NationStates Jolt Archive

http://00hell.blog.co.uk/2009/03/05/abortion-for-9yr-old-rape-victim-is-murder-says-catholic-archbishop-5699747/

http://www.radionetherlands.nl/news/international/6202027/Nineyearold-rape-victim-has-abortion

Not quite, but almost so. The church is trying to sue the mother for murder, and tried to prevent the abortion in a risky pregnancy, of a 9-year old.

I would like to point out that I know more about religion than this Archbishop, as well as more about morals, and, well, more about anything. I would also like to point out that that is not a merit.

GODS, I want to gouge this man's eyes off!

No Ebil Mozlems are involved, thus not newsworthy.

;)

Despite the very misleading title...

D'oh.

On a more serious note, this just goes to show how often religious officials have a serious disconnect with medical reality. It's one thing if an adult or even a late teen tries to carry a child, but a nine-year old? Even if both survive the health of both are going to be severely wrecked.

I'm fairly certain that only the Pope can excommunicate someone...

Otherwise it's like me walking into the Oval Office and saying--"STOP! I HEREBY VETO THIS BILL!"

On a more serious note, this just goes to show how often religious officials have a serious disconnect with medical reality. It's one thing if an adult or even a late teen tries to carry a child, but a nine-year old? Even if both survive the health of both are going to be severely wrecked.

The good archbishop doesn't give a damn.

I'm fairly certain that only the Pope can excommunicate someone...

Otherwise it's like me walking into the Oval Office and saying--"STOP! I HEREBY VETO THIS BILL!"

Latae sententiae.

This is actually really sick. Not only that a 9 year old is pregnent, but that the Archbishop is being a tool.

Latae sententiae.

I learn new stupid things about my religion every day, I suppose.

This is actually really sick. Not only that a 9 year old is pregnent, but that the Archbishop is being a tool.

Well, "was" pregnant.

On other news, the Church decided to drop the attempt to prosecute the mother for murder, because they realized it wouldn't stick.

Aren't they nice?

In b4 DEY KILLD TEH BABYZ

In b4 DEY KILLD TEH BABYZ

I swear, I'm so angry my response to that remark will be "let the fuckers die, they deserve to, screw them".

I swear, I'm so angry my response to that remark will be "let the fuckers die, they deserve to, screw them".

Deep breath.

Not quite, but almost so. The church is trying to sue the mother for murder, and tried to prevent the abortion in a risky pregnancy, of a 9-year old.

I am surprised the bishop did not demand that the girl marry the father of the twins, with no possibility of divorce. After paying the biological father of the girl (or his relatives) a few pieces of silver of course.

I am surprised the bishop did not demand that the girl marry the father of the twins, with no possibility of divorce. After paying the biological father of the girl (or his relatives) a few pieces of silver of course.

Why do you hate babies?

I am surprised the bishop did not demand that the girl marry the father of the twins, with no possibility of divorce. After paying the biological father of the girl (or his relatives) a few pieces of silver of course.

In his old age and dementia, he forgot to.

Why do you hate babies?

God told me to. Cannot go against god and be humane, now can I ? That would be wrong. The archbishop says so.

God told me to. Cannot go against god and be humane, now can I ? That would be wrong. The archbishop says so.

Thank you, I needed that giggle.

I'm fairly certain that only the Pope can excommunicate someone...

Otherwise it's like me walking into the Oval Office and saying--"STOP! I HEREBY VETO THIS BILL!"

That would actually be funny to see.

As for the article, epic fail on the Roman Catholic. Apparently they have no medical doctors on their payroll....you know, someone to tell them that a 9 year old having a baby would kill her...and the baby....you know, common sense...

As for the article, epic fail on the Roman Catholic. Apparently they have no medical doctors on their payroll....you know, someone to tell them that a 9 year old having a baby would kill her...and the baby....you know, common sense...

They do. That doesn't mean that archbishops listen to them if it is inconvenient.

That would actually be funny to see.

As for the article, epic fail on the Roman Catholic. Apparently they have no medical doctors on their payroll....you know, someone to tell them that a 9 year old having a baby would kill her...and the baby....you know, common sense...

Thats the thing. They know it would kill the girl.


They just dont care.

Not that I don't agree that this is despicable and disgusting, but that's got to be one of the most misleading thread titles in the history of NSG. It doesn't even remotely resemble the actual situation being discussed in the thread.

Thats the thing. They know it would kill the girl.


They just dont care.

Hmm, I may print this article out and the next person who ask me why I converted from Catholicism to Paganism, I'll just hand them a copy of the article.

I'm fairly certain that only the Pope can excommunicate someone...
You are thoroughly mistaken.

Wow this serves as a great example of how fake and purely fraudulent religions are. To be angry at anyone who performs an act of compassion such as the abortion the doctors performed is insane. Yes the lives of the twins are prevented but in all honesty there was a good chance both they and their 9 year old mother would not survive.

Yes the lives of the twins are prevented but in all honesty there was a good chance both they and their 9 year old mother would not survive.

The lives of the twins would have been prevented as well if stepdaddy had not fucked the little girl. One assumes the Archbishop will therefor now call upon the justice system to release stepdaddy immediately, so he can continue his noble work.

Not that I don't agree that this is despicable and disgusting, but that's got to be one of the most misleading thread titles in the history of NSG. It doesn't even remotely resemble the actual situation being discussed in the thread.

I have to agree. Someone needs to change the title....

Hmm, I may print this article out and the next person who ask me why I converted from Catholicism to Paganism, I'll just hand them a copy of the article.

Yes, because clearly this same incident happens constantly all over the globe and is not an isolated and horrible abuse of authority on the part of someone who is not indicative of organized religion as a whole.

Yes, because clearly this same incident happens constantly all over the globe and is not an isolated and horrible abuse of authority on the part of someone who is not indicative of organized religion as a whole.

It does, however, highlight issues with Catholic doctrine.

And an Archbishop is pretty high up.

It does, however, highlight issues with Catholic doctrine.

And an Archbishop is pretty high up.

He's the highest church authority in Pernambuco state. He's the Archbishop of Recife, its capital.

Mind you, Pernambuco isn't a hellhole of a state, no matter how much this idiot makes it seem so.

(I'm not from Pernambuco, neither am I from around it, I'm from Minas Gerais, further south.)

And an Archbishop is pretty high up.

Maybe he ran up against that business principle that states that people tend to get promoted one level past their level of competence. (I don't remember what it's called, it's The (Some Guy's Name) Principle.)

but that's got to be one of the most misleading thread titles in the history of NSG. It doesn't even remotely resemble the actual situation being discussed in the thread.

I'm going to have to agree with this. That's a headline worthy of the Weekly World News or possibly The New York Times.

Maybe he ran up against that business principle that states that people tend to get promoted one level past their level of competence. (I don't remember what it's called, it's The (Some Guy's Name) Principle.)

Peter, IIRC.

I'm going to have to agree with this. That's a headline worthy of the Weekly World News or possibly The New York Times.

Really? New York Times? You had to work in a dig?

How the fuck does a 9 year old get pregnant? I wasn't aware that was possible.

Yes, because clearly this same incident happens constantly all over the globe and is not an isolated and horrible abuse of authority on the part of someone who is not indicative of organized religion as a whole.

It doesn't but the fact that the Archbishop didn't think about the little girl's life and instead fell back on the church doctrine. He wasn't thinking about what the right thing to do was, he was thinking about what the Church doctrine was.

I'm going to have to agree with this. That's a headline worthy of the Weekly World News or possibly The New York Times.

I'd really prefer it if you didn't associate yourself with my sentiments if you're going to be a partisan tool about it.

Really? New York Times? You had to work in a dig?

It's a throwaway joke, don't get your panties in a bunch.

It doesn't but the fact that the Archbishop didn't think about the little girl's life and instead fell back on the church doctrine. He wasn't thinking about what the right thing to do was, he was thinking about what the Church doctrine was.

My point was that if you're going to use something as a blanket condemnation of organized religion, it might work better if you didn't use an isolated horrible incident.

My point was that if you're going to use something as a blanket condemnation of organized religion, it might work better if you didn't use an isolated horrible incident.

Except that being party to (which would include having knowledge, and not acting to oppose) abortion is a 'crime' for which even the Pope can be kicked out.

That's about as definitive of 'systemic' as it can get. This particular tool was just one smiling face on the tin of the catholic brand.

Except that being party to (which would include having knowledge, and not acting to oppose) abortion is a 'crime' for which even the Pope can be kicked out. That's about as definitive of 'systemic' as it can get. This particular tool was just one smiling face on the tin of the catholic brand.

There are plenty of liberal Catholics and liberal Catholic priests who are possessed of absolutely no qualms about abortion, and they manage to function within the hierarchy.

He's a fucking asshole. What kind of moron tries to block a nine year old who's carrying twins as a result of being raped from having an abortion? The pregnancy might well have killed her.

What a fucking backward moron. I bet he would have said it was "God's will" had she died of complications.

There are plenty of liberal Catholics and liberal Catholic priests who are possessed of absolutely no qualms about abortion, and they manage to function within the hierarchy.

Which is, strangely, irrelevent. They are exceptions to the (doctrinal) rule - not the cheerful chappy in the OP.

GODS, I want to gouge this man's eyes off!

I, being Me Myself, thy LORD, hereby grant thee My permission to do so.

Now thou shalt formally ask for such permission unto all other colleagues of Mine, too; lest they become jealous of Mine and We, being Us Ourselves your LORDS, have to make you humans start some other religion wars again to sort it out.

Tell Me, that is Me Myself thy LORD, when thou art done.

:D

I, being Me Myself, thy LORD, hereby grant thee My permission to do so.

Now thou shalt formally ask for such permission unto all other colleagues of Mine, too; lest they become jealous of Mine and We, being Us Ourselves your LORDS, have to make you humans start some other religion wars again to sort it out.

Tell Me, that is Me Myself thy LORD, when thou art done.

:D

God, I need their numbers!

What a fucking backward moron. I bet he would have said it was "God's will" had she died of complications.

Didn't you know? God's will has always been subservient to the whims of those who claim to serve him. They might claim otherwise, but they're the ones holding the leash now, aren't they?

Well, they may have dropped the lawsuit, but the archbishop has excommunicated the mother and the abortion providers.

Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7926694.stm)

A Brazilian archbishop says all those who helped a child rape victim secure an abortion are to be excommunicated from the Catholic Church.
~snip~
The Catholic Church tried to intervene to prevent the abortion going ahead but the procedure was carried out on Wednesday.

Now a Church spokesman says all those involved, including the child's mother and the doctors, are to be excommunicated.

The Archbishop of Olinda and Recife, Jose Cardoso Sobrinho, told Brazil's TV Globo that the law of God was above any human law.

He said the excommunication would not apply to the child because of her age, but would affect all those who ensured the abortion was carried out.

Oh so F**king kind and generous of him.


Originally Posted by Heinleinites
There are plenty of liberal Catholics and liberal Catholic priests who are possessed of absolutely no qualms about abortion, and they manage to function within the hierarchy

No freaking wiggle room! (http://www.catholicplanet.com/articles/article78.htm)


Canon Law and Church Teaching

Canon 1398: “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.”
.
The phrase “latae sententiae” means a judgment or sentence which has already been brought, in other words, a sentence or judgment which does not need a future additional judgment from someone in authority; it refers to a type of excommunication which is automatic. Such a sentence of excommunication is incurred “by the very commission of the offense,” (CCC 2272) and does not require the future particular judgment of a case by competent authority.
...
Obtaining an Abortion

Any Catholic who deliberately and knowingly obtains a procured abortion commits a mortal sin and is also automatically excommunicated, under canon 1398.
...
Any Catholic who substantially assists another in the deliberate sin of abortion is also guilty of serious sin and also incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.
...
Believing in Abortion

Unfortunately, some Catholics obstinately deny that abortion is always immoral, and some Catholics claim that abortion can, at times, be a morally-acceptable choice, and some Catholics claim that a person can, in good conscience, choose abortion. Under the Code of Canon Law of the Roman Catholic Church, canons 751 and 1364, all such Catholics are automatically excommunicated for the sin of heresy.
.
This sentence of latae sententiae excommunication applies to any Catholic who denies that abortion is gravely immoral, regardless of whether they keep this denial hidden or publicly reveal it.
...
Promoting Abortion

Those Catholics who publicly announce their denial that abortion is always gravely immoral, or who publicly promote abortion, or who publicly argue in favor of legalized abortion, also commit a mortal sin and also incur a sentence of automatic excommunication.
...
Voting for Politicians

In general, the moral law requires Catholic voters to vote for those candidates who oppose abortion over those who favor abortion. However, there are exceptions to this general principle. For example, if a political candidate favors abortion, but is a member of a party which generally opposes abortion, a Catholic voter may, in good conscience, vote for that candidate, with the intention of giving more political power to the party which opposes abortion.



This gos beyond heartbreaking. It goes into the areas that form the reasons core of my leaving the Roman Catholic church. I can not, and will not, worship any god who allows his public face - his personal intercessors - priests/ bishops/ cardinals. and pope - to do acts of rampant cruelity such as this.

That little girls life was in danger and they are punishing those who saved her? Shame on that wicked, wicked man who presumes to speak for that *god*

and as for the father. I can't say what I'd like to see done to him. He had best remember though, that what goes around comes around. May he get what he has earned!

1) Edit the title, please. Muckracking journalistic style is good. Yellow journalistic style is bad. That sensational and wildly inaccurate headline is yellow journalism.

2) I don't know about the people actually involved with the case, but if it were me, I would be very grateful to be excommunicated from any church that would back up such an evil fucktard of an archbishop. [grossly inappropriate]It's nice that there are still some high ranking officials in the Catholic Church determined to carry on the proud tradition of having no problem with little children being used for sex.[/grossly inappropriate]

3) How did a 9-year-old get pregnant? Medical anomaly? Or what the heck was in her diet? I mean, I know some girls start puberty quite early, but -- sheesh.

4) Finally, I was too lazy to do more than skim over the articles. What is being done with the scum who impregnanted the child?

The Stepfather's been arrested, apparently after he tried to flee the region.

And yes with the trend of females entering puberty at ever younger ages, a nine year old could have started menarche and been impregnated.

From what I understand you can get pregnant after you first ovulate. I know someone who had their first period when they were nine....

There are plenty of liberal Catholics and liberal Catholic priests who are possessed of absolutely no qualms about abortion, and they manage to function within the hierarchy.

An additional thought:

If this particular guy is operating against the will of the governing body of the Catholic church, then we could expect something like a special dispensation for the mother, etc. So - I'll accept your claim when I see the Pope undo the excommunications.

3) How did a 9-year-old get pregnant? Medical anomaly? Or what the heck was in her diet? I mean, I know some girls start puberty quite early, but -- sheesh.

An interesting aside; the youngest mother in medical history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lina_Medina

GnI- it's worse than that - the Arch bishop doesn't have to do it.

It's automatic.

See the link and quote I posted above.

GnI- it's worse than that - the Arch bishop doesn't have to do it.

It's automatic.

See the link and quote I posted above.

Oh, I know - I mentioned it earlier, also. I'm giving Heinleinites an 'out', of sorts. I'm saying his argument can be considered to not be 100% horseshit, IF...

Sad and this after I heard that the Catholic Church had a meeting on evolution and refused to invite any ID people.

ah, okay

and as for the father. I can't say what I'd like to see done to him. He had best remember though, that what goes around comes around. May he get what he has earned!

Father-in-law. And he's in jail. On a high-profile abortion charge. And yes, we have the same prison culture regarding rape as you do. His * will become an O.

The Stepfather's been arrested, apparently after he tried to flee the region.

Specifically, to Bahia State. But he was arrested.

Father-in-law. And he's in jail. On a high-profile abortion charge. And yes, we have the same prison culture regarding rape as you do. His * will become an O.

If they have the prison culture they probably won't even touch his *. They'll just shank him and leave him to die. Going to jail on child molestation is an unspoken death sentence without heavy supervision and quarantine.

If they have the prison culture they probably won't even touch his *. They'll just shank him and leave him to die. Going to jail on child molestation is an unspoken death sentence without heavy supervision and quarantine.

Or this.

I did sorta like the joke, though.

Sad and this after I heard that the Catholic Church had a meeting on evolution and refused to invite any ID people.

that's only because they find ID to be too far from the bible, but not quite a excommunicate able offense.

Apparently they have no medical doctors on their payroll....you know, someone to tell them that a 9 year old having a baby would kill her
sorry to be a pedant, but possibly not. It depends more on the size and health of the girl, not her age.
You just have to look at the size of some of the Asian women who have had successful pregnancies to see that small size doesn't necessarily equate with death.

sorry to be a pedant, but possibly not. It depends more on the size and health of the girl, not her age.
You just have to look at the size of some of the Asian women who have had successful pregnancies to see that small size doesn't necessarily equate with death.

Except those small Asian women tend to be physically mature and ready for childbearing. Even with unnaturally precocious puberty, a 9-year old is a 9-year old. Look at childbirth mortality throughout history as an example.

The Stepfather's been arrested, apparently after he tried to flee the region.

And yes with the trend of females entering puberty at ever younger ages, a nine year old could have started menarche and been impregnated.
I have read in various articles about health trends that some authorities are questioning why the trend to earlier puberty is happening and that international health organizations are working to compile statistics to see if it has to do with lifestyles or other environmental conditions. Obviously, you would expect significant variation among individuals, including some rare extreme variations like what Sdaeriji posted, but a general trend towards a shift to younger onset of puberty is strange. Is it historically cyclical, or is it being caused by something? Because, obviously, younger girls are not better able to give birth, so...one wonders.

An interesting aside; the youngest mother in medical history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lina_Medina
That shit is wack. Biology freaks me out sometimes.

sorry to be a pedant, but possibly not. It depends more on the size and health of the girl, not her age.
You just have to look at the size of some of the Asian women who have had successful pregnancies to see that small size doesn't necessarily equate with death.

I think that it has more to do with the maturity of the girl's body than with her physical size. Just because a girl has reached menarch doesn't mean she's physically able to bear children without damage. A nine-year-old, while possibly sexually nearly mature, is not completely developed in other areas and a pregnancy could retard or stop that development. She may not die, she'll certainly have stunted skeletal growth and other organ damage which may, among other things, prevent her from having children in the future.

I have read in various articles about health trends that some authorities are questioning why the trend to earlier puberty is happening and that international health organizations are working to compile statistics to see if it has to do with lifestyles or other environmental conditions. Obviously, you would expect significant variation among individuals, including some rare extreme variations like what Sdaeriji posted, but a general trend towards a shift to younger onset of puberty is strange. Is it historically cyclical, or is it being caused by something? Because, obviously, younger girls are not better able to give birth, so...one wonders.


That shit is wack. Biology freaks me out sometimes.

At least in the United States, there's claims that hormones used to make cows produce more milk are getting into the milk and possibly accelerating puberty in girls.

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/09/got-milk-got-hormones-got-a-problem-with-that/

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/08/health/08real.html

At least in the United States, there's claims that hormones used to make cows produce more milk are getting into the milk and possibly accelerating puberty in girls.

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/09/got-milk-got-hormones-got-a-problem-with-that/

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/08/health/08real.html
Yeah, I've heard that. I'm not entirely convinced, but then, there is a lot of shit in the food chain that didn't used to be there, and there is ample evidence of the significant changes in physical development that changes in diet and lifestyle can have.

On the other hand, I personally have not come across any explanations -- only articles raising the question and saying that data is lacking about this -- about why American women in the 19th century were hourglass shaped, turned noticeably tubular in the 1920s, and then gradually got more broad-shouldered and bigger breasted (before implants) as the 20th century went on. Diet? Lifestyle? Genetic vagaries?

It's a mildly interesting question.

http://00hell.blog.co.uk/2009/03/05/abortion-for-9yr-old-rape-victim-is-murder-says-catholic-archbishop-5699747/

http://www.radionetherlands.nl/news/international/6202027/Nineyearold-rape-victim-has-abortion

Not quite, but almost so. The church is trying to sue the mother for murder, and tried to prevent the abortion in a risky pregnancy, of a 9-year old.

I would like to point out that I know more about religion than this Archbishop, as well as more about morals, and, well, more about anything. I would also like to point out that that is not a merit.

GODS, I want to gouge this man's eyes off!

Sick. What the flip is wrong with some people, no?

On the other hand, I personally have not come across any explanations -- only articles raising the question and saying that data is lacking about this -- about why American women in the 19th century were hourglass shaped, turned noticeably tubular in the 1920s, and then gradually got more broad-shouldered and bigger breasted (before implants) as the 20th century went on. Diet? Lifestyle? Genetic vagaries?

It's a mildly interesting question.

It's somewhat interesting, especially when you factor in societal aesthetics. But if diet was solely the answer, then we would not see any trends towards broader shoulders and bigger breasts in general across the board for most societies prior to industrialized agriculture wouldn't we?

Although if we expand on this, then we'd run into the wider range of ethnic physical differences, like the classical one of Chinese being shorter in general to say, someone of German descent. Examining it from the diet and lifestyle perspective might give some answers, maybe, or a whole lot of nothing. It seems somewhat unlikely the average feudal era Germans fundamentally ate any better than their Chinese counterparts. Or maybe it is the difference between wheat based and rice based diets?

A rather big question mark no?

Unless she is planning another abortion, the excommunication is lifted the next time she attends confession/reconciliation

It's somewhat interesting, especially when you factor in societal aesthetics. But if diet was solely the answer, then we would not see any trends towards broader shoulders and bigger breasts in general across the board for most societies prior to industrialized agriculture wouldn't we?

Although if we expand on this, then we'd run into the wider range of ethnic physical differences, like the classical one of Chinese being shorter in general to say, someone of German descent. Examining it from the diet and lifestyle perspective might give some answers, maybe, or a whole lot of nothing. It seems somewhat unlikely the average feudal era Germans fundamentally ate any better than their Chinese counterparts. Or maybe it is the difference between wheat based and rice based diets?

A rather big question mark no?
I can tell you that since WWII when Western diets have been introduced in Japan, the Japanese have gotten taller and women have been fuller in their breasts than prior generations if that helps.

I can tell you that since WWII when Western diets have been introduced in Japan, the Japanese have gotten taller and women have been fuller in their breasts than prior generations if that helps.

Fair enough, but you have to ponder about Europeans and East Asians circa 1500s before there was industrial agriculture and regular high protein/fat meals. There was already a marked difference in body size and shape even then. If diet is the reason, did the European diet have a fundamentally higher intake of food in general, or was it the differences in what they ate that accounted for the varied sizes?

At least in the United States, there's claims that hormones used to make cows produce more milk are getting into the milk and possibly accelerating puberty in girls.

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/09/got-milk-got-hormones-got-a-problem-with-that/

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/08/health/08real.html

I thought menarche was linked to critical body mass so surely changes in diets across a population would be a more likely reason.

Edit : Nevermind. Articles agree

This news have made me shake with anger.

http://00hell.blog.co.uk/2009/03/05/abortion-for-9yr-old-rape-victim-is-murder-says-catholic-archbishop-5699747/

http://www.radionetherlands.nl/news/international/6202027/Nineyearold-rape-victim-has-abortion

Not quite, but almost so. The church is trying to sue the mother for murder, and tried to prevent the abortion in a risky pregnancy, of a 9-year old.

I would like to point out that I know more about religion than this Archbishop, as well as more about morals, and, well, more about anything. I would also like to point out that that is not a merit.

GODS, I want to gouge this man's eyes off!

Its just more religious wackjobs trying to say that the man in the sky is not really worth caring about after all. Remember, the whole concept behind Catholicism is "Shit happens, and as long as its to you its your own fault."

I'm fairly certain that only the Pope can excommunicate someone...

Otherwise it's like me walking into the Oval Office and saying--"STOP! I HEREBY VETO THIS BILL!"

Lol, totally do it... but take a picture, I want to see Obama's face when you do.

I think it's very helpful of the Catholics to expel from their ranks anyone who has even a tiny sliver of human decency.

I also think it's adorable to have threads like the one on "liberal Catholicism" on the front page along with this one. If you support the Catholic Church, THIS is what you're supporting. If you can't accept that then stop calling yourself Catholic, and for the love of all that's good please stop giving them money so that they can scream insults at 9-year-old rape victims.

I'm sure I've heard of this story before....

Whatever, the archbishop is a dick, but I suspect most people would get over being excommunicated.

It's somewhat interesting, especially when you factor in societal aesthetics. But if diet was solely the answer, then we would not see any trends towards broader shoulders and bigger breasts in general across the board for most societies prior to industrialized agriculture wouldn't we?

Although if we expand on this, then we'd run into the wider range of ethnic physical differences, like the classical one of Chinese being shorter in general to say, someone of German descent. Examining it from the diet and lifestyle perspective might give some answers, maybe, or a whole lot of nothing. It seems somewhat unlikely the average feudal era Germans fundamentally ate any better than their Chinese counterparts. Or maybe it is the difference between wheat based and rice based diets?

A rather big question mark no?
Different grains have a definite effect, as do different proteins. Several years ago, when Japan was economically flush and spending shitloads of money, The Economist ran an article about a social shock hitting the culture of that country because their children, especially the girls, were getting bigger. With the rise of affluence, Japanese families were eating more imported wheat and beef and furnishing their homes with more western style chairs, etc. The difference was being seen immediately in the physical development of children, especially girls. With the change of lifestyle -- sitting up right in chairs, etc -- young people of both sexes lost the traditionally seen shortening and bowing of the leg bones (which is not genetic but determined by body usage). With the more western diet, young Japanese were growing taller and bigger in bone and muscle mass (also not genetic). The dietary difference in female development was especially marked, with Japanese girls in the 90s growing up to a full head taller than their parents. All of a sudden, there was culture shock as all the older Japanese found themselves surrounded by all these tall, muscular, long-legged women with money, jobs and education. And all of it was traced to changes in diet and lifestyle. :eek:

To a rather profound degree, we are what we eat.

Different grains have a definite effect, as do different proteins. Several years ago, when Japan was economically flush and spending shitloads of money, The Economist ran an article about a social shock hitting the culture of that country because their children, especially the girls, were getting bigger. With the rise of affluence, Japanese families were eating more imported wheat and beef and furnishing their homes with more western style chairs, etc. The difference was being seen immediately in the physical development of children, especially girls. With the change of lifestyle -- sitting up right in chairs, etc -- young people of both sexes lost the traditionally seen shortening and bowing of the leg bones (which is not genetic but determined by body usage). With the more western diet, young Japanese were growing taller and bigger in bone and muscle mass (also not genetic). The dietary difference in female development was especially marked, with Japanese girls in the 90s growing up to a full head taller than their parents. All of a sudden, there was culture shock as all the older Japanese found themselves surrounded by all these tall, muscular, long-legged women with money, jobs and education. And all of it was traced to changes in diet and lifestyle. :eek:

To a rather profound degree, we are what we eat.

Big-breasted Japanese girls! *_*

Er... Sorry? You were saying?

Uhm. Oh, er, yes! I agree.

Words fail me... :(

On the other hand, I personally have not come across any explanations -- only articles raising the question and saying that data is lacking about this -- about why American women in the 19th century were hourglass shaped, turned noticeably tubular in the 1920s, and then gradually got more broad-shouldered and bigger breasted (before implants) as the 20th century went on. Diet? Lifestyle? Genetic vagaries?


IIRC, women weren't largely tubular in the 20s, that was merely what was considered attractive at the time.* It's similar in a way to the heroin chic of the 90s.

*Well, what popular culture termed attractive. Whether it was actually what was considered attractive is another story entirely.

I think it's very helpful of the Catholics to expel from their ranks anyone who has even a tiny sliver of human decency.

I also think it's adorable to have threads like the one on "liberal Catholicism" on the front page along with this one. If you support the Catholic Church, THIS is what you're supporting. If you can't accept that then stop calling yourself Catholic, and for the love of all that's good please stop giving them money so that they can scream insults at 9-year-old rape victims.

Lumping all Catholics with morons like these is no different from going "Ebil Mozlemz lulz". If there weren't decent Catholics, there wouldn't have been such things like Liberation Theology or Vatican II for the backwards conservative faction to squash completely.

On the other hand, I personally have not come across any explanations -- only articles raising the question and saying that data is lacking about this -- about why American women in the 19th century were hourglass shaped, turned noticeably tubular in the 1920s, and then gradually got more broad-shouldered and bigger breasted (before implants) as the 20th century went on. Diet? Lifestyle? Genetic vagaries?

It's a mildly interesting question.

I think that particular bit was most likely down to very, very tight corsets.

I think that particular bit was most likely down to very, very tight corsets.

I thought you were going to wear one of those for me...

Lumping all Catholics with morons like these is no different from going "Ebil Mozlemz lulz".

The description "Morons like these" seems to fit an Archbishop and the current Pope. So the comparison with the ebil muslemz lolz is not entirely valid - these people are the ones that are supposed to explain what being a Catholic actually means.

Lumping all Catholics with morons like these is no different from going "Ebil Mozlemz lulz".

No, it's not.

'Morons like these' are adhering to the absolute rule of the church. This is pretty much the exact opposite of "ebil Mozlemz lulz".

IIRC, women weren't largely tubular in the 20s, that was merely what was considered attractive at the time.* It's similar in a way to the heroin chic of the 90s.

*Well, what popular culture termed attractive. Whether it was actually what was considered attractive is another story entirely.

Also, a lot of women were corseted much of their lives in the 19th century, so that helps explain the hourglass figure.

Ah, Cabra's already said it. =)

Also, a lot of women were corseted much of their lives in the 19th century, so that helps explain the hourglass figure.

Ah, Cabra's already said it. =)

F**k, they must have suffered for their art.

And the Chinese women with bound feet.

And all the other extremely dedicated followers of fashion.

The description "Morons like these" seems to fit an Archbishop and the current Pope. So the comparison with the ebil muslemz lolz is not entirely valid - these people are the ones that are supposed to explain what being a Catholic actually means.

No, it's not.

'Morons like these' are adhering to the absolute rule of the church. This is pretty much the exact opposite of "ebil Mozlemz lulz".

But as Vatican II showed, the entire philosophy of the Church has the potential to change with leadership. It's unfortunate the recent trend in Vatican leadership favors conservative old guards up to and including the Sith Pope, but to say that Catholics are incapable of human decency without following the spirit of their faith to me isn't that far off from the vitriolic Ebil Mozlems screed from the likes of Kimchi. What the Church needs is leadership with a different vision, perhaps if and when Palpatine goes tumbling down the reactor shaft.

God, I need their numbers!


5.Thou knowest them in the deep of thy hearth.
6.I, being Myself Yuppity It's Me Again,
7.can give thee a hint, this hint being
8.the product of the number of the Virtues
9.by the one-hundred-eleventh part
10.of the number of the Beast.


I am thy LORD. I'm efficient when I want to do so, and also I speak in quotes sometimes, at My Own Self's whim, because it's cooler than using small caps, but doing it all the time would annoy Me.

I am thy LORD. I'm efficient when I want to do so, and also I speak in quotes sometimes, at My Own Self's whim, because it's cooler than using small caps, but doing it all the time would annoy Me.

So, their numbers are the answer to the big question of life, the universe, and everything?

But as Vatican II showed, the entire philosophy of the Church has the potential to change with leadership.

Awesome. Find me the evidence of the Vatican's philosophy on abortion changing, please.

Something occurred to me.

If the archbishop ever has kidney stones, he'd sure as hell better NEVER complain about passing them.

Something occurred to me.

If the archbishop ever has kidney stones, he'd sure as hell better NEVER complain about passing them.

Firstly, why on earth would this occur to you? Secondly, what the hell does that have to do with anything? He doesn't oppose abortion because he wants women to be in pain.

Firstly, why on earth would this occur to you? Secondly, what the hell does that have to do with anything? He doesn't oppose abortion because he wants women to be in pain.

1- Because I'm insane.

2- True, he opposes abortion regardless of that. But if he wants a 9 year old to pass 10 pounds of ham through her vagina, he'd better not complain about passing kidney stones.

1- Because I'm insane.

2- True, he opposes abortion regardless of that. But if he wants a 9 year old to pass 10 pounds of ham through her vagina, he'd better not complain about passing kidney stones.

Again, why not? He doesn't oppose abortion because he wants women to hurt during childbirth, nor do I imagine he believes pregnancy and childbirth to be simple, easygoing events. The two are not connected, despite your efforts. He has every right to complain about passing kidney stones, as they are in no way related to abortion.

Again, why not? He doesn't oppose abortion because he wants women to hurt during childbirth, nor do I imagine he believes pregnancy and childbirth to be simple, easygoing events. The two are not connected, despite your efforts. He has every right to complain about passing kidney stones, as they are in no way related to abortion.

Okay, but then he'll get excommunicated by MY religion: If you have kidney stones, you have to KEEP THEM IN. :p

IIRC, women weren't largely tubular in the 20s, that was merely what was considered attractive at the time.* It's similar in a way to the heroin chic of the 90s.

*Well, what popular culture termed attractive. Whether it was actually what was considered attractive is another story entirely.

I think that particular bit was most likely down to very, very tight corsets.
I don't mean as tubular as the 1920s fashion extreme nor as hourglass as the 1890s fashion extreme. Both of those were down to underwear support garments.

But according to the various articles I've read about it over the past couple of decades (it's a very sporadically raised question) there were general trends to towards wider hips and narrower waists in normal, unrestricted bodies before the turn of the century, and afterwards, a trend towards narrower hips and less difference between shoulders, waists and hips through the 1920s-30s. Yes, it is true these were also the fashionable looks, and women who did not fit them would use underwear to pad or squish themselves into the desired shapes. But I am talking about a general trend in musculature and bone size. And these trends seem to come and go fairly fluidly. And there is an unanswered question as to why.

EDIT: Anyway, this is totally off topic. Sorry I brought it up.

...
No freaking wiggle room! (http://www.catholicplanet.com/articles/article78.htm)...

Not quite. There are examples of Catholics openly saying they are pro-choice and not being excommunicated.

An additional thought:

If this particular guy is operating against the will of the governing body of the Catholic church, then we could expect something like a special dispensation for the mother, etc. So - I'll accept your claim when I see the Pope undo the excommunications.

Heinleinites dod not claim that all Catholics are pro-choice, or that the higher bits of the hierarchy are suddenly rewriting doctrine. He claimed that there are pro-choice Catholics who continue to be Catholic even after openly proclaiming themselves to be prochoice. He happens to be correct.

The governor, who attends a Beverly Hills parish, has pointedly remarked that he is one of many Catholics who don't necessarily agree with the institutional church on such issues. In November, according to exit polls, 53 percent of Catholic voters favored Davis, while 39 percent went for Republican challenger Bill Simon, the losing gubernatorial candidate who strongly opposes abortion.

''I'm unapologetically pro-choice, and I'm not changing my position,'' Davis said after the bishop's sermon.

....

Shortly after, the National Catholic Register, a conservative Catholic weekly, reported that Weigand had threatened Davis with excommunication if he continued to receive the sacrament of communion. The bread and wine, which worshipers eat and drink at the close of Mass, is said to be the body and blood of Christ.

But Weigand, who declined to be interviewed for this story, wrote in his Feb. 8 column that he hasn't threatened Davis with excommunication or any other penalty.

Linky. (http://www.catholicsforchoice.org/news/inthenews/2003/20030215mercnews_bishoppushingdavis.asp)

The way I see it, the Church's upper hierarchy is trying to deal with a change in the laity over this issue. At this point, they can still exercise their authority with impunity over poor women from developing nations, but not powerful white men from developed nations.

Heinleinites dod not claim that all Catholics are pro-choice, or that the higher bits of the hierarchy are suddenly rewriting doctrine. He claimed that there are pro-choice Catholics who continue to be Catholic even after openly proclaiming themselves to be prochoice. He happens to be correct.


They are exceptions, and they hold an unorthodox view. They are certainly not representative... and the Church could make that official, if they so choose.

Which I basically said: "They are exceptions to the (doctrinal) rule - not the cheerful chappy in the OP"

What you just posted doesn't actually respond to my post. I almost wonder why you tacked it on there.

The way I see it, the Church's upper hierarchy is trying to deal with a change in the laity over this issue. At this point, they can still exercise their authority with impunity over poor women from developing nations, but not powerful white men from developed nations.

To be fair, he not only failed to prevent the abortion, but also everyone here thinks he's an ass.

So, their numbers are the answer to the big question of life, the universe, and everything?

Thou art a very intelligent follower. Have a complimentary bottle of wine from My vineyards.

Thou art a very intelligent follower. Have a complimentary bottle of wine from My vineyards.

I don't drink alcohol. Can it be Dr Pepper instead?

I don't drink alcohol. Can it be Dr Pepper instead?

Meh. Thy Godthat is I is mildly displeased.
Here I am with a bottle of Roc De Puisseguin Saint-Emilion (2003), Grand Vin de Bordeaux, appellation Puisseguin Saint-Emilion controllée...

Oh well, I'll drink it Myself and give thee the Dr.Pepper, if that is thy wish.

Meh. Thy God is mildly displeased.
Here I am with a bottle of Roc De Puisseguin Saint-Emilion (2003), Grand Vin de Bordeaux, appellation Puisseguin Saint-Emilion controllée...

Oh well, I'll drink it Myself and give thee the Dr.Pepper, if that is thy wish.

Thanks!

*Inhales the Dr Pepper*

On a more serious note, this just goes to show how often religious officials have a serious disconnect with medical reality. It's one thing if an adult or even a late teen tries to carry a child, but a nine-year old? Even if both survive the health of both are going to be severely wrecked.

so... given how dangerous it would have been for her to try to carry one baby, much less two..

if she had died because she didn't have the abortion, would the archbishop be excommunicated for murder, since his actions would have led to her death??????

this is evil - really evil. shame on him, every which way possible. shame on him

*Inhales the Dr Pepper*
Committed suicide, you say? Drowned himself in Dr. Pepper, you say? Oh dear, oh dear. Well have you informed his relatives? Oh, they've all drowned themselves in Coke Zero, you say? Well that's just tragic. Yes, I suppose it is better that it wasn't Diet Coke. I do feel a little better for them now, yes.
One last question, who exactly am I talking to?

But as Vatican II showed, the entire philosophy of the Church has the potential to change with leadership.
That's not entirely true. Vatican II had less to do with the leadership of John XXIII and more with a general feeling in the Church that something needed to be done. Many of the changes they implemented weren't new ideas, either; in fact, the "Americanism" that one of the Leos (forget which) was afraid was tainting the Church in the US back in early 1900s ended up as an universal change. (That was an unwieldy sentence.) Finally, the entire philosophy of the Church did not change. It's still monotheistic, has an organized, hierarchy, etc.
It's unfortunate the recent trend in Vatican leadership favors conservative old guards up to and including the Sith Pope, but to say that Catholics are incapable of human decency without following the spirit of their faith to me isn't that far off from the vitriolic Ebil Mozlems screed from the likes of Kimchi. What the Church needs is leadership with a different vision, perhaps if and when Palpatine goes tumbling down the reactor shaft.
Palpa...I mean, Benedict (he really does look like the emperor) was actually a strong proponent of Vatican II when it was in effect. I see his actions as stemming from an interest to bring back traditionalists into the "mainstream" Church and, as others have said, an astounding ignorance of the outside world.

I'm a Catholic, and I'm a little ashamed right here.

so... given how dangerous it would have been for her to try to carry one baby, much less two..

if she had died because she didn't have the abortion, would the archbishop be excommunicated for murder, since his actions would have led to her death??????


It would have been god's will. The Archbishop would have committed no crime.

That would actually be funny to see.

As for the article, epic fail on the Roman Catholic. Apparently they have no medical doctors on their payroll....you know, someone to tell them that a 9 year old having a baby would kill her...and the baby....you know, common sense...

Well, the Catholic Church has always been out of touch on issues relating to sex with underage girls.

so... given how dangerous it would have been for her to try to carry one baby, much less two..

if she had died because she didn't have the abortion, would the archbishop be excommunicated for murder, since his actions would have led to her death??????

this is evil - really evil. shame on him, every which way possible. shame on him

Of course, the crazy thing here (as opposed to sick and evil things) is that the Church isn't supposed to excommunicate for an instance of a sin or even crime. None of the pedophile priests were excommunicated.

That's what Christianity, even Roman Catholic Christianity, is all about. You can be forgiven for anything except an continuing unwillingness to accept forgiveness.

so... given how dangerous it would have been for her to try to carry one baby, much less two..

if she had died because she didn't have the abortion, would the archbishop be excommunicated for murder, since his actions would have led to her death??????

this is evil - really evil. shame on him, every which way possible. shame on him

Maybe the thought it was his baby?

Of course, the crazy thing here (as opposed to sick and evil things) is that the Church isn't supposed to excommunicate for an instance of a sin or even crime. None of the pedophile priests were excommunicated.

I was just thinking that. The more I hear about this case, the more it sounds like this archbishop is really going rogue. He sentiments are probably the same as his higher ups, but this seems "highly unorthodox," to make a bad pun.

I was just thinking that. The more I hear about this case, the more it sounds like this archbishop is really going rogue. He sentiments are probably the same as his higher ups, but this seems "highly unorthodox," to make a bad pun.

Yeah, I'm also pretty sure you have to have done something like heresy or something to get excommunicated.

Awesome. Find me the evidence of the Vatican's philosophy on abortion changing, please.

That wasn't so hard, was it? (http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_hist.htm)

Yeah, I'm also pretty sure you have to have done something like heresy or something to get excommunicated.

So heresy is worse than (perceived) murder in the eyes of the Church ?

That wasn't so hard, was it? (http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_hist.htm)

That rather depends on what you think that source said.

The official version of the Catholic church, according to your source, seems to have been a uniform condemnation of abortion - with a couple of occassions on which people argued over what, exactly, an abortion means.

So heresy is worse than (perceived) murder in the eyes of the Church ?

Well of course. They don't like the idea of you proving them wrong on something. Remember Galileo?

These religious freaks would have preferred the child died trying to give birth to two children born of child rape than abort fertilized eggs....If they could they would protest masturbation because it kills potential humans. Only an overpopulated earth causes such misery that fundamentalist freaks can thrive.
:eek:

Muravyets - yes still off topic, but ...

But according to the various articles I've read about it over the past couple of decades (it's a very sporadically raised question) there were general trends to towards wider hips and narrower waists in normal, unrestricted bodies before the turn of the century, and afterwards, a trend towards narrower hips and less difference between shoulders, waists and hips through the 1920s-30s. Yes, it is true these were also the fashionable looks, and women who did not fit them would use underwear to pad or squish themselves into the desired shapes. But I am talking about a general trend in musculature and bone size. And these trends seem to come and go fairly fluidly. And there is an unanswered question as to why.

I think, in part, it may have somthing to do with encouraged posture of the time period. If you look at victorian clothing, the way it is constructed, the woman who today could wear it, not just in general size wise, but individual measurements wise - couldn't fit into it as it takes a different posture than what women use today.

I learned this from my studies of Medieval garb, the same applies from that time as well. You can not sew from patterns of the time and have a modern woman wear them in any comfort - you have to remake them using modern patterns. We carry our 'selves' differently - the way our arms/ shoulders hang and such.

And it is also interesting to look at whether riding sidesaddle was encouraged or not at the era - riding astride does widen the hip spread and positioning of the buttocks / how much kneeling was done on a regular basis/ how much bending and lifting all of these can affect the body's build.

Corseting can confine the ribcage, keeping it from expanding completely; binding the hips can keep them from doing the same. When you start a girl child wearing such while her body is developing you are actually molding it.

Also remember that for centuries the Japanese population prided itself on eating minimally, and the bulk of protien went to the men. With the end of WWII their over all height has risen, as other have noted.

Take a look that those the Appalachians in the US. They are on the low end of the size charts - The observation by Hannibal Lector - in The Silence of the Lambs -about Clarice Starling is an accurate one- the comment that she showed some length of bone, as demonstation that her parents had gotten out of the coal mines of that region ( or something close to that, I haven't reread the book in about ten years )

An archbishop can charge someone with murder? WTF? Or will they 'suggest' the local equivalent to a D.A. to do so?

Either way, the abused child was at serious risk and was in serious risk of death do her small size, therefore there was no other option.

An archbishop can charge someone with murder? WTF? Or will they 'suggest' the local equivalent to a D.A. to do so?

He even checked with the archdiocese's lawyers, though he knew legally he could do nothing.