made by people who were supposed to speak through divine grace. as such they do not see any case in which they can say "i am making this decision because it is right and if god chooses to punish me, i wil ...[text shortened]... ate rulebook of right and wrong. anything that contradicts is simply sin on humanity's part.
    "By my decision I kill a 9 year old innocent girl, if god disaproves he'll punish me." as the cardinal in Brazil perhaps said. No bold of fired was crushim him into the ground, so he was right, wasn't he? No, he wasn't!

    These special kind of christian people are defended by the vatican, telling people that they have the right given by god. And a billion of christian people don't say anything, because the pope himself says nothing.

    I say - Everyone defending this cardinal's decision is as guilty as him, and the girl's step father.
    The heroes in this qeustion are the doctors who performed this abortion, and the mother by her approval. They show more about the love of god than the people of church.

    Peodphiles are also special kind of people. Should we defend them too?
  12. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    11 Mar '09 12:19
    Originally posted by Palynka
    Why do you keep misrepresenting their stance? I also disagree with them, but there's no need to beat such strawmen.
    These straw men are defended by the vatican, and ultimately by the pope. Pope says he is a man of god. That kind of god I don't want as my god. Nor should anyone else.

    By defending the vatican et al, then you defend the act.
  13. Standard memberPalynka
    Upward Spiral
    Halfway
    Joined
    02 Aug '04
    Moves
    8702
    11 Mar '09 13:412 edits
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    These straw men are defended by the vatican, and ultimately by the pope. Pope says he is a man of god. That kind of god I don't want as my god. Nor should anyone else.

    By defending the vatican et al, then you defend the act.
    The Vatican didn't say that the girl should die, and I find it intellectually dishonest to say or imply otherwise, no matter how good your intentions are.

    It's also sad that you think that defending the vatican in one issue equates to agreeing with the vatican on other issues. "Either with me or against me" is a false dilemma.
  14. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    11 Mar '09 13:52
    Originally posted by Palynka
    The Vatican didn't say that the girl should die, and I find it intellectually dishonest to say or imply otherwise, no matter how good your intentions are.

    It's also sad that you think that defending the vatican in one issue equates to agreeing with the vatican on other issues. "Either with me or against me" is a false dilemma.
    "A senior Vatican cleric has defended the excommunication" according to BBC. The doctors saved the 9 years old girls life by aborting the two fetuses. I think the doctor know more than a cardinal from Rome who didn't ever even see the little girl. If the doctors didn't perform the abortion, then the girl would die. The cardinal thought the doctors and the mother had done something wrong by saving the girl. Meaning that it was better that the little girl died. That's my interpretation.

    Everyone defending the cardinals of the vatican is also thinking they did the right thing by wanting the little girl to die.

    Now, this sounds like black or white issue. But I'm aware that there are a gray zone too. Therefore I ask anyone:
    (1) Do you think the girl should die instead of perofming the abortion? Do you want to punish the doctors and the mother, but not the step father whos babies it is?
    (2) Do you think that abortion was a good thing considering the alternate consequences, thus thinkin that the church did the wrong thing and they should apologize for their actions and put an end of tha banning of the doctors and the mother?
    (3) Or are you in a gray zone, a middle ground? What is your motivation for this?

    This question is not only for you, dear Palynka, but for anyone wanting to answer the question - was it right, was it wrong, or something in between?
  15. Standard memberPalynka
    Upward Spiral
    Halfway
    Joined
    02 Aug '04
    Moves
    8702
    11 Mar '09 14:111 edit
    Wrong again. It was not certain that the girl would die, so it's incorrect and dishonest to claim that the Vatican WANTED her to die.

    If you can't see this simple fact, then we cannot have a basis to even begin a proper discussion.
Back to Top