Forcing a woman to be pregnant when emergency contraception is available is NOT "compassionate care". Nor is it "protection of religious conscience" for the woman denied contraception.

It's still all about imposing medieval religious values on the unwilling and the vulnerable.

"catholic hospitals do provide emergency contraception ..., but not if tests indicate ovulation". In other words not if it is needed.

"Two patients", one of which is a mutlicellular mass wholly within and dependent upon the other competent adult. Who has the legal standing to speak for either of them? Certainly not the Catholic church or its medical minions.

The choice for health care providers is to provide a full spectrum of medically (not theologically) acceptable services or stop holding themselves out to the public as full-service providers.

I believe we are missing the point. What if you were the child in the womb? (What if you were on the train going to the extermination camp... see http://repentamerica.com/singalittlelouder.html)

There is nothing unacceptable medically with allowing a child to be born naturally, rather than ripping it out unnaturally from it's mother (be it mechanically or chemically).

In the case of rape, etc. Adoption is most certainly an option. Why does the child get punished?? If we want to kill someone, why does the innocent baby get it... perhaps the offender should get proper punishment, so we don't have more ladies being victimized? Hmmm?

From the opposite perspective of Mr. Skelton, "forcing a [child] to [DIE] when [many people are hoping to adopt him/her] is [absolutely] NOT "compassionate care."

Hi katie,
I realize that adoption is an option. But asking a woman to carry the child of her rapist, boy that sure is asking alot. Shouldn't she have emrgency contraception, should she want it? Given the leniency of the legal system, I think the rapist often gets an easier road than his victim.

Hey dryfly,
Every option to a victimized woman is "a lot." Whichever road she takes, it's going to be tough. If she choses to carry her child full term and adopt him out, she may still feel at times as if she "abandoned" him, but can overall knows that she did what was best for all parties.

However, when she covers up the situation by using contraception or abortion it gives her a reason to feel guilty about the situation - the man took something from her, then she turned around and took something from that child. The feeling will go with her the rest of her life, whether she suppresses it or not. That guilt is terrible compared to the pseudo-guilt that comes from being victimized.

The God of the Bible is SO good - he allows one into Heaven no matter how grotesque their sin, if the only repent and trust in Him for remission!

Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
Isaiah 1:18

A blob of cells is NOT a child, regardless of what your Bronze Age theology tells you. That's nothing but emotional pandering. If a woman doesn't have sovereignty over her own body, who does? Who decides? Who has the right to decide for her? More importantly, who dares presume the authority to make the decision for her? I'll bet a paycheck they won't step up to provide support for the "child" for the next 18 years.

If "God" doesn't care enough about it to make a personal appearance and state "his" position, then those who claim religious authority should mind their own business. Let them be an example for others by applying their specious "values" to their own lives instead of dictating and demanding everyone bow to them.

As for the hospitals - no Plan B, no federal funding. If they don't want to provide legitimate medical care that meets modern standards, let them do it on their own dime, NOT WITH MY TAXES. I'm sure there's still a market for physicians who consider leeches and alchemy to be modern technology.

BTW: If "The God of the Bible is SO good", then why does he order wholesale genocide, send plagues and pestilence, and torture his most loyal believers? (And that's just the Bible - don't get me started on today's world.)

Mr. Skelton - A bit narrow minded, perhaps? Alchemy? please!

Current scientific data has concluded unmistakably - Conception marks the beginning of human life. To disagree with that is to go back to when small = simple (the evolution lie). Just because the blob of cells is tiny - it's meticuliously intricate. You're also a blob of cells, when you think about it, just much bigger. I would like to know what makes your blob so important that you can decide what may happen to other blobs.

The unborn is a separate individual from the mother. Biologically speaking, it is a scientific fact that the mother and fetus are separate organisms. While the baby is dependent on the mother, it is still a distinct individual. Please consider the following evidences:

* Many women carry babies with a different blood type than their own.
* Women may be carrying a male child.
* The fetus has a DNA fingerprint completely distinct from the mother.
* If the embryo of black parents is transplanted into a white mother, she will still have a black baby.
* Early in development the fetus has its own hands, feet, heart, skin, and eyes.

And, just to let you know - The God of the Bible is STILL good! It's the hearts of men that are desperately wicked. He is only doing justice when he pronounces judgments. He wouldn't be a good god if he didn't punish evil. He himself doesn't torture his believers. It's outside persecution that he allows in His grace to strengthen or bring home His own.

Why he would have to "come down" & make his opinion know is odd to me. His words are preserved in His book...

Ecclesisates 11:5 As thou knowest not what is the way of the spirit, nor how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child: even so thou knowest not the works of God who maketh all.

Luke 2:5 To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.

Exodus 21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished...

To God, it's a "child." And, if you are going to slay "the children" (Isa. 57:5) God will execute proper judgment

As a woman who is almost 30 I am so pleased to see the open minded comments. Who are any of you to tell me or my peers what to do with our bodies… especially if our bodies have been violated.
Katie,
I’m sad for you today and hopeful for your tomorrow… the world is not perfect and while adoption is an option…it’s not the only answer

Finally, a worthwhile comment? Thank you for bringing up the 'mind your own house' point! Don't you just love people who spend all their time deciding how others should live their lives? Katie, do you own a mirror? When you no longer see sin there, then return to preaching.

I'm truly interested in finding out what "on my mind" meant by being hopeful for my tomorrow... Am I to stop looking at the facts and lose my sense of reality? Should I espouse the accepted "treatment" methods regardless of what they actually do?

Sane, yes I own a mirror (lol). I'm sorry, but I can't wait until I'm perfect to spread God's word. I have the "new spirit" of the Lord dwelling in me which CANNOT sin... but I definitely still have to deal with the old sin nature of my flesh which LOVES to sin.

I'm only a sinner, saved by GRACE! : )