Log in

No account? Create an account
Vexen Crabtree 2015


Vexen Crabtree's Live Journal

Sociology, Theology, Anti-Religion and Exploration: Forcing Humanity Forwards

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Vexen Crabtree 2015

Catholic Church & rape of 11-year-old girl

A Vatican official has said the Catholic church will excommunicate a medical team who performed Colombia's first legal abortion on an 11-year-old girl, who was eight weeks pregnant after being raped by her stepfather.


I'm still shocked by the immorality that results from stupid religious dogma... they're just treating life like a game, a second-best to idealism. *boggles*

  • 1
If one works from the point that a soul begins it's life at conception then they have a point and a punishment that only has any relivence within that religous dogma is not going all that far. It's not like a death sentance or other physical punishment.
After all a life is a life and once it has begun what right do we have to stop it unless it endangers us.

On the other hand if you belive (As is my best guess) that a soul can not come in to being without a physical form is caperble of supporting it (If there are such things as souls that go beyond the bounds of cause and effect) Then The catholic church is wrong, but if you belive it is wrong then Excomunnication is no big deal anyway.

All of this comes down to questions for which there are no proven answers.

I often wonder about the belief that the soul is created at conception. Does that mean that chimeras have two souls? What about identical twins; do they have to share one soul? What if one twin dies a God-hating atheist, and the other a God-fearing Christian? And what about spontaneous abortions? A nontrivial number of foetuses are spontaneously aborted by the body so early on that the woman might not even notice that she's (a) pregnant and (b) miscarrying, so if the Catholic church is so anti-abortion, shouldn't they be pro-contraception? After all, the rhythm method results in more pregnancies than, say, condom+pill, so it follows that the rhythm method also results in more spontaneous abortions.

After all a life is a life and once it has begun what right do we have to stop it unless it endangers us.

I'd say that the chances of a prepubescent child carrying and giving birth to a baby without endangering herself are slimmer than anyone ought to like.

but if you belive it is wrong then Excomunnication is no big deal anyway.

The doctors and nurses might disagree with the RCC, but remember that they live in a very Catholic country; their family, friends, and co-workers are very likely to be Catholic and hence influenced by the church's ruling. The excommunication might not bother them, but the knock-on effects may well do.

The raped girl is eleven years old... they're not saving her by letting her come to full term, they're merely prolonging it's death, risking the mother in the process. There can be no excuse for the amount of pain and suffering that their unscientific, morally bankrupt policy causes... they should be tried by an international criminal court for trying to force such a young girl to go through that.

If the girl is physicaly endangered or incaperble of takeing the pregnacy to term (not a certain thing even at the age of eleven but I would trust in the doctors oppinion if they belived the girl in this case was not yet robust enough to suvive unharmed) then to bring in the whole rape thing is mearly a destraction irrelivent to the important argument and to bother mentioning it mearly an obfusction of what is important. If the girls life is endangered then the stated reasoning behind the dogma of the church bares no wait and which ever megalomaniac is behind this dictac is being deliberately stupid in the name of another powertrip. Of course as is the problem with a huge organisation in a state of parranoia once part of it loudly states an oppinion the top brass have to back it up to prove the church is never wrong.

Don't you see the suffering and pain that this girl will go through, and her child? Why are you defending these immoral people? I don't get what you're trying to achieve, when principles contradict morality, it's the intellectual side of things you have to question. Suffering is real, this child's life is not a joke.

I would go through pain and suffering to save a life (If there were a life there to save). Wouldn't you?

Of course I wouldn't put my lif at undue risk to save another. That would be robbing Peter to pay Paul and totaly pointless.

Further more if I had to choose between saving sombody from suffering and saving sombody's life I would save the life (Unless of course the suffering person were the one at risk of death and had exsperssed a concidered prefference for death over suffering at that point I admit to not being sure what I would choose to do Although in this case that is irrelivent).

You have a preteen daughter.
She comes to you and tells you she has been raped.
The doctors say she is pregnant.
You expect her to give birth to the rapists baby?
You exepect anyone who has been impregnated by a rapist to give birth to the baby?
I agree not the baby's fault, but would you want to live knowing you were the product of rape?

The girl was not some sort of lolita.
She was abused since the age of seven by somebody who was supposed to protect her.

It would depend on a number of factors which I have already laid down in previous comments but to summerise and be totaly clear about the issue I personally would say that if the child had been pregnant long enough for reasonable cognative functions to develope and if the pregnancy was likely to come to term without causing the death of either the child to be, the mother or both, then yes I would think it right that the young mother should take the pregnancy to term and give birth. How the life was concived bares no relivance to this, after all you can't choose your pearents.

A senator, Gina Parody, said: "The Vatican has the right to excommunicate whomever they choose. But I would hope that they also excommunicate priests when they rape boys or girls."

I rather like that quote. It's quite poetic.

The insanity never fails to stun me no matter how jaded I become.

Religion is poison to humanity. The more people get up the nerve to say that out loud the better. The "Religion Kills" t-shirts and things I put up on cafe press have attracted a few like minded humans.


For a Satanist you waste a lot of energy on Christianity. Is it like an ex lover that you just can't forget about no matter how much you project that confused hatred onto their memory? Or are you just envious of their success at proselytizing?

Ta ta.


  • 1