March
5th 2009
Posted under Christianity & Pro-Life
The following is akin to an academic debate over abstractions (e.g. how many angels can dance on the point of a very fine needle?), except that it really happened.
A 9-years-old Brazilian girl was raped and consequently impregnated with twins by her stepfather. Doctors deemed the would be mother unfit to carry one child, let alone two, and so aborted the two children.
The Catholic Church fought this, attempting to save the lives of the two fetuses, and has now, after the abortion, threatened excommunication on all involved, except the 9-years-old girl who was too young to be held responsible.
And so, which party was right in this conflict: the doctors or the Church? Was abortion justified in this case?
RonL on 05 Mar 2009 at 9:16 pm #
Of course it does. The girls life was in danger, so I fail to see how there is room for debate.
I don’t morally support rape as a reason for abortion, because it is an innocent party who is killed. (I would have no problem with rapists being put down)
Then again, I’m Jewish, not Catholic. I’m actually more pro-life than Orthodox Jews, who permit abortion in the first 40 days for any reason.
Danby on 05 Mar 2009 at 10:45 pm #
I would not take the doctors at their word that the child’s life was in danger. Abortionists lie all the time, if there’s money to be made.
In any case, the Catholic Church does not forbid abortion in cases in which the mother’s life is truly in danger, e.g. ectopic pregnancies. So in this case, I would assume that the local bishops also, for good reason, did not accept the abortionists’ evaluation of the girl’s physical ability to bear the children. The rape and incest aspects of the case are of no bearing as far as the Church is concerned.
Kirt Higdon on 06 Mar 2009 at 2:36 pm #
The Catholic Church has “threatened excommunication on all involved”? According to Canon Law, all involved in procuring an abortion are automatically excommunicated.
Weaver on 06 Mar 2009 at 11:16 pm #
Mr. Higdon,
from the article:
I assumed that meant they were threatened, but I can see how that could mean automatic excommunication instead, especially if that’s normal Church policy.
—
Danby,
it wouldn’t surprise me if the doctors were discovered to be dishonest, especially if they perform many abortions, including where there’s little risk to the mother.
—
RonL,
that’s pretty much what I was thinking too, but I’m only generally anti-abortion, lacking a solid stance on issues like this which are less clear.
roho on 07 Mar 2009 at 1:19 am #
Wow Weaver. This is some case? And sad.
What could be worse? Impregnation by Satan himself?
What of the mental damage?
On one hand, I think of “Helen Keller” and all that she overcome, yet all that she brought to the world?
And then I think of this innocent child’s life needing to move on?
And still, there is the Church with it’s judgement and justice?
My final decision is a “Justfiable Abortion” based on the medical expertise that I’m not qualified to question.(Life is not always black and white.)
Molly on 11 Jan 2012 at 3:53 pm #
@Danby
I have a problem with what you said. “I would assume that the local bishops also, for good reason, did not accept the abortionists’ evaluation of the girl’s physical ability to bear the children.” As far as I know, bishops do not have any medical training for evaluating women’s abilities to bear children. They are trained to give mass and know the bible. They probably did not accept the abortionists’ evaluation of the girl’s physical ability to bear the children because of preconceived notions of what is right and wrong.