[b]The death of Savita Halappanavar on 28 October 2012, at University Hospital Galway in Ireland, led to nationwide protests—which spilled over into India, Britain and many other countries—calling for a review of the abortion laws in Ireland. Halappanavar, a Hindu of Indian origin, was suffering from a miscarriage when she was some 17 weeks pregnant, and she sought medical attention and treatment at University Hospital Galway. The hospital told them the foetus was not viable, but they could not perform an abortion under Irish Law as the foetus's heart was still beating. During the next several days, Halappanavar was diagnosed with septicemia which led to multiple organ failure and her death.
Once the events became public, the news of Halappanavar's death spread rapidly through both traditional and social media outlets, with one of the original stories in The Irish Times on 14 November receiving over 700,000 hits by 17 November.Rallies and protests were held, calling for a change in the abortion laws in Ireland, which the protesters claimed led to Halappanavar's death.Indian diplomatic and consular officials requested an official inquiry into the events surrounding Halappanavar's death.The United Nations also became involved.
The incident is currently under investigation,and the Taoiseach (prime minister), Enda Kenny, has stated: "I don't think we should say anything about this until we are in possession of all the facts."The Health Service Executive (HSE) named Professor Sir Sabaratnam Arulkumaran to head a seven-member panel looking into the case. The panel will seek to uncover all the facts and "to identify any safety issues arising in this case".
[/b]
After the outrage that followed the death of savita,sound reasoning replaced religious dogma.

The first termination of a pregnancy carried out under the provisions of new abortion legislation has taken place at the National Maternity Hospital on Holles Street, Dublin.
The termination of the twin pregnancy was carried out on a patient who was almost 18 weeks’ pregnant in view of the risk to her life and the unviability of her pregnancy, according to sources at the hospital. Foetal heartbeat were present..
The case bears a number of similarities to that of Savita Halappanavar, in that the woman’s membranes had ruptured and she was demonstrating signs of sepsis.
In contrast to Ms Halappanavar, who died in University Hospital Galway last October after she was refused a termination, the National Maternity Hospital patient has made a good recovery after receiving antibiotic treatment and undergoing the termination a number of weeks ago.
The National Maternity Hospital is one of 25 hospitals in the State authorised to carry out terminations under the provisions of the Act.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/first-abortion-carried-out-under-new-legislation-1.1502946

Nigerians,never let your religion get in the way of your reasoning

Abortion is evil, lots of children are aborted daily and their cries wound the sacred heart of Jesus. Aborted babies cry all day and request for the end to come upon this world.
The catholic church, from its various directive and teaching of the Holy spirit plus revelations from faithful visionaries are against abortion. They are contributing all day to stop this evil called abortion. infact, masses are booked for aborted babies and spiritual baptism are made for them. Please, save a soul.
If your pastor does not preach against abortion for fear of losing his congregation, go preach it yourself since you have no congregation to lose. Remember we sin more by not doing what we ought to do. Abortion is evil, spread the message. Peace

p*rn is the bible of the hedonist,the internet his pulpit,contraception is the golden key and abortion, insurance.The fruits include female and child sex slavery.These behemoths -internet p*rn industry as is, and sex slavery- cannot exist in the current state without legalised abortion and contraception,there founders are the mighty pharmacomedical industrial complex(worth billions),urged on by the hedonists.
medically and theologicaly speaking and ectopic pregnancy is not aborted.An abortion is the intentional termination of life.The goal in an ectopic case is to save the mother,since the tube is the offending part ,it is removed to heal the mother and the babys' death is an accident of the tubes removal.it is not an abortion .Pregnancy is not a disease,abortion is not a medical treatment.
catholic view of ectopic preg further explained http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/medical_ethics/me0140.htm

^^Pure undiluted sophistry.A misleading and fallacious method of reasoning.You folks only see the world from your own small prism.You fail to take into cognisance that the world is made up of 7 billion people,all with divergent views on a plethora of subjects.

Are we supposed to tolerate murder because 7billion have divergent views?

cold: ^^Pure undiluted sophistry.A misleading and fallacious method of reasoning.You folks only see the world from your own small prism.You fail to take into cognisance that the world is made up of 7 billion people,all with divergent views on a plethora of subjects.

So what is a human being?

...and why is it wrong to kill a human being?

Chrisbenogor:
How many kids have you adopted? Your blood relatives adopted? I am sure it's zero.
The fetus is not a human being.

