BS: Christian Persecution

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Oct 13 - 06:04 AM

Certain others may shout loudly about their claimed compassion for their fellow man, yet be strangely selective about which fellow man is deserving of that compassion.

Shame on them.
That is not true compassion.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 09 Oct 13 - 07:48 AM

IF THE CAP FITS.................?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Oct 13 - 07:50 AM

It does not Don.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Oct 13 - 11:23 AM

I took Don's comment as intended to apply generally, and wholly agree with it.

A bungled medical emergency with tragic consequences, involving medical staff who appear to have totally misunderstood the laws of both of Ireland and of the Catholic Church, do not really seem too pertinent to a discussion about persecution of religious minorities. Professionals make mistakes from mistakes frim time to time in all countries.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Oct 13 - 12:10 PM

Can we get this clear
This was not a "bungled medical emergency" - it was a deliberate refusal to carry out a life-saving (routine elsewhere) medical procedure on a woman purely on religious grounds - despite requesting the procedure she was told it could not be carried out because "Ireland was a Catholic Country" - a deliberate act of letting the woman die, simple as that.
This has been admitted by all concerned, to the extent that the government has been forced to introduce new (extremely limited) laws.
These were opposed strenuously by the Church, even to the point where politicians in favour of them were threatened with excommunication from the church - extreme spiritual blackmail which, as any Catholic knows, is tantamount to condemning the soul to eternal torment.
The South American cases were even more cold bloodedly devious as they occurred in a country that was allowed to carry out such procedures according to law.
An 11 year old girl, the daughter of an itinerant family of fruit pickers, was raped by a farmer.
The family reported the rape, but no action was taken.
Some time later the girl fell ill and the family took her to a church-run hospital, where they reported that she had contacted two sexually communicated diseases - they hid the fact that the girl was also pregnant and that giving birth would almost certainly kill her; it was also revealed at a later stage that the foetus had virtually no chance of survival, the mother being far too young and physically incapable of delivering.
These facts were kept hidden until if was too late for the family to insist on a termination legally.
The family appealed to the local clergy, one of whose officials told them that the girl should "embrace her martyrdom with pride".
To save the girl's life the family were forced to flee over the border to have the foetus aborted at an extremely late stage in the pregnancy - as a last minute act-of-mercy.
To describe these as "medical bungling" is grotesquely misleading - it is the religious persecution of an 11 year old child at its most gross - and it should have pride-of-place on discussions such as this.
To attempt to prevent such discussion is crude censorship - nothing more.
In the Sarita Halappanava case it is also extremely misleading to describe the refusal to terminate as " medical staff who appear to have totally misunderstood the laws of both of Ireland and of the Catholic Church"
The law, which has been held in place by Church pressure, prevented the woman from having an operation - the staff knew this.
Like the South American cases - the church opposes pregnancy termination under all circumstances and even opposed the shoddy set that the Government has now been forced to introduce.
Citing what happened in Italy is totally dishonest, as anybody who takes the trouble to read the unique circumstances that brought about those changes - once again, despite fierce opposition from the church - (link above)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Oct 13 - 12:12 PM

The "cap fits" perfectly by the way
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Oct 13 - 01:12 PM

Some examples
Jim Carroll

The Catholic Church and Abortion
3 of 7 in Series: The Essentials of the Catholic Church's Stance on Controversial Issues
The Catholic Church opposes and condemns any and all direct abortions. Even pregnancies that result from rape, incest, and present a danger to the life of the mother aren't reasons for abortion. The Church teaches that human life is created and begins at the moment of conception. The Catholic Church sees abortion as the termination of an unborn life, and therefore, it's always wrong, sinful, and immoral. The circumstances by which that life was conceived are considered irrelevant.
Catholics believe that willingly, knowingly, and deliberately committing evil is never justifiable — no matter how good the intention and no matter how noble the cause. This is a moral absolute for Catholics, and it can't be diluted or altered. The Church believes that if in even one circumstance, someone is allowed to knowingly and willingly commit evil so that good may come from it, then Pandora's box is opened for anyone to claim he was merely doing a so-called necessary evil for the greater good in the long run. So the Church teaches that one innocent life can't be taken even if it would save hundreds, thousands, or millions.
Valuing the lives of both mother and child
Often, people say that the Catholic Church opts for the child over the mother. Not the case at all. If a pregnant woman has a heart attack and needs emergency surgery, it's considered morally permissible to put her under anesthesia and operate, even though it's likely that she'll spontaneously abort the unborn fetus as a consequence.
The distinction is that her body is doing the act of ejecting the fetus as an effect of the primary action of the doctors who are trying to save both lives — the mother and the baby. If the baby dies naturally, the Church believes that no sin has been committed. But if the doctor or nurse directly kills the baby, that's considered murder, the taking of an innocent life.
The Church sees a drastic difference between causing death and allowing the process of certain death to continue.
Acting quickly in the case of rape
Even the horror and tragedy of rape or incest isn't considered cause to kill an innocent unborn life. If possible, the woman — who is also considered an innocent victim — can get treatment as soon as possible to try to prevent conception from occurring immediately after the rape or incest.
Moral theologians and doctors say that it takes several hours to a day for the sperm to reach the egg, so the Church permits a female rape victim to be given a contraceptive only if ovulation or conception haven't yet taken place and the drug given isn't an abortifacient — a so-called contraceptive that doesn't prevent fertilization and conception but rather removes, destroys, or prevents implantation of the embryo.
If a woman waits too long, usually more than 24 hours, though, conception may take place, and any procedure or treatment to eject the unviable human embryo is an abortion.
The Church's stand is that even though she's an innocent victim of a horrible evil, the unborn child is also an innocent victim. No matter what the circumstances that led to the conception, once conceived, that child has an immortal soul and has a right to live as much as the mother.

CHILE WON'T LET PREGNANT 11-YEAR-OLD RAPED BY HER MOTHER'S BOYFRIEND HAVE AN ABORTION
By Katie | Published: July 9, 2013
She is known as Belén. She is eleven years old and 14 weeks pregnant. She was raped repeatedly by her mother's boyfriend over the course of two years. The mother claims the relationship that started when her daughter was NINE was consensual. Thankfully, Belén's grandmother doesn't see it that way, and she alerted the police to the abuse, which the boyfriend admitted to. There are several reasons even an anti-choicer would think Belén deserves an abortion:
She is eleven years old.
She is a rape victim.
She is the victim of incest.
The pregnancy poses a serious health risk to Belen.
The health of the fetus is at risk
Belén's doctors want to terminate. But they are afraid to. Because Belén happens to live in one of the five countries (along with El Salvador, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, and Malta) that does not allow abortions under any circumstances. So, tragically, outrageously, and– I wish– unbelievably, Belén is being forced to carry her pregnancy to term in a country controlled by conservative sectors and the Catholic Church. Chile's abortion laws have regressed. Abortion in Chile used to be legal for medical reasons, but the notoriously authoritarian and torture-loving dictator Augusto Pinochet put an end to that when he took power in a coup in 1973. Though the country is no longer living under dictatorship, it continues to live its legacy and under dictatorial abortion laws. Chile only legalized divorce in 2004. Chile's president, the conservative Sebastián Piñera opposes reforming Chile's abortion laws. And last year the senate voted against bills that would have legalized abortion in the case of rape, a nonviable fetus, and for the health and safety of the woman.
This may sound similar. In another extremely conservative and Catholic Latin American country, El Salvador, doctors wanted wanted to terminate the pregnancy of a patient whose health and life were at risk and whose fetus had Anencephaly, a severe and lethal birth defect in which the brain or part of the brain is missing. Thanks to the international media attention and pressure, El Salvador ultimately allowed Beatriz, who is 22 and suffers from lupus and almost died during her first pregnancy, to have an abortion. But they claimed the abortion was a delivery and removed the fetus through a c-section, which is much more dangerous than the D&C Beatrice's doctors wanted to perform. Or you may be thinking of another extremely Catholic country in Europe, where a woman was denied an abortion of her nonviable fetus because Ireland "is a Catholic country." In this case, Savita Halappanavar died.
We have to make sure to raise our voices in this case as well and support Chilean campaigns to reform abortion laws. And there is some good news. Former president Michele Bachelet and survivor of torture under Pinochet, who is likely to win the presidency once again, is committed to changing legalizing abortion, at least in the cases of rape and for health reasons, as she tweeted on Friday, the day the story of Belen broke.


CHURCH CONDEMNS ABORTION PERFORMED ON RAPED GIRL, 11
Sibylla Brodzinsky in Bogotá
The Guardian, Thursday 31 August 2006
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.
Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, the president of the Vatican's Pontifical Council for the Family, said in addition to the doctors and nurses, the measure could apply to "relatives, politicians and lawmakers" whom he called "protagonists in this abominable crime".
The girl, whose identity has not been released, had "fallen in the hands of evildoers", the cardinal said in an interview with local television on Tuesday.
In May Colombia's constitutional court partially lifted the ban on abortion in this deeply Catholic country, allowing pregnancies to be terminated in cases of severe deformity of the foetus, when the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest, or when the mother's life is in danger.
The first test of the ruling came when the girl sought to terminate her pregnancy, which followed her being raped by her stepfather. The man admitted to the abuse, which began when the child was seven.
When the case became public, doctors were wary of performing the abortion as the text of the court's ruling has yet to be published and they feared prosecution. But the high court issued a new ruling, compelling doctors to abide by its decision if the woman's case fell within the criteria.
Once the ruling was handed down, the girl's pregnancy was terminated at a public hospital in Bogotá.
Carlos Lemus, the director of Simon Bolivar hospital where the abortion was performed, said he respected the church's decision but did not share its view.
"We acted within the constitutional framework," Dr Lemus said. "We were faced with the petition of a girl who wanted to go back to playing with her toys."
He said Cardinal Trujillo "calls the doctors and nurses 'evildoers'. I think the person who raped her is the evildoer".
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."
The president of Colombia's ecclesiastic tribunal, Monsignor Libardo Ramírez, said according to canonical law excommunication was applied to anyone who participated in the "murder of a child in the womb".
But he added that it would be up to Cardinal Rubiano Sáenz, as the leading figure of the Roman Catholic church in Colombia, to decide whether to formally apply the sanctions and to whom.
Public health authorities have estimated that more than 300,000 clandestine abortions are carried out each year in the country.
Illegal abortion is punishable by up to three years in prison for both the women who terminate their pregnancies and for the doctors who perform the procedure.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Oct 13 - 01:16 PM

Professionals make mistakes from mistakes frim time to time in all countries.

Unless, of course, the said "professionals" are acting the way they do in accordance with religious dogma - which is no kind of "mistake".

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Oct 13 - 03:20 PM

Last comment from me tonight:
The enquiry into the death of Hallapanava has just reported back that it was caused mainly from acute Septicaemia and other complications.
It was pointed out that problems arose due to the inability of the medical staff to deal with this condition, not just in Galway, but throughout the country, and it is recommended that it should be a priority to put this situation right.
Which basically means that anybody in her condition faces the same fate as she did because, even after the introduction of the new laws, it will still be virtually impossible to obtain a termination (see below).
Anybody who has the slightest knowledge of Irish politics knows that this, and other laws relating to sex, were passed and remain in place due to the excessive power possessed by the church, now on the wane, but very much still there.
Below is a report by the Family Planning Association of Ireland.
The report also points out that there is an average of 5,0000 young women from Ireland forced to cross to the U.K. to obtain pregnancy terminations that are not available in Ireland.
G'night all!!
Jim Carroll

Abortion is legal in Ireland when there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the pregnant woman, this includes the risk of suicide.
There are no guidelines available in Ireland to assist doctors to determine whether a woman's life is threatened by her pregnancy and as a result abortion is inaccessible for most women in Ireland on these grounds.
Abortion is not legal in Ireland in cases of rape, incest or foetal abnormalities.
Abortion is also criminalised in most circumstances in Northern Ireland.
There are some pregnancy counselling services whose sole purpose is to prevent women from having abortions. They misinform and intimidate women to achieve their aim. If you have been in contact with one of these agencies please contact the IFPA pregnancy helpline 1850 49 50 51.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Oct 13 - 04:10 PM

Those are the laws the Irish people freely choose to live under.
That is their absolute right as free people.
It is not any kind of persecution.
No-one is forced to go there and be subject to them.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Oct 13 - 06:47 PM

The professionals certainly were mistaken in their understanding both of church law and of Irish civil law, both of which accept the need to carry out whatever is necessary to save the life of the mother in those circumstances.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket evolving slowly
Date: 09 Oct 13 - 09:03 PM

The inability of The Royal College of Surgeons of Ireland to accept requests for a fitness to practice review put them at odds with The Academy of Royal Colleges. Still being sorted now. ..

For me, I find it interesting how so many old institutions that were British Empire wide retained their affiliation and even name after the setting up of the free state and independence. Nothing to do with the thread but there again, differentiating between Christians and other cults when noting atrocities is a distasteful thread to begin with.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 01:16 AM

differentiating between Christians and other cults when noting atrocities is a distasteful thread to begin with.

It would be, but no-one did.
Just saying it is more prevalent.

Like when there is a devastating famine in a country.
Action taken there does not imply starvation does not exist elsewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 03:18 AM

"Those are the laws the Irish people freely choose to live under."
Those are the laws which Catholics have been brought up to believe it is a mortal sin not to live under - choosing to ignore that fact is to show a malicious ignorance of the power of religion.
You were the one who used a suggestion of "cultural implants" in Muslims to denigrate an entire population - and entire belief even.
The power of the church was undeniable up to the point that the clerical abuse scandal broke the grip, yet the generations of people who grew up under that grip are still subject to it - it's recognised as "guilt".
So far you have repeated your claim of "free will" without qualifying your claim in one single instance - by what authority do you make such a claim - you are not a Catholic, you appear to possess no special knowledge of Catholicism, you haven't given any evidence of your claims, 'death-by-a-thousand-denials' once again.
Things are changing in Ireland, but it has taken the revelations of decades of child abuse by members of the Christian (a form of religious persecution in itself) to bring about those changes.
It took the death of a young woman to bring about the minimalist changes in pregnancy termination laws.
Those changes took place under the threat of "eternal damnation" and are still being resisted by the Church (isn't the fact that an organised Church, the most powerful one on the planet, a sign of religious persecution?).
Is there any chance that you are going to are going to respond to the actual evidence you have been given, or maybe produce some of your own, or do you intend to just go on chanting your mantra (rhetorical question - I know the answer from past experience)?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 03:27 AM

Those are the laws which Catholics have been brought up to believe it is a mortal sin not to live under

The Italians were deeply steeped in Catholicism, but they chose differently.
Who but the Irish people should decide their laws Jim?
You?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 03:51 AM

"The Italians were deeply steeped in Catholicism, but they chose differently."
And you have been given the circumstances in which those choices were made, the main one being that the Church was forced extremely reluctantly to compromise - that situation exists nowhere else - or if it does, show it how it does.
It certainly does not in Ireland, where it took the revelations of decades, possibly centuries of Christian persecution (which you claim does not exist) in the form of child rape to bring about any changes.
You have still not produced one shred of evidence - this is simple mindless repetition.
Respond to the points you have been given and stop repeating meaningless nonsense.
Simple question - is not child rape using the authority of the position of Christian ministers and the protection of the perpetrators, allowing them to continue their "little weaknesses" a form of Christian persecution?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 04:04 AM

Are you saying that the Irish are not fit for home rule Jim?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 04:14 AM

In Italy "the Church was forced extremely reluctantly to compromise "

Who forced them Jim?
Was it the Italians?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 05:05 AM

The described circumstances which do not exist elsewhere forced the
read the ****** article
"Are you saying that the Irish are not fit for home rule Jim? "
I'm saying that the situation exists everywhere the Church - any church manages to get a grip
Obama is now in the throes of attempting to nullify the effects of the Catholic church in the US - maybe we should rethink 1777?
You have refused to comment on clerical child abuse
You have refused to respond to a simple question of whether you believe Sarita Hallapanavar was to blame for her own death for "choosing to live in Ireland"
Which more or less sorts out who is totally lacking in compassion here.
Below is a report from this morning's Belfast Telegraph concerning a British (Northern Ireland still fits that description - as you have been at pains to point out) woman's experiences.
The Irish Times report includes descriptions of howling mobs of pro-lifers (sic) screaming abuse at the woman concerned
Feel fee to ignore it, as you have ignored everything else.
Jim Carroll

09 October 2013
A woman forced to travel from Northern Ireland to England for an abortion because her baby had no chance of survival has called for the law to be changed.
Even though her baby had not developed a skull and was completely brain dead she was refused a termination under the current legislation.
Instead, doctors said she would have to wait for the baby to die then have an induced labour.
"Before this happened to me, I didn't agree with abortion but this is medical - this is a dead body I'm being forced to carry in Northern Ireland because of this silly law," she said.
In Northern Ireland abortion is not illegal but is very tightly controlled. The procedure is permitted only if the life or mental health of the mother is at serious risk.
Foetal abnormality does not constitute grounds for an abortion in the region, which is not covered by the 1967 Abortion Act.
The woman, known only as Sarah, was first made aware of the severe problems last week when her 20-week scan failed to detect any sign of the baby's head.
She said: "We were told we were carrying a baby with anencephaly - it's the worst case of spina bifida so the baby has no skull formed and it's brain dead. It's very hard to come to terms with."
She flew to London for a termination earlier this week -- a move she said added to her trauma.
Every year more than 1,000 women travel from Northern Ireland to clinics in England, Scotland and Wales where access to an abortion is allowed up to 24 weeks into pregnancy on grounds that include abnormalities which could lead to a child being seriously disabled.
The woman told the BBC's Stephen Nolan Show she felt there was no alternative to terminating the pregnancy.
"My only choice basically was to carry the baby either until it passed away inside me or I could deliver and it would pass away," she said.
"The law won't let you have an abortion unless the baby is going to harm you."
In a statement, Northern Ireland Health Minister Edwin Poots said senior officials were now looking at the case to see if lessons can be learned.
"Senior officials in my department are considering this particular case on my behalf. I want to be 100% assured that everything has been done that we would expect to be done, within the confines of the legal position that exists in Northern Ireland," he said.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 06:02 AM

The Irish people have chosen.
Not any church, but the people.
Would you deny them their right to choose their own laws?
No-one is forced to go there and be subject to them.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 06:17 AM

You have refused to comment on clerical child abuse

We have had many threads about it.
This is the only one about the extermination of Christians.

We all hate sexual abuse.
Clerical abuse is a monstrous breach of trust.

Now, back to the subject.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 07:02 AM

You are wasting your breath Jim, trying to explain the power which the Catholic Church wields in Eire to someone who is totally ignorant of the situation and doesn't care to find out.

A measure of that determination to stick mindlessly to an insupportable view, is the lack of acknowledgement of the fact that all but a tiny minority were born there and had no choice in the matter.

Some people will never learn because they already know everything, based upon what they choose to believe.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 07:22 AM

"You are wasting your breath Jim,"
Been aware of that fact for along time Don
It's just occasionally worth the effort of watching him dig himself deeper into is hole.
What've we got
Persecution of women via church inspired and imposed laws on British soil - not interested so no comment
Clerical abuse protected and prolonged by the leading Christian church - not interested so no comment
Christian mind games to condition children from birth - not interested, so no comment
And so ad infinitum.
Persecution of Christians, especially by those nasty A-rabs - different ball game altogether
This is getting to be too much like cruelty to dumb animals - blood-sport for my taste off for some clean, fresh air
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 07:47 AM

Jim and Don, the only power the Church has is what the people choose to give it.
The Church in Italy was the same.

The Italians chose a different way.
The people of Ireland made their choices.

Who are you, Don and Jim, to denigrate their free and democratic choice.

You clearly do not believe them to be ready for home rule.
Too ignorant and superstitious.
Right boys?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 10:21 AM

I feel I must chip in this time, just for once in a way, in support of Jim's view of the matter. There is a demographic in Ireland which to my mind would qualify as 'persecuted': unhappily or unwillingly pregnant young women; and the persecution persists to this day ~~ the death of Savita Halappanavar was on 28 October 2012, less than 12 months ago. I agree with Jim that her fate [& it was by no means unique] should qualify in anybody's book as an instance of persecution.

Perhaps Jim would now admit the undoubted, statistically authenticated, fact, which he appears oddly reluctant to acknowledge, that, worldwide, Christians are at present the most persecuted identifiable demographic.

I am not a Christian.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 10:40 AM

That poor lady was entitled to an abortion within the law.
The medical staff failed her.
A blind eye has not been turned to their failure.
Action has been taken to prevent it recurring and to assign responsibility.

The persecuted Christians get no such redress.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Elmore
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 12:55 PM

Feeling poorly today. Seems like this thread'll outlive me.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 01:17 PM

Hell, way things are going, Elmore, the thread will probably outlive Christianity[sic].

That may not be a bad thing.....

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 01:56 PM

Not quite so simple as that, I fear, Keith. Following just extracts from just the intro paras to Wikipedia's account of the case, showing that none of the statements in your last post absolutely represents the fact of what the law was [still being disputed, tho since amended in something of a hurry as an outcome of the matter!, as I read the not altogether crystal-clear account]; and enquiries are ongoing in an attempt to establish a. the facts, & b. any responsibility that might lie. Meanwhile, I continue to consider the poor young woman was legally & judicially *persecuted* within any meaningful definition of the concept:~~

The death of Savita Halappanavar on 28 October 2012, at University Hospital Galway in Ireland, led to nationwide protests—which spilled over into India, Britain and many other countries—calling for a review of the abortion laws in Ireland....Following the death of Savita, the Media blamed the fatality of Savita on Ireland's so called ban on abortion in Catholic Hospitlas. However, the third and final National inquiry found that this was not the case. The cause was identified to be medical negligence which led to a series of uncompleted checks and inadequate Procedures. However, the Irish Government amended legislation in Ireland prior to the reports being completed which legalised abortion where the Mother's Health was in danger. A practice that had been in place in all Irish Hospitals since they first opened their doors.
However, events had spiralled into motion once the events became public. The news of Halappanavar's death spread rapidly through both traditional and social media outlets...Rallies and protests were held, calling for a change in the abortion laws in Ireland, which the protesters claimed led to Halappanavar's death. Indian diplomatic and consular officials requested an official inquiry into the events surrounding Halappanavar's death. The United Nations also became involved.
Prior to the investigations (prime minister), Enda Kenny, has stated: "I don't think we should say anything about this until we are in possession of all the facts." The Health Service Executive (HSE) named Professor Sir Sabaratnam Arulkumaran to head a seven-member panel looking into the case. The panel will seek to uncover all the facts and "to identify any safety issues arising in this case"

I think you will agree that nothing about the matter is quite as open-&-shut as you tried to make it sound. Meanwhile, if there is one thing certain about the lamentable matter, it is that the poor girl is dead; and should not be...

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Elmore
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 02:01 PM

Greg F., More than likely, we'd be better off without any organised religion. Feels like it upsets folks more than it comforts them.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 03:15 PM

...Following the death of Savita, the Media blamed the fatality of Savita on Ireland's so called ban on abortion in Catholic Hospitlas. However, the third and final National inquiry found that this was not the case. The cause was identified to be medical negligence which led to a series of uncompleted checks and inadequate Procedures.

Nothing is ever black and ehite, apart from penguins, pandas and magpies, but I think that states the position pretty well. Neither Irish law nor church teachings prevented Savita receiving whatever treatment she neededs, even if that meant the termination of the pregnancy.

In the light of the apparent failure of medical staff involved to understand the legal situation appropriate action in making this clearer was seen as appropriate. As might be the position in any country in the face of medical staff failing to understood the law.
............

The suggestion that Catholics can be assumed to act in accordance with church teachings just is not true, for good or ill. For example, the fact that the Church is now firmly opposed to capital punishment seems to have very little impact on many American Catholics (though admittedly in the referendum on that in Ireland the death penalty was firmly ruled out as unconstitutional). A similar assumption in the case of Muslims would be recognised as part of the Islamophobic spectrum.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 03:36 PM

"worldwide, Christians are at present the most persecuted identifiable demographic.
If you mean are they the most obvious - of course they are, nobody has denied that.
On the contrary, I have taken some time to draw Keith (and your) attentions to just how persecuted Christians actually are - mainly by their own churches - Keith continues to deny this, now blaming the medical staff for the death of a young woman because of religious imposed laws - dare I ask how you feel about that?.
I don't believe that the persecution by Muslim extremist regimes (not Muslims) could hold a candle to that meted out wholesale and long-term to their own faithful, using that very faith as a means of persecution - but as you say, Christians are the most visibly numerous victims at the hands of Islamic fanatics at the present time.
I wouldn't know how to count heads to come up with a total for how many Muslims are being persecuted for not being Jewish, or how many former Yugoslavians suffered and died for not being Christian
Nor could I begin to guess how many people of all denominations are suffering persecution and death by regimes or even national powers with the full support of Churches - mainly Christian, to protect western oil interests, or those of logging firms or multinationals like Shell or Esso or Barclays Bank (all high level investors in terrorist states ruled by murderous despots).
All persecution, either by, in the name of, or with the support of any religion is downright evil and is, as far as I can see, condemned unconditionally by all here but Keith, who only wants to talk about the persecution of Christians by Muslims and so far has denied it happening to anybody else, totally absolving all Christian churches of any form of persecution..
I ask again, how do you feel about his stance on the church bearing no blame for laws in Christian countries, or his denials on their role in condemning women to death, (another name added (posthumously) to the list in Ireland tonight) or influencing governments in any way?
I wonder how you feel about suggestion that if we don't like the way a country is run we should move out (including, by his silence, the late Mrs Hallapanavar)?
I wonder if you feel like asking him why this doesn't apply to Christians being persecuted in Muslim countries?
Keith is an abomination who has put a great deal of time (though almost no effort) in defending atrocities throughout the world - so far with your support, usually by your silence with occasional gestured of defence.
I will be surprised to receive a clear answer to any of these - feel free to surprise me.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 04:29 PM

I should have thought your questions answered in my 2 previous posts, Jim. What are you still not clear about?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 06:04 PM

All persecution, either by, in the name of, or with the support of any religion is downright evil and is, as far as I can see, condemned unconditionally by all here but Keith,

We have actually had one member posting saying that most Christians deserved to be persecuted.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 06:14 PM

We have actually had one member posting saying that most Christians deserved to be persecuted

Get a life, or more to the point get a brain.

After all the persecutions "Christians"[sic] have inflicted over the millenia, just might be time that what goes around, comes around.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 07:42 PM

Precisely so. "They deserve to be persecuted".

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: bobad
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 07:51 PM

I suppose the same can be said of Americans.....generalize?.....who me?....nah.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Musket evolving slowly
Date: 10 Oct 13 - 11:00 PM

Anyone fancy a chat about Christian persecution?

I was speaking to a guy from Uganda in the hotel bar here in Bangkok last night. I googled some of what he said just to be sure, as I had no idea.

A few years ago there was a contraception drive that was showing good results. Unwanted pregnancies down, especially for those who couldn't even feed themselves, STDs down in huge numbers, especially HIV+. The cost to the health care system in anti retro viral medicines down in the millions of US dollars worth etc etc.

Then came elections. Notwithstanding the ones wishing to make being gay a capital offence or the ones standing on making sex illegal for two years to make AIDS die out.   No. The ones that got in were the worst.

The American Christian Right in their abstinence ideas bankrolled enough politicians to stop the government funded contraception.

Starving babies, huge rises in STDs and no money to prevent them being fatal for thousands and thousands of people.

Christian persecution? Amazing the wicked things you do when you get Jesus to agree with your personality disorder.   Im sure other religions persecute whole countries but as Keith said, let's keep this thread about Christians eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Oct 13 - 01:29 AM

"I should have thought your questions answered in my 2 previous posts, Jim. What are you still not clear about?"
Apologies Mike, I cross posted with your last message - a re-occurring problem with my now self-imposed habit of letting my thoughts sort themselves out before I press the send button - still tend to knee-jerk though.
As you say, the problem is far from black and white.
Throughout my life the church has ruled supreme in countries like Ireland, particularly on subjects like abortion and contraception.
Over the last decade things have changed a little, most of these changes having been brought about by the clerical abuse revelations and on-going The Magdalene Laundries horrors.
The Hallapanavar case has forced the Government to tinker with the termination laws which were based on church teachings - a long way to go yet but a stumble in the right direction.
The situation in the South is still as described by the Family Planning Association statement (09 Oct 13 - 03:20 PM) the only way to obtain a termination of pregnancy is to prove that the life of the mother is at risk (a near impossible task) - we still have 1,000 women a year shipping themselves to Britain for terminations that have been legal there for half a century - but at least a teetering step.
It remains to be seen how the church and their Pro-Life (sic) fanatics will deal with the evolving situation.
The situation in the Six Northern counties remain as described.
Pregnancy termination is only one of the problems left by the legacy of church omnipotence.
I would still have to ship any of my children forty miles if I wished them to have a mixed or non-denominational education, and then, I they would have to cope with poor facilities and overcrowded conditions.
The church is well aware of how important education is in maintaining its grip, and, despite the child abuse scandals, is fighting tooth-and-nail to ascertain that things remain as they always have been, particularly with primary school education.
Those of my generation still remain committed to the church:
Not so long ago a victim of child abuse was booed out of church for protesting at the visit of a Bishop who was involved in those scandals.
The Government is footing a large part of the compensation costs to the victims who are successful in their legal action.
Two Magdalene Sisters involved in the Laundry scandal spoke on a radio interview, declared them and their fellow abusers totally innocent of all wrongdoings and described their victims as "the sweepings of the street".
Four wealthy denominations of nuns involved in the Laundries have refused to donate a penny towards compensating their victims.
To deny the effects of the church on peoples minds' and bodies, as is being done here, is shamefully and inhumanly dishonest, and if it were a widely held view it would guarantee the continuance of persecution and abuse - hopefully it is becoming confined to fanatics such as our own resident one.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Oct 13 - 02:59 AM

Keith, who only wants to talk about the persecution of Christians by Muslims

No. Just highlighting the victims not the perpetrators, who are not all of the same faith anyway and some of none (N Korea)

We had the same laws here well within my lifetime.
I imagine most countries did.
I would not impose my values on another culture.

I would welcome discussion of any denial of the right of belief, but not the various restrictions on abortion in different states.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Oct 13 - 07:06 AM

List of Countries where Abortion is illegal
Angola,
Central African Rep.Chad
Congo
Benin
Gabon
Guinea-Bissau
Kenya
Madagascar,
Mauritius,
Mauritania,
Senegal,
Somalia,
Uganda.
Afghanistan,
Iran,
Egypt,
Lebanon,
Libya,
Oman,
Syria,
United Arab Emirates
Yemen.
Bangladesh,
Myanmar,
Indonesia,
Laos,
Papua New Guinea
Philippines
Sri Lanka
Malta
Colombia,
Ireland
Brazil,
Guatemala,
Haiti,
Honduras,
Nicaragua,
Panama,
Venezuela,
Paraguay,
Dominican Republic
Chile,
El Salvador
Mexico
Sudan (r)
Cote d'Ivoire
Lesotho
Mali
Niger
Ta
- See more at: http://www.whichcountry.co/countries-where-abortion-is-illegal/#sthash.6waRK9g6.dpuf

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Oct 13 - 08:22 AM

"We had the same laws here well within my lifetime."
.,,.
Not quite clear to me what you refer to here, Keith. What 'laws'? and the 'same' as what?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Oct 13 - 08:40 AM

The English abortion law was only liberalised in 1968.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Oct 13 - 09:23 AM

So, the issue of abortion in different cultures is very interesting and would make a good thread.
This one is about people persecuted for their belief.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kelly-james-clark/christianity-most-persecuted-religion_b_2402644.html

Extract.
In early November, German Chancellor Angela Merkel declared that Christianity is "the most persecuted religion in the world." Although met with predictable criticism, Rupert Short's recent research report for Civitas UK confirms Merkel's claim -- we may not want to hear it, but Christianity is in peril, like no other religion. While this is a contest no one wants to win, Short shows that "Christians are targeted more than any other body of believers." Short is the author of the recently published Christianophobia: A Faith Under Attack. He is concerned that "200 million Christians (10 percent of the global total) are socially disadvantaged, harassed or actively oppressed for their beliefs."

Christianity is facing elimination in its Biblical homeland. Between a half and two-thirds of Christians in the Middle East have departed or been killed over the past century. Short attributes the intolerance and violence towards Christians to the rising Islamicization of Middle Eastern countries. Some of the oppression is government sanctioned and some government permitted; most is government ignored.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Oct 13 - 11:09 AM

They deserve to be persecuted

Not a question of "deserving" it - its a question of karmic destiny and/or not being surprised that its coming back to bite them in the ass, Kevin.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Oct 13 - 03:10 PM

So they deserve it.
They are to blame for ancient history.
Your Karma, as a white American, is to be enslaved or massacred, right Greg?
And as Musket said, their suffering and deaths are "hilarious."

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Oct 13 - 05:51 PM

Your Karma, as a white American, is to be enslaved or massacred, right Greg?

Wrong. My people were Quakers.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Oct 13 - 06:03 PM

Right.
You are a white American.
White Americans had slaves and massacred native Americans.
You deserve the same.
That is your karma, whatever.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Oct 13 - 06:06 PM

You are as much guilty of historical crimes as any dirt poor christian being murdered tonight.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Oct 13 - 06:15 PM

You are a white American.

Am I Keith? What makes you so sure?