Try getting your head around this, and at the same time, be prepared to feel utter revulsion at some point here.
Some scum-bag in Brazil rapes his nine-year old step-daughter and she becomes pregnant (with twins)
It turns-out said scum-bag, had also been touching-up her intellectually handicapped sister as well, and has a prior record of child molestation.
The scum-bag flees, upon capture says “sorry God” and he is forgiven by local The Catholic Church.
The nine-year olds mother (remember this is a friggin’ nine year old here, peoples and clearly too young to make her own decisions) is advised by doctors, proceeding with the pregnancy would endanger both her daughters and the children’s lives, and possibly render her sterile.
Not to mention the ignominy of carrying her abusers children.
The Catholic Church in Brazil, with the backing of Rome, excommunicates the victims mum and those associated with the abortion process.
By default The Catholic Church in effect punishes the young victim as well, by making her mother a ‘social leper’.
Now imagine a world, where The Catholic Church was accorded the role as the sole arbitrators of ‘right and wrong’?
It would be like twisted movie, scripted by George Orwell, produced by George Romero, shoot on black and white film.
Rapists would walk free, providing they showed enough contriteness.
Nine year victims would die in labour, and likely also her children in the whole messy process (frankly the thought of a nine year old giving birth, physically sickens me)The victim and her family and the doctors concerned would be excommunicated and ostracized from society.Twisted stuff.
This has to be the best advert for secular society I’ve heard in a long time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
If you are going to make things up then of course you can create a fantastic ad for atheism.
As has been said to you ad nauseaum on MandM:
According to the first hopsital that examined her, the girl's life was not in danger. The second said it was but cited vague statements about increased risk without pointing to the degree of risk or what precisely it was about this case that meant it was different to other cases of girls of this age that have been successfully managed. When one considers that the law in Brazil has huge restrictions on abortion but for the grounds of rape and risk to life and you put that alongside the above, it is reasonable to conclude that it is questionable whether her life was in fact in danger.
Yet, and this is the bit you have consistently ignored, if it was in danger, the Catholic Church would have permitted an abortion for her in accord with their teachings. They allow abortion in some circumstances.
No one has documented any evidence proving the Catholic church forgave the rapist. People are just saying they have without proof.
Such forgiveness, in any event, cannot be gained just by saying sorry. Anyone who knows anything about Christian concepts of forgiveness knows this.
You are ignoring the condemnation the Catholic Church has publicly expressed for the rapist and his actions. Selective reading? Or perhaps you just made your mind up without the facts?
Finally your entire argument is circular as it just assumes, without argument or evidence, that what you state as obvious, that there is no ethical problem with abortion. Simply concluding it and stating it does not establish it.
I am sick to the stomach of hypocritical Christians who justify the unjustifiable, for the sake of some ancient doctrine and an invisible God man.
The victims here are the child and her mother, the guilty party is the rapist - irrespective of what you believe in, and where you get your facts from (mine came off The BBC web site and rather ironically on the same ‘Religion’ page, there was an article on a Catholic Irish Bishop was being investigated for covering-up child molestation cases by his clergy)
You have a daughter like me Madeleine, it breaks my heart to think of what this young girl went through, mentally, emotionally and physically, and the way she has become a theological pawn and has to suffer more to appease a Church that is so out of touch with reality.
I recommend you look at the You-Tube clip below, the presenters state verbatim what I written – so we can’t all be ‘making this up’.
The P.M of Brazil sided with the family and came out against ‘the’ churches stand, so he too sees the injustice.
As a fair-minded Christian you should start looking at your own faith and start instigating change – not supporting this abhorrence.
Its cases like this that make harden me to my cause to rid humanity of this evil superstition.
I am sure if we meet, we would get on fine Madeleine, but on this one the Catholic Church is at odds with decency itself.
Look into your daughters eyes, then tell me I'm wrong.
See ya.
Paul.
Apologies for the OT post: I'm a moderator at RD.net and wanted to pass along the following info, in case locals weren't aware.
Ray Comfort will be debating someone at Canterbury Uni on Wednesday 18 March, 12:30-1.30pm at Ngaio Marsh Theatre.
He's posted his outline on his blog (if you can believe anything he says):
"I won’t be posting for a week or so because I will be in New Zealand. While there I will be at a university debating on the subject of evolution.
Here is my outline:
1. An atheist is someone who believes nothing created everything. If he denies that and believes that “something” created everything, he’s not an atheist.
2. Man can't create a grain of sand from nothing. How intellectually dishonest is it then to say that there was no Intelligent Designer?
3. Where did females come from (in every species)?
4. Which came first? The blood, the heart or the blood vessels?
5. There are variations within species, but no species to species transitional forms in the fossil record.
6. God made Archaeopteryx with teeth and a tail. It’s a bird, not a dinosaur. He made many weird animals. There's a huge mouse with a pocket in its front that hops all over Australia, horses with stripes, weird desert animals with humps on their backs . . . and He made some birds with teeth.
7. Paleontologists have a huge incentive to twist the truth, just a little. If they can find a bone with a lump on it, theorize that it was a limb or a feather, give it an impressive name, say it is 73 million years old, and suddenly he has his picture on the cover of National Geographic magazine, has a book deal and lectures for life. The human propensity to gullibility is evidenced by evolution's many believers. Malcolm Muggeridge: "I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution . . . will be one of the great jokes in the history books in the future." Evolutionists have done to science, what hypocrites have done to religion. We have men who call themselves scientists, when they should have instead got a job with Disney as imagineers."
Pinch of salt required, but I was hoping someone local might know who he's debating, and be able to pass along the info.
The Ecophysiologist
Forum Moderator
RichardDawkins.net
Hi there,
That would account for the cryptic message I got a month or so ago asking for ‘a chosen atheist warrior’ from Christchurch to debate the concept of God, with some nameless big-name coming to town.
I left said anonymous poster my email address ( canterburyatheist at gmail.com) wanting more detail – but I never heard back.
Nor would I as an ‘amateur’ debate a paid professional like Comfort based on his terms, which he’s obviously done here.
Thanks for the heads-up.
Would rather got to the pub frankly!
Paul.
jeez dude, just missed out on the debate, Wednesday is nearly finished, I know this is probably farcical
but I say do not be angry at the Christians as you would not be angry at a simple child who believes in the easter buunny.
Circling back... Here are a couple of links to discussions of Comfort's recent Chch 'debate' on RichardDawkins.net forum.
http://www.richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=76812&start=0&hilit=ray+comfort
http://www.richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=73020&p=1816366&hilit=ngaio#p1830139
Regards,
The Ecophysiologist
Forum Moderator
RD.net
Post a Comment