Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Post Reply
Page 1 of 4  •  1 2 3 4 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Conn. Conf. of Bishops OK Morning After Pill
10 years ago  ::  Oct 19, 2007 - 8:51PM #1
Shaner
Posts: 1,596
Hello All,

The Conneticut Conference of Bishops have, as of October 1st, approved the use of the Morning After Pill in Catholic Hospitals for cases of rape. 

From their Website:  http://www.connecticut.nasccd.org/bins/ … 4785X]LINK

What are your thoughts?  Do you believe more Catholic Hospitals should offer this option?

~Sandy~
"Lord, to whom shall we go?  You have the Words of Eternal Life"
"Philippians 4:13. "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me."
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Oct 19, 2007 - 11:27PM #2
Burks1999
Posts: 64
Personally I think it would be the same as them saying abortion is okay if you were raped. It's wrong! The morning after pill can just keep a fertilized egg, baby, from implanting that's just a really early abortion to me! One crime doesn't justify another! IMHO!
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Oct 19, 2007 - 11:34PM #3
Prajna
Posts: 1,705
While I am fan of abortion I think this is a 'good', for lack of a better word, idea.  I could never imagine being raped and having to give birth to my rapists 'baby.'   I think it would cause more "harm" in the end.
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Oct 20, 2007 - 11:25AM #4
Shaner
Posts: 1,596
What I find interesting about this is that the ACCB hasn't issued anything about the Conn. Bishops allowing this.....not a peep from them. 

They've known about it for awhile now, are they giving assent by their silence?

~Sandy~
"Lord, to whom shall we go?  You have the Words of Eternal Life"
"Philippians 4:13. "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me."
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Oct 31, 2007 - 4:57PM #5
danman916
Posts: 2,627
[QUOTE=Prajna;9807]  I think it would cause more "harm" in the end.[/QUOTE]Well the opposite certainly is true for the aborted baby.
The question I always ask is this;

Since when is anyone's right to life ever dependent upon another person wanting them or not?

I have never had a single person answer this question yet. They always skirt around the issue because they know that statement is damning to those who are "pro-choice".

As a former fetus, all children have the right to life;
Even those conceived through the horrors of rape.
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Oct 31, 2007 - 4:57PM #6
danman916
Posts: 2,627
[QUOTE=Prajna;9807]  I think it would cause more "harm" in the end.[/QUOTE]Well the opposite certainly is true for the aborted baby.
The question I always ask is this;

Since when is anyone's right to life ever dependent upon another person wanting them or not?

I have never had a single person answer this question yet. They always skirt around the issue because they know that statement is damning to those who are "pro-choice".

As a former fetus, all children have the right to life;
Even those conceived through the horrors of rape.
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Oct 31, 2007 - 7:44PM #7
Shaner
Posts: 1,596
[QUOTE=danman916;36452]
The question I always ask is this;

Since when is anyone's right to life ever dependent upon another person wanting them or not?
.[/QUOTE]

I would definitely say the Death Penalty take's away one's right to life........their dependence upon it is taken away from them by other humans.
They too have no say in the matter.

Peace,
Sandy
"Lord, to whom shall we go?  You have the Words of Eternal Life"
"Philippians 4:13. "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me."
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Nov 01, 2007 - 5:41AM #8
Mysty101
Posts: 2,025
[QUOTE=Shaner;36740]I would definitely say the Death Penalty take's away one's right to life........their dependence upon it is taken away from them by other humans.
They too have no say in the matter.

Peace,
Sandy[/QUOTE]

But the fetus is innocent, the criminal is not.  I, too, pray that there would be no need for the death penalty, but many sad cases have shown that many savage criminals have been released.  The death penalty would have been self defense, if the Megan who precipitated "Megan's Law" had been given a say in the matter.

SuZ
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Nov 01, 2007 - 3:29PM #9
Shaner
Posts: 1,596
Hi Suz,

When it come's to life being Sacred, from conception to natural death, I don't factor in 'innocence or guilt'. 

Yes, some crimes, like those against innocent children, are repugnant to us as a Society.  Some laws need to be changed.

However, it still doesn't give us a license to murder, anymore than it give's us a free pass on abortion. 
Our late John Paul II spoke out numerous times against the Death Penalty as has our present Pope, Benedict XVI.

~Sandy~
"Lord, to whom shall we go?  You have the Words of Eternal Life"
"Philippians 4:13. "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me."
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Nov 01, 2007 - 6:46PM #10
Mysty101
Posts: 2,025
Hi again Sandy,

And yes I do agree that any murder is wrong, but I do not consider self-defense  (as in the case of the criminal who precipitated Megan's Law) to be murder.

I would prioritize speaking against war (where thousands of innocent are murdered ) ahead of speaking against the death penalty for vicious criminals.  Unfortunately the Catholic Church is far behind reality in expectations of rehabilitation of the criminal mind---(most cannot control their urges, and never will)

I am alive, but will never be the same because of a criminal, and my experience was nothing compared to what others have endured.  It is said better to let 100 guilty go free than to charge 1 innocent.  What of the hundreds of innocent who are destroyed because the guilty go free?

SuZ
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 4  •  1 2 3 4 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook