Pope Canonizes Symbol For Abortion Opponents

[Kadie]

Pope Canonizes Symbol For Abortion Opponents
Saint Championed For 'Extreme Sacrifice'

POSTED: 2:04 p.m. EDT May 16, 2004

VATICAN CITY -- Pope John Paul has named six new saints, including a woman who became a symbol for abortion opponents.

The Vatican has long championed the case of Gianna Beretta Molla, an Italian pediatrician. She died in 1962 at the age of 39 -- one week after giving birth to her fourth child. Doctors had told her it was dangerous to proceed with the pregnancy.

In proclaiming her a saint, John Paul praised her "extreme sacrifice" and her simple but profound message.

http://www.thekcrachannel.com/news/3311042/detail.html

[ant]

1. I wonder what happened to her kids

I should start off by saying that I am not passing judgment on this woman's personal choice. The choice was hers to make and that's that.

However, it's interesting that while this woman is held up as a symbol of noble sacrifice because she risked her life for the life of her unborn child, nothing is mentioned about the fact that she also risked the lives of her born children. Is the church not concerned with that variable in this equation? If I assume for the moment that it's fair to say women are sometimes morally obligated to die for others, shouldn't we still consider the negative consequences her death might have on her existing family? Do you sacrifice an unborn child for the sake of your three living ones? Do you sacrifice your own life and the emotional/psychological health of your born children for the sake of an unborn child?

What a complicated, moral dilemma...best not to dizzy my pretty little head over it and just let the church/state make the decision for me and my family.

It's also interesting that we are the same culture that gives women so much grief over how their personal life choices impact their children. If I work and put my kid in day care I am satan, but if I refuse an abortion and die and leave my children without a mother at all I'm a saint. Better a dead mother than a working mother, I guess?

[alcuno]

2. I don't know if this deserves sainthood, but I understand what she did.

I can accept the Church's stand saying no abortions. However, it should be an individual decision and not legally impeded.

The counter to your argument is whether the unborn child should be sacrificed for the living children. A lot of Catholics, including myself, would say no.

[ant]

5. actually...

...I wasn't really making an argument so much as showing what a complex decision it actually is. My point was that there really is no argument, or that both arguments are equally valid. There are no clear, obvious answers, and what's best for one family may not be best for another. For instance, a woman who is wealthy and married might have less to worry about in terms of what will happen to her kids should she die than a poor woman with no husband. If I had no family and thought my kids might end up in the state's custody I might be less willing to risk my life.

Of course, these issues still focus on how the woman's personal choice affects her children. I suspect the argument that she does not have an obligation to risk death for anyone might come across as selfish to some. In the eyes of the Church, "choosing life" is the morally superior position only when the life chosen is that of the unborn child. The mother choosing life for herself isn't as noble. Is her life not as valuable? Who decides, by what standard, and why?

In any case, these are family decisions that families need to make for themselves, by themselves. I object to the Church's not so subtle effort to cast one particular choice as the morally superior one, but that would be just one of many reasons for why I left the Church a long time ago.


Edited because the Church's efforts are not so subtle.

[Tellurian]

3. This looks like a ruse...

I firmly believe the Pontiff is not aware of all that is swirling around the Vatican these days. Pope John may have indicated the woman was saintly but did not personally approve of her being the representative symbol of anti abortionists. That, I believe, was a spurious decision by surrounding cardinals, unbeknown to the pontiff, a group sympathetic to Cardinal Sheridan's crusade.

[baby_bear]

4. You pose some good questions, ant

I converted to Catholicism in my late 20s. I was under the tutelage of the Paulist Fathers at UCLA and later in Seattle. I was afraid that my pro-choice attitude - which I wasn't about to change - would preclude me from being "acceptable." But the initial priest I had an interview with assured me that the most important thing was to do what could be done to keep a family intact - tacitly implying that both birth control and abortion may be lesser evils than forcing women to bear children when that could tear the family asunder, for various reasons.

He was very reassuring to me, and I went ahead with the conversion. It was a very positive experience.

Unfortunately, many decrees, decisions, etc., have come from the Vatican since that time that have made me less comfortable with the church. That is an understatement.

I do appreciate your thoughts on this, and I do not believe that a woman has a moral obligation to give up her life for whatever reason. That is and should be a personal decision.

s_m

[Malva Zebrina]

6. Until the Catholic church treats each and every humand being as equal

in rights, I can only laugh at these proclamations


They have been consistently misogynistic.



They subdue and attempt to control women, seeing women as second class, compared to men, who, are allowed, apparently, to get away with all sorts of sins, including pedophilia. LOL

That is their stance.