Oluwalala:

Its physcopants like you, that is holding nigeria back! Are u saying people can't have personal opinion on issues of social importance, must it be attributed to religion or a paticular faith! Its people like you, that are the 1st to judge teenage mothers. I don't support abortion, not because am a christian but because I don't think its right!

na who come be this one? i see psychopath has found a new definition in the dictionary "someone who fights to prevent the murder of innocent babies"

You're saying a baby born prematurely is not a human being?

...since he is not biologically independent and should still be in the womb.

That would be preposterous.

Chrisbenogor:
My position however is different
A fetus is not a human being, all innocent human beings deserve to live. There is no reason whatsoever to kill a human being unless he or she has committed a crime which is punishable by death according to the laws of the land. A fetus however does not qualify as a human being because it is biologically still dependent on another human being to become fully independent. There has to be a line... a line where all of us christian muslim budhist traditional worshippers atheists all agree and that is when the child is born. At that point it does not matter if the child was a result of rape, incest, whatever it is that child is now a human being and ready to be accorded all the protection a human being should have.

italo: Are we supposed to tolerate murder because 7billion have divergent views?

Your opinion. Simples!

What is your opinion?

That the killing of humans in the womb isnt murder?

cold:
Your opinion. Simples!

italo: What is your opinion?

That the killing of humans in the womb isnt murder?

atheist dont have opinions,they just go about creating doubt and fuzziness,G.K.chesterson suggested it would be very interesting the day they decide to create doubt in their own minds,their most hallowed sanctuary.sadly they allow doubt everywhere but there.
The carnal mind is at emnity with God.

human being


noun
1.
any individual of the genus Homo, especially a member of the species Homo sapiens.

2.
a person, especially as distinguished from other animals or as representing the human species: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/human+being

babies in the womb are also humans ,please stop killing them.

Noneroone:
The essence of doctrine is to make christians comform to certain moral and spiritual standards necessary for their salvation. Likewise, the catholic church condemn abortion because they believe it constitute the act of shedding blood. If the church succeeds in condeming the act why the faithfuls do otherwise, is the essence of the doctrine not defeated? Will the young girls who die during abortion be saved by the mere fact that catholic doctrine rejects abortion? What i am saying is that the catholic church end in rejecting the act in principle while keeping some teachings (such as purgatory and penance ) which are antithetical to this doctrine. If a girl who commits an obortion knows she can still pray 14 hell marys and be forgiven or still go to heaven after spending some time in the purgatory, where is the deterrance? The catholic church rejects the act in doctrine while living the faithfuls to their 'freewill' or even encouraging them indirectly. I hope i have explained what i mean by saying " they pretend a lot"

Going by your argument Christ himself must have committed the same crime when he forgave the sin of the woman who committed adultery and was about to be stoned or when he forgave the thief that asked for forgiveness on the cross and on the verge of dying. Maybe he must have sinned against you when he told the parable of prodigal son. God is all about mercy and forgiveness, no matter our sins he is ever willing to forgive repentant sinners. Why not work out your own salvation with fear and trembling rather than seeing those who are pretending. You must be the holiest person on earth I suppose. Jugde not so that thou will not be judge, Jesus warns. You know nothing about catholic church and her teachings.

cold: [b]The death of Savita Halappanavar on 28 October 2012, at University Hospital Galway in Ireland, led to nationwide protests—which spilled over into India, Britain and many other countries—calling for a review of the abortion laws in Ireland. Halappanavar, a Hindu of Indian origin, was suffering from a miscarriage when she was some 17 weeks pregnant, and she sought medical attention and treatment at University Hospital Galway. The hospital told them the foetus was not viable, but they could not perform an abortion under Irish Law as the foetus's heart was still beating. During the next several days, Halappanavar was diagnosed with septicemia which led to multiple organ failure and her death.
Once the events became public, the news of Halappanavar's death spread rapidly through both traditional and social media outlets, with one of the original stories in The Irish Times on 14 November receiving over 700,000 hits by 17 November.Rallies and protests were held, calling for a change in the abortion laws in Ireland, which the protesters claimed led to Halappanavar's death.Indian diplomatic and consular officials requested an official inquiry into the events surrounding Halappanavar's death.The United Nations also became involved.
The incident is currently under investigation,and the Taoiseach (prime minister), Enda Kenny, has stated: "I don't think we should say anything about this until we are in possession of all the facts."The Health Service Executive (HSE) named Professor Sir Sabaratnam Arulkumaran to head a seven-member panel looking into the case. The panel will seek to uncover all the facts and "to identify any safety issues arising in this case".
[/b]
After the outrage that followed the death of savita,sound reasoning replaced religious dogma.

