Slog

Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drunks

Thursday, January 24, 2013

So, Father, When Does Life Begin?

Posted by on Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 8:10 AM

If it's going to fuck up the rest of some poor woman's life, life definitely begins at conception. Sperm + egg = life. Destroying a blastocyst? No different than murdering a toddler. But if it's going to inconvenience the Catholic Church or, heaven forbid, potentially cost the Church some money, well... that's a different story.

 

Comments (15) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
Perhaps it its a step to nullify their sexual assaults on children. you aren't an adult until 18. Fetuses have no rights, and neither do alter boys.
Posted by pussnboots on January 24, 2013 at 8:23 AM · Report this
Pick1 2
The Catholic Church is full of hypocrites. News at eleven.
Posted by Pick1 on January 24, 2013 at 8:26 AM · Report this
Pope Peabrain 3
Women who use Catholic hospitals are endangering themselves and their families lives.
Posted by Pope Peabrain on January 24, 2013 at 8:34 AM · Report this
dnt trust me 4
Peabrain, would love to see you say that to the faces of a bunch of old hags in the waiting room at a Catholic hospital. Thing is, I know you would do it. The reliable word is that you have massively big balls.
Posted by dnt trust me on January 24, 2013 at 8:45 AM · Report this
Pick1 5
@3 In emergencies you don't often get to choose which hospital you go to.

This mistake was huge and exactly the reason hospitals have malpractice insurance. A doctor missing a page could happen at any hospital you go to, it's not just christian hospitals to blame for this.

The hypocrisy of saying two children in the womb that were old enough to likely survive a c-section were not "people" is the problem.
Posted by Pick1 on January 24, 2013 at 9:08 AM · Report this
6
Oh dear. How have the leaders of the faithful embarrassed the faithful now?

1. Saying "fetuses are not considered people with legal rights by the laws of the state" is true.

2. If said by any Catholic organization that has explicitly endorsed the Vatican's policy on the unborn, it is hypocrisy. Yeah, this one's not really defensible. This was a chance for the RC Church to stand up and say, "Many people disagree with our beliefs, but at least we hold to them even when it'll cost us," and they've missed it.

Best-case scenario? Someone on the board of that hospital who secretly supports women's right to choose agreed to this legal strategy to shame the Church into modernity. Yeah, it's not the likely-case scenario.
Posted by DRF on January 24, 2013 at 9:59 AM · Report this
SiSiSodaPop in Vegas 7
Obviously this is a setup. If the guy wins his lawsuit against the hospital for the fetuses dying, then the court has to rule that fetuses are persons; and that is the gateway for claiming that abortion is murder. As much as the story gives me a sad, I hope he doesn't win the lawsuit, at least not on the grounds that a fetus is a legal person with civil rights. If he wins, it should be because the hospital's own policies regard fetuses to be considered persons.
Posted by SiSiSodaPop in Vegas on January 24, 2013 at 10:27 AM · Report this
8
@7 +1
Here, according to one of the commentators in the original article, is what could and should have been argued in this case:
"Anyone who has even a basic knowledge of medicine knows that if a pregnant woman is dying and the fetus has ANY chance at all of surviving outside the womb, you do an emergency C-section - and EVERY doctor is trained to do that, even if they are not going into obstetrics as a specialty. There was also the option of keeping the mother alive via life support until the babies could be delivered. Granted that sets up an issue later on about removing life support - but at least it would have given the babies a fighting chance."
In both cases, however, they didn't need to wait for her OB to show up or answer the page... they just needed to ACT, which they failed to do. THAT is where they are at fault."
The question should not be whether or not those babies are viable human beings who get counted in the lawsuit - it should be why there was no one in that hospital capable of making the decisions that might have saved the lives of those babies in the first place - and if there was no one there capable or willing to make that choice, then why would anyone continue going to that hospital for ANY treatment? I would never trust them with my health or that of any of my family members again if I lived in that area."
Posted by cheakamus on January 24, 2013 at 10:41 AM · Report this
merry 9
WOW.

This is going to be a great precendent case and, hopefully, will undermine all their future bleating about the sanctity of zygotes......
Posted by merry on January 24, 2013 at 11:06 AM · Report this
10
You go to (or get taken to) the hospital nearest you. Which in a number of cases is the ONLY hospital in the area, and since various arms of the Church seem to be buying up every hospital they can, it's going to be a Catholic hospital.
Posted by sarah70 on January 24, 2013 at 11:43 AM · Report this
11
@7, That's exactly the thought that came to my head when I saw the article. I don't know if it's a deliberate setup by the church (if so, pretty brilliant and a remarkable example of them sacrificing their good name for the cause) or if they're just going to luck into it but the idea of this case going before the Robert's court makes me extremely nervous.
Posted by Root on January 24, 2013 at 1:01 PM · Report this
12
Let me explain...

When it comes to issues of sex, fertility and conception, Catholic doctrine is vehemently pro-life. However, when it comes to matters of illness and hospitals, Catholic doctrine is all, "God's will," and doesn't want to do anything to extend life.

Actually, I guess maybe there's a certain consistency there. But it would be nicer to know that a Catholic hospital might be somewhere you could go for something other than a priest.
Posted by Brooklyn Reader on January 24, 2013 at 1:03 PM · Report this
OutInBumF 13
@12- Don't forget that the RCC are the first ones into the Death With Dignity discussions too, with the 'God's will' argument. Man is forever trying to use medical science to interfere with god's will. So letting babies die in utero is god's will....sigh and grrrr.
Sad about the fetae's deaths, but I hope this case never makes it to the Roberts court for all the reasons above. Yikes.
Posted by OutInBumF on January 24, 2013 at 8:07 PM · Report this
14
@13 But let's remember that for thousands of years there was little that anyone could do about many illnesses except accept them with dignity. People built traditions around that, and those traditions don't go away when technology provides us with other solutions. Most of the Church's actions can be explained by being very, very slow to change, but it does change.

And I second the yikes.
Posted by DRF on January 24, 2013 at 8:53 PM · Report this
BrotherBob 15
I say, let the defense win. And then use that win as an argument in the abortion arena...
Posted by BrotherBob on January 30, 2013 at 11:26 AM · Report this

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy