Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

This shit pisses me off to no end. Self-righteous asshole Phoenix Bishop. Too bad he wasn't aborted - the world would be a better place.

The Catholic bishop of Phoenix on Tuesday stripped a local hospital of Catholic affiliation after it ended a woman's pregnancy to save her life.

Bishop Thomas Olmstead said he had no choice but to sever ties after St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center violated church teachings in the November 2009 case. He called the surgery involving the 11-week pregnancy "an abortion."

Linda Hunt, St. Joseph's hospital president, said she is saddened by the Olmstead's announcement but stands by the decision.

The patient suffered from pulmonary hypertension that could limit the functioning of her heart and lungs, the hospital said. Allowing the pregnancy to continue could have exacerbated the condition, it said.

Hunt said the medical procedure to end the pregnancy was performed only after consulting with the patient and her family, doctors and the hospital's ethics committee. Olmstead later ex-communicated one member of the ethics committee, Sister Margaret McBride.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6BK61Z20101221" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It seems the decision to sever ties with the hospital was motivated by factors other than the controversial abortion. The lede to the story is misleading in that it suggests that the November 2009 incident was the sole issue.

Olmstead, at a news conference, said the hospital failed to adequately address "the scandal caused by the abortion" and that it has for years violated other ethical and religious guidelines set by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

He told reporters the violations included offering contraceptive counseling and supplies, providing voluntary male and female sterilization, and performing abortions due to a mother's mental or physical health or when the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest.

JoltinJoe wrote:It seems the decision to sever ties with the hospital was motivated by factors other than the controversial abortion. The lede to the story is misleading in that it suggests that the November 2009 incident was the sole issue.

Olmstead, at a news conference, said the hospital failed to adequately address "the scandal caused by the abortion" and that it has for years violated other ethical and religious guidelines set by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

He told reporters the violations included offering contraceptive counseling and supplies, providing voluntary male and female sterilization, and performing abortions due to a mother's mental or physical health or when the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest.

There was not a peep about this until the abortion. The Bishop went public with the abortion story, wanting the Hospital to fire people.

Hunt said the medical procedure to end the pregnancy was performed only after consulting with the patient and her family, doctors and the hospital's ethics committee. Olmstead later ex-communicated one member of the ethics committee, Sister Margaret McBride

So what say you, Joe - is an abortion to save a mother's life a Scandal?

dbackjon wrote:

JoltinJoe wrote:It seems the decision to sever ties with the hospital was motivated by factors other than the controversial abortion. The lede to the story is misleading in that it suggests that the November 2009 incident was the sole issue.

Olmstead, at a news conference, said the hospital failed to adequately address "the scandal caused by the abortion" and that it has for years violated other ethical and religious guidelines set by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

He told reporters the violations included offering contraceptive counseling and supplies, providing voluntary male and female sterilization, and performing abortions due to a mother's mental or physical health or when the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest.

There was not a peep about this until the abortion. The Bishop went public with the abortion story, wanting the Hospital to fire people.


So what say you, Joe - is an abortion to save a mother's life a Scandal?

You're entitled to your opinions about the bishop. I suspect many Catholics, even other clergy, would say he was being far too rigid in the abortion case. As for me, I'm not sure a bishop should substitute his judgment for that of a doctor who, as I understand it, indicated that the loss of the fetus -- while not wholly unexpected -- was the result of medical procedures undertaken to save the mother's life. To say that the doctor intended to perform an abortion, and the procedures employed had no other purposes -- I'm not sure what the bishop has to go on.

My point was simply that the bishop cited other reasons for his actions other than this matter.

dbackjon wrote:

JoltinJoe wrote:It seems the decision to sever ties with the hospital was motivated by factors other than the controversial abortion. The lede to the story is misleading in that it suggests that the November 2009 incident was the sole issue.

Olmstead, at a news conference, said the hospital failed to adequately address "the scandal caused by the abortion" and that it has for years violated other ethical and religious guidelines set by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

He told reporters the violations included offering contraceptive counseling and supplies, providing voluntary male and female sterilization, and performing abortions due to a mother's mental or physical health or when the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest.

There was not a peep about this until the abortion. The Bishop went public with the abortion story, wanting the Hospital to fire people.

Hunt said the medical procedure to end the pregnancy was performed only after consulting with the patient and her family, doctors and the hospital's ethics committee. Olmstead later ex-communicated one member of the ethics committee, Sister Margaret McBride

So what say you, Joe - is an abortion to save a mother's life a Scandal?

Who gives a fuck what Liar Joe says? He's a catholic whackjob cultist.

JoltinJoe wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

There was not a peep about this until the abortion. The Bishop went public with the abortion story, wanting the Hospital to fire people.


So what say you, Joe - is an abortion to save a mother's life a Scandal?

You're entitled to your opinions about the bishop. I suspect many Catholics, even other clergy, would say he was being far too rigid in the abortion case. As for me, I'm not sure a bishop should substitute his judgment for that of a doctor who, as I understand it, indicated that the loss of the fetus -- while not wholly unexpected -- was the result of medical procedures undertaken to save the mother's life. To say that the doctor intended to perform an abortion, and the procedures employed had no other purposes -- I'm not sure what the bishop has to go on.

My point was simply that the bishop cited other reasons for his actions other than this matter.

More excuses, smoke & mirrors and lies from Liar Joe.


Joltin "Liar" Joe

JoltinJoe wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

There was not a peep about this until the abortion. The Bishop went public with the abortion story, wanting the Hospital to fire people.


So what say you, Joe - is an abortion to save a mother's life a Scandal?

You're entitled to your opinions about the bishop. I suspect many Catholics, even other clergy, would say he was being far too rigid in the abortion case. As for me, I'm not sure a bishop should substitute his judgment for that of a doctor who, as I understand it, indicated that the loss of the fetus -- while not wholly unexpected -- was the result of medical procedures undertaken to save the mother's life. To say that the doctor intended to perform an abortion, and the procedures employed had no other purposes -- I'm not sure what the bishop has to go on.

My point was simply that the bishop cited other reasons for his actions other than this matter.

You understand the situation - no chance for the baby to be born, mother would die. The bishop thinks he knows more about medicine than the doctor.

This was not an abortion undergone lightly. Careful consideration was done.

dbackjon wrote:

JoltinJoe wrote:It seems the decision to sever ties with the hospital was motivated by factors other than the controversial abortion. The lede to the story is misleading in that it suggests that the November 2009 incident was the sole issue.

Olmstead, at a news conference, said the hospital failed to adequately address "the scandal caused by the abortion" and that it has for years violated other ethical and religious guidelines set by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

He told reporters the violations included offering contraceptive counseling and supplies, providing voluntary male and female sterilization, and performing abortions due to a mother's mental or physical health or when the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest.

There was not a peep about this until the abortion. The Bishop went public with the abortion story, wanting the Hospital to fire people.

Hunt said the medical procedure to end the pregnancy was performed only after consulting with the patient and her family, doctors and the hospital's ethics committee. Olmstead later ex-communicated one member of the ethics committee, Sister Margaret McBride

So what say you, Joe - is an abortion to save a mother's life a Scandal?

The only scandal is a political elite telling the Catholic Church what they should stand for.

Start your own pro-abortion gay rights hospital, jon.

I'm sort of in the middle here. I'm firmly convinced that abortion is murder. However, from the way THIS case is described, I'm not convinced that abortion is in view here. It sounds more like an accident that happened in the process of saving a mother's life. An accident is NOT murder.

If that's correct, then the bishop is wrong. While a faith-based hospital SHOULD uphold the tenets of the church which sponsors it, a diocese/regional level church organization should have no say in what goes on because the office is likely to be too small to have medically-based advice. This should be taken care of at the national level (in this case, the office of the US Council of Bishops, which SHOULD have a medically-trained church-law expert on staff.

As far as the other allegations, well, that should have been addressed earlier. That just comes off as an excuse.

native wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

There was not a peep about this until the abortion. The Bishop went public with the abortion story, wanting the Hospital to fire people.




So what say you, Joe - is an abortion to save a mother's life a Scandal?

The only scandal is a political elite telling the Catholic Church what they should stand for.

Start your own pro-abortion gay rights hospital, jon.

I'm pretty sure that abortion is not one of the major problems confronting gay people.

SuperHornet wrote:I'm sort of in the middle here. I'm firmly convinced that abortion is murder.

Your dipshit of a god performes millions of abortions a day. Spontaneous abortions are common.

BlueHen86 wrote:

native wrote:
The only scandal is a political elite telling the Catholic Church what they should stand for.

Start your own pro-abortion gay rights hospital, jon.

I'm pretty sure that abortion is not one of the major problems confronting gay people.

The catholic church's bigotry against gays and women are a major problem for any reasonable human.

dbackjon wrote:

JoltinJoe wrote:
You're entitled to your opinions about the bishop. I suspect many Catholics, even other clergy, would say he was being far too rigid in the abortion case. As for me, I'm not sure a bishop should substitute his judgment for that of a doctor who, as I understand it, indicated that the loss of the fetus -- while not wholly unexpected -- was the result of medical procedures undertaken to save the mother's life. To say that the doctor intended to perform an abortion, and the procedures employed had no other purposes -- I'm not sure what the bishop has to go on.

My point was simply that the bishop cited other reasons for his actions other than this matter.

You understand the situation - no chance for the baby to be born, mother would die. The bishop thinks he knows more about medicine than the doctor.

This was not an abortion undergone lightly. Careful consideration was done.

I agree. I think this bishop is being rigidly judgmental of good people faced with an enormously complicated ethical and medical issue and who -- without the luxury of an abundance of time -- did their best to do what they believed to be the correct thing, ethically and morally, under these remarkable circumstances. If he believed they proceeded improperly, more weight should be placed on the time constraints they faced and their efforts to sort out the ethical issues before they acted, and the bishop should have addressed his concerns privately with them.

D1B wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:I'm sort of in the middle here. I'm firmly convinced that abortion is murder.

Your dipshit of a god performes millions of abortions a day. Spontaneous abortions are common.

If I point out that people anymore are just ignoring your, uh, "contributions" to these threads -- would I be guilty of not ignoring you?

JoltinJoe wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
You understand the situation - no chance for the baby to be born, mother would die. The bishop thinks he knows more about medicine than the doctor.

This was not an abortion undergone lightly. Careful consideration was done.

I agree. I think this bishop is being rigidly judgmental of good people faced with an enormously complicated ethical and medical issue and who -- without the luxury of an abundance of time -- did their best to do what they believed to be the correct thing, ethically and morally, under these remarkable circumstances. If he believed they proceeded improperly, more weight should be placed on the time constraints they faced and their efforts to sort out the ethical issues before they acted, and the bishop should have addressed his concerns privately with them.

Damn JJ, that's a thoughtful, well-articulated, well-reasoned & logical response given the passionate & inflammatory subject matter. Well done..

native wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

There was not a peep about this until the abortion. The Bishop went public with the abortion story, wanting the Hospital to fire people.




So what say you, Joe - is an abortion to save a mother's life a Scandal?

The only scandal is a political elite telling the Catholic Church what they should stand for.

Start your own pro-abortion gay rights hospital, jon.

...and then you have this...

D1B wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:I'm sort of in the middle here. I'm firmly convinced that abortion is murder.

Your dipshit of a god performes millions of abortions a day. Spontaneous abortions are common.

...and this.

Appaholic wrote:

JoltinJoe wrote:
I agree. I think this bishop is being rigidly judgmental of good people faced with an enormously complicated ethical and medical issue and who -- without the luxury of an abundance of time -- did their best to do what they believed to be the correct thing, ethically and morally, under these remarkable circumstances. If he believed they proceeded improperly, more weight should be placed on the time constraints they faced and their efforts to sort out the ethical issues before they acted, and the bishop should have addressed his concerns privately with them.

Damn JJ, that's a thoughtful, well-articulated, well-reasoned & logical response given the passionate & inflammatory subject matter. Well done..

Thanks App.

I wonder if this bishop recalls that a more accurate translation of the "Our Father" would be "and release us from our debts, as we release the debts of others." (Debt/sin being synonymous in Aramaic). One who judges so critically risks being judged so critically too.

native wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

There was not a peep about this until the abortion. The Bishop went public with the abortion story, wanting the Hospital to fire people.






So what say you, Joe - is an abortion to save a mother's life a Scandal?

The only scandal is a political elite telling the Catholic Church what they should stand for.

Start your own pro-abortion gay rights hospital, jon.

I didn't know I was a political elite...

and this is being criticized by many, many local Catholics here.

I have a number of gay friends that work either for St. Joe's, or the parent Catholic Healthcare West. While there is no partner benefits there, or any type of company recognition of partnership status, they are all treated with respect and dignity like any person should be. One of my co-worker's partner is in management at CHW, and he has never felt uncomfortable going to company events as a couple.

As a Catholic, I have a real problem with this... those people did the right thing. This was not some abortion on demand - this was a necessary life saving procedure... the kind of thing that used to be a no-brainer until the church decided a decade or two ago that ramming a narrow political agenda down everyone's throat mattered more than adhering to our core values. The sanctity of life is paramount in the Church - the life of an unborn infant is no more valuable than the life of the mother. The hospital made a horribly difficult decision to let one live and the other die, but only because the alternative was the death of both... Guess a "better" Catholic than I is going to have to explain how that violated the Catechism - because from where I sit, they performed a miracle in saving the mothers life.

JoltinJoe wrote:

D1B wrote:
Your dipshit of a god performes millions of abortions a day. Spontaneous abortions are common.

If I point out that people anymore are just ignoring your, uh, "contributions" to these threads -- would I be guilty of not ignoring you?

Here's the deal, Joe. (And I think all of the regular posters understand this.)

Agree or disagree, Jon and UNH come here to debate the issues in an intelligent, collegial manner. Period.

D1B, on the other hand, is nothing more than a vitriolic troll who gets his jollies from bullying those who disagree.

Jon and UNH are therefore hightly valued members of the board even when we conservatives don't agree with them. D1B is the perfect example of why some boards have ignore buttons.

Of course, you already knew that, Joe....

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:As a Catholic, I have a real problem with this... those people did the right thing. This was not some abortion on demand - this was a necessary life saving procedure... the kind of thing that used to be a no-brainer until the church decided a decade or two ago that ramming a narrow political agenda down everyone's throat mattered more than adhering to our core values. The sanctity of life is paramount in the Church - the life of an unborn infant is no more valuable than the life of the mother. The hospital made a horribly difficult decision to let one live and the other die, but only because the alternative was the death of both... Guess a "better" Catholic than I is going to have to explain how that violated the Catechism - because from where I sit, they performed a miracle in saving the mothers life.

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:As a Catholic, I have a real problem with this... those people did the right thing. This was not some abortion on demand - this was a necessary life saving procedure... the kind of thing that used to be a no-brainer until the church decided a decade or two ago that ramming a narrow political agenda down everyone's throat mattered more than adhering to our core values. The sanctity of life is paramount in the Church - the life of an unborn infant is no more valuable than the life of the mother. The hospital made a horribly difficult decision to let one live and the other die, but only because the alternative was the death of both... Guess a "better" Catholic than I is going to have to explain how that violated the Catechism - because from where I sit, they performed a miracle in saving the mothers life.

+1

JoltinJoe wrote:

Appaholic wrote:
Damn JJ, that's a thoughtful, well-articulated, well-reasoned & logical response given the passionate & inflammatory subject matter. Well done..

Thanks App.

I wonder if this bishop recalls that a more accurate translation of the "Our Father" would be "and release us from our debts, as we release the debts of others." (Debt/sin being synonymous in Aramaic). One who judges so critically risks being judged so critically too.

I get the impression this Priest might be somewhat of a grandstander....every profession has them...

Catholic Health Association backs Phoenix hospital

http://ncronline.org/news/catholic-heal ... x-hospital" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

At the time it was revealed that the woman in question was in the 11th week of pregnancy, had four other young children, and had resisted abortion as an option until it became clear that both she and the unborn child were in imminent danger of death if she tried to continue her pregnancy.

Olmsted contended that the hospital violated Directive 45 of the bishops’ “Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services,” which says, “Abortion – that is, the directly intended termination of pregnancy before viability or the directly intended destruction of a viable fetus – is never permitted. Every procedure whose sole immediate effect is the termination of pregnancy before viability is an abortion.”

The hospital contended that it was not in violation of that directive but rather was following the modifying principle in Directive 47, which says, “Operations, treatments, and medications that have as their direct purpose the cure of a proportionately serious pathological condition of a pregnant woman are permitted when they cannot be safely postponed until the unborn child is viable, even if they will result in the death of the unborn child.”