The first termination of a pregnancy carried out under the provisions of new abortion legislation has taken place at the National Maternity Hospital on Holles Street, Dublin.
The termination of the twin pregnancy was carried out on a patient who was almost 18 weeks’ pregnant in view of the risk to her life and the unviability of her pregnancy, according to sources at the hospital. Foetal heartbeat were present..
The case bears a number of similarities to that of Savita Halappanavar, in that the woman’s membranes had ruptured and she was demonstrating signs of sepsis.
In contrast to Ms Halappanavar, who died in University Hospital Galway last October after she was refused a termination, the National Maternity Hospital patient has made a good recovery after receiving antibiotic treatment and undergoing the termination a number of weeks ago.
The National Maternity Hospital is one of 25 hospitals in the State authorised to carry out terminations under the provisions of the Act.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/first-abortion-carried-out-under-new-legislation-1.1502946

Nigerians,never let your religion get in the way of your reasoning

Deliberately we have always used the expression 'direct attempt on the life of an innocent person,' 'direct killing.' Because if, for example, the saving of the life of the future mother, independently of her pregnant condition, should urgently require a surgical act or other therapeutic treatment which would have as an accessory consequence, in no way desired or intended, but inevitable, the death of the fetus, such an act could no longer be called a direct attempt on an innocent life. Under these conditions the operation can be lawful, like other similar medical interventions — granted always that a good of high worth is concerned, such as life, and that it is not possible to postpone the operation until after the birth of the child, nor to have recourse to other efficacious remedies
. -Pope Pius XII on the principle of double effect


The principle of the twofold, or double effect, states that it is morally allowable to perform an action that will produce both good and bad effects as long as the following conditions are all met. The example shown is for the treatment of an ectopic pregnancy, where the preborn child is developing in the Fallopian tube. If the child continues to grow there, the tube will eventually rupture and will probably cause the death of both the mother and the child.[13]

(1) The object of the action to be performed must be good in itself or at least morally neutral. In this case, the object of the surgery is to remove a pathological organ which presents a threat to the life of the woman. By contrast, the object of surgical or chemical abortion is simply to kill the preborn child ["object" is the end toward which an action tends, and does not connote the intention(s) of the operator, as does the word "objective"].



(2) The good effect must not come about as a result of the evil effect, but must come directly from the action itself. In this case, the good effect (saving the mother's life) is not caused by the bad effect (the death of the preborn child). By contrast, in the case of direct abortion (surgical or chemical abortion), the death of the child is wrongly considered to be the "good" effect.



(3) The evil effect must not be desired in itself but only permitted. In the case of the removal of an ectopic pregnancy, the surgeon does not intend or want to kill the baby; his death is an unintended and unwanted side effect of the surgery. By contrast, the intent of abortion is to kill the preborn child.



(4) There must be a sufficiently grave reason for permitting the evil effect to occur. In this case, the reason is to save the life of the mother, a good that is greater than or equal to the evil effect of the baby's death. Pro-abortion groups often stretch this principle to absurd lengths, going so far as to justify all abortions under the principle of the double effect because, as they allege, all abortions threaten the life of the mother.[14]



(5) Sometimes a fifth condition is added, implicit in (4), above, namely, that there is no other alternative available to solve the problem at hand. If there are alternatives other than the intervention that offer better possibilities to save both mother and preborn child, these of course must be used.
In fact, this last condition is the one that most clearly distinguishes the "indirect abortion" case (the case under the double effect principle) from the "therapeutic" abortion case. "Therapeutic" abortion is direct abortion, and therefore is always gravely evil. It is the abortion committed with the (supposed) intention of saving the mother's life, but where one or more of the above conditions are not met. Basically, the doctor in this case does have alternatives to save both mother and preborn child, but chooses abortion as the most expedient way to solve the problem at hand. The phrase "therapeutic abortion" is in fact an oxymoron, since no direct abortion is therapeutic, i.e. it does not "cure" anyone of an illness, but instead kills an innocent human being.
It is perhaps a sign of the times that abortionists see pregnancy itself as a disease, and abortion as the "cure" for this dreaded malady. At an Association of Planned Parenthood Physicians conference, Willard Cates compared the miracle of pregnancy to a venereal disease when he said that "Unwanted pregnancy is transmitted sexually, is socially and emotionally pathologic ... and has many other characteristics of the conventional venereal diseases. The incubation time, defined as the period between exposure (mid-cycle coitus) and the development of initial symptoms (usually missed menses), averages approximately two weeks."[15] Barbara Roberts said that "It's obvious, therefore, that unwanted pregnancy is the most common venereal disease ... This disease is associated with immense suffering. Seeking to be cured of this disease, women from time have risked pain, mutilation, and death in numbers that really stagger the imagination."[16] And late-term abortionist Warren Hern has said that "[Pregnancy] is an episodic, moderately extended, chronic condition ... defined as an illness ... treated by evacuation of the uterine contents. ... The relationship between the gravid female and the feto-placental unit can be understood best as one of host and parasite. Pregnancy should be seen as a biocultural event in the context of other human illnesses."[17]
The promotion of "therapeutic" abortion by pro-abortionists in countries where abortion is illegal is a strategy they use to not only legalize abortion in these cases, but also to eventually legalize abortion on demand. Exceptions to direct abortion are not only evil in themselves, they also and always lead to abortion on demand

italo: You're saying a baby born prematurely is not a human being?

...since he is not biologically independent and should still be in the womb.

That would be preposterous.

I dont even know where to start with you, I have given my position many many times and asked you what you would do in the scenarios I painted you gave the escapism answer of "it depends".
Please sir stop escaping lemme even give you a better, "realer" scenario so you can tackle for us

vivalableue: Ok I'm a firm believer in Christ. Already with 2 children in their young age (3 and 2) and I discover am pregnant. At first I was resolved to keep it, even though the father wanted nothing to do with his child. Until I started getting very ill, sharp pain in my stomach. The pregnancy was growing and causing internal bleeding due to a cyst on my ovary. I was so exhausted with running around with 2 small ones. Still even with prayer, I wasn't getting better. I had to stop working and was hospitalized. The abortion was offered and after much prayer and advice from pastor (who was against it) and parents (who were against it until they found out I was basically going to die if I kept the pregnancy, asked me to abort it). My kids must not be motherless in this very crucial time of life. I did it, and although I felt terrible none-the-less, I believe Godhas the grace to forgive and blessed me with in spite of my failings. I know that it was a very hard choice to make, but the babies who were already in my heart were my only factors. Yes my health and life meant a great deal, but the future of my babies was so important for me. How can you ask a mother to disregard the family she already has for a principle? Parents
will do anything to save their kids. That is all. Somethings aren't black and white, the world we live in is confused.

This above poster was hypothetically your wife, what would you advise her to do?
This country needs people who not only talk the talk but people who walk the walk.

[/quote]Noneroone:
The essence of doctrine is to make christians comform to certain moral and spiritual standards necessary for their salvation. Likewise, the catholic church condemn abortion because they believe it constitute the act of shedding blood. If the church succeeds in condeming the act why the faithfuls do otherwise, is the essence of the doctrine not defeated? Will the young girls who die during abortion be saved by the mere fact that catholic doctrine rejects abortion? What i am saying is that the catholic church end in rejecting the act in principle while keeping some teachings (such as purgatory and penance ) which are antithetical to this doctrine. If a girl who commits an obortion knows she can still pray 14 hell marys and be forgiven or still go to heaven after spending some time in the purgatory, where is the deterrance? The catholic church rejects the act in doctrine while living the faithfuls to their 'freewill' or even encouraging them indirectly. I hope i have explained what i mean by saying " they pretend a lot"[quote]

How on earth does penance and purgatory encourage abortion? are you sure you are mentally okay.By the way the thrash you just spewed here does not even represent the churche's teaching on purgatory and penance.Please go and get some education and stop making a fool of yourself

How I wish someone can prove to me how abortion has changed the lot of women in countries where it has been legalised. One wonderful thing about every sin is that there are usually logical reason to commit them but they never bring peace. There are documented evidences of ills of abortion on perpetrators in countries where it has been legalised. Unfortunately the ills are not publicised like reasons to have it legalised. I will advise those who seek abortion to first find out what negative could come out of it before proceeding to get one. All that glitter are not gold they said and 'there is that which seems right to man but the end is destruction' God warns. Evil will remain evil no matter the colour and appeal it is given. ABORTION is EVIL and guarantees no peace it promises.

chukwudi44:

Deliberately we have always used the expression 'direct attempt on the life of an innocent person,' 'direct killing.' Because if, for example, the saving of the life of the future mother, independently of her pregnant condition, should urgently require a surgical act or other therapeutic treatment which would have as an accessory consequence, in no way desired or intended, but inevitable, the death of the fetus, such an act could no longer be called a direct attempt on an innocent life. Under these conditions the operation can be lawful, like other similar medical interventions — granted always that a good of high worth is concerned, such as life, and that it is not possible to postpone the operation until after the birth of the child, nor to have recourse to other efficacious remedies
. -Pope Pius XII on the principle of double effect


The principle of the twofold, or double effect, states that it is morally allowable to perform an action that will produce both good and bad effects as long as the following conditions are all met. The example shown is for the treatment of an ectopic pregnancy, where the preborn child is developing in the Fallopian tube. If the child continues to grow there, the tube will eventually rupture and will probably cause the death of both the mother and the child.[13]

(1) The object of the action to be performed must be good in itself or at least morally neutral. In this case, the object of the surgery is to remove a pathological organ which presents a threat to the life of the woman. By contrast, the object of surgical or chemical abortion is simply to kill the preborn child ["object" is the end toward which an action tends, and does not connote the intention(s) of the operator, as does the word "objective"].

Utter Nonsense, people have got brains to think for themselves. This is a grand attempt at confusing people by twisting words to give the desired effect. First of all what is abortion?
Abortion is the termination of pregnancy by the removal or expulsion from the uterus of a fetus or embryo prior to viability.[b][/b]
In your first scenario you comfortably call the fetus a "pathological organ" that presents a threat to the woman's life, for the purpose of soothing your conscience it is no longer a human being at this point - pathetic!
You move on to then say the object of surgical or chemical abortion is simply to kill the "preborn child" you think the sleight of fingers hand with words would fool any smart person?
An abortion is an abortion, it is done by removing the fetus simple and plain. If you say this process is killing then it is killing, whether it threatens the woman's life or not.

(2) The good effect must not come about as a result of the evil effect, but must come directly from the action itself. In this case, the good effect (saving the mother's life) is not caused by the bad effect (the death of the preborn child). By contrast, in the case of direct abortion (surgical or chemical abortion), the death of the child is wrongly considered to be the "good" effect.

Ok this one got me laughing, news flash oga the good effect is caused by aborting - killing if you like the the pre born child. You have to kill it to save the mother's life. Again we are not fooled.

(3) The evil effect must not be desired in itself but only permitted. In the case of the removal of an ectopic pregnancy, the surgeon does not intend or want to kill the baby; his death is an unintended and unwanted side effect of the surgery. By contrast, the intent of abortion is to kill the preborn child.

what is it they smoke at these places these days?
Is there a separate name for when an abortion is performed to save the mothers life? To even go as far as calling it an unwanted side effect is totally intellectually dishonest. The only way to save the mother is to "kill" the child, when the surgeon starts the operation it is to remove the fetus....scratch that - his intention is to "kill" the baby to save the mother.



Ok I am not going to bother about the rest, I do not worry about you but about the many readers of the thread who you intend to confuse with such dishonesty. To think that you talk about morality just makes me laugh, I pity you anyway really I do. Having to make excuses all the time for not only religion but also for the catholic church must not be easy. What I would have loved was for you to finish arguing here and come join me on another thread to justify the murder thousands of innocent women - (yeah real women not those about to die) and children very innocent ones as well by general ayotallah Moses.

It must really suck to be you.

Chukwudi abeg no vex.....explain your post in naija english before some people interpret nonsense to suit their biased arguments.
Ha! I said it!!!

tete7000: How I wish someone can prove to me how abortion has changed the lot of women in countries where it has been legalised. One wonderful thing about every sin is that there are usually logical reason to commit them but they never bring peace. There are documented evidences of ills of abortion on perpetrators in countries where it has been legalised. Unfortunately the ills are not publicised like reasons to have it legalised. I will advise those who seek abortion to first find out what negative could come out of it before proceeding to get one. All that glitter are not gold they said and 'there is that which seems right to man but the end is destruction' God warns. Evil will remain evil no matter the colour and appeal it is given. ABORTION is EVIL and guarantees no peace it promises.

In my country it is legalised since more than 30 years. That mean before you can go for it you have to go to an information center, there are special people, where you can speak, and they tell you all what you need to know and only when a woman was at this information center she can go for abortionl.

We have less abortions since it is legalised because also young girls get help there and when the family didnot want them they can go to a mother and child home where they can stay before and after they get the child and get help from the goverment.

We have also at every hospital a place where you can put a child you don't want, it is a baby drop off-box, this is anonym so no child must die like in nigeria.

In my country there are many parents who want to adopt a child but we didnot have many kids they for this so many parents look for a child from an other country, also from an third world country. Many couples from europa would take also a child from nigeria but it is so hard and the goverment didnot want this, that is the next problem.

In some countries christian organisation help couples when they want to adopt a child from there country.

babestell:
He doesn't need to adopt kids. Did he tell you he was looking for kids . BTW when people adopt in naija, they usually go to great lenghts to conceal it, so the true statistics is not readily available. Like all things naija, the proper framework for the process to help people is not there. You csn spend years trying to adopt.....paperwork alone is crazy. That is why pregnancy farms flourish. People need babies from birth not at 3 months or 3 years. Give this girls an option....please don't abort, hook them up with families that need babies, let there be a sort of arrangement, take the stigma off adoption. In my maternal family, 3 out of 5 siblings adopted:for various reasons sha. The 4th one is starting the process now. When the first aunty adopted she tried hiding it but after a while it came out, the kid is 18years now and wants to enter UNILAG to study maths like me . If his own biological mother had aborted him nko.

The Fetus is a human being. No matter how people try to distort the truth or deny it. The fetus is a human being albeit a weak and defenceless one who needs 9 months to mature into an independent functioning one.

Babe I am feeling you like madt... Ride on jare...

i am a Christian, and i am not a roman-catholic. i am also a doctor. and i would like to share my views on the subject being discussed, albeit without the religious undertone, to keep from sentimental comments.
first off, i acknowledge that life begins at conception. i do not subscribe to termination of life. thus i may be termed 'pro-life'. however, as a medical practitioner, i have to use discretion in explaining what i mean by being pro-life.
take the instance of a girl raiped by as many armed robbers u may want to assume she was raiped by. if she presents to me within that time and up to 72 hours later, there is all i can do to ensure she is safe and free from infection and unwanted pregnancy from the unfortunate act. apart from giving her the emergency examination of her body and private parts and treating for infection, i will go ahead to do an ultrasound scan to ensure there is no immediate sign of growing fetus (which of course is virtually impossible within this time frame). and i would give her the 'morning-after' contraceptive pill as well as the anti-hiv drug regimen. if she comes later but an ultrasound scan still shows nothing present, i will still give the same treatment. but my pro-life begins when i can visibly see even the tinyest littlest detail of life in her womb. apart from treating for infection and giving anti-hiv, all i can offer is counselling.
then other scenarios where the continued existence of the pregnancy is already threatening the life of the mother. u may want to google MOLAR PREGNANCY for instance. in such a case i wont hesitate to operate the woman and take out that bloodsucking mass from her womb, whether or not a fetus is there. and if the life of the fetus is affected as a result, at least the procedure saves the mother who, in a later time, will be able to conceive again all things being equal.

all i have said indicates i support the use of contraceptive methods to prevent fertilization/conception in the first place, which is the furthest i can go. but u see, the catholics wont even hear that u used a condom or morning after pill to prevent unwanted pregnancy, only the highly unreliable Billing's method, claiming u shouldnt alter the natural course that God Himself designed. they say se.x is for procreation, but does that mean u cant have se.xual pleasure until u r ready for another kid? if it is so, then u shouldnt even use Billing's method, because it means u r trying to enjoy se.x outside of its 'intended purpose'.

take home summary:
-i am pro-life up to the limit of established growing pregnancy.
-i am FOR the use of all forms of contraceptives to PREVENT (NOT TO TERMINATE) unwanted pregnancy.
-i would take into consideration how much it threatens her life, in order to save her. note though, that my considerations will not cover emotional or psychological or other sentimental condition. counselling can take her thru those ones.

GRACIAS MES AMIS!

^ ^ ^ ^ . Reading your post makes me wanna go back to school and read medicine so that I can save lives like you do.

Loskee: i am a Christian, and i am not a roman-catholic. i am also a doctor. and i would like to share my views on the subject being discussed, albeit without the religious undertone, to keep from sentimental comments.
first off, i acknowledge that life begins at conception. i do not subscribe to termination of life. thus i may be termed 'pro-life'. however, as a medical practitioner, i have to use discretion in explaining what i mean by being pro-life.
take the instance of a girl raiped by as many armed robbers u may want to assume she was raiped by. if she presents to me within that time and up to 72 hours later, there is all i can do to ensure she is safe and free from infection and unwanted pregnancy from the unfortunate act. apart from giving her the emergency examination of her body and private parts and treating for infection, i will go ahead to do an ultrasound scan to ensure there is no immediate sign of growing fetus (which of course is virtually impossible within this time frame). and i would give her the 'morning-after' contraceptive pill as well as the anti-hiv drug regimen. if she comes later but an ultrasound scan still shows nothing present, i will still give the same treatment. but my pro-life begins when i can visibly see even the tinyest littlest detail of life in her womb. apart from treating for infection and giving anti-hiv, all i can offer is counselling.
then other scenarios where the continued existence of the pregnancy is already threatening the life of the mother. u may want to google MOLAR PREGNANCY for instance. in such a case i wont hesitate to operate the woman and take out that bloodsucking mass from her womb, whether or not a fetus is there. and if the life of the fetus is affected as a result, at least the procedure saves the mother who, in a later time, will be able to conceive again all things being equal.

all i have said indicates i support the use of contraceptive methods to prevent fertilization/conception in the first place, which is the furthest i can go. but u see, the catholics wont even hear that u used a condom or morning after pill to prevent unwanted pregnancy, only the highly unreliable Billing's method, claiming u shouldnt alter the natural course that God Himself designed. they say se.x is for procreation, but does that mean u cant have se.xual pleasure until u r ready for another kid? if it is so, then u shouldnt even use Billing's method, because it means u r trying to enjoy se.x outside of its 'intended purpose'.

take home summary:
-i am pro-life up to the limit of established growing pregnancy.
-i am FOR the use of all forms of contraceptives to PREVENT (NOT TO TERMINATE) unwanted pregnancy.
-i would take into consideration how much it threatens her life, in order to save her. note though, that my considerations will not cover emotional or psychological or other sentimental condition. counselling can take her thru those ones.

GRACIAS MES AMIS!

Exactly why study is important for sound judgement on issues. The Issue here bothers on Health and Moral. For health; Medicine, and for moral;Theology. Sis, you were able to understand the catholic church thus far because of the knowledge you have in medicine and your possession of some basic theology picked up as a christian. Frankly speaking, where you find difficult to understand is the theology aspect. If you understand that people will even attack your level of pro-life out of ignorance, then you will appreciate the fact that you may be wrong still to attack the extent to which the Catholic church took its position on those areas you found uncomfortable. Find time if you desire, to read up from the net, the catholic positions on Abortion and contraceptives and why she stands by those decisions. It is good to know the truth...just like you did in the health angle...and it shall set you free. Bravo so far.

dugochi: give the baby up for adoption.

na waaooooo

Syncan:


Exactly why study is important for sound judgement on issues. The Issue here bothers on Health and Moral. For health; Medicine, and for moral;Theology. Sis, you were able to understand the catholic church thus far because of the knowledge you have in medicine and your possession of some basic theology picked up as a christian. Frankly speaking, where you find difficult to understand is the theology aspect. If you understand that people will even attack your level of pro-life out of ignorance, then you will appreciate the fact that you may be wrong still to attack the extent to which the Catholic church took its position on those areas you found uncomfortable. Find time if you desire, to read up from the net, the catholic positions on Abortion and contraceptives and why she stands by those decisions. It is good to know the truth...just like you did in the health angle...and it shall set you free. Bravo so far.

and so, dear Syncan, highly knowledgeable in the 'theology' aspects of abortion, pray tell ur views and ur truths on abortion and the use of contraceptives as unsentimentally and as reasonably as possible. i love knowledge, and i stand for what is true, fair and just. thankyou.

chukwudi44:
How on earth does penance and purgatory encourage abortion? are you sure you are mentally okay.By the way the thrash you just spewed here does not even represent the churche's teaching on purgatory and penance.Please go and get some education and stop making a fool of yourself

Religious fanatism isn't a virtue, it can lead to spiritual blindness. Quit before it becomes late.

Noneroone: Religious fanatism isn't a virtue, it can lead to spiritual blindness. Quit before it becomes late.

Stupidity and ignorance are not virtues,they can lead to something worse than spiritual blindness

i observe that the clergies are not responding to this post, anyway, am not here to defend the faith, but to give my personal view. i believe that abortion is a sin, there are however, cases that are excused or let me simply say justifiable. in a case where the mother's life is at stake, abortion could be justifiable, in a case of rape, it is excusable, in a case where both parents are not ready for the baby, it is permitable, but in a case where a girl mistekenly got pregnant for a boy, it is inexcusable, but in all, abortion is punishable.

Would you rather I commit suicide or murder. My situation isn't necessarily isolated, many women get confronted with problem am sure. Don't forget I wanted that child, but my kids need me more.
I went to my ob/gyn(who treats the professional hockey player wives) who referred me to his superior. Lastly, this isn't about my choice as much it is about my church's reaction. Although my pastor condemned it, he still prayed for me and encouraged me to be more involved in my church. To be around my fellow believers, to grow in love. Why? Because only God can judge- we were commanded to live one another as Christ loves the church. My church members admonished me in love, encouraged me on Christ. We share everything, there will never be a hungry congregant. We make sure that thereis a roof over everyone's head, and clothes in our houses. We open our homes for ministry and fellowship. We don't sweep sin under the carpet, nor do we encourage sinful living. That is church is about, it's a body,a family a flock. Let's move past denomination because that is the enemy's plan. We must learn to strengthen each other this is a very dangerous time we are living in. We must be a beacon of lite for lost and confused souls. Show the world that a group of mere humans, faults and all, can become more than conquerors in Christ Jesus. Here are done steps to do this, encourage one another in the Lord. Season our words with grace, organize yourselves in the community to help those who are disadvantaged. Pool resources to make a difference in the lives of those around you. Transparent to those who ask questions. Seek first the kingdom of God and all things will be added unto you. In all things do it with love, learn to serve those who persecute you. Join together and pray for the leaders and for the peace and success in your city/state/country. Learn to turn your cheek when wronged, forgive those who hurt you. Have faith, give joyfully love enormously. That's all.

babestell:

How many women do you know that had to make this decision and compare it to those who do it for cosmetic reasons. A very minute few, even women that are hypertensive carry baby to term nowadays. Mordern medicine is really doing wonders, if you dont know ask your doctor, dont be surprised another doctor may have been willing to work with you to carry baby to term. Imagine a woman who has been trying to conceive for 8 years and then she does with this complication, such a woman may try everything to bring baby to term (parents will do anything to save their kids, your words). This story is very touching and sad but guess what if you still committed MURDER to save your life, for a worthy cause sha so in our human thinking we believe God will understand. But what of those aborting babies because they are female and they want a male child, or those aborting because they had unprotected sex or because they dont want more children or just to punish a guy

chukwudi44:

Stupidity and ignorance are not virtues,they can lead to something worse than spiritual blindness

Am happy you know. Can you now put it into practice and refrain from being aggressive.

Loskee:

and so, dear Syncan, highly knowledgeable in the 'theology' aspects of abortion, pray tell ur views and ur truths on abortion and the use of contraceptives as unsentimentally and as reasonably as possible. i love knowledge, and i stand for what is true, fair and just. thankyou.

Honestly, I feel like I detect sarcasm in your post above, however I want to take your last sentence as true and just respond.I do not claim to be an authority in any of the subjects I stated,I rather referred to the Catholic Church and her teachings, that's why I study and submit to it when it comes to issues like this. for those more knowledgeable than me on the issues have done the hard work already and still does in debates. Now on Abortion, your stand is practically same with the church and I noted this earlier. With respect to contraceptives,one point.Essentially, God has designed marital love to be both unitive(Gen2:18 ) and procreative(Gen1:28 ); to suppress or to violate either one contradicts the design of God.Nevertheless, we have witnessed the proliferation of the use of artificial birth control in particular. What has consequently evolved in society is a contraceptive mentality, the removal of conjugal love from the Sacrament of Marriage, and in many cases especially outside the context of marriage the reduction of conjugal love to simply a sex act without genuine love. Pope John Paul 11 adds that "Sexuality too is depersonalized and exploited: from being the sign, place, and language of love, that is, of the gift of self and acceptance of another, in all the other's richness as a person, it increasingly becomes the occasion and instrument for self-assertion and the selfish satisfaction of personal desires and instincts. Thus, the original import of human sexuality is distorted and falsified, and the two meanings, unitive and procreative, inherent in the very nature of the conjugal act, are artificially separated: in this way, the marriage union is betrayed and its fruitfulness is subjected to the caprice of the couple. Procreation then becomes the 'enemy' to be avoided in sexual activity...".