Symptom or disease? Excommunicating injustice

How do we decide whether to treat the symptom or the disease?

"If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell."

(Matthew 5.29-30)​

The metaphor is interesting. Taken literally, this part of the Sermon on the Mount seems to suggest that it is better to blind oneself than visually appreciate what God has endowed. Or, well, cut off your hand after wanking.

Or something similarly stupid.

Taken in a figurative context, it can be just as dangerous.

Let us consider it:

• A hand is twitching painfully because a tumor in the wrist has affected certain nerves. We must amputate.

• A hand is twitching painfully because a tumor in the brain has affected certain nerves. We must ... well, what?​

Modern medicine allows us to better locate the source of offense, so we would probably excise the tumor from the brain if possible, but we wouldn't hack off the hand.

So far, we're still in the figurative. After all, the unfortunate hand-severing wanker—one Timothy Ringstob, of whom no mention can be found after the above-linked story about cutting off his hand—would have done better to either cut off his penis or perform some sort of lobotomy on himself. In either case, he would have been closer to the offense than in removing the hand.

So far we're still in the figurative. The theme, for those who need reminding at this point, is the question of whether to treat the symptom or the disease.

Enter ... the Catholic Church. And a nine year old girl. Some family, some doctors, and a couple of old men in priestly vestments who think they have a clue.

The story so far: Doctors in Brazil recently performed the abortion of twins carried by a nine year-old. The doctors feared that the 80-pound girl could not carry the pregnancy to term without dying.

The Catholic Church has responded by excommunicating the girl's mother (for authorizing the procedure) and the doctors (for performing the procedure).

Here's a question, though: What about the alleged father of the twins, the girl's 23 year-old stepfather?

Of course he hasn't been excommunicated. Perhaps after he is convicted of the crime? Maybe?

Nope, probably not:

"It is a sad case, but the real problem is that the twins conceived were two innocent persons, who had the right to live and could not be eliminated," Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re told the Italian daily La Stampa ....

.... Upon learning of the abortion, the regional archbishop excommunicated the doctors, as well as the girl's mother. He did not excommunicate the step-father, saying the crime he is alleged to have committed, although deplorable, was not as bad as ending a fetus's life.

"The law of God is higher than any human laws," Archbishop Jose Cardoso Sobrinho said in an interview on Globo television. "When a human law is against the law of God, that law has no value."

(CBC)​

Here we have the question of the symptom and the disease. Cardinal Re and Archbishop Sobrinho seem to have overlooked the problem. They're upset at the outcome of a situation, but don't seem to give a damn about the cause.

I would propose that the blindingly obvious counterpoint to this is that if you don't want nine year-olds having abortions, get the fuck off of them!

Really, don't rape kids, they won't get pregnant.

Well, for the most part. There is that story about God forcing a young woman to carry his child.

But this travesty also resurrects a deeper question about the anti-abortion zeal: What the hell is God doing blessing the conception of twins in a nine year-old?

Let's even acquit the stepfather for the sake of argument. What possible reason could God have for blessing the conception of twins in a nine year-old?

Seriously, what the hell is wrong with these people?
_____________________

Notes:

Willis, Elroy. "Jesus Restores Right Hand in Philippines". ElroysEmporium.com.

Bible: Revised Standard Version. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/r/rsv/

"Vatican backs excommunication of Brazilian MDs over child's abortion". CBC.ca. March 7, 2009. http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/03/07/catholic-abortion.html

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

so in short, your argument is "good things are immune to being wrongly applied", yes?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Did you mean - 'How do we decide whether to treat the symptom or the cause'?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

This and that

Sure, why not? I mean, we could probably devise a philosophical shortcoming for that expression, too, but yes, that's the essential question.

• • •​

No, nothing so obscure. I'm just making a point about some people's priorities.

 

Yeah, but you're trying to apply that point to far too many people. I.e., trying to make generalizations ...which is most often wrong.

Baron Max

 

Yes, I'm sure you counted

How many people, Max?

 

"WE" is exactly how many people, Tiassa.

Baron Max

 

This and that

That's ... helpful.

Would you care to be a bit more specific? Maybe so it's a little more clear what the hell you're talking about?

• • •​

There is nothing I would object to in that post, although I will add that the reason they only care about upholding their doctrines is that they're selfish. It's all about going to Heaven.

The soapbox sound bite is simply to remind one and all that redemptive monotheists negotiate using the most valuable currency in the Universe—their souls—and thus cannot be bargained or haggled with.

Really, if you sincerely believed that you would spend eternity suffering excruciating misery and pain if you didn't, would you rape and torture someone into confessing witchcraft, and then set them on fire?

(Read Matthew 25, and cast yourself as a Church Inquisitor.)

 

Tiassa, I normally enjoy reading your posts and agree with you, but I'm not really sure what your point is here. They clearly acknowledge that the rape was a bad thing. But since they consider abortion to be murder, they are more upset about the abortion than the rape. Of course the abortion is the result of the rape, but it's generally accepted that you don't get to murder people in order to improve your situation, even if your situation is only unfortunate because someone else wronged you. To use a strained analogy, you don't get to murder someone by draining all his blood for your own use, even if you really need a transfusion because someone else stabbed you.I don't agree with them, but it's all consistent with their world view.

Why doesn't god use his magic powers to prevent any bad things from happening to children? There isn't anything theologically unique here.

 

How many people actually feel that "we" should cut off the hand or cut off the head? ...which is actually the "people" that your OP addresses. So ...how many of them are there?

Or did you just pick one person and afix that label to others? And isn't this thread a very similar thing to how "we" view Muslims since 9/11? And would you agree with viewing all Muslims in that way, Tiassa? ...which is, of course, what you've done with your post, ain't it????

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Baron Max

 

Notes Around

But there are thousands of Catholics in prison, and hundreds at least for murder. None of them are being excommunicated.

Of course, this goes back to Matthew 25 (v.34-46) in a literal manner:

"... Then the King will say to those at his right hand, `Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.'

"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink? And when did we see thee a stranger and welcome thee, or naked and clothe thee? And when did we see thee sick or in prison and visit thee?'

"And the King will answer them, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.' Then he will say to those at his left hand, 'Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.'

"Then they also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?'

"Then he will answer them, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.' And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."​

It is not just Brazilian Catholics, though. One of the great disgraces of my school was their policy toward teen pregnancy. With a police gang-rape investigation going on during my junior year, the policy at my Jesuit school was to expel the victim because a teen pregnancy was bad for their reputation. I watched this happen.

They're taking a very narrow and literal view of the Bible, one that contests other teachings of Jesus, and for the sake of political grandstanding. And it's also a route that allows them to duck a constant black eye: the sexual abuse of children.

The Catholics are apparently upset that the girl's pregnancy qualified for a legal abortion. Rather than leave it to God and minister to a sad, hurt little girl, they're punishing her by excommunicating her. Do you think, Nasor, that if the girl had died and the twins went down with her, they would excommunicate the doctors for failing to prevent three deaths? Would they excommunicate the stepfather for causing the death? Or would they simply say, "Praise Jesus"?

No. There's nothing in it for them. But this? Well, they get to exploit a child for the sake of political grandstanding.

I don't disagree with your theological interpretation. Rather, I would say that's part of the point. They're treating the symptom (pre-teen abortion) instead of the disease (child sexual abuse). And that's their priority. As I noted in my response to Bells, it's all about going to Heaven.

The funny thing is that God knows what is in a man's heart, so, yeah, God knows it's all about going to Heaven. God knows it's all about trying to increase their own chances for salvation. And I think this is part of what Jesus meant when he said that not everyone who worships will enter the kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 7.21). The greed of this Catholic hierarchy is so great that their priority in faith is the self.

Ask any preacher: Is the self the priority of faith? and you will be told No. Some churches teach that other people are the priority of one's faith; others teach ideas like "God first, others next, self last". Even a Catholic priest will tell you something like that. The difference, of course, is the abstract versus the applied.

God works in mysterious ways, I guess.

I mean, that's what they say, isn't it? Or did that actually go out of vogue in the last century sometime? (Is God supposed to make sense?)

Still, this oft-asked question arises once again in this case.

• • •​

Max, one of the difficulties of answering your question is that, while you apparently object to something in the topic post, you won't specifically quote it, and you won't tell us how you reached your perspective.

I am unable to answer your question unless I presume what you mean.

Would you like me to do it the long way, then? You know, go back to the topic post, enumerate all occasions of the word "we", and explain the context of each?

Or are you capable of telling me which sentence, paragraph, or idea troubles you so and explaining the problem you're having with it? I mean, that would be easier.

Seriously, Max, what the fuck are you on about?

• • •​

A Note to the Gallery and Other Participants

Could somebody please help me out here? I would happily answer Baron Max's question, but I have no idea what he's getting after here. Anyone? Anyone?

I mean, I could speculate, but history suggests Max doesn't like those outcomes.
_____________________

Notes:

Bible: Revised Standard Version. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/r/rsv/

 

I think that question is perfectly understandable. Look at your OP, read it, then answer that simple question.

Baron Max

 

Why should they be excommunicated, Tiassa? Do you know the Catholic rules for excommunication? Again, why should they be excommunicated?

And I hope that question is more to the point, so you won't be tempted to try to confuse everyone by making innane statements.

Baron Max

 

i have always wondered what the churches position is on ectopic pregancy. They cant be carried to term, they wont be viable even if the womens life was sacrificed to carry the child AND they WILL kill the women in the proccess of there growth. Sadly the body cant seem to deal with them itself so surgical extraction is the only option.

On this story specifically, you see now why i rejected the church tiassa and why i get SO offended when my mother keeps on wanting to refer to me as catholic "by culture" even though i reject everything the church stands for.

 

The question remains: What are you blithering about?

So a clumsy reformulation of the question at hand is your retort? Is the basis of your disagreement? Here, let's compare two questions:

• Topic Post — How do we decide whether to treat the symptom or the disease?

• Baron Max — How many people actually feel that "we" should cut off the hand or cut off the head?​

You know, Max, I know someone who survived a brain tumor. Doctors did not see any need to amputate her head. I can also say that she is not unusual among brain tumor survivors in this.

So let's try this comparison:

• Topic Post — Modern medicine allows us to better locate the source of offense, so we would probably excise the tumor from the brain if possible, but we wouldn't hack off the hand.

• Baron Max — How many people actually feel that "we" should cut off the hand or cut off the head?​

Again, no amputation of the head.

Hmm ... one more, maybe?

• Topic Post — So far, we're still in the figurative. After all, the unfortunate hand-severing wanker—one Timothy Ringstob, of whom no mention can be found after the above-linked story about cutting off his hand—would have done better to either cut off his penis or perform some sort of lobotomy on himself. In either case, he would have been closer to the offense than in removing the hand.

• Baron Max — How many people actually feel that "we" should cut off the hand or cut off the head?​

What's that? No amputation of the head?

O ... kay ... so what are you on about, Max?

What, my personal opinion? They shouldn't.

Theologically speaking, excommunication is generally arbitrary.

It's more to a point. I would wonder why you're introducing all these sideshow distractions, except I learned a while ago not to. Obtuse priggishness is your modus operandi, Max, and there's really no point in wondering why you would embarrass yourself like that since your long-demonstrated lack of honesty suggests we'd never get a straight answer.

So how about you either stop changing the subject and offer up some useful explanation of your question as pertains to posts #5, 7, and 11, or else run along and troll someone else?

 

Unless, of course, by "improve your situation" we mean "avert your death at the hands of said people."

Which is exactly what happened here. The 9 year old would have died without the abortion.

No, but you DO get to kill someone else if they are attempting to drain all of your blood for their use. Which is a much better analogy to this situation.

 

Tiassa, I wouldn't bother with Baron. He's making the only argument he's apparently capable of, which is to say engaging in a intellectually dishonest red herring to side track you. It seems to be working.

 

Do YOU believe they are going to go to Heaven for their actions?
Do YOU believe Heaven exists?