Should We Kill Rapists, Not Babies?

From February 10 to March 20, our community will take part in 40 Days for Life … a groundbreaking, coordinated international  mobilization. We pray that, with God’s help, this will mark the beginning of the end of abortion in our city [Glasgow] — and beyond.  Source

animatedbabyIn the Scottish print media, the above pro-life event is being portrayed as a militant US style attack on women going into hospitals/clinics for abortions.  Not so, of course, it’s a peaceful, prayerful vigil, that’s all, but, hey, when did any media hack let the truth get in the way of their bigoted bias, if you get my drift…

This article in The Scotsman is a classic  example of the shallowness of the pro-abortion industry and its supporters.  Penned by Muriel Gray, who passes for a “celebrity” or “personality” in Scotland, it is full of the daft hyperbole that presents the pregnant woman as a wee, mousy, terrified gal, who is likely to buckle when she sees a handful of folk fingering their rosary beads outside the place where she is about to take the life of her unborn child. Legally, of course.  Don’t get me wrong.  She’s not doing anything criminal in the eyes of the law in Scotland today.  It’s just not legal to smoke in a restaurant or say something “offensive” about same-sex “marriage” but killing an unborn baby? Nope, that’s fine. That’s legal.

I decided to post this thread after reading the (at the time) two comments underneath Mzzzzz Gray’s Scotsman piece.  The second comment handed out the old chestnut, “what if the woman had been raped” [it’s then OK to abort the baby…]

I remembered seeing the headline “Why Do We Kill Babies Instead Of Rapists?” on a Lifesitenews report some time ago and thought, what the heck, let’s reflect on that sentiment here to challenge the oppressors, not just of free speech, but of free prayer and free movement.  Mzzzz Gray thinks it’s OK to protest, as long as the protest takes place outside Parliament, not outside hospitals.  My reply:  mind your own business. I’m not taking orders from you and your ilk as to where I pray my swears… Gerragrip wummin!

Comment:

Rape is a truly terrible crime.  Everyone agrees on that, and we know that death is a highly likely outcome for one of those involved.  But why should it be one of the innocents; why, in fact, the most innocent of all human beings, the most vulnerable, the baby in the womb?  If someone has to die as a result of rape, why not the guilty man – the rapist?  

334 responses

  1. If I had to make a choice to kill either an unborn baby or a rapist, I’d choose the rapist, every time.

  2. Perplexed and Eileenanne,

    I see you are both children of this liberal world. The Church has never opposed capital punishment for those who seriously offend against the good of society. Until recent times, most States had the death penalty in place for very serious crimes. Of course the condemned were given a chance before execution to make their peace with God, it was never about revenge, and they were not tormented with a ten year wait on death row, wondering when the executioner would come for them.

    Holy Scripture is supportive of the death penalty for the most serious offences against the common good, as it is supportive of just war. So this modern nonsense coming from the Vatican is exactly that, nonsense.

    I wonder how many young children, abducted and murdered by perverse people, would still be alive had those criminal perpetrators known that they faced the death penalty upon capture and conviction. What is the point of society locking up people like that, who can never be released?

    Is it not also a fact that killers have been released early from prison, or when their sentence was up, only to kill again? No civilised society should be turning such people loose on an unsuspecting population. No, there is certainly a case for capital punishment where the crime is serious enough to warrant it and evidence is sound and beyond doubt.

    • Hear hear, Athanasius, you speak the most sense I have heard in years! The Church has never opposed capital punishment for certain crimes. We, as a society, have lost our moral compass.

    • So God was wrong to safeguard Cain from Capital Punishment?

      And for example, in 1966, 16 years after his death it was proven Timothy Evans was unjustly executed for a crime he did not commit.

      To kill someone in error is not acceptable, and is wholly contrary to The Gospel of Life.

      • Who alone can judge?

        You will also recall the episode from Acts in which St. Peter declared the death penalty on a man and his wife who had sold their property but kept some of the money secretly hidden rather than contribute entirely to the needs of the people”? Both were carried out dead from his presence.

        • I think as recorded in Acts God struck both people down, and having witnessed the first death Peter anticipated the second.

          Contrast your reading of Holy Scripture, with the incident where St Paul stopped his jailer(s) killing himself (Acts 16:27), as would have been the norm, and through that act of mercy brought people to know Jesus.

          Further, in the O.T. whole Towns, under God’s instructions, were designated as places of Sanctuary, and safeguard, for people who might otherwise be executed by people like you.

          • Who alone can judge?

            No, actually St. Peter declared the sentence by the authority of God. There is absolutely no reading of that passage that can lead to a conclusion that St. Peter merely anticipated what God would do next.

            As for St. Paul and the jailer(s). That’s an example delivering poor despairing souls from the evil of suicide, not from just punishment.

            And the O.T. has numerous examples of God commanding that certain transgressors be killed. These towns of sanctuary you speak of are out of context.

            • The O.T. Towns of which I speak, as with the mark of Cain, are entirely in context.

              Acts 5: 4-5 “Why hast thou conceived this thing in thy heart? Thou hast not lied to men, but to God. [5] And Ananias hearing these words, fell down, and gave up the ghost. ” Peter commanded nothing, but spoke in the name of God.

              With regards the jailer, and St Paul, if he had not killed himself he would have been executed by those in authority. St Paul was alerting him to the fact they had not escaped, and the jailer would escape punishment through death.

                • Lily

                  To quote the article you cite:

                  “It is simply becoming harder and harder to argue that a particular act of capital punishment is circumstantially necessary (the third element of a good moral act). The Pope is NOT substituting his judgment for the political prudence of those who must make decisions about when to use capital punishment. He is teaching principles and making a general evaluation about modern circumstances. Ultimately, the laity who are responsible for these judgments in political society must make them in the individual cases. In doing so, however, they have a grave obligation to apply all the principles taught by the Church to the cases before them, as taking a human life is always grave matter if done unjustly.”

                  • WACJ

                    You say that taking a human life is always grave matter if done unjustly. By unjustly I take it you mean outside the law of the land.

                    So does aborting an unborn child come under the heading of a just killing in your estimation?

                  • Precisely. So Lily, Athanasius and Crofter Lady are perfectly correct and their opinions conform to the teaching of the Church. It seems you fail to understand the piece you have copied and pasted. Which of these bloggers suggested that taking a human life is not a grave matter? And as you’re on about the OT, what about Sodom and Gomorrah?

              • Who alone can judge?

                Yes, your O.T. quotations were out of context in as much as they attempt to demonstrate that God is altogether opposed to capital punishment. The following references should disabuse you of that false notion:

                Exodus 21:12

                Exodus 21:16

                Exodus 22:19

                Leviticus 20:13

                Deuteronomy 13:5

                Deuteronomy 22:24

                2 Samuel 11:1-5, 14-17; 2 Samuel 12:13

                And what about this from St. Paul?

                Acts 25:10-11, ‘But Paul said, “I am standing before Caesar’s tribunal, where I ought to be tried. I have done no wrong to the Jews, as you also very well know. If, then, I am a wrongdoer and have committed anything worthy of death, I do not refuse to die; but if none of those things is true of which these men accuse me, no one can hand me over to them. I appeal to Caesar.”

                Here is the Douay Rheims, Latin Vulgate Scriptural description of the event involving St. Peter.

                Acts 5: 5-10: ‘And Ananias hearing these words, fell down, and gave up the ghost. And there came great fear upon all that heard it.

                And the young men rising up, removed him, and carrying him out, buried him. And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what had happened, came in. And Peter said to her: Tell me, woman, whether you sold the land for so much? And she said: Yea, for so much. And Peter said unto her: Why have you agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? Behold the feet of them who have buried thy husband are at the door, and they shall carry thee out. Immediately she fell down before his feet, and gave up the ghost. And the young men coming in, found her dead: and carried her out, and buried her by her husband.

                According to St. Augustine:

                The same divine authority that forbids the killing of a human being establishes certain exceptions, as when God authorises killing by a general law or when He gives an explicit commission to an individual for a limited time.

                The agent who executes the killing does not commit homicide; he is an instrument as is the sword with which he cuts. Therefore, it is in no way contrary to the commandment, ‘Thou shalt not kill’ to wage war at God’s bidding, or for the representatives of public authority to put criminals to death, according to the law, that is, the will of the most just reason (from The City of God, Book 1, Chapter 21)

                The following is a summary of Summa Contra Gentiles, Book 3, Chapter 146 which was written by Aquinas prior to writing the Summa Theologica. St. Thomas was a vocal supporter of the death penalty. This was based on the theory (found in natural moral law), that the state has not only the right, but the duty to protect its citizens from enemies, both from within, and without.

                For those who have been appropriately appointed, there is no sin in administering punishment. For those who refuse to obey God’s laws, it is correct for society to rebuke them with civil and criminal sanctions. No one sins working for justice, within the law. Actions that are necessary to preserve the good of society are not inherently evil. The common good of the whole society is greater and better than the good of any particular person. “The life of certain pestiferous men is an impediment to the common good which is the concord of human society. Therefore, certain men must be removed by death from the society of men.” This is likened to the physician who must amputate a diseased limb, or a cancer, for the good of the whole person. He based this on I Corinthians 5, 6: “You know that a little leaven corrupts the whole lump of dough?” and I Corinthians 5, 13: “Put away the evil one from among yourselves”; Romans 13,4: “[it is said of earthly power that] he bears not the sword in vain: for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath upon him that does evil”; I Peter 2, 13-14: “Be subjected therefore to every human creature for God’s sake: whether to be on the king as excelling, or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of good.” He believed these passages superseded the text of Exodus 20,13: “Thou shall not kill.” This is mentioned again in Matthew 5,21. Also, it is argued that Matthew 13, 30: “Suffer both the weeds and the wheat to grow until the harvest.” The harvest was interpreted as meaning the end of the world. This is explained by Matthew 13,38-40.

                Aquinas acknowledged these passages could also be interpreted as meaning there should be no use of the death penalty if there was a chance of injuring the innocent. The prohibition “Thou shall not kill”, was superseded by Exodus 22,18: “Wrongdoers you shall not suffer to live.” The argument that evildoers should be allowed to live in the hope that they might be redeemed was rejected by Aquinas as frivolous. If they would not repent in the face of death, it was unreasonable to assume they would ever repent. “How many people are we to allow to be murdered while waiting for the repentance of the wrongdoer?”, he asked, rhetorically. Using the death penalty for revenge, or retribution is a violation of natural moral law.

                The Church teaches that the commandment is “Thou shalt not murder”, which permits the death penalty by the civil authority as the administrator of justice in a human society in accordance with the Natural Law.

                • In the quote from St Paul, he appeals to Caesar precisely because he is being unjustly condemned to death.

                  I will not trouble myself to check all your references as they are all selective quotes used, by you, and yet it is The Church that is the guardian, and interpreter, Holy Scripture, and as the upholder of Tradition it says in The CCC “Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm – without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself – the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.”

                  Would you defend everything on the basis of what one Theologian wrote? A particular Saint may give particular insight into particular truths, but they cannot have the last word on every topic. For example,
                  Thomas Aquinas also wrote: , (Summa Theologica I q. 92 a. 1)
                  “Woman is defective and misbegotten, for the active force in the male seed tends to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine sex; while the production of woman comes from defect in the active force or from some material indisposition, or even from some external influence, such as that of a south wind, which is moist.” I wonder if The Editor would agree with you, and him on this, if you do.

      • I didn’t know the answer to your question about Cain but guessed it and then searched online and found that my guess was right. I quote what I found online, in a question and answer forum. Somebody asked why God protected Cain when he was a murderer – here’s the answer.

        “This question appears to be founded on a false premise: That it was now “open season” on Cain. This is incorrect – although Cain was a murderer, killing him wantonly would again be murder. It is not permissible to murder a murderer: Biblical Law extends “due process” to murderers (first mention is in Genesis 9:6) just as we do today to all criminals. Since Cain had an infamous reputation as a murderer, he needed protection so his presence would not provoke further murder.

        A better question might be why Cain was not punished by God with death for his act of murder. However, at the time that would have left Adam with no male descendants. Adam’s third son, Seth, was born only later, as explained in Genesis 4:25.”

        That makes perfect sense to me.

    • The death penalty: Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2267
      “Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

      If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

      Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm – without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself – the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.”

      Athanasius is technically correct, but it’s amazing the lengths to which the Catechism goes to exclude the death penalty…such cases “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.”

      We should not kill anyone, ever, for any reason, period.

      • Perplexed,

        After explaining that the Catechism repeats the traditional teaching of the Church which permits capital punishment, you exclude it “period”. A spirit of disobedience, perhaps?

        Archbishop Lefebvre eat your heart out!

        • Absolutely not. What the Catechism talks about is a doctrinal teaching (which is subject to change), not a dogma (which is absolute and eternal). In line with the Church’s right and duty to develop certain teachings, yes, I do exclude the death penalty: period.

          • Perplexed,

            Well, as Sacred Scripture clearly demonstrates in several places, God doesn’t exclude the death penalty. Where does that leave you?

            By the way, the Church’s sanctioning of the death penalty was not so much part of her doctrinal teaching as her moral teaching.

            • Athanasius,

              It leaves me with the New Testament example of the Sacred Scriptures, where Jesus prevents the woman caught in adultery from being put to death for her crime/sin. That’s good enough for me. We should never execute anyone, ever, for any reason, period.

              • Perplexed

                Even in this Year of Mercy some choose to cite Holy Scripture about condemnation, and death. Thanks for quoting The Gospel of Life, Jesus Christ himself.

              • I think this review of Cardinal Dulles rather puts your absolutist argument to bed. The mercy of Our Lord shown to the woman caught in adultery should not be read as a nullification of the the State’s right under God to execute serious criminals.

                …In the Old Testament the Mosaic Law specifies no less than thirty-six capital offenses calling for execution by stoning, burning, decapitation, or strangulation. Included in the list are idolatry, magic, blasphemy, violation of the sabbath, murder, adultery, bestiality, pederasty, and incest. The death penalty was considered especially fitting as a punishment for murder since in his covenant with Noah God had laid down the principle, “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in His own image” (Genesis 9:6). In many cases God is portrayed as deservedly punishing culprits with death, as happened to Korah, Dathan, and Abiram (Numbers 16). In other cases individuals such as Daniel and Mordecai are God’s agents in bringing a just death upon guilty persons.

                In the New Testament the right of the State to put criminals to death seems to be taken for granted. Jesus himself refrains from using violence. He rebukes his disciples for wishing to call down fire from heaven to punish the Samaritans for their lack of hospitality (Luke 9:55). Later he admonishes Peter to put his sword in the scabbard rather than resist arrest (Matthew 26:52). At no point, however, does Jesus deny that the State has authority to exact capital punishment. In his debates with the Pharisees, Jesus cites with approval the apparently harsh commandment, “He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him surely die” (Matthew 15:4; Mark 7:10, referring to Exodus 2l:17; cf. Leviticus 20:9). When Pilate calls attention to his authority to crucify him, Jesus points out that Pilate’s power comes to him from above that is to say, from God (John 19:11). Jesus commends the good thief on the cross next to him, who has admitted that he and his fellow thief are receiving the due reward of their deeds (Luke 23:41).

                The early Christians evidently had nothing against the death penalty. They approve of the divine punishment meted out to Ananias and Sapphira when they are rebuked by Peter for their fraudulent action (Acts 5:1-11). The Letter to the Hebrews makes an argument from the fact that “a man who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy at the testimony of two or three witnesses” (10:28). Paul repeatedly refers to the connection between sin and death. He writes to the Romans, with an apparent reference to the death penalty, that the magistrate who holds authority “does not bear the sword in vain; for he is the servant of God to execute His wrath on the wrongdoer” (Romans 13:4). No passage in the New Testament disapproves of the death penalty.

                Turning to Christian tradition, we may note that the Fathers and Doctors of the Church are virtually unanimous in their support for capital punishment, even though some of them such as St. Ambrose exhort members of the clergy not to pronounce capital sentences or serve as executioners. To answer the objection that the first commandment forbids killing, St. Augustine writes in The City of God:

                The same divine law which forbids the killing of a human being allows certain exceptions, as when God authorizes killing by a general law or when He gives an explicit commission to an individual for a limited time. Since the agent of authority is but a sword in the hand, and is not responsible for the killing, it is in no way contrary to the commandment, “Thou shalt not kill” to wage war at God’s bidding, or for the representatives of the State’s authority to put criminals to death, according to law or the rule of rational justice.

                In the Middle Ages a number of canonists teach that ecclesiastical courts should refrain from the death penalty and that civil courts should impose it only for major crimes. But leading canonists and theologians assert the right of civil courts to pronounce the death penalty for very grave offenses such as murder and treason. Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus invoke the authority of Scripture and patristic tradition, and give arguments from reason.

                Giving magisterial authority to the death penalty, Pope Innocent III required disciples of Peter Waldo seeking reconciliation with the Church to accept the proposition: “The secular power can, without mortal sin, exercise judgment of blood, provided that it punishes with justice, not out of hatred, with prudence, not precipitation.” In the high Middle Ages and early modern times the Holy See authorized the Inquisition to turn over heretics to the secular arm for execution. In the Papal States the death penalty was imposed for a variety of offenses. The Roman Catechism, issued in 1566, three years after the end of the Council of Trent, taught that the power of life and death had been entrusted by God to civil authorities and that the use of this power, far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to the fifth commandment.

                In modern times Doctors of the Church such as Robert Bellarmine and Alphonsus Liguori held that certain criminals should be punished by death. Venerable authorities such as Francisco de Vitoria, Thomas More, and Francisco Suárez agreed. John Henry Newman, in a letter to a friend, maintained that the magistrate had the right to bear the sword, and that the Church should sanction its use, in the sense that Moses, Joshua, and Samuel used it against abominable crimes.

                Throughout the first half of the twentieth century the consensus of Catholic theologians in favor of capital punishment in extreme cases remained solid, as may be seen from approved textbooks and encyclopedia articles of the day. The Vatican City State from 1929 until 1969 had a penal code that included the death penalty for anyone who might attempt to assassinate the pope. Pope Pius XII, in an important allocution to medical experts, declared that it was reserved to the public power to deprive the condemned of the benefit of life in expiation of their crimes…”

            • Athanasius,

              “By the way, the Church’s sanctioning of the death penalty was not so much part of her doctrinal teaching as her moral teaching”.

              I stand corrected, but even here I would have to say that the Church has the right and duty to develop certain moral teachings and, on that basis , I exclude the death penalty, period.

            • Well my old catechism, the one favoured by many here, said quite clearly that the Church could permit mixed marriages in order to avoid ” a worse evil”. That suggests it did allow something it considered evil.
              I’m nor equating mixed marriage with capital punishment, but the circumstances in which CP is permissible, according to the Church, are extremely unlikely to arise.

              • Eileenanne,

                There is a great difference between tolerating a lesser evil with disaproval and upholding evil. Mixed marriages have always been greatly frowned upon by the Church, which is why they take place in the sacristy minus Nuptual Mass, flowers, hymns, etc.

                The same cannot be said of capital punishment, which the Church has always clearly upheld as a right given by God to be exercised with prudence by legitimate State authorities.

                • Nowhere in a Church, with Full Canonical Status, do marriages take place in The Sacristy and without hymns and flowers!

                  • Who alone can judge,

                    If that’s now the case in local parish churches then it is down to the loss of faith in those places. The Church has never permitted mixed marriages outside of the sacristy, or at least in the chapel with no Mass, flowers, music, etc.,and that’s as old as the Church herself.

                    If you’re saying that has changed then I can only regret the ever-greater apostasy that is unfolding. They simply don’t have any supernatural belief anymore, anything goes as long as no offence is given. Tragic indeed!

          • Eileenanne,

            The Church upholds that the death penalty for certain serious crimes is a power of the State, mandated by God.

            • Right. And since it is a power of the state, individual states and therefore individual citizens, can decide for or against allowing capital punishment so long as they will only apply the death penalty within the very tight constraints the Church lays down. States that are confident of protecting their people without executing criminals do not need it on the statute book.

              • Eileenanne,

                The Church does not lay down “very tight restraints” for States who have the death penalty. I don’t know where you got that from.

                • Athanasius,
                  I refer you to Perplexed’s post at 7.17 on 19th January which quotes exactly what the CCC says about when capital punishment is allowable.
                  Do you think those conditions exist today?

      • Perplexed,

        If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.”

        Ah! “the dignity of the human person”? There’s that Modernist term again, slipped into a Modernist Catechism. Look up the old Catechism for a proper understanding of the Church’s teaching.

        And what about the dignity of the victims of serious crime? Surely it’s their dignity that should be considered primarily.

        The truth is that since the death penalty was abolished, serious crimes against the common good of society have reached epidemic proportions. Who was it that said “a society without justice is a violent society”. These extreme measures are sometimes neccesary to maintain civil order.

        • Athanasius,

          “A recent survey of the most leading criminologists in the country from found that the overwhelming majority did not believe that the death penalty is a proven deterrent to homicide. Eighty-eight percent of the country’s top criminologists do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent to homicide, according to a new study published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology and authored by Professor Michael Radelet, Chair of the Department of Sociology at the University of Colorado-Boulder, and Traci Lacock, also at Boulder.

          Similarly, 87% of the expert criminologists believe that abolition of the death penalty would not have any significant effect on murder rates. In addition, 75% of the respondents agree that “debates about the death penalty distract Congress and state legislatures from focusing on real solutions to crime problems.”

          The survey relied on questionnaires completed by the most pre-eminent criminologists in the country, including Fellows in the American Society of Criminology; winners of the American Society of Criminology’s prestigious Southerland Award; and recent presidents of the American Society of Criminology. Respondents were not asked for their personal opinion about the death penalty, but instead to answer on the basis of their understandings of the empirical research”.

          (M. Radelet and T. Lacock, DO EXECUTIONS LOWER HOMICIDE RATES?: THE VIEWS OF LEADING CRIMINOLOGISTS, 99 Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 489 2009)

          I would tend to give more weight to those who speak from a country that still has the death penalty in some states, so I am ot convinced by your suggestion that people are less likely to commit violent crimes if they are faced with judicial execution.

          • Perplexed

            Whether capital punishment is a deterrent or not is immaterial.

            What is material is that a killer who is executed will certainly be deterred from doing it again.

          • Perplexed,

            There are a number of serious crimes that warrant the death penalty, not just murder. My own earlier example was the crime of those who abduct and murder children. I would also include drug dealers as very serious offenders against the common good, who should face death for their heinous crimes, in the hope of course that the realisation that they are about to die will bring about their repentence.

            While I recognise the observations of the leading modern criminologists, etc. that you quote, I wouldn’t equate their findings with the wisdom of the Doctors, Saints, Councils and Popes of 2000 years. In fact, these same criminologists who argue that capital punishment solves nothing also reject the supernatural concept of good and evil. For them, all criminal activity proceeds from a psychological or socialogical cause. No wonder they have failed to stem serious crime, which has gone through the roof since the 1960s. I remember a priest once saying that psychology is just confession without absolution. What a brilliant observation that was.

            Yes, the absence of grace in our time has contributed greatly to an increase in serious crime, but you won’t hear the criminologists say that. Most of them are sold on the comfortable prisons and rehab programmes that encourage one-time offenders to become career criminals.

            • Athanasius,

              “While I recognise the observations of the leading modern criminologists, etc. that you quote, I wouldn’t equate their findings with the wisdom of the Doctors, Saints, Councils and Popes of 2000 years…”

              If that wisdom of the aforementioned categories covers a time span of 2000 years, then I take it you include the pontificate of Pope St. John Paull II (+2005), who vigorously campaigned against the death penalty, both in his personal appeals in specific cases, and in his written magisterium.

              In Evangelium Vitae (1995), Pope John Paul II refers to the matter in a comment on the murder of Abel by his brother Cain: “God, who is always merciful even when he punishes, “put a mark on Cain, lest any who came upon him should kill him” (Gen 4:15). He thus gave him a distinctive sign, not to condemn him to the hatred of others, but to protect and defend him from those wishing to kill him, even out of a desire to avenge Abel’s death. Not even a murderer loses his personal dignity, and God himself pledges to guarantee this. And it is precisely here that the paradoxical mystery of the merciful justice of God is shown forth. As Saint Ambrose writes: “Once the crime is admitted at the very inception of this sinful act of parricide, then the divine law of God’s mercy should be immediately extended. If punishment is forthwith inflicted on the accused, then men in the exercise of justice would in no way observe patience and moderation, but would straightaway condemn the defendant to punishment. … God drove Cain out of his presence and sent him into exile far away from his native land, so that he passed from a life of human kindness to one which was more akin to the rude existence of a wild beast. God, who preferred the correction rather than the death of a sinner, did not desire that a homicide be punished by the exaction of another act of homicide”.

              Notice he quotes Sacred Scripture (Gen 4:15) and a Doctor of the Church, St. Ambrose (+397), to back up his argument. Intelligent and wise man as he was, I’m quite sure he even consulted studies of the death penalty carried out by criminologists, for the Church and secular science do not stand in opposition when they are working on behalf of humanity.

              There has indeed been a long-recognized right to execute attributed to the State that was acknowledged by the Church, but this was in the past: today, this is no longer the case because that moral teaching is developing and is pointing resolutely towards the suppression of the death penalty, in the time span you mentioned in your previous post.

              A tongue-in-cheek question: if you apply the 2000 years time span, why did your previous post not cover the period after the pontificate of Pope Pius XII?

              • Perplexed,

                John Paull II was an altogether different Pope from the pre-council ones. For example, he organised and attended the syncretist gatherings at Assisi, which outrage must have had his predecessors spinning in their graves. So please, don’t throw John Paul II at me as an example of Magisterial teaching on the death penalty. There is 2000 years of solid consistent teaching before JPII and his alternative message. I’ll stick with the 2000-year teaching, if it’s all the same to you.

                • It is all the same to me, my point being that the time scale you apply includes Pope John Paul II and, sticking to the point under discussion, I do present him to you as an example of Magisterial teaching for that is what he is, whether we like it or not.

              • By the way, it is heresy to state that the Church’s doctrinal and moral teaching is incomplete and therefore subject to development. St. Pius X personally condemned that great Modernist error in his Syllabus.

                The Church’s doctrinal and moral teaching is called divine revelation, which ended with the death of the last Apostle. What you’re suggesting is called “relativism,” or the evolution of doctrinal and moral teaching to suit fashions. That’s not Catholic.

                • Some moral issues have only arisen in recent decades, or do you have pre-Trent examples of I.V.F., and Nuclear Weapons, or apartheid. The teaching will draw on Holy Scripture and Tradition but must respond to new situations.

        • Another false dichotomy. This thread is littered with them. We must uphold the dignity of ALL people, victims and perpetrators, born and pre-born.

          • That was in response to Athanasius who spoke as if we had to choose between the dignity of the victim and that of the perpetrator. We don’t.

          • Interesting. Usually, when we post a pro-life thread on some aspect of the abortion industry, just about everyone’s out to tea. Yet, this thread is busy, busy, busy… Interesting.

            Murdering babies in their mothers’ wombs does not, it seems, excite anything like the same passion as the suggestion that perhaps there is a case for capital punishment for those convicted of serious crimes like murder and rape.

            All the babies in creation may be killed by abortionists especially if the baby has been conceived as a result of rape and few blink an eyelid, let alone cancel their tea party to publicly denounce the practice when it is raised here (and I dare say on other blogs). Indeed, Catholics are as quick as anyone else to allow the exception of rape for abortion. Talk about visiting the sins of the father on the child.

            Suggest that the rapist might be killed, though; suggest that perhaps the law banning capital punishment for the guilty might be reversed, and… WOW… do we get a reaction. I mean, if the rapist’s crime is so bad that it is considered OK to kill his child, what’s so special about HIM that he’s allowed to live, move and have his being? I don’t get it.

            Yet, the widely held view is in favour of the rapist’s right to life. Defend the guilty rapist? You bet. His right to life is not to be meddled with. Pity about the babies.

            As already indicated, Catholics are as bad, if not worse, than anyone else when it comes to vigorously defending the (unqualified) right to life of the guilty, while passively tolerating the evil law permitting the murder of the most innocent and vulnerable human being of all – the unborn child.

            • Editor, I disagree entirely with your assessment of the reactions to this thread. I am entirely against killing of any human being, from those in the womb to those on the verge of the tomb. The former have the right to expect a helping hand to come into this world, the latter should never receive a helping hand to leave it. That decision belongs to Another.

              I would suggest we campaign vigorously for the defense of the innocent and the guilty life, and leave the ultimate judgment to that Other.

              We should not kill anyone, ever, for any reason whatsoever, period.

              A practical question: how does one add emphasis to the text (bold, italics, etc.)? Many thanks!

                • Petrus,

                  I am passing no judgement on the Church, I am not interested in right or wrong judgments here, but merely accept what She is saying today: it is the Church that calls for the abolition of the death penalty ad the arguments put forth by the Magisterium in recent decades convince me.
                  In a spirit of obedience, in the real sense of the word: oboedire, abaudire = to listen.

                  • Where does the Church, in the Magisterium, call for the abolition of the death penalty?

                    Sent from my Samsung device

                    • I believe you can infer that from the content of the CCC (part of the ordinary Magisterium of the Church) where, despite leaving on paper a tiny opening for the application of the said death penalty, the Church is nudging towards its abolition; furthermore, the appeals of the Popes on behalf of condemned criminals, backed up by references to Scripture and other Church sources, for example Ambrose, are also part of the ordinary Magisterium of the Church. Ordinary, but still the Magisterium nevertheless…

                    • But didn’t Cardinal Ratzinger say that a Catholic could disagree with a pope on the death penalty? You see the holes in your argument? The Church doesn’t “nudge” on important issues. Modernist clap trap!

                      Sent from my Samsung device

                    • Nowhere as far as I know, but the circumstances in which the Church permits capital punishments will almost never apply.

                    • Cardinal Ratzinger may well have done so, I do not know, but if it is permissible to disagree (as you do), then surely it is also possible to agree (as I do)?
                      In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas…

                      Modernist clap trap!…LOL!

              • Perplexed,

                I’m going to have to restrict my response to answering your practical question as I must soon be elsewhere:

                To use bold or italics do the following:

                in front of the word you wish to emphasise type < then, without leaving a space, type either the letter b or i
                Then again without leaving a space type the arrow in opposite direction >

                At the end of the word, put the arrow again followed by the forward slash / followed by the letter b or i and finally the opposite direction arrow again > ALL WITHOUT LEAVING ANY SPACES.

                I tried to type the symbols below but they are now showing up when I submit the post. Follow above instructions, really very simple, and you will find the words appear in bold or italics, as you choose.

                bold

                italics

                Do as many test posts as you wish to practise, and I will delete them later when I see them.

            • Editor,
              Re the activity on this thread compared with others on abortion.
              I think that could be because on a forum mostly populated with Catholics, there is little to say about abortion. Abortion is wrong. Always. Circumstances alter the gravity of the sin, but it is always wrong. What else is there to say?
              On capital punishment,however, there is room for debate and it is a topic about which people on all sides of the argument feel strongly.
              It is a pity you chose to set up this thread as a choice between killing a rapist and killing his child. That is a choice no one ever has to make. A straightforward discussion on the pros and cons of the death penalty would be preferable. The waters are slightly muddied by the juxtaposition of the rapists treatment and his child’s.
              I don’t think we ever hanged rapists in this country. As far as I know the death penalty was only available for murder. Even today I don’t think they execute rapists in America.

          • Eileenanne,

            If you know the Catechism (that is, the old Catechism), you will know that man is created in the image and likeness of God and that this likeness is chiefly in the soul.

            Hence, man’s true dignity consists in loving and serving His Creator, which includes observing the Commandments and loving one’s neighbour. They who seriously offend against the law of God and society, I speak here of heinous crimes such as murder, etc., sacrifice their dignity just as surely as Lucifer and the fallen angels did when they revolted against the Most High. You cannot possibly compare such perpetrators of evil with their victims. Certainly we must hope for the conversion and repentance of great sinners, even if it does take the noose to provoke it, but let us not pretend that in their sinful state they have equal dignity with their victims. They do not! This modern understanding of the “dignity of all human persons” originates from the French Revolution and so-called “Enlightenment,” and it is completely false.

            Try persuading the Jews that the Nazis on trial at Nuremberg after the war should not have been condemned to death for their crimes against humanity on the grounds of their “human dignity” and they will rightly laugh you to scorn.

            • I believe that Jesus looks at victims and perpetrators and loves them both so much that He died a painful death to save them. I don’t think I have the right to disregard the dignity of either.

    • The Church permits capital punishment in certain circumstances. She has NEVER said we must legislate to allow it or to carry it out. I am against it as the Church permits me to be..

      • Eileenanne

        “The Church permits capital punishment in certain circumstances. She has NEVER said we must legislate to allow it or to carry it out. I am against it as the Church permits me to be..”

        And I’m sure all the major drug dealers, for example, are very pleased and relieved at such popular modern opposition.

        • You are the first person I have ever heard suggest the death penalty for drug dealers. Most people who would approve it at all would only support it for murder.

    • “…the evidence is sound and beyond doubt.”

      I recent years we have seen many miscarriages of justice where people,who would have been hanged if that punishment had still been availabile, have been released and pardoned after serving many years of service. The fallibility of the justice system is a powerful argument against the death penalty.

      • That’s true (about unjust executions) but these should galvanise all concerned into demanding a clean out of the bad police officers, lawyers and judges who are, on the one hand, allowing serious offenders to walk the streets and kill people, often because they get off on a technicality, while on the other, there are people convicted on either poor or false evidence. These cases are an argument against being naively trusting of the justice system, more than an argument against capital punishment, per se.

        • I have heard it opined that if capital punishment were an option, one likely outcome would be that juries would be reluctant to convict at all. I think that might be true.

      • Eileenanne

        St. Thomas Aquinas completely rejects your argument on the grounds that a few miscarriages of justice is an insufficient reason for ending capital punishment and thereby exposing many more innocent people to murder.

        • Really? That is astonishing. I have always believed the exact opposite and will continue to do so. The good saint was not infallible.

          • Athanasius,
            I have tried to find exactly what St Thomas said on this subject but so far haven’t found it. Can you help me with a link please? Thank you.

  3. I know ED that you have got to -Lets say research to find out what’s passing for normal out there- I think our so called Scotish Government is a great barometer to the rest of the country. The Leaders of parties I E Ms Davidson and Mr -if you vote me in al shut Catholic Schools -Harvie show the anti normal sexual agenda that now rips through our Society. I ain’t got much time for the Tories . But it’s a sad day when you would rather have the sons of Thatcher ruling over you than your own Parliement . As for Msz Gray as you say if she’s a celebrity God Help Us .

  4. I think it worth mentioning that St. Ninian was conceived as a result of rape. What a loss he would have been to the world if abortion had been available (and acceptable) under the law in those days.

    Faith of our Fathers,

    Your comment doesn’t appear to have anything to do with the subject under discussion.

  5. I think it’s a no-brainer – the guilty rapist should die not the baby.

    I didn’t know that St Ninian was conceived as a result of rape. How did you find that out, Athanasius?

  6. Thank you dear Patricia for your true grit in posting this very important blog ….how very sad it is that people crave for more infant bloodlust and woe betide anyone who dares to challenge these rabidly pro death groups ..they have launched a petition ..all the froth and bubble about good Souls praying outside a Hospital that kills babies to make us look the evil ones .
    These abortionists have a very weird twisted logic and reall yhave no decent argument they try to distract you from the main point …a childs life is lost to all sorts of diatribe ..recently I have been in written conflict with a young Dr who kept on about tearing out organs he was almost Frankenstinian in his outlook..but he shied away from admitting abortion …drs ..loosly worded ..tear out babies from their Mums wombs..
    it would be wonderful if as many contributers to this excellent Blog would go to this Prayerful 40 DAYS FOR LIFE WITNESS …..And also answer any biased ,unjust and downright lies printed in the Press truth and right is on our side we must be proud to be PRO LIFE ..for too long we have stood back letting the pro death camp have their rantings the tide is turning we must speak up for those with no voice
    Thank you

    • Wendy,

      I agree – as many of us as possible should attend the 40 Days for Life event in Glasgow. It’s on my list of things to definitely do in Lent!

      There is a petition to prevent the event – the pro-death lobby don’t let the grass grow under their feet – click here to read more

      And for your interest, I have replied to one of the comments on The Scotsman article by Muriel Gray, which has drawn, so far, 14 “dislikes” and only 5 “likes”. The system there is different from any I’ve seen – you need to click where it says “1 reply” and then you see any replies to comments. I’m the “1 reply” to the first person who mentioned rape as the exception, so if you want to add your comment that would be good. Click here to reach the Muriel Gray article with comments at foot of page.

      • I agree with your take on Muriel Gray, dear Editor. How a hard-nosed gallus Alice like that can be considered a ‘personality’ escapes me. Joan Burnie of the Daily Record is another one of the same ilk.

        I know you don’t have much time for Joanna Bogle, but I attended one of her talks in London some time ago. To gasps of astonishment from some female delegates, she claimed that….’many women have become the men they wanted to marry’…The likes of Gray and Burnie do rather spring to mind.

        • I don’t want to sign up to comment on the article, but maybe someone who has could point out that in England Junior Doctors have been praised for picketing hospitals.

  7. No one likes the thought of the death penalty. Of course it is awful to comprehend. Someone has mentioned that there is a possibility of a person being wrongly convicted. This is very true. However, you cannot use what is clearly an exception to abolish the rule.

    What I’m seeing by some contributors to thus discussion is a disregard for Church teaching by means of a cherry picking approach to interpreting Scripture. It’s pure Protestantism.

    The fact of the matter is that the Church does permit the Death Penalty. Last year a young woman was pulled into bushes and raped at 2pm in the afternoon. This happened within 200 yards of my home. Now, this premeditated attack is horrific. Would it have happened if the perpetrator had known the punishment for this violent attack was likely to be death?

    It is a wicked society that will protect the life of a rapist but not that of the unborn baby. What if, when the child is 3, 4, 5 etc they begin to resemble their father ? Could they be put to death then?

    I think women must have been put under pressure by their husbands to abort babies conceived as the result of rape. It is an awful situation but those men need to take a long hard look at themselves. The baby is completely innocent and my view is the husband in these situation has a duty before God to provide for that baby.

    So, in conclusion, yes, I do believe a rapist should be executed before an unborn baby.

    • Perplexed quoted The CCC, and Lily cites an expert in an article from ETWN.

      US States that permit Capital Punishment have the same problems with crime as do those that do not execute their citizens.

      Significant numbers of rapists in India have been executed but still it remains a significant problem.

      No system of justice is just if it executes innocent people. To take an innocent life as a deterrent is immoral and unjust, and is an attempt to take the place of the only Author of Life, God himself.

      When I last checked, from time immemorial The Church has cited Holy Scripture, as appropriate, in her teaching. Holy Scripture is not the tool of Protestants, but The Word of God entrusted to The Church.

      • The CCC gives Luke 23:40-43 as evidence of capital punishment being supported in Scripture.

        The Church has always put scripture and tradition side by side.

        There may be plenty of reasons why the death penalty doesn’t always deter, and the American system is a crazy one, IMHO because they keep people on death row for years and years, so the person tempted to commit a capital crime isn’t thinking he is going to be put to death soon, if caught. That’s one thing that I always think when I hear about the American system. If they were facing death soon after sentencing, they might think twice before killing or raping someone.

        • I don’t see how the passage you refer to can possibly be taken as support for capital punishment, but it doesn’t really matter. The Church permits capital punishment under certain circumstances (which almost never arise) but does not instruct us to impose it.

          • That passage IS cited in the CCC as scriptural support for capital punishment (check it out) because in His conversation with the two thieves being crucified alongside Him, Jesus does not correct the “good thief” when he tells his partner in crime that they deserve their punishment, that being put to death is a just punishment for their crime, but that Jesus is innocent. Our Lord doesn’t contradict that, thereby recognising the right of the State to use capital punishment if it deems it necessary.

            • As I have said all along, I accept that the Church permits capital punishment in certain circumstances- albeit circumstances which will very rarely, if ever, arise. The Church does NOT define any circumstances in which Catholics are obliged to favour imposing the death penalty. We are free to hold varying opinions on the subject.

            • At another time, Jesus said,”Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.”
              Have you ever wondered why some people live lives of crime and you don’t?

              • Have you ever wondered why some people live lives of crime and you don’t?

                No, usually I can see why. Many criminals have led lives of appalling tragedy and often of childhood neglect and cruelty. What I find remarkable is all those who have suffered such treatment who don’t turn to crime, but there it is. It is unarguable that capital punishment is permitted by the Church, but I am personally not in favour of it, for 3 main reasons.

                Firstly, it’s a strange person who can execute someone coldly.
                Secondly, there are those innocents who are executed – a terrible fate.
                Thirdly, there is always the possibility that the criminal may find salvation, if given enough time and opportunity.

                However, between a rapist and an innocent child there is no contest when it comes to who should die.

                • Well said Therese, except that there is never any likelihood that anyone has to choose between killing a baby in the womb or killing his rapist father, so it is pointless trying to answer the question put to us in this thread.

          • Eileenanne,

            Those circumstances “which almost never arise” is another of those Modernist myths. The circumstances confront us every day on the news for every country in the world. There are plenty of circumstances screeming out for a re-introduction of the death penalty. Our society has fallen apart since it was stopped.

            • I am referring to the limitations the Church places on when capital punishment is permissible. These mean that occasions when Catholics can legitimately support the death penalty wiill be extremely rare. I can’t think of a situation where there would be no other way of protecting society than execution of a criminal. However heinous his crimes, he can always be contained. If that is so, we may not kill him.

        • Lily,

          Excellent point about the length of time convicts spend on death row in the USA. I bet stacks of them die natural deaths before their execution date arrives. I agree – if they were facing a sooner rather than later date of departure, they might well think twice about helping their granny kick the bucket. It would sure stop me in my tracks, believe me 😀

        • Lily

          You cited an article in which an expert says exactly what I am saying. The problem is you used it to counter me. Don’t you think you should listen to your own expert?

        • In every system where there is a legitimate right of appeal, which is properly observed, it takes years to carry out the execution. In places like North Korea, and Saudi Arabia, no such delay exists. I think I know which system Jesus would approve of. As I cited in an earlier post, one person in England was found to be wholly innocent 16 years after his execution. That is not providing justice for anyone.

          • Who alone can judge,

            I’d be a rich man if I heard “I think I know what Jesus would do” in Protestant churches. It confirms what I’ve often believed – many modern Catholics, just like Protestants, don’t really believe in Our Lord. They believe in a mythical, namby pamby, flower wearing hippy version of Him.

            How can you possibly know if Our Lord would prefer the judicial system of North Korea or the United States? That statement is one of the most ridiculous things I’ve read in a long time.

            • I think Jesus and his approach to the woman accused of adultery, and The CCC gives a clear indication of how Jesus might think, and neither points to summary execution, without the right of appeal to an impartial judge. Neither The CCC or the example from the life of Jesus could be presented as a Protestant world view either.

      • Who alone can judge,

        How do you know that serious crime would not be even worse in the US and India if not for the death penalty? And don’t tell me you’ve read some stats.

        By the way, it has been highlighted recently that India is not acting anywhere close to severely enough on men who rape women. It is a regular occurrence in that country and the death penalty is rarely used for it. In fact, perpetrators are rarely charged. There’s a big problem with rape in India precisely because there is scant use of the death penalty.

        • Some rape victims in this country also feel our nation doesn’t take the crime seriously, or respond well to victims.

        • How do you know there would be LESS serious crime if the death penalty were available? I am happy to consider some stats.
          There would be no point in India or any other country introducing the death penalty for rape if alleged perpetrators are rarely charged. That is the issue that needs to be addressed.

          • Well said eileenanne. Victims of rape in the UK want a system of law, and a support network, that works. That is the same in most countries I imagine.

        • I think I cited the fact States with Capital Punishment are no less lawless, or free of the most heinous crimes. That is just want country!

          I also think the evidence is that if a person thinks they will be executed no matter what then there is no reason to cease their bad behaviour.

  8. Eileenann

    Maybe the best people to judge on capital punishment are those that have been affected by serious crime.

    It is easy enough pontificating when it is well away from your own doorstep.

    • Those who have been tragically affected by serious crime are the least qualified to determine punishment. These decisions need to be made coolly and rationally, not through a fog of hurt and anger. Though actually it is surprising how many victims of dreadful atrocities are forgiving of the perpetrators.

      • Eileenanne,
        I believe your entire stand on this matter is beyond reproach and I congratulate you on what I see as a balanced, compassionate, well-informed and just approach to what is a very throny problem.

      • Eileenanne

        I`m afraid my opinion differs from yours. It is those who have been tragically affected by serious crime who are now being involved in the sentencing of some of these criminals.

        It is not as if they are being asked the next day what punishment should be meted out. In some cases it is years after.their “fog of hurt and anger” has subsided.

        I would maybe think differently myself if a life sentence meant life but there is a murderer on the loose in Scotland at the present moment who absconded after his weekend leave.

        Do you not think the family of his victim should have some say in the matter as I`m sure they will be panicking until this person is captured or surrenders.

        And by the way, it was coolly and rationally made decisions that allowed him to abscond in the first instance.

        There is at least one dangerous prisoner in Scotland at the moment who has publicly promised to spread more havoc when he is released (shortly) from prison.

        Let`s hope you and Perplexed don`t get in his way when he carries out his threats.

        • Well said, Frankier.

          I suppose there would be a good many liberals changing their opinions if one of their loved ones was on the receiving end of a serious crime. I genuinely hope that never happens to any of them, however.

          We need the death penalty back in use as soon as possible to get our society back to some kind of civilisation again. At the moment it’s open season on the innocent and the guilty get a cosy prison life at the expense of the tax payer. I would much rather see the death penalty back than live in that kind of upside down system. But that’s what Satan does, he turns all the old established ways on their head and calls it progress.

          • I suppose e there would be a good many liberals changing their opinions if one of their loved ones was on the receiving end of a serious crime.
            Possibly, but that is a weak argument. Those who are deeply emotionally involved are seldom best placed to make important decisions.

            • Eileenanne

              What about the decisions of those who are not deeply emotionally involved? Are they always right?

              According to your logic, they must be.

              Could you tell me what deeply emotional involvement Tony Blair had in Iraq?

              Again, according to your logic, he must have had it in abundance when you see the poor decision that was made.

              • Oh dear Frankier. Just because deep emotional involvement may adversely affect decision making we cannot assume emotional detachment in itself guarantees good decision making. It’s the old all dogs are animals but not all animals are dogs argument.

  9. “The guilty get a cosy prison life” oh please! Prison is certainly not a cosy life, it is a dreadful place to be. The system is harsh, dehumanizing, underfunded, and there is little room for the restorative justice programmes which actually may help prisoners to turn their lives around. In my six year experience of working as a lay volunteer in the chaplaincy of a big remand prison, I can honestly say I have met few inmates who find prison cosy. Only maybe the homeless who find it preferable to life under a hedge. The majority have significant mental health issues and many come from appalling backgrounds. Oddly enough, the most decent seem to be the lifers who in most cases are there because of one crime only. I am not talking about serious serial killers or terrorists however. Bad as our prisons may be I would not like to see them become the human death row warehouses as in the USA.

    • I was once shown round one of our older prisons which housed mainly short stay prisoners. The cells our Victorian forefathers designed for single occupancy were mostly furnished with bunks and housed two men.

      • Christiana2 & Eileenanne,

        I fairly regularly visit a prisoner in one of Scotland’s best known prisons. He is a Protestant gentleman who has been reading our newsletter for years now, and whom Miss McMoneypenny and I met for coffee and conversation about Scriptures, just before he was sentenced. We didn’t know anything about the charges against him/court-case – I dare say he was, understandably, hoping to be acquitted – but I have kept in touch with him since his incarceration.

        He’s been in two prisons since sentencing and I’ve visited him in both; they are both very modern buildings. He tells me that he has no complaints. Lovely airy buildings and rooms, good food and respectful prison officers. So far, thankfully, he’s had good cell-mates as well. I’ve no problem with any of that – we are supposed to be a civilised society and revenge is never a healthy path to take. I just don’t think it’s wise to make out that prisons are tough places today. As he would tell you, it’s the loss of one’s liberty that is the punishment, really.

        Some people, however, argue that that is not quite good enough, and that imprisonment, certainly for serious crimes, should mean that prisoners miss more than the freedom to walk to the local library or organise an evening out.

        I’m no expert on any of this; I know that the idea of executing someone horrifies us today, probably much more than the heinous crimes committed that would in bygone days have led to the rope. The possibility of an innocent person being unjustly executed (less likely now, thanks to DNA, it seems) is definitely upsetting. I think of close relatives of mine who might be falsely charged. I hope none of us are naïve enough to think we have a wonderfully honest police force – let’s leave that gullibility to the Question Time audiences. So, I know that if any close relative of mine were falsely charged and executed, I’d go, as we say in Glasgow, bananas.

        But that said, if we are talking about principles here, then we must admit that the principle of capital punishment finds strong impetus in both the Old and New Testaments. Someone pointed out that Christ excused the woman caught in adultery and thwarted the proponents of the death sentence in that instance, but that is different from the principle of the right of the State to execute in certain cases and within the parameters of justice and social safety. Mob rule cannot be equated with a legitimate justice system. As pointed out above somewhere, Our Lord Himself did not denounce the State execution of the two thieves crucified with Him.

        We’re obviously not going to reach consensus on this topic. I deliberately juxtaposed the killing of a rapist with the killing of an unborn child because I guessed that the former suggestion would meet with rage, whereas we are so de-sensitised to the killing of babies in the womb, notwithstanding the “O but we all KNOW that abortion is wrong… ” that I guessed the thrust of the discussion would be on the rights and wrongs of capital punishment. The sad fact is that we are not really horrified about abortion, certainly not as horrified as we are at the thought of capital punishment, else we would talk about it day in and day out and at every opportunity, or at least refuse to vote for any political party which refused to abolish such an inhuman, evil law. The passive acceptance of it is shocking, absolutely shocking, within the Catholic community, bishops included.

        Anyway, we’re not going to agree so I suggest we leave it there, otherwise we’re going to end up going round in circles. I think we all recognise that the Church does accept the right of the State to sanction capital punishment if deemed necessary – and, really, that is all we need to know. We don’t have to like it or campaign for it, but we cannot claim that it is immoral. That, bloggers one and all, is really the nub of the matter.

        • Petrus,

          I can’t see how rapists (and other sex offenders) can’t be rehabilitated. They can’t be excluded from God’s grace,surely?

          • Margaret Mary,

            They can’t be excluded from God’s grace, no. However, I don’t think someone capable of committing such a terrible crime can be reintegrated into society. I could never trust a rapist or paedophile to live an independent life. I also think these crimes are so horrific that the State must have the strongest deterrent possible.

            Sent from my Samsung device

            • Petrus,

              You seem to think that God’s grace doesn’t extend to the person changing his or her thinking and even being appalled at their own sins, wanting to change and live a good life. It doesn’t make sense to say they can get grace but cannot change and live to please God.

              • Nicky

                I haven’t put any limits on God’s grace. What I’ve said relates to the role of the State. How can a violent rapist (we do need to acknowledge that all rape is not the same) or paedophile ever be trusted again? If a convicted paedophile moved in next door to you claiming they had “moved on” and were now disgusted by their actions, could you really trust them? Would you really feel comfortable?

                Anyway, the issue here is the right of the State to execute offenders.

                Sent from my Samsung device

          • It does seem that sex offenders are more difficult to rehabilitate than other offenders. The programme that used to run at Peterhead had many successes, but I don’t know if it was transferred elsewhere when the prison closed.

            • Eileenanne,

              That’s very interesting. I wonder what the programme consisted of. Do you have any further details?

              Sent from my Samsung device

              • Not really. I just recall reading about it when Peterhead was closing and people were protesting that the expertise there might be lost or scattered.

              • Surely, the programme must have been corresponding with the grace of God? What other programme could it possibly be?

      • For decades I have visited prisons. The punishment is the restruction of liberty, and free movement. In every other respect, the dignity of the human person, and justice demand they have rightful access to everyday necessities.

        The current Pope has prioritised work with people in Prison more than any other Pope. To quote him: ‘I have always been very attached to them, precisely because of my awareness of being a sinner. Every time I go through the gates into a prison to celebrate Mass or for a visit, I always think: why them and not me? I should be here. I deserve to be here. Their fall could have been mine. I do not feel superior to the people who stand before me.
        And so I repeat and pray: why him and not me? It might seem shocking, but I derive consolation from Peter: he betrayed Jesus, and even so he was chosen.’ “

          • Petrus

            To repeat the punishment is the restriction of liberty. therefore, it follows they have access to books, t.v., family visits, telephones etc. etc.

            • I’m sorry I totally disagree. TV and books? You have got to be kidding! For rapists and murderers? I agree they should have a comfortable living area, decent food, access to medical care etc but TV?

              Sent from my Samsung device

              • Petrus

                Our Lord has made it quite clear to all of us that we will have to account to Him for every word and action, and that Purgatory is a place of great suffering, a prison if you will, where expiation is worked out in suffering until the last penny is paid, though with hope.

                That being so, prison for serious offenders should surely reflect in some small measure what the divine wisdom has created out of love for the purification of repentant sinners in eternity? Hardship and suffering has a habit of bringing people closer to God.

                But perhaps Eileenanne, Perplexed and WACJ think the human dignity comfort route is a better way to go? I don’t.

        • Who Alone Can Judge

          You see, this is where Pope Francis gets all confused and says silly things. Of course we are all sinners and we all depend utterly in the mercy and grace of God. But there also has to be a recognistion on our part that we need that mercy and grace. For many offenders there is no such recognition and no remorse for their crimes.

          Do you expect judges all over the world to take Pope Francis’ bewildering view and start acquitting all serious criminal offenders on the grounds that they too are sinners and have no right to judge and sentence. I mean, come on!

        • I wouldn’t quote this Pope as evidence of anything if you want to win an argument with an informed Catholic. He’s very attached to convicts and hates traditional Catholics.

      • Eileenanne

        I have only been shown around Kilmainham Jail when interested in getting the true story of Ireland`s past. I have no desire to visit any other.

        I have, however, worked in the construction of every type of civil engineering project, above and below ground, above rivers and railways, on motorways, dams and deep sewers. You name it, etc.

        I have been involved in the construction of Assessment Centres, borstals and (only) one prison.

        I have also worked in the building of a few nursing and care homes.

        Guess where I would rather spend my final days if it had to come to a choice?

        There are three or four scoundrels awaiting sentence on the Hatton Gardens
        jewel robbery at the present time, or so I`ve heard anyway.

        At the ages they are at they will be far better off spending the rest of their time in prison. It`s free, after all. Especially if it is in a prison of the type I have previously mentioned. Nice and warm in winter, ample food, gymnasiums to keep nice and trim and no gas, electricity or grocery bills.
        Even kept away from danger in the outside world and all the human rights that you are entitled to. Who needs freedom?

        On the other hand, some of their old school chums who tried to earn an honest living and scrimped and scranned all their days to keep a roof over their heads and provide for their families will be lying in one of the timber framed nursing homes at a cost of (approx.) £1,000.00 a week paid for by their savings PLUS the sale of their home.

        There is a prison inmate from Kilmarnock who is in custody for beheading and removing the limbs of an innocent young man from the same area. He has cost the taxpayers a fortune in legal aid for (mostly failed) appeals and has virtually become a lawyer himself owing to his incessant appeals.

        This person has a house lying empty in Kilmarnock and isn`t being sold for his upkeep.

        Where is the justice here?

        By the way, was the `older prison` you visited in Arrochar? It sounds like it to me.

        • For the sake of accuracy, and in case you have frightened the wits out of anyone budgeting for a nursing home, let me correct your assertion that care costs £1000 per week,

          The actual cost is around £650 per week, but everyone gets free personal and nursing care which is paid directly to the home, leaving the resident to find about £400-£450 from savings and income. Pensions are of course paid as normal so savings last longer than your figures would suggest.

    • Christiana

      Lifers? One crime only? And they’re not even killers? Is that not terrible!

      I suppose if you get life you really don’t have many opportunities to commit
      more crimes anyway, unless you get a long weekend leave.

      I understand the hardships you talk about. It must be boring looking out the cell bars watching lucky people queuing up at bus stops in the middle of winter to go to work while having to suffer the noise of a football match on Sky Sports
      or the click of snooker balls behind you.

      I suppose though that the wee, odd, smuggled-in “sweeties” can help relieve the boredom.

      • Frankier,

        I suggest you change your newspaper. You’re falling for a load of right wing claptrap.

        • Eileenanne

          Thanks for making my day.

          What a relief!

          Here`s me thinking what a terrible world we`re living in and all I need to do to make life better is to change my newspaper.

          Hang on though: my wife`s just reminded me: I don`t buy a newspaper.

          That`s me back to square one.

          Could you advise as to whether I should visit a therapist or just subscribe to the Glasgow Observer? Or is it right wing too?

      • Frankier

        I used to do the IT support in prisons and it is every bit as cosy as you describe. They are even permitted conjugal visits from wifes these days. Yes, Any hardships the inmates suffer in today’s prisons come from other inmates, not the system, which caters for their every need.

  10. Thanks editor for this article about the 40daysforlife event in Glasgow.

    I hope that as many people as are able will join in this vigil and give time up to pray for closure of all abortion wards and centres and for all those involved in abortion.

    The law to allow abortion is heinous and must be reformed. Many clinis in the US and even one in London has closed due to the prayers during these vigils and many lives have been saved.

    Rape is always the excuse for those who agree with abortion and it is a terrible crime but its a fact that there are few pregnancies as a result of this crime.
    What about the crime of the abortionist who makes a living out of killing? This surely deserves the death penalty..

    8 million babies have been killed since the law changed in 1967. (in England and Wales)This cannot go on. Most of them have been allowed on the grounds that to proceed with the pregnancy the mother would suffer mentally and physically.

    It is a fact that the mother is most likely to suffer these symptoms if she has an abortion and regret it for the rest of her life.

    • Clotide,

      There doesn’t appear to be any timescale given for the vigil on the 40Days website – perhaps you would let us know the details of when to go along.

      And I hope enough of us go along to make an impression – at least as many as would be likely to turn up at a protest against capital punishment !

      • Editor,
        Below is a copy of details about the 40days for life in Glasgow.

         Dear Fellow Pro-lifers, 40 days for life is coming to Glasgow in February of this year.   You have probably heard of it- the idea is that a prayer and fasting vigil takes place for 40 days from 8 am until 8 pm and volunteers are needed to fill time slots. It is planned for the new Queen Elizabeth Hospital from 10 February 2016 until 20 March 2016.  Please find attached the flyer for this event which has been organised by Rose Docherty, 40 Days for Life Scotland, Campaign Director. SPUC Scotland is involved in the organisation, so too the Sisters of the Gospel of Life, the Knights of Saint Columba and others. 
        40 Days for Life is a prolife campaign to raise awareness about the crisis of abortion in our country.  This is the FIRST TIME 40 Days for Life has been done in Scotland.  It is a wonderful God given opportunity to help establish a culture of life in Scotland and to raise awareness about the crisis of abortion in our small country.Can you undertake to come and pray for an hour each day>  or one day a week during Lent?
        40 Days for Life prolife campaign comprises of three component parts.
         
        1 prayer and fasting, 2. peaceful vigil and 3. community outreach.
         

        It is taking place outside of  the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital (formerly the old Southern General Hospital ) across the road from  the Hardgate Road entrance over the 40 days from Ash Wednesday (Day 1)  till the night before Palm Sunday 20th March (Day 40)
         There are a number of events planned around 40 Days for Life.
        Two of the main people from 40 Days for Life are flying in from America to London and then flying up to Scotland to meet with the ‘backroom support’ to encourage us onwards.
        This meeting to which you are invited is on Thursday evening 4th February at 7pm. At the Mercure Hotel, Ingram Street, Glasgow.  They will drive back down to England the following morning to Nottingham which is one of three new sites doing 40 Days for Life for the first time.
        Then there will be a;A Kick Off Rally (hoping to hold this in George Square at 3pm on Saturday 6th February for an hour.
         A Mid Point Rally to support  the people taking part in the vigil which will operate from 8am until 8pm each day of the 40 days. People are being asked to sign up for an hour per week during Lent in order to help sustain an unbroken daily twelve hour prayer vigil to end abortion in our country.
         A Closing Rally once again hoping to hold this in George Square at 3pm on Palm Sunday.
         
        What we are now concentrating on is filing our vigil schedule. For this we need good folk to network asking family /friends/fellow Christians to agree to step forward and come along and pray silently for an end to abortion in our country. According to ISD Online based on 2014 official abortion statistics , 30 plus children are aborted each day in Scotland this equates to 900 per month, the equivalent of a high school of young people! Women, men and wider family members are being hurt by abortion every day.
        Can you become a Day Captain, which involves taking responsibility for one of the 40 Days ( a date will be allocated) and be responsible for recruiting four people per hour for each of the twelve hours. We aim to have an unbroken 12 hour prayer vigil each day from 8am until 8pmpraying for an end to abortion.So can  you help by spreading the word please?.
         We are concentrating on the first days and weeks at this time. 
        40 Days for Life is a part of the solution to abortion, the beginning of the end of abortion in our country.

        So to conclude and summarise:  we are a  prayerful and peaceful Christian vigil prayer campaign to end abortion in our country. We are not a demonstration.There will be no noisy shouting, no loud hailers, no graphic images outside the hospital or at rallies, no rallies at the vigil site.
        Everyone taking part is asked to sign a Statement of Peace promising to act at all times in a Christ like manner.
         
        IF YOU CAN TAKE PART IN ANY WAY CONTACT ROSE DOCHERTY BY EMAIL on Rose Docherty
        STATING 

        Your Name::::
        Email address
        Your Mobile::::
        Your Home No:::::
         
        Your availability: eg ..I can do an hour each day from 11am till noon
                                             I can do each Thursday evening from 7pm till 8pm
                                             I can do from 8am till 10am on Mondays 
                                             (these are just examples, you know best what you can give)
         
        Do remember to dress appropriately for standing outside
         
        We also hope this is something our young people may wish to get involved in.
         

  11. Despite all the liberal rot being fed to us today about human dignity, this particular era in history is the most violent and lawless of all, and, coincidentally, the most apostate. In fact, even the ancient pagan cultures were more civilised than our modern world. It is a world in which anything and everything goes, where morality and decency are scorned, where the villains get more sympathy than their victims, where the young have their innocence robbed from them at the earliest age, where murder is so common place that it is barely any longer news worthy and where people are terrified to travel for fear of terroists with universal reach.

    In Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and Syria tens of thousands of innocent people are being wiped out every year in conflicts they did nothing to provoke. There is civil war in the Ukraine, frequent stand-offs between North and South Korea, the ever present Israeli/Palestinian war, fragile relations between India and Pakistan, between China and Taiwan and between the US/EU and Russia, which could, and may yet, go nuclear. There is constant sabre rattling between Israel and Iran, and between Iran and Saudi, while that so-called ISIS group of Muslims brings terror to the African and other nations.

    Add to the mix millions of aborted babies every year, a new movement to legally kill off the terminally ill, that anti-cultural anomoly called “gay marriage,” a drugs epidemic in every Western country together with a rocketing suicide rate, and we can see how human dignity fairs when the dignity of God is trampled underfoot.

    In fine, despite the obvious and rapid disintegration of society everywhere in our time, human dignity remains the war cry of those who reject the tried and tested methods of the old Christian order, including capital punishment for those who seriously offend against the common good.

    The world today constantly “dialogues” and “diagnosis”, looking for answers to questions that it was once certain of, and all the while it falls deeper and deeper into the abyss of liberal chaos, heading to Hell in a handcart called human dignity.

    • Athanasius,
      Are you really opposed to the idea that humans have dignity? I find it hard to believe, but it does seem to be what you are saying.

      • Eileenanne

        My argument is that the dignity of God is primary and that man’s true dignity lies in loving and serving his Creator. This pseudo dignity that is spoken of today, a dignity that upholds abortion, homosexuality, contraception, and all manner of other anti-cultural, anti-life behaviours, not to mention the spiritual falsehood of ecumenism and inter-religion, which is even worse, is a great lie. This is degradation disguised as dignity.

        • Athanasius,
          Still slightly confused about your thoughts on dignity. Are you saying that we should only respect the human dignity of good people? That seems a slightly odd attitude for one who claims to follow Christ.

      • That’s a very literall interpretation of Athanasius ‘ words. My understanding is that he is condemning false human dignity.

        Sent from my Samsung device

        • Well I did think it must be something like that. I assumed that even In the first 1960 years AD, the era in which Athanasius seems to want to live, the Church taught that all people have dignity and must be respected as such.

    • Too true, Athanasius. Even Catholics, practising Catholics, have been hoodwinked and led astray by the Human Rights brigade. Everyone has rights apart from those who are faithful to God’s law. Everyone’s opinion is valid apart from those who uphold and defend the natural law.

      The modern Catholics on this thread have really excelled themselves this time. They make noises about pro – life but I’ve never seen a more passionate response to a pro – life thread. Alas, these people are more vociferous in defending rapists than the unborn. Truly a sign of these liberal times.

      Sent from my Samsung device

      • “Alas, these people are more vociferous in defending rapists than the unborn”.

        In my opinion, these words are a total distortion and misrepresentation of the contributions to this thread by people whose views differ from your own.
        Since they merit no further attention, all I can do is…LOL!

        • I think you are pretending there is no answer to my comment because you can’t think of one!

          Sent from my Samsung device

          • Petrus

            If this is an example of “Traditional” pro-lifers defending life then it is no wonder that genuine pro-lifers, like myself, struggle to get our voices heard when we are drowned out by “Catholic” members of the “Hang them and Flog Them Brigade.”

            Not one of the current 136 posts is pro-abortion, or seeks to defend abortionists.

            • You have missed the point entirely. Pro Life threads tends to attract very few comments. However, when we discuss the possibility of the death penalty, the liberal pro lifers come out the woodwork to express horror. It does suggest that the claims of being Pro Life of our resident liberal lobby are nothing more than lip service.

              Sent from my Samsung device

              • Petrus

                On the contrary, some of us are making the point you cannot be selectively pro-life. From the moment of conception to our natural end, society should protect human life. Thus protect us from hunger, disease, warfare, and Capital Punishment etc. It not only true that only God can judge it is also true only God can take life. At least, from a truly Christian, pro-life, perspective.

              • What do you expect Catholics to say about abortion? Once one person has said it is wrong and the rest say “I agree” the discussion is pretty much over.

                • But the same applies to capital punishment. That’s not stopped the anti-capital punishment people here from banging on about it and making out the Church teaches that it’s wrong, when it teaches no such thing.

                  • It is important to emphasise that the Church permits capital punishment only when certain conditions apply. That’s the point I and others have tried to make. Some folks seem to want to execute people rather more freely.
                    I and others also believe those conditions will apply so rarely that to all intents and purposes the Church rejects capital punishment, at least in a country like the UK.

          • How right you are! I have no answer to a statement based on a total distortion of the facts. However, there is one question I can ask and I will do so using your own terminology/modus operandi: please name/ quote one message in which a blogger defended a rapist rather than an unborn child. I await your reply, but won’t be holding my breath.

            • I’ve answered that question. The lack of comments on previous pro life threads speaks volumes. Look at the number of comments here, many of which expressed outrage at the death penalty for rapists. The facts speak for themselves.

              Sent from my Samsung device

  12. Who Alone CJ

    No, from a truly Catholic perspective, the state can take life in certain circumstances, whether we personally like it or not. That is a fact, which as a Catholic you mustaccept, so please don’t hurl insults about Traditional Catholics being the hang and flog em brigade. You demean your position by such statements and leave yourself open to the suspicion that you dislike Catholic Tradition. In my experience, (and I have plenty) many NO Catholics are pro-choice when it comes to their own daughters, or in the cases of rape/handicap, Does this make NO Catholics as a whole the “I’m all right Jack” brigade? Of course not, so please don’t try to muddy the waters.

    • Therese,

      The important words in your post are IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.

      The “certain circumstances ” are described in the CCC will apply very rarely if ever. That is the point some here are missing.

      • Eileenanne

        Of course the Modernist CCC has reduced every penalty, including canonical, to practically no penalty at all, except for the “illicit” consecration of bishops, which was stepped up in severity, so you won’t find the Church’s true teaching on justice in the Modernist CCC. Check out the old Catechism for the answer.

    • It appears many here want to hang practically every criminal even when The CCC, and The Pope, say it is no longer a serious option in most situations.

      Any notion of rehabilitation or forgiveness is acknowledged. The teaching of Jesus on such matters is discarded.

      • Who Alone Can Judge

        The teaching of Jesus is not discarded, as you claim. On the contrary, it is upheld by 2000 years of consistent Magisterial teaching and the teaching of the saints and Doctors. You see, for Traditional Catholics the Church didn’t begin with Vatican II, the conciliar Popes and their new CCC, even if they are canonising each other to convince us otherwise.

        • Athanasius

          I believe recent teachings are wholly consistent with Holy Scripture and Tradition, and faithful to the role and mission of The Church.

          The Church didn’t begin in 1962 but it didn’t end then either. It is the living Bride of Christ.

          • Who Alone Can Judge

            “I believe recent teachings are wholly consistent with Holy Scripture and Tradition, and faithful to the role and mission of The Church.”

            Prove it! find me any pre-Council Magisterial teaching that demonstrates “consistency” with conciliar ecumenism and religious liberty.

            “The Church didn’t begin in 1962 but it didn’t end then either. It is the living Bride of Christ.”

            This is the same as the modernist “Living Tradition,” which term has been b*stardised from its original meaning, the same living Tradition handed down unchanged, forever fresh, forever life giving, to one that equates to evolution in doctrine and morals, changing the faith to suit the fashions of the modern world and meet with its, not God’s, approval.

        • I’ve never seen such an outrageous statement. “The teaching of Jesus is discarded”? I’ve never even heard a Protestant say such a thing.

          Sent from my Samsung device

          • Had a bad day at the office, Petrus? I suspect you may have misinterpreted the statement “The teaching of Jesus on such matters is discarded”. Look at it carefully, all is not as it seems at an initial, superficial and prejudiced glance. And while we’re at it, read it in context, that might make the task of understanding slightly easier. And don’t forget to apologize and withdraw your own statement, once it has sunk in.

        • Athanasius

          Do you accept it is the teaching, and practice, of The Universal Church, from time immemorial, not to publicly venerate a person, or call them a Saint, until The Church has definitively raised them to the Altars?

          • Who Alone Can Judge

            Yes, the Church has always had that precaution. But then, the Church had the same immemorial precaution of a lengthy and in-depth investigation into the life of a person before declaring them a saint. That has changed dramatically under the last few Popes who appear to be canonising very quickly on demand.

            John Paul II alone canonised more saints in his Pontificate than all his predecessors back to St. Peter. No wonder the world press mocked the process by dubbing the Vatican ‘a saint factory.’

            Nothing has been left unsoiled by our post-conciliar Popes, they have changed, or permitted changes, to every aspect of the Cahtolic Faith so that there is barely any resemblance to the old Apostolic religion left. Tragic to say, these Popes have seen themselves as new Apostles of a New Pentecost and they have almost destroyed the Church in this Modernist delusion.

            Read St. Pius X’s Pascendi, he warns us of the Modernist deception and blows its dangerous reformist doctrines wide open.

        • Athanasius

          “You see, for Traditional Catholics the Church didn’t begin with Vatican II, the conciliar Popes and their new CCC, even if they are canonising each other to convince us otherwise.”

          Love it!

          with regard to CCC and old Catechism; there was a book out some time ago (around 2008 or so; not sure if it’s still around) “No crisis in the Church?” by Simon Galloway which compares the teaching of the Church before and after Vatican II. What many Catholics do not realise is that the modern catechism which came out during the Pontificate of John Paul II contradicts previous church teaching in many instances. Why did we need a “new” catechism anyway?? Must be to blend in with all the other “new” things in the wake of V2.

          • Spiritus,

            Exactly so! The New CCC was produced to support the New Liturgy, the New Ecclesiology, the New Ecumenism, the New inter-religious syncretism, the New freedom of conscience, the New Code of Canon Law and the New opening to the world. It is not consistent in many aspects with the Catechism of old because that Catechism basically condemned all of the aforementioned novelties as destructive of the Catholic religion.

      • Who Alone Can Judge,

        I forgot to say that you greatly exaggerate when you ssay that many here want to hang practically every criminal. The criteria for using the death penalty was laid out at the beginning of this discussion and has been maintained throughout. The death penalty is for those who seriously offend against the common good of society.

        Rehabilitation and forgiveness are always open to even the most serious criminals, but that should not deter the State from its duty to protect the common good. Quite often, in fact, criminals faced with imminent death have made their peace with God, which they might not have done otherwise.

        St. Thomas Aquinas scorns the false mercy that gives serious criminals endless opportunities to rehabilitate, while they merrily continuing with their crimes against the unwary innocent. Rehabilitation and forgiveness must be sought by the offender if it is to be genuine. They can’t have it imposed on them by a shower of hippies who fear to do their duty.

          • Who Alone Can Judge,

            Neither can the tens of thousands more innocent victims of so many murderers and drug dealers, for example, appeal for justice while they who killed them enjoy breathing in fresh air. There will always be cases of flawed judgement, which is regrettable, but on balance the courts usually get it right and justice is done, beyond reasonable doubt.

            If we accept this argument of no death penalty for fear of the odd mistake, then the military term “collateral damage” should be thrown out of the window and many murder charges should ensue against armed forces personnel.

            • I accept we believe it is wrong to take a life. That is the only thing that should kind our thinking on the topic.

              Added to that is the knowledge the The CCC says that the criteria for sanctioning state murder cannot be fulfilled.

              A dead criminal cannot repent or rehabilitate and denying that right is contrary to everything Jesus has taught about forgiveness and repentance.

              I have also met reformed drug dealers and rapists

              • Who Alone Can Judge

                I have answered the points you raise about the odd false judgment and the equally flawed judgment of the Modernist CCC in other places. I really do not have the itme to go through it all again.

                I have also stated several times that St. Thomas Aquinas scorned the notion that capital punishment should be abolished in the forlorn hope of criminal repentance while multitudes of victims continue to pay the ultimate price at their hands.

                • I think eileenanne has asked you to source you rendition of that teaching of Aquinas. I have also pointed out the sheer, absolute, folly of basing your understanding of the faith on the writings of a particular saint, as they may sometimes correctly elucidate the faith, but at other times offer a subjective view.

                  The writings, and sermons, of Aquinas do not necessarily equate with the fullness of Holy Scripture and Tradition.

                  • Who Alone Can Judge

                    What? Are you suggesting that one of the greatest Doctors and saints of the Church, he who is called “the Angelic Doctor,” whose teaching is used to form priests in Catholic seminaries, may have spoken or written at times in a way not consistent with Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition? Am I misunderstanding you?

                    Now, I have already posted the words of St. Thomas and St. Augustine somewhere further back in this thread. However, your wish is my command!

                    The following is a summary of Summa Contra Gentiles, Book 3, Chapter 146 which was written by St. Thomas prior to writing the Summa Theologica. St. Thomas was a vocal supporter of the death penalty. This was based on the theory (found in natural moral law), that the state has not only the right, but the duty to protect its citizens from enemies, both from within, and without.

                    “For those who have been appropriately appointed, there is no sin in administering punishment. For those who refuse to obey God’s laws, it is correct for society to rebuke them with civil and criminal sanctions. No one sins working for justice, within the law. Actions that are necessary to preserve the good of society are not inherently evil. The common good of the whole society is greater and better than the good of any particular person. “The life of certain pestiferous men is an impediment to the common good which is the concord of human society. Therefore, certain men must be removed by death from the society of men.”

                    The argument that evildoers should be allowed to live in the hope that they might be redeemed was rejected by him as frivolous. If they would not repent in the face of death, it was unreasonable to assume they would ever repent. “How many people are we to allow to be murdered while waiting for the repentance of the wrongdoer?”, he asked, rhetorically.

                    • Throughout history, and the world, there are examples of people who have committed heinous crimes who have repented, and amended their lives. Indeed, if such change were not possible you are calling God a liar.

                      However, your claim was that St Thomas said miscarriages of justice need not concern The Church, or Society, as the greater good is served by executing people who may have done the said crime. It is that point that Eileenanne and myself have asked you to source. You must have a very interesting take on Abraham in his dialogue with God, to cite only one of many Scriptural examples, in Genesis 18 in relation to Sodom and Gomorrah, and that dialogue contradicts your view.

                      Further,I would say again that in declaring a person a Saint, or a Doctor of The Church, The Church is not saying their every thought, or opinion, be given equal weight or equal opinion.

                      In another discussion you cited Cardinal Dulles (?), because he wrote well, and cited sources you read in the same way, some could do that with Cardinal Kasper on various topics. Stop canonising the views of particular people when you choose to ignore The Pope, The Magisterium and The CCC.

                    • Who Alone Can Judge

                      “Throughout history, and the world, there are examples of people who have committed heinous crimes who have repented, and amended their lives. Indeed, if such change were not possible you are calling God a liar.”

                      Of course heinous criminals have repented by the grace of God through history. But, alas, this is not the general rule. St. Thomas points this out in the quotes above. He also states that it is more likely that imminent death will bring a criminal to repentance than a lighter sentence.

                      “…However, your claim was that St Thomas said miscarriages of justice need not concern The Church, or Society, as the greater good is served by executing people who may have done the said crime.”

                      I made no such claim.

                      “It is that point that Eileenanne and myself have asked you to source.”

                      Here’s the original source again. This is the third time I’ve copied this over. Look it up!

                      Summa Contra Gentiles, Book 3, Chapter 146.

                      “You must have a very interesting take on Abraham in his dialogue with God, to cite only one of many Scriptural examples, in Genesis 18 in relation to Sodom and Gomorrah, and that dialogue contradicts your view.”

                      I didn’t mention Abraham or Sodom & Gomorrah.

                      “Further,I would say again that in declaring a person a Saint, or a Doctor of The Church, The Church is not saying their every thought, or opinion, be given equal weight or equal opinion.”

                      True, but it is surely the wise and humble thing to do to give more credit to the opinions of a Doctor/Saint than our own, don’t you think?

                      “In another discussion you cited Cardinal Dulles (?), because he wrote well, and cited sources you read in the same way, some could do that with Cardinal Kasper on various topics. Stop canonising the views of particular people when you choose to ignore The Pope, The Magisterium and The CCC.”

                      Cardinal Kasper? Now you’re getting ridiculous. If Cardinal Kasper told me it was raining outside, I would go to the window to check.

                      Cardinal Dulles, as you rightly point out, wrote well and cited sources. That’s what genuine Catholic scholars do to emphasise the truth.

                      I choose the Papal Magisterium of 2000 years over the personal opinion of an individual Pope, who just happens to be a Modernist. My way is the true Catholic way. The alternative way is the way of the sycophant. Remember, only dead fish swim with the current!

                      And, as I have pointed out several times, the CCC is seriously flawed in places. Compare it with the old Catechism and you’ll see what I mean. If you really want to bolster your case, quote me from the old Catechism and I’ll take heed.

                    • Athanasius

                      I haven’t the time, or inclination, to check all your posts but I am pretty certain you have said, without citation, that St Thomas thinks that occasionally executing the wrong person is not a problem, as, ultimately, it serves the Common God. You have been asked four times to source that strange claim. You haven’t yet.

                      It is true you didn’t mention Genesis 18, but I am asking you to explain how your view of Capital Punishment is consistent with Holy Scripture, and that passage in particular.

                      Genesis says quite clearly that God will spare a whole community of extremely sinful people if a few good people were in their midst.

                    • Who Alone Can Judge

                      Some bloggers have indicated that this exchange between us is getting tiresome. I agree.

                      To be honest, no genuinely Traditional Catholic could review the Scriptural and Church teaching on capital punishment and still maintain that it should be abolished. The fact that you do maintain that stance, and have clearly not even read half the evidence I’ve presented, suggests that you’re not really looking for the truth of the matter. You have your modernist opinion and I stick with the Traditional teaching of the Church. We’ll leave it at that.

                    • I disagree, Athanasius. This is not an exchange . It’s a defence of the Truth v the defence of the indefensible.

                      Sent from my Samsung device

                    • “Your eye shall not pity; it shall be life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot” (Exodus 19:21);

                      “You have heard it was said (……..), but I say to you (……..)” (Matthew 5:38-40).

                      More perplexed than ever, lol!

                    • This is the sissy, hippy, flower power “Jesus” that only exists on Songs of Praise

                      Sent from my Samsung device

                    • Petrus,
                      I would just like to remind you that this was the Jesus of Matthew chapter 5. I believe the words of the Lord merit a little more respect, don’t you?

                      Athanasius,
                      No, not the entire justice system, just remove the death penalty from the face of the earth. I think we’re getting there, slowly but surely.

        • Athanasius, you said:
          The death penalty is for those who seriously offend against the common good of society.

          All of them? Or only those who cannot be safely contained by other means?

      • Who alone…

        Jesus upheld the right of the State to use capital punishment. That’s already been demonstrated. YOU are discarding that key fact. It’s got nothing to do with forgiveness. Many people will have forgiven the murderer of their friend or family member (a few spring to mind, as I type this) but that doesn’t meant the culprit goes unpunished. Think. And pay attention. And don’t mix issues. Amateur debaters learn that early on in their training.

        ps what’s the weather like in Wales?

          • You have some nerve demanding an answer from me to a question you have asked another blogger, when your entire history here is one of refusing to answer simple questions. What a nerve.

            The answer is pretty obvious; you wrote:

            “The death penalty is for those who seriously offend against the common good of society.” (quoting Athanasius) Then asked:

            All of them? Or only those who cannot be safely contained by other means?

            You fail to define what you mean by “other means”. However, within that limitation, the obvious answer to your question is that the authorities must discern what is the nature, and what is the level of the danger posed to society when deciding the appropriate punishment. The Church does not command the State to employ capital punishment, merely acknowledges the right of the State to do so, if deemed necessary.

            Now, I have to get on with the February newsletter, with which I’m already late for a number of reasons, but please do not EVER imply that I am not willing or able to answer any question from you. As I’ve just said, with your history here, ignoring questions posed to you right, left and centre, you have some nerve demanding prompt answers from anyone. If I were to list the questions you’ve left unanswered, I’d be here for another four hours.

            • Editor,

              I thought it was obvious that “other means” meant anything other than killing up to but not necessarily, whole life imprisonment.
              I did not “demand” anything. I made a polite request.

              Editor and Athanasius,

              A simple yes or no would have been fine. I am still unsure whether you accept the Church teaching on capital punishment in its entirety,

              • Eileenanne,

                There are other threads on this blog dealing with really serious matters affecting the faith, and quite possibly the salvation, of souls. I just wondered if your zeal on this thread might at some point spill over into those other, more important, ones. The rest of us have moved on from this exhausted subject.

                • I agree, Athanasius. Eileenanne only cares about one upmanship. It’s such a shame it’s never worked. I think there’s very little zeal in her.

                  Sent from my Samsung device

                  • Petrus,
                    When people resort to personal remarks about those with whom they disagree it is usually a sign that they know they’ve lost the argument.
                    Funny how often it happens to me here…

                    • Eileenanne,

                      “You do realise you don’t HAVE to visit or contribute to the threads you find tiresome?”

                      Yes, I do realise and that’s why I’ve stopped debating on this thread.

                    • Eileenanne

                      Don’t flatter yourself, you are not a regular contributor to the threads on this blog and you’re certainly no Catholic apologist.

                    • No personal remarks, eileenanne, just an accurate observation based on many years experience. In all your years of trolling you have never once won an argument. I don’t think you could win an argument on the Faith with a mirror !

                      Sent from my Samsung device

                • Athanasius,
                  I happen to,think this is an important subject. Sorry for boring you. You do realise you don’t HAVE to visit or contribute to the threads you find tiresome?

              • Eillenanne

                The example from the life, and death, of St Maria Goretti, and what happened with her would be rapist, and killer, highlights why Church teaching is nuanced.

                He attended her canonisation, and lived as a lay brother in a Monastery until his death in 1970.

                I believe at the canonisation Mass he received Holy Communion from The Pope.

                • WACJ

                  Maria wasn’t, thank God, raped. She was attacked and fought and prayed to protect her purity. Her attacker gave an honest account of the attack, which was how Maria’s sanctity became known. He repented and spent his life in a monastery in penance for his crime.

                  I remember doing a project with pupils on Maria Goretti when I was teaching in England and what stick came my way from the modernists on the staff who didn’t want pupils feeling they had to say “no” in such circumstances. Crazy people.

                  The Church’s teaching on capital punishment isn’t “nuanced” – it is clear. The Church has always simply acknowledged the right of the State to use capital punishment if deemed necessary, and that remains the case.

                  • She was killed by an attacker with rape on his mind. In 1950, if not now, that in many places would be a Capital crime. The Church welcomed the sinner.

                    • Wrong. The Church welcomed the repentant sinner. Huge difference.

                      And having a crime on one’s mind, isn’t grounds for prosecution, let alone capital punishment. Otherwise, I’d be sitting in a prison cell by now – wishing I’d never HEARD the name WACJ… 😀

                    • Editor

                      The man killed Maria and wanted to rape her.

                      The majority of posts here favouring Capital Punishment have said categorically such people cannot repent, and have added to the list drug dealers etc.

                      You have not corrected one of those who have said such people cannot change/repent but you correct me?

                    • WACJ

                      No one on this blog has said categorically that serious criminals cannot repent, so that is a deliberate falsehood on your part.

                      What we have said is that very serious criminals who offend grevously against God and the common good of society are much more likely to repent if faced with the death penalty and an imminent judgment by God.

                      St. Maria Goretti’s killer probably repented as a result of the grace she obtained for him. He is a one-off.

                      However, as St. Thomas Aquinas rightly observes, one-offs of this nature are not sufficient grounds upon which to abolish capital punishment. The price of acting in so foolish a manner is that many more innocent people suffer at the hands of serial offenders who never convert. Hence, your argument is completely untenable.

        • I don’t much listen to weather forecasts.

          However, to make a more serious point. Central to the legal, and penal, system in the Judaic Christian Tradition is the rejection of retribution, and the well founded hope that people can be rehabilitated and restored to society. That is not surprising as, as St Paul said, what proves that God loves us is that Jesus died for us whilst we were still sinners.

          • Who Alone Can Judge

            Yours has been the liberal, counter-cultural argument of the past 60 years and the world is now in a far worse place with violent offenders than it was when the hippies first supplanted justice with the joss stick. I’d say that fact more than anything we can say here kills your argument completely. As Our Lord admonished, judge the fruits!

            I don’t know why you insist on this modern psychiatric approach to justice when 2000 years of Church teaching opposes it. Is it just because the liberal Popes John Paul and Francis have said so, or have you actually researched your subject?

  13. Saying that one does not think that rapists should be executed is not the same as defending them! Rape is a terrible crime but to lump all rapists together and put them in the same category as paedophiles is not sensible or just. And I am going to stick my neck out here and say that there are degrees of rape i.e. The man who drags a stranger into bushes and rapes her is not necessarily the same as the young man who is encouraged by his intoxicated girlfriend who then changes her mind athe last minute and then cries rape. I am not for a minute condoning his actions but should he face the death penalty? Surely he could be rehabilitated into society? Or is my thinking just too liberal?!

    • Christiana

      Move over – there’s room for my neck on that block as well. I think inebriated young men are not shown anywhere near the tolerance that inebriated young women are in some of these cases. The men are supposed to maintain control while under the influence, but the women aren’t. Crazy.

    • Christiana,

      Of course distinctions have to be made, and you have correctly made one concerning different “degrees” of rape. The law and the courts are best placed to judge individual cases. What we are addressing here are the callous criminals who premdeditatedly set out to commit very serious crimes against society.

  14. Just in case anyone missed this I have posted again and hope many people join this great event to pray that there is an end to abortion.

     Dear Fellow Pro-lifers, 40 days for life is coming to Glasgow in February of this year.   You have probably heard of it- the idea is that a prayer and fasting vigil takes place for 40 days from 8 am until 8 pm and volunteers are needed to fill time slots. It is planned for the new Queen Elizabeth Hospital from 10 February 2016 until 20 March 2016.  Please find attached the flyer for this event which has been organised by Rose Docherty, 40 Days for Life Scotland, Campaign Director. SPUC Scotland is involved in the organisation, so too the Sisters of the Gospel of Life, the Knights of Saint Columba and others. 
    40 Days for Life is a prolife campaign to raise awareness about the crisis of abortion in our country.  This is the FIRST TIME 40 Days for Life has been done in Scotland.  It is a wonderful God given opportunity to help establish a culture of life in Scotland and to raise awareness about the crisis of abortion in our small country.Can you undertake to come and pray for an hour each day>  or one day a week during Lent?
    40 Days for Life prolife campaign comprises of three component parts.
     
    1 prayer and fasting, 2. peaceful vigil and 3. community outreach.
     

    It is taking place outside of  the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital (formerly the old Southern General Hospital ) across the road from  the Hardgate Road entrance over the 40 days from Ash Wednesday (Day 1)  till the night before Palm Sunday 20th March (Day 40)
     There are a number of events planned around 40 Days for Life.
    Two of the main people from 40 Days for Life are flying in from America to London and then flying up to Scotland to meet with the ‘backroom support’ to encourage us onwards. This meeting to which you are invited is on Thursday evening 4th February at 7pm. At the Mercure Hotel, Ingram Street, Glasgow.  They will drive back down to England the following morning to Nottingham which is one of three new sites doing 40 Days for Life for the first time.
    Then there will be a;A Kick Off Rally (hoping to hold this in George Square at 3pm on Saturday 6th February for an hour.
     A Mid Point Rally to support  the people taking part in the vigil which will operate from 8am until 8pm each day of the 40 days. People are being asked to sign up for an hour per week during Lent in order to help sustain an unbroken daily twelve hour prayer vigil to end abortion in our country.
     A Closing Rally once again hoping to hold this in George Square at 3pm on Palm Sunday.
     
    What we are now concentrating on is filing our vigil schedule. For this we need good folk to network asking family /friends/fellow Christians to agree to step forward and come along and pray silently for an end to abortion in our country. According to ISD Online based on 2014 official abortion statistics , 30 plus children are aborted each day in Scotland this equates to 900 per month, the equivalent of a high school of young people! Women, men and wider family members are being hurt by abortion every day.
    Can you become a Day Captain, which involves taking responsibility for one of the 40 Days ( a date will be allocated) and be responsible for recruiting four people per hour for each of the twelve hours. We aim to have an unbroken 12 hour prayer vigil each day from 8am until 8pmpraying for an end to abortion.So can  you help by spreading the word please?.
     We are concentrating on the first days and weeks at this time. 
    40 Days for Life is a part of the solution to abortion, the beginning of the end of abortion in our country.

    So to conclude and summarise:  we are a  prayerful and peaceful Christian vigil prayer campaign to end abortion in our country. We are not a demonstration.There will be no noisy shouting, no loud hailers, no graphic images outside the hospital or at rallies, no rallies at the vigil site.
    Everyone taking part is asked to sign a Statement of Peace promising to act at all times in a Christ like manner.
     
    IF YOU CAN TAKE PART IN ANY WAY CONTACT ROSE DOCHERTY BY EMAIL on Rose Docherty
    STATING 

    Your Name::::
    Email address
    Your Mobile::::
    Your Home No:::::
     
    Your availability: eg ..I can do an hour each day from 11am till noon
                                         I can do each Thursday evening from 7pm till 8pm
                                         I can do from 8am till 10am on Mondays 
                                         (these are just examples, you know best what you can give)
     
    Do remember to dress appropriately for standing outside
     
    We also hope this is something our young people may wish to get involved in.
     

    • This is certainly an initiative that deserves our full support and participation, thanks for bringing it to our attention, Clotide!

  15. Thank you Clotilde …..this is marvellous information which I have shared with lots of PRO LIFERS …I really hope you get a massive turn out ,change hearts and minds and of course save precious little babies ..well done all

  16. This is a great initiative, Clotilde, for prayer and sacrifices are the only way to stop abortion in its tracks. May God bless this initiative and all who take part in it.

  17. Thanks Perplexed, WW and Athanasius for your responses and even if you cant join this vigil please pray for those taking part and for their intentions. There is the March for Life taking place today in Washington US which you can check out on google. Even though the worst snow storm in years it is still going ahead.

    • Clotide,

      I hope to attend on Ash Wednesday afternoon with some others, and hopefully on other occasions thereafter.

      I have just received the following letter, sent to the Daily Mail, from a pro-lifer, regarding a pro-abortion article published yesterday (don’t have time to search the link, but anyone who wants to find it, should Google):

      Dear Sirs,

      I am writing in order to take issue with the Daily Mail, with regard to the very pro-abort ‘spin’ on today’s Alice Nettleingham abortion story.

      So much nonsense is talked about ‘choice’ and that ‘the only option’ for her was to have her unborn baby aborted. So, whose choice was it to have sex? Did anyone ever get pregnant from washing their car? And if a pregnancy results from a so-called ‘casual fling’, is this the child’s fault? We hear so much talk about ‘human rights’ from the UN et al. The most fundamental of all human rights is surely the right to be born, without this all other human rights are meaningless. Why should a new and unique human being be denied the right to birth, just because his (or her) parents refuse to face the consequences of their own reckless behaviour?

      And before anyone says…’ah, but what about rape?’…I would point out that abortion statistics consistently show that abortions carried out on the grounds of ‘rape’ number less than 0.5%. The vast majority are carried out for so-called ‘social reasons’ i.e. where there is nothing ‘wrong’ with the baby and no danger to the mother’s health.

      When she attended for her ‘procedure’, I don’t suppose anyone at the abortuary bothered to warn her of the likely medical consequences of it in years to come. The abortion-breast cancer link, for example, is something that’s been known about since 1957. It has since been verified by a number of independent studies, notably one conducted in 2007 by the London-based Pension and Population Research Institute, results published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons (see http://www.jpands.org/vol12no3/carroll.pdf). Research Director Patrick Carroll found that having a very first pregnancy aborted is ‘especially carcinogenic’. How strange that every cigarette packet carries a health warning, yet these baby-butchers are under no such obligation to warn their ‘customers’.

      One other thing I wish to point out is that the Daily Mail should not be giving any publicity to the likes of ‘Women on Waves’. This organisation’s ‘abortion ship’ has docked in several countries where abortion is illegal, to distribute the abortion-inducing drug RU486 to women who wish to try their hand at ‘DIY abortions’ at home. Rebecca Gomperts and her crew are a bunch of pirates, in my opinion.

      Sincerely [identity withheld]

  18. Dear all …thanks PAtricia for putting this wonderful letter up to fill in the details the Daily Mail has published an awful article from this Alice regarding her abortion story out in the East what is so shocking they have printed details of where to get an abortion in Asia PREGNANT: WHERE TO GET AN ABORTION IN ASIA
    COUNTRY

    Bangladesh

    IS IT LEGAL?

    Technically no but MR is permitted up to 9 weeks of pregnancy
    ANY EXCEPTIONS?

    Yes: to save the woman’s life and MR is available
    WHERE TO GO

    Women on Waves

    Cambodia
    Yes
    /
    Women on Waves
    China
    Yes
    /
    Women on Waves
    Japan
    Yes but there are some problems: surgical abortion procedures can be outdated and Mifepristone is not registered in Japan
    Misoprostol is available in the pharmacy
    Women on Waves
    Malaysia
    No
    Yes: to save the woman’s life and preserve her physical and mental health.
    http://www.womenonweb.org to obtain abortion pills
    Mongolia
    Yes
    /
    Women on Waves
    Nepal
    Yes
    /
    Women on Waves
    Philippines
    No
    Yes: to save the woman’s life but law does not state this explicitly. Misoprostol is registered but difficult to obtain
    http://www.womenonweb.org to obtain abortion pills
    Sri Lanka
    No
    Yes: to save the woman’s life. Misoprostol is available under the brand name Keshimiso but difficult to get.
    http://www.womenonweb.org to obtain abortion pills
    Thailand
    No (but there is help in Bangkok)
    Yes: in the case of rape, to preserve mental health and if there is fetal impairment. In Bangkok, abortion is available for all situations
    Cabbages and Condoms
    Vietnam
    Yes
    Misoprostol is under the brand names Alsoben and Misoprostol Strada. Mifespristone is available as Mifestad 200 and Nopreg pil
    http://www.mariestopes.org.vn
    The main abortion services in Asia are Marie Stopes, Women on Waves and Women on Web.
    Source: http://www.teacaketravels.com
    Unplanned pregnancy: She fell pregnant to a man she had been seeing for about six weeks, despite using protection

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3409625/Alice-Nettleingham-sought-abortion-Asia-shared-story-help-others.html#ixzz3xzOYO5RO
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

    Well WOMAN ON WAVES /WOMEN ON WEB is a totally illegal organisation that post abortion pills or delivers them by drones it used to carry out abortions on its ship ..hence women on waves the women hten use the pills without medical help and are at great risk of harm if not death …up to now the proverbial blind eye seems to be turned by Governments ..YET A APPER SUC HAS THE MAIL CHOSE TO PRINT ALL THESE DETAILS giving a massive free advert to totally ILLEGAL ABORTIONS en masse
    If you feel concerned you can contact D mail ….EDITORIAL @MAILONLINE.CO.UK….voicing your concerns ….I wrote but have had no reply as yet and I also telephoned them I spoke to a lady called Ashlee………

  19. http://www.womenonwaves.org/en/page/702/how-to-do-an-abortion-with-pills–misoprostol–cytotec
    These abortions are totally illegal …..and yet the D Mail printed details of how to get an abortion in Asia .. please .see article above
    I rang DM and e -mailed them and phoned them ..to date no reply
    If you wish to add your voice them please contact
    EDITORIAL @MAILONLINE.CO.UK

    These abortions are done with no medical help …….what of the LAws in those Countrys including Poland and Ireland everyone seems to be turning a proverbial blind eye ..sadly ..could you imagine if it were PRO LIFERS ?

  20. Who Alone Can Judge

    You made a claim yesterday, which I responded to with a challenge. You have not met that challenge yet and I would be grateful if you did. Here was the exchange.

    You said: “I believe recent teachings are wholly consistent with Holy Scripture and Tradition, and faithful to the role and mission of The Church.”

    I responded: “Prove it! find me any pre-Council Magisterial teaching that demonstrates “consistency” with conciliar ecumenism and religious liberty for example.”

    Well, do you have authoritative pre-Council sources to back your claim?

  21. I’m receiving emails from readers convinced that WACJ is actually one of our previous trolls, who blogged under various names, and it could be that he has changed some of his data, and thus is not being blocked.

    He’s certainly showing the same characteristics; high volume of comments posted, papolatrist mindset, and ignoring key questions.

    If this continues, and I’m convinced he’s one of the banned culprits, he’ll end up in the same sorry place as them – out of eyeshot.

    • Phew! Absolutely agree. He / she seems to be the same troll. The pity of it is that not only do I not read his / her posts but, as a consequence I don’t read our wonderful bloggers replies either! Yeah, just block him / her….

      • Crofterlady,

        That’s a real pity because the one good thing about these numpty trolls is that they afford us an opportunity to do some very basic educating, over and over again. Repetition is the mother of education. So, I hope nobody else follows your naughty example.

  22. It can be very annoying having to trawl through endless tit-for-tat type arguments between trolls and regular bloggers, more so when the troll in question simply does not wish to “get it” and is only interested in prolonging an argument. I am a “lurker” myself; I do not post very many comments I admit but I DO read the blog quite a bit.

    • Spiritus,

      There’s no excuse for you not coming on regularly – not with a beautiful avatar like that! Almost beats Pew Catholic’s sunny smile.

      Watch now, she’ll be on to defend herself … Pew P.Catholic (middle name “Predictable”!)

  23. Editor,
    I see from above that you will attend the 40daysforlife vigil in Glasgow so that’s great. I’ve been in touch with the organiser mentioned who is co-ordinating it so that every day is covered. I hope to be at the initial rally on the 6th Feb and going various days throughout so maybe see you there.
    Keep spreading the word!

    • Clotide,

      I hope we don’t have to sign up for a specific time, as I have things to do, people to see, and it may be mid afternoon before we make it to the hospital. If we just turn up, hopefully, we won’t confuse anybody with a list.

    • Wendy

      I totally agree most people are slowly forgetting the atrocities at planned parenthood
      The Vatican seems to want the faithful to stop being obsessed by abortion,and get with the message of “Love and Mercy”

  24. Margaret Mary

    That is an excellent article, thanks for posting it. I suggest both Eileenanne and WACJ read it carefully, and then read it again!

  25. I meant to make the observation yesterday but couldn’t, but the killer, and would be rapist, of St Maria Goretti, Virgin and Martyr, not only repented, and attended her canonisation but went on to become a lay brother who lived, and worked, in a Monastery in 1970. (The main events being in pre-conciliar Church where the death penalty was not much debated).

    Maria, was canonised very speedily.

    As to the number of posts I have made, then they have mostly been in response to others who wrote as many, if not more.

  26. Editor,

    Not sure whether you need to sign up for times at the 40days vigil. I think the organisers are concerned that they have people for every day but you would be able to join on an ad hoc basis.

    • Clotide,

      What is a real pity, is that the 40 Days for Life people don’t take graphic banners and posters, but stick to the silent, prayer vigil “protest”. The fact that they don’t is actually putting off people from attending, as I found out at Mass today. Some Catholics are more interested in sending a clear message to SPUC to waken up and stop being weak, than anything else. And it’s not making a blind bit of difference to the proponents of abortion. They’re still determined to stop the vigil if possible and in the meantime keep presenting it in the media as a violent, militant attack on the woman’s (no) right to choose.

      I’m still going to go, and today’s Sunday Herald headline and evil front page has only determined my resolve. Despite the fact (and at least one journalist must have checked the website, surely; they’re a clueless bunch but that’s basic research) they are insisting on portraying this vigil as a violent US militant type event – not that they are right about those either; it’s not “militant” or “violent” to speak to the women going into the clinics and, as I’ve said before, I’m sick of seeing these women portrayed as wee mousy types who are afraid of their own shadow. If their mental health is so poor that they are afraid of potentially being shown a picture of what they are about to do, with perhaps a plea to think again, then they shouldn’t be allowed to make a decision to kill their unborn child.

    • You just go up to the last comment which has a reply button, click that, and your reply appears. It works for me.

  27. Thanks Josephine, but to do that your comment often appears way beyond the post you mean to answer, which makes following the sense rather difficult.

    • I think it does. I haven’t done it for a while but I remember being surprised that my comment appeared at the end of the section where there were no reply buttons. It used to happen a lot (I’ve not been on for a while) and it used to irritate me, so when I learned to go up to the last reply button in the bit of the argument I wanted to answer, then my comment used to appear where I wanted it to. I just tried to remember to say the name of the blogger I was answering as a back up!

  28. http://www.heraldscotland.com/services/helpfaq/

    I have just spoken at length to an employee of The Herald /Sunday Herald about the total unfairness of reporting anything pro life the idiot who wrote the offending article was Judith Duffy ….I was told e -mails are welcome so all contact details are to be found above please ring in with your concerns of screaming ,scaremongering often innaccurate atricles regarding anything pro life yet lauding anything done by the pro death camp

    • Thank you Wendy. I’ve just submitted the following complaint:

      I am appalled at the entire coverage of the forthcoming pro-life vigil, 40 Days For Life, to be held in Glasgow during Lent, commencing 10th February.

      The wild claim that this is a US style militant attack on women going in for abortions, is disgraceful. It is a downright falsehood.

      In any case, the issue of whether or not the US prolife campaigns and protests are as described in your paper is dubious; the reporting of those events reflects the pro-abortion view about the “termination” of life in the womb; those who support abortion see all and every expression of concern or protest as “militant” – as is clear from the hysterical response to 40 Days For Life, here in Glasgow.

      The portrayal of the pregnant women in your reports as little mousy types afraid of their own shadow, does not, I would wager, stand up to examination. If it does, then these women are clearly not mentally fit to be making a decision to end the life of their unborn child. If they are unable to defend their decision, then there’s obviously something wrong with the decision. And if there’s nothing wrong with abortion, if it isn’t killing a human life, why the agonising and the need for protection from those who have a different view of the sanctity of life in the womb?

      None of these issues were covered in any of the Herald reports on this event. The reporting has been biased, hysterical and completely un-researched.

      From the first report I read, by Gerry Braiden, right through to the disgraceful front page horror story on page 1 yesterday, Sunday 24th January, The Herald has demonstrated that it cannot be trusted to report a major issue, an important, if controversial event, dispassionately and fairly. Let’s leave aside for the purposes of this complaint, how, on earth, a group of people praying outside a hospital full of sick people can be “controversial”. That’s one for greater minds than mine.

      I ask that, to remedy the dreadful reporting to date on this event, that your reporters will be rebuked and that the paper will carry an alternative report, giving the FACTS about both abortion, and the 40 Days For Life vigil. I will happily recommend a suitable writer.

      It’s not just about a few terrified women (whose “choice” should have been NOT to have engaged in intimacy if they didn’t want to face and deal with the possible natural consequences) feeling “intimidated” by a line of concerned (for them as well as their baby) fellow human beings praying outside the hospital where they plan to end the life within them, but it’s about a society which persistently talks and writes about child abuse while supporting, viciously, the murder of millions of babies in the very place where they should be safest – their own mother’s womb.

      Finally, I would write a letter for publication on this subject but I have long been censored in the pages of The Herald. There was a brief respite during the editorship of Douglas-Home, who told me to start submitting again and some letters did make it into print, but, that short respite aside, the fact is that since the former Deputy Editor, Kevin McKenna, gave instructions that all letters from me and anyone else from Catholic Truth were to be sent “upstairs” (and thus never published) I have come to see that my letters continue to be censored and so there is no point in submitting anything. I do hope, therefore, that entering this formal complaint will, at least, result in some improvement in the dreadful reporting on the abortion vigil.

      Yours sincerely

      Signed…
      Editor
      Catholic Truth

  29. From: wendy walker
    Sent: 25 January 2016 13:55
    To: letters@theherald.co.uk
    Subject: SUCH HYSTERIA ABOUT A PEACEFUL PRAYERFUL EVENT

    Dear Editor
    I am writing to you with deepest concerns about a truly horrific article regarding ..40 Days for Life ..written by Judith Duffy
    It is this sort of horrendous reporting that causes fear and hate .
    Yes 40 Days for Life originated in the USA ..but has spread now to be all over The World …it is peaceful and Prayerful and reflects the huge amount of people who care for both Mum and baby equally .
    Mercifully people are realising the absolute horror of abortion …the grotesque way in which these little children are killed ..the appalling consequences of physical and mental conditions left on people affected by abortion ..
    For the screaming pro abortion camp they try to justify abortion by harrassing innocent people doing nothing illegal but just showing up abortion for what it is ….funny though the secular press does not call them fanatics ,and all the unsavoury names kept for pro life people it really is discrimination .
    There is never a pro life article to counterbalance this horrendous one sided view
    As Human life begins at conception its time for people to realise the sheer scale of abortion ,its effects on Society and not be swayed by the futile arguments of the screeching harpies who clamour for more infant bloodlust
    Yours truly
    Wendy Walker

  30. Editor and Wendy,

    Thanks Editor and Wendy for your responses and hope to add mine to their mischievous attacks on those who speak out for the voiceless with the truth and not in the high pitched screaming hysteria used by the pro-aborts.

    I just read that in Belgium they are now realising that abortion is inhuman and not equable with the basic human right to life.

    I didn’t read the article in The Herald but agree that we must respond to these scurrilous reports which do nothing to help the women who have experienced abortion or allow the truth behind the killing of all those human beings brutally forced from the wombs of their mothers We must expose their lies and show what abortion does to babies, mothers, fathers and society.

    Most of the women who go down this tragic road are physically and mentally scarred for life and those who say that they do not suffer are in denial.
    If they did print the truth about abortion there would be a huge reduction in abortion and the abortionists would lose a lot of money. Who is funding this wall of silence?

    As many people as possible should write to the Herald and explain what they know about abortion.
    Even if our letters do not get printed at least someone has to read them.

  31. Sorry . It should read that the Netherlands have suddenly decided to rethink their liberal attitude to abortion.
    This article can be found on the SPUC Scotland web-site.

     
    The liberal scientific think-tank of the Netherlands just came to the conclusion that the current abortion-law is against the liberal principle that ‘every life has value’.  This includes the life of a ‘fetus’ before 24 weeks!  The most striking remark is: ‘Nederland toestaat dat een kinderleven in de meest kwetsbare fase overgeleverd is aan de wil van de moeder, en de toevallige omstandigheden waarin zij verkeert”, noemt zij „een ongemakkelijke waarheid.”’  Which roughly translated means ‘the Netherlands allows a child’s life in it’s most fragile phase (fetus), to be entirely dependable upon a mother’s self-determination’.  They call this an undesirable situation and are pleading for a RESTRICTION of current abortion law! and this is a real sea-change in the Netherlands.  The way pregnancy termination is currently allowed in the Netherlands, is contrary to the liberal principle that each individual human life in itself is valuable. The concept of ’emergency-pregnancy’ in the current abortion law should be strengthened,  argues the Liberal writer Charlotte Lockefeer-Maas in the edition of the Liberal Reveil that appeared Wednesday. Lockefeer-Maas is editor of this magazine published by the Prof. B.M. TeldersStichting, the scientific think-tank of the ruling liberal party VVD.
    The Liberals must consider, according to Lockefeer-Maas that the majority of abortions in Netherlands are performed because of socio-economic reasons. “Terminating a pregnancy is killing a living human life”, according to the editor.
    The pro-abortion argument that termination of pregnancy is entirely the self-determination of the woman called Lockefeer-Maas not sustainable. “Undeniably is damage to another lifetime inflicted, in the most extreme extent that other life comes to an end.”
    Also abortion after a rape is unjustifiable by only referring to the self-determination of women. “The question that must be answered is: How does one justify evil (the crime of the rape) with another evil (ending an innocents persons life?).”
    Liberals, who base their political thinking on the individual, have to recognize that new life begins at conception. “The smallest embryo is valuable in itself and not only after 24 weeks, or if the individual can be considered an autonomous being”, she argues in the Liberal magazine Reveil. That the Netherlands allows a child’s life in the most vulnerable phase to be totally surrendered at the mother’s will”and the accidental circumstances in which it finds itself”, she calls “an inconvenient truth.”
    If the health of the baby and/or the mother are at stake, then choosing abortion after a personal consideration of the involved is justified, according to Lockefeer-Maas. The current abortion law however goes far beyond the legal measures of such exceptional situations. She advocates the concept of “emergency” in the current abortion law must be applied much more strictly, “in order that the right to life and the value of each human life, also that under 24 weeks, is recognized and respected.”

  32. My letter to ‘The Herald’….

    For the attention of the Editor

    Dear Sir,

    I am writing to take issue with the Herald with regard to your extremely prejudiced article.

    40 Days for Life are planning a peaceful and prayerful pro-life witness event, yet the Herald has portrayed the group as a bunch of screaming, hysterical and bullying fanatics, who are out to harass and intimidate ‘poor downtrodden and defenceless women’ who ‘need’ abortions. I condemn your blatant anti-life bias in the strongest terms.

    For your information, during WWII many pregnant women in concentration camps had their babies forcibly aborted. The ‘method’ commonly employed was a Nazi officer’s jackboot stamped on the mother’s abdomen, with the inevitable grisly consequences. At the Nuremberg Trials, the fiends who did this were rightly convicted of ‘crimes against humanity’. Some 20 years later, however, the 1967 Abortion Act was passed – and virtually overnight the deliberate killing of unborn human life became a ‘choice’ and a ‘women’s right’. This is one of the worst examples of double standards in human history, when abortion is all wrong if it suits one agenda, yet ‘all right’ if it suits another.

    So much guff gets talked about ‘human rights’. The most fundamental of all human rights is surely the right to be born, without this all other human rights are meaningless. If abortion is not a ‘crime against humanity’, those convicted at Nuremberg ought to be officially pardoned and their surviving relatives awarded £millions in compensation.

    Abortion is either a human wrong or a human right, but it can’t be both.

    Sincerely,
    Patrick McKay.

    Regular bloggers – do please get your e-mails/letters in!

  33. A dear pro life friend of mine who has no computer is ringing his complaint in to S Herald today re this awful article I read it out to him over the phone he lives N..U..Tyne

  34. Thank you Pat and Wendy. It is great to have your letters published here because they are not all going to be published in The Herald – if any are published it’ll be a miracle, so it gets one over on the editor of Herald Scotland by publishing them independently.

  35. There’s a call in Brazil, where abortion is illegal, to allow abortions for pregnant women at risk from the Zika virus – they don’t hang about, the pro-abortion lobby, do they? Click here to read more

    Remember, it’s not a foregone conclusion that a new-born baby will have the disease, yet they’d rather risk killing a perfectly healthy baby (not that there’s any justification in killing ANY baby) than risk the virus.

  36. I have found the posts by Eileenanne, Perplexed and Co., absolutely laughable, to say the least. Forget your post-Vatican II Modernists claptrap and instead, be obedient to the teachings of our Holy Mother the Church, whose teachings are more ancient, learned and venerable than any left-wing criminologist or bleeding heart politician, such as Lord Longford, who defended the likes of Myra Hindley, one of the most depraved women ever to live on this earth. He even campaigned for her release. Do you, Eileenanne et al, agree with Longford? Apparently Hindley was a ‘reformed character. Have you heard of Dean Corll, John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer, who murdered well over 100 young men (women in Bundy’s case) during there reigns of terror. Corll kidnapped, sodomised, mutilated, tortured and murdered young men in the most debauched manner possible. Even today some victims have never been found, causing further misery to his victim’s families. Are you seriously telling me that he has not surrendered his right to life?

    Read this SSPX source and this Tradition in Action source, and then tell me if you will maintain your current position which is blatantly modernist, and which you obstinately refuse to repudiate despite being informed of traditional Church teaching. You quote John Paul II. To be frank, I wouldn’t trust John Paul II to go to the shop for my morning paper. He was all for ecumenism, interreligious unity, collegiality and religious freedom. You cannot quote him for traditional teaching.

    Sources here: http://archives.sspx.org/against_sound_bites/capital_punishment.htm

    http://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/n013rp_DeathPenalty_Popes.htm

    http://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/n012rp_DeathPenalty_Aquinas.htm

    Yet again, true Catholic Doctrine is totally reasonable, watertight and impossible to refute.

      • I don’t want any cheese, but I have got sense and the Catholic Faith in buckets if you’d like some? You have proven that you are stricken with the same diabolical disorientation that has afflicted the entire Conciliar Church since the 1960s with your glib comment.

        • CC,

          C’mon, it was just a wee bit of fun. You have to laugh. Goodness, if we don’t laugh, we cry… or whine! 😀

          Making a bit of fun doesn’t mean anyone is stricken with diabolical disorientation. C’ mon… Smile 😀

    • Without delving too deeply I would say that the people you listed stopped killing because they were discovered, arrested, and convicted. Knowledge of a possible execution certainly didn’t deter them, and indeed, most likely, they could console themselves with the fact the penalty was the same whether they killed one or many.

      • Regardless of whether Corll, Bundy, Gacy et al were arrested and convicted, they were executed, thus providing true justice, in accordance with God’s Holy Law as laid out by the Bible and immemorial Church teaching, and also protecting society at large from further atrocities. Did you condescend to read that link? I am very open minded. Show me a link with convincing evidence opposing the death penalty and I might change my mind. Unfortunately, I haven’t found any convincing sources.

          • WACJ

            I think we’ve already WELL established that the CCC does not “oppose” the death penalty. It recognises the right of the state to use capital punishment. That the affirmation is a bit weaker than it might be, is hardly surprising. EVERYTHING is weaker than it might be – we’re living through the worst ever crisis in the Church, if you recall: remember: “Let’s not obsess about abortion”?

            • I think the reason why some say we shouldn’t obsess about abortion is that we should be seen to be consistently pro-life, and not fixate on one aspect of the death industry. Clearly you disagree, and favour Capital Punishment. Saint John Paul in his encyclical “EVANGELIUM VITAE” broadened the issue, based on the constant teaching of The Church, that God, alone, is the author of life, and he expressed himself very eloquently, and avoided what some, wrongly, see as an offensive sound-bite. And so in that light perhaps you will agree that tackling hunger, and at least treatable sickness and disease, ridding the world of weapons of mass destruction, and protecting the dying from so called “mercy killing” are relevant to the topic.

              I was part of the many demonstrations, and mass lobbies of The UK Parliament, when various MP’s tried to restrict the abortion law. It saddens me that, for example, Mr Cameron claims to favour restriction of abortion and, as yet, has only used his political clout to enact bogus Human Rights whilst having a party claiming to be opposed to The Human Rights Act!

              • WACJ

                Firstly, it wasn’t “some” who said we shouldn’t “obsess” about abortion, it was Pope Francis. Of course, other so-called Catholics probably thought so as well and only took courage to “out” themselves when he said what he shockingly said, as if butchering an innocent baby in his own mother’s womb does not stand out from every other crime against humanity, as uniquely evil.

                I note, too, that you are sticking to the totally erroneous position that the Church opposes capital punishment. Your error is akin to those ignoramuses who claim that the Church permits contraception, just because so many use it. I’m not wasting my time going over the same ground again. The Church’s position is clear, you just do not like it.

                As for your outrageous dismissal of the murder of innocent unborn babies equating their killing as equally wrong (in your view) to the State sanctioned capital punishment of the guilty, words fail. Let’s leave it there. You are never going to admit that the Church permits capital punishment even if a recent pope or two said “better not to use it if possible, but it’s still OK to do so”. You interpret that as “Capital punishment not allowed” – Governor or no Governor of half a dozen schools, there’s not a teacher in the land can help you with this one.

                N O T I C E . . .

                A pro-life activist in England, a non-Catholic lady who can tell the difference between killing an innocent baby, whether inside or outside the womb, and a fully grown adult murderer of another person, has alerted me to a “pro-choice” demonstration to “defend” the woman’s right blah blah which is set to take place in Glasgow on Saturday, 13 February. Click here to see the advertisement. I thought some pro-life groups may wish to organise something to counter their propaganda, albeit low key.

                If so, please let us know and as many of us as possible will go along.

                • Editor

                  I have said only two things: God, alone, is the author of life, and speaking of life, from the moment of conception, to the grave, we must be consistently pro-life.

                  We cannot be selectively pro-life, or choose to sanction the protection of some human beings, and not others.

                  • WACJ

                    Yes, God is the author of life. But He is also the author of lawful authority and He has delegated that authority to the civil authorities to punish those who offend against the common good, yes, even to the taking of life if the crime is serious enough.

                    There is nothing anti-Christian or anti-life in that long-established truth, nor in the similar truth concerning just war. Or would you argue that Hitler should have been permitted to overrun the world because pro-life means one cannot be selective about killing criminals?

                    • The Pope, the wider Magisterium, and the official documents of The Church, including encyclicals, The CCC, and a Saint, who is probably a future Doctor of The Church, say that “Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm – without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself – the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.” CCC2267

                      Independently of Perplexed, I cited the mark of Cain, and the pleading of Abraham for Sodom and Gommorah, which God heard, and more recently I, too, have cited Evangelium Vitae.

                      You might note that Nick Hardwick, the retiring Chief Inspector of Prisons, has , in effect said, in Britain, where we are better than most other countries on such matters, it is hell on earth.

                      Only today, on the BBC World Service, I heard of the case in China, where 7 officials are under arrest for wrongly executing an 18 year old for a crime he did not commit. China is not noted for slavish attention to human rights. Even the slightest possibility of error in judgement is too high a price to pay.

                      Another commentator cited Mass Murderers in The USA as a reason why Capital Punishment is right, but it was the detection, and prosecution, of their crimes, and not fear of execution, that brought their crimes to an end.

                      Even Pope Saint John Paul, and Pope Francis, two pre-eminent proponents of The Church teaching you dissent from, conceded that military action is sometimes necessary. As far as I know you are the only one to mention The Just War Theory on this thread. and no-one else here has questioned it. It is an interesting diversionary tactic you have.

                    • I think when this person continues to state that we are “dissenting from Church teaching” on this matter it’s time to leave him to it. There’s only so many ways to say the same thing over and over again, so if he’s struggling to understand I think we just need to move on. You can’t turn mince into steak, after all!

                      Sent from my Samsung device

  37. http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/zika-virus-linked-to-brain-damage-in-unborn-babies-sparks-abortion-debate-in-south-america-a6846226.html

    As we have said before this ILLEGAL ..group W O Waves seem to think they rule the World and thin kthey can just sail to PRO LIFE COUNTRYS .and carry out theri heious obnoxious work …they should have been arrested years ago they must have killed thousands of children Worldwide sadly even the Daily Mail Australia felt fit to give them free advertising recently ..equally sad is the deafening sillence of pro life groups and indeed The Churches …we miss so many golden opportunitys …its tragic ….It only takes for good men to do nothing for evil to provail !!!…how true

    • In terms of his thinking and actions, no.

      Thankfully, however, rape is not a Capital Crime in this country, and The E.U. will not extradite people to countries that execute people. Civilisation prevails in a once Christian Continent.

  38. I wonder if this man is a Muslim. His attitude towards women, apart from his vile view on rape, is consistent with the Islamic view of women as chattels. As regards his call to legalise rape, he should be arrested and charged with promoting serious crime. It’s nutcases like him that incite other nutcases to go out and rape. It just shows how utterly insane our liberal freedom of speech and expression laws are. Everything evil gets an airing and everything virtuous gets a bashing. How Satanic is that?

    Here are 3 of the 45 Communist goals archived under US Congressional Record as a genuine threat to American society (Appendix, pp. A34-A35), Jan. 10, 1963. The goals were exposed in the book “The Naked Communist,” written in 1958 by Cleon Skousen, an anti-Communist conservative writer. I would say it was a global threat come true, not just an American one. Is it any wonder that this man is free to promote his hateful sexual fantasies in public?

    #24 Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.

    #25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

    #26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”

    • The Marital Rape exception did not come into force in Scotland until 1989, and in England and Wales until 1991. In other words a man could rape his wife if no violence was evident!

      Likewise, in UK law women were still treated as chattel until 1870 in England and Wales, and 1881 in Scotland.

      Attitudes to women are not necessarily coloured by faith, as no Christians were challenging the status quo until those dates, and there will not many Muslims here until relatively recently. It is unfortunate to use such examples to portray other faiths, or cultures, in a light worse than our own.

      • It probably be better to say the MRE ended on those dates rather than came into force, as that is the opposite of what is meant!

      • WACJ

        I know of no other religion or culture that has its women covered head to foot with only eyes visible. I know of no other religion or culture that stones women to death (as in Saudi Arabia) for the crime of adultery while the man gets off without punishment. I know of no other religion or culture today, save perhaps Hinduism, in which women are forced to marry men, sometimes much older, that they either don’t know or don’t love. Yes, it is a faith issue.

        As for the British treatment of women in the 19th century. Well, that’s Protestantism for you. But even that wasn’t as bad as the above.

        Concerning marital rape, that’s a dubious devlopment in modern law. The whole idea behind the Sacrament of marriage is that spouses procreate. And, as St. Paul said: “better to marry than to burn”. If the marriage is of God, then, as it should be, then there can be no such thing as rape within that union, as the two are one flesh. If it is not of God, then I suppose the entire setup is open to all manner of bitterness with claims and counter claims.

        Our Lady of Fatima revealed to little Jacinta that many marriages were not pleasing to God. It’s like everything else in life, exclude God and chaos ensues.

        • “Marital rape” is a most dangerous concept and it puts all married men at the mercy of their wives. It is very easy to “cry rape” and ruin a man’s life and reputation, while the women are protected. That’s a disgrace.

        • I seem to recall that Jesus saved a woman caught in adultery but no man was ever charged.

          Perhaps the fact that you think being open to procreation means that sexually activity within marriage doesn’t also require specific mutual consent, each time it takes place, says more about you that you strange take on other cultures.

          I think 1989, and 1991, are in the 20th Century, and, as with many things, although the laws changed in 1870, and 1881, those attitudes continued for much Longer, and I think you will struggle to show that attitude only existed in “protestant” homes, and your view on marital rape attests to the problem.

          Being covered from head to foot is only a slight movement on the requirement we dress modestly at all times.

  39. As it happens I am on holiday in Dubai for a few days. One can see the most beautiful girls veiled, some in the full niqab, elegant, with toddlers scampering behind, or one can observe Western girls in “barely there” outfits. Imposed modesty or no modesty? Just occasionally I find myself thinking how easy it would be to throw on a burka to cover my ample frame and not worry!

  40. Lots of love and special blessings to all who participate in 40 Days for LIfe …perhaps those lucky enough to go will give us little snippets of how your experience was..?… It will make interesting reading …if you cannot go please remember to pray at home especially for 40 days including a Novena

    • Wendy,

      I’m planning to be there on Sunday.

      So far, I’ve heard from quite a few who’ve attended that the group have had good responses, plenty of car horns tooting in support and so on. I’ll report back when I’ve been there myself.

      • I went with 3 Protestant friends to Newcastle on Tuesday to protest abortion; we held placards, and my brave friend addressed the crowds passing. It was excruciating; we were met with strong hostility, especially from young men. There was a definite atmosphere of suppressed violence. One older gentleman came up and asked if he could also stand holding a placard, which was the only highlight. I did have some serious conversation with two young men (who were not aggressive); one of them said he was a lawyer – he doesn’t believe in right or wrong – it’s all about perception, apparently. It explains some of the decisions one reads about in court cases, I suppose.

        • Therese,

          Well done – that was a brave thing to do.

          And on top of all the rest of the chaos, we now hear of a lawyer who doesn’t believe in right and wrong. Eh? Crazy. Let’s hope he’s never made a judge. After all the “perception” of most robbers is that they need the money and there are plenty of murderers who think they’re doing society a favour by removing certain people from the planet.

  41. Thank you so much everyone who has signed ………I am so grateful
    A couple of people told me they had trouble signing so I contacted The Govt Petition to alert them ..I am just hoping it has not in some way been sabotaged because of its Pro Life ethos ….I am hoping I am totally wrong of course and its just a technical blip we really do need every precious signature thank you all again

  42. Good news regarding Scottish 40 Days ….excellent Patricia
    Do not be dismayed re Newcastle …Pro Life people must be brave and the more Souls venture out the more I feel will join …….
    Sadly people have such bizarre ideas and use all sorts of excuses to cover either their own guilt or shame or they just do not have a practical answer ……sadly of course are totally ignorant about life within the womb ..and the terrible trauma of abortion .
    I am sure any Pro Life event will be very greatly enriched with your Prayerful presence God Bless You all…brilliant

    • Wendy,

      Circumstances have conspired to make it impossible for me to get to the 40 Days event in Glasgow tomorrow, so I am determined to get there during the week at some point. I will report back then – promise!

  43. 40 Days for Life
    Dear WENDY,

    The secular media can be very skeptical of a 40 Days for Life campaign – especially when it’s going into a new country.

    That was the case in Scotland, where the media labeled 40 Days for Life as “controversial U.S. style anti-abortion campaigning.” I know it’s a mouthful, but that’s what they came up with.

    However, now that 40 Days for Life has been – as promised – peacefully carried out in Scotland over the past few weeks, the media has altered their tone … and the vigil is getting results!

    I know you’ll be inspired by the leaders in Scotland, where I visited earlier in the campaign.

    They have overcome much adversity … and they share their courage and enthusiasm with me and Robert Colquhoun, our international campaign director, in this podcast episode flavored with American, English and Scottish voices.

    (If you haven’t done so already, please help spread the word about the 40 Days for Life podcast by rating and reviewing it on iTunes.)

    Glasgow, Scotland

    “We are gathering so many stories from people coming over to talk to us outside of the hospital,” said Rose in Glasgow. “It is very inspiring.”

    This vigil takes place outside a brand new hospital that draws traffic from all parts of central Scotland.

    “While it true to say that we have had the occasional aggressive comment,” she said, “we realise that behind such experiences often there is deep pain and so we continue to pray.”

    One doctor told Rose that there were many conversations going on inside the hospital about 40 Days for Life. Patients looking out the window often see the volunteers praying in the cold and the rain.

    “It rained practically non-stop for a full week,” she said, and people have offered them coffee, food – and even new umbrellas.

    “Without exception, when we explain what the scale of the abortion crisis is in Scotland – 900 children dying each month – people are shocked and horrified,” Rose said.

    “We ask them to reflect upon this information. It can truthfully be stated that 40 Days for Life in Scotland is helping to raise awareness about abortion.”

    Nottingham, England

    “The weather was foul,” said John in Nottingham. “Cold and very wet.”

    Nonetheless, he said, a woman in her 80s arrived to pray around lunchtime. She had taken two buses from her home just to make it to the vigil – in spite of the rain – to support those who were praying on behalf of the babies.

    “She needed physical support to stand with us,” John said, “but she prayed with us for an hour.”

    Such signs of encouragement have become quite comforting in the wake of the verbal abuse hurled at the vigil participants – “mostly by random angry young men, unaware of the irony of using threatening language to say we are intimidating women, in front of women volunteers.”

    There is also a feminist group orchestrating an online petition, complaining that the prayer teams are harassing patients, using verbal abuse, and causing vandalism. “And just in case you aren’t absolutely certain,” John added, “no, we haven’t done any of those things!”

    The group received additional affirmation from a young man and woman who stopped by to talk to them – and thank them for being there.

    She had been pregnant a while back and many people had tried to persuade her to have an abortion. Despite all the pressure, she had the baby.

    “It was only a brief encounter,” said one of the volunteers, “but it left us smiling!”

    Here’s today’s devotional from Carmen Pate of Alliance Ministries.

    Day 21 intention

    Pray that we each will daily put on the full armor of God, so that we are strong in the Lord and the power of His might.

    Scripture

    For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.

    Therefore, take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day and having done all, to stand.

    — Ephesians 6:12-13

    Reflection from Carmen Pate

    I am confounded to see how the battle over the issue of life is perceived more often in churches today as political rather than spiritual. Ironically, the enemy has used this twisted perception to silence many in the body of Christ.

    We must see the battle for what it is and if we are to be prepared to face the spiritual enemy on the issue of abortion, we must daily “put on” the armor God has given us:

    Gird your waist with Truth (vs. 14) — Commit your emotions to believe truth and to speak truth, regardless of the repercussions.

    Put on the breastplate of Righteousness (vs. 14) -It will protect our hearts — the innermost springs of our beings — from all unrighteousness so evident in this fallen world.

    Shod your feet with the preparation of the Gospel of Peace. (vs. 15) — Preparation is vital if we are to be effective in God’s work.

    Taking the shield of faith (vs.16) — The Accuser will instill doubt, fear, and guilt. Faith acts as an invisible shield that deflects such false accusations.

    Taking the Helmet of salvation (vs.17) — A helmet protects the head, the brain and in turn our mind and thoughts. Satan hopes we will set aside divine revelation for human reasoning.

    Taking the sword of the Spirit (vs.17) — The Word of God, the only offensive weapon in this armor, was used by the Lord Jesus against Satan. The living Word is powerful and effective.

    Our armor is complete. We are ready to wage war, and the next verse tells us how, “Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the spirit.” (vs.18)

    Prayer

    Dear Lord, as you lead us into the spiritual battle of abortion may we be reminded that the battle is truly Yours. We thank you for equipping us with Your armor. Lead us daily to put it on!

    Thank you for allowing us to serve under your command, and for hearing our requests for direction and protection. Thank you for the victory that is ours because of Your Son, Jesus, Amen.

    Printable devotional

    To download today’s devotional as a formatted, printable PDF to share with friends:

    http://40daysforlife.com/media/day21.pdf

    For life,

    Shawn Carney

    SHAWN CARNEY
    President
    40 Days for Life
    http://www.40daysforlife.com

    Share:

    If you no longer wish to receive 40 Days for Life devotionals, prayers, breaking news, hope-filled reports of lives saved, and solutions to help end abortion where you live, click this link: Unsubscribe

    40 Days for Life 4112 E 29th St. Bryan, Texas 77802 United States (888) LIFE-316

    Here is todays news from DAYS FOR LIFE …SCOTLAND AND NOTTINGHAM REPORTS

    • Wendy,

      That’s a fabulous report and shows the journalists were wrong in their original reports.

      “There is also a feminist group orchestrating an online petition, complaining that the prayer teams are harassing patients, using verbal abuse, and causing vandalism. “And just in case you aren’t absolutely certain,” John added, “no, we haven’t done any of those things!”

      The whole “pro-choice” case is based on a lie so we should not be too surprised at the lies they continually tell about the pro-life movement.

    • Wendy, et al,

      At last, I managed to get along to the 40 Days For Life event, outside the Maternity Hospital at the new Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Glasgow.

      There were only about a half-dozen people there, praying the Stations of the Cross when I arrived in the company of my beloved 13 year old Great Nephew, Christopher.

      We were given placards to hold (or place in front of us) which carried statements such as “Pray for an end to abortion” (mine) and “Choose Life” etc.

      Several cars tooted in support, and some people called out “well done” types of encouragement from the windows of their cars. One of the group told us that several doctors had come over to shake hands with each of them and thank them for what they are doing, as they hate what is going on but feel unable to do anything about it. That was encouraging to hear.

      I got into conversation with a couple of women – one said that she was a sometime Catholic Truth reader (I think she reads it when a friend passes her copy on) and the other, a lady of the older generation, told me that she was a “Eucharistic minister” (Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion). Which of course, was a red rag to a bull. She actually agreed with me that no lay person should be in that role, touching the Blessed Sacrament etc. and agreed that there was a lot of confusion around, but then she raised another red rag (Medjugorje) and the “bull” got to work again. On Medjugorje, she could not be budged. Apparently her rosary had turned to gold during a visit there. When I said that this was evidence of diabolical activity, she was just astonished. I scribbled down the details of our Conference, with contact address to order a ticket, so please pray that she decides to come along.

      The ignorance, the sheer Protestantism that has taken hold of so many Catholics who should know better, as I’m afraid I pointed out to her – in her age group and mine, there is just no excuse for gong along with the craziness of Vatican II.

      Anyway, we left after about an hour, having managed to fit in a Rosary in between discussions with the very kindly and well meaning “Eucharistic minister”, because we’d planned to head for Mass in Balornock (there is a TLM there on a Thursday – and Tuesday – at 6.15pm) but by the time we had completed the bus journeys to where my car was parked, we were too late. Given the traffic on the motorway, we’d have been just in time for the morning Mass 😀

      Hopefully, we’ll make it back to the 40 Days for another hour or two either before it finishes on the Feast of St Joseph, 19th March, or on the closing day itself.

      • I forgot to say I’m way behind with closing the threads, so the January threads, including this one, will be closed soon. If anyone else has made it to the 40 Days, please let us know here until it is closed, and, thereafter, on the GD thread. Thank you!

  44. Wonderful account well done PAtricia