Mrs. Santorum

PostmodernProphet said:
look, I provided the link to look at the original text of the Bible......did you do so?......do you believe I misrepresented the text?.......do you have anything to say about that post based upon the efforts you have engaged in to determine if I am right or wrong?.......or is this just another of your typical posts about something you have no knowledge of.....like Catholic doctors killing their patients......we all know you lie, we all know you lose arguments, but at least have the decency to argue from a position of knowledge rather than from total ignorance.......read, get back to me.......
Click to expand...

What does the New Testament say about homosexuality?
 
Rana said:
I wonder what these people do when it is their own sister, wife, daughter, I bet, just like the Santorums the rules don't apply then.
Click to expand...


These are the rules.....and Santorum followed them....

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/...n/abortion.htm


III What if, in order to save the life of the mother, independently of her pregnant condition, a surgical intervention or a therapeutic treatment is necessary which would have as an accidental consequence, in no way desired nor intended, the death of the fetus?

"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 nor 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." Pius XII, Allocution to Large Families, Nov. 26, 1951.
 
Can any liberal here link to the text of Santorum's proposal to outlaw abortion in spite of the physical health of the mother?
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I'm sorry you're a fucking idiot.....I know it isn't my fault, but it still makes me feel bad to see it.....meanwhile, no Catholic doctors have been shown to have let anyone die to save an unborn child, the nun in question is not excommunicated, the liberals on the board have been embarrassed and all is well with the world......
Click to expand...

It's always hilarious to see a non-Catholic know-it-all bloviating about the Church and its rules. Just quit while you're ahead.
 
christiefan915 said:
It's always hilarious to see a non-Catholic know-it-all bloviating about the Church and its rules. Just quit while you're ahead.
Click to expand...

These are the rules.....and Santorum followed them....

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/...n/abortion.htm


III What if, in order to save the life of the mother, independently of her pregnant condition, a surgical intervention or a therapeutic treatment is necessary which would have as an accidental consequence, in no way desired nor intended, the death of the fetus?

"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 nor 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." Pius XII, Allocution to Large Families, Nov. 26, 1951.
 
bravo said:
These are the rules.....and Santorum followed them....

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/...n/abortion.htm


III What if, in order to save the life of the mother, independently of her pregnant condition, a surgical intervention or a therapeutic treatment is necessary which would have as an accidental consequence, in no way desired nor intended, the death of the fetus?

"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 nor 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." Pius XII, Allocution to Large Families, Nov. 26, 1951.
Click to expand...

Uh, my argument with him was about excommunication, not abortion.
 
christiefan915 said:
You do that a lot. It's why no one takes you seriously.
Click to expand...

The same people who take you seriously you mean. You and your liberal cohorts have always needed your army of "no ones" and "everyone's" to support your stupidity. Forgetting of course that in partisan politics you sound ridiculous making such pathetic claims.
 
bravo said:
These are the rules.....and Santorum followed them....

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/...n/abortion.htm


III What if, in order to save the life of the mother, independently of her pregnant condition, a surgical intervention or a therapeutic treatment is necessary which would have as an accidental consequence, in no way desired nor intended, the death of the fetus?

"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 nor 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." Pius XII, Allocution to Large Families, Nov. 26, 1951.
Click to expand...

So what happens if whilst the doctors are thinking about the best way to treat the mother and not abort the baby deliberately, it becomes obvious that time is of the essence and the mother will die unless the foetus is removed immediately?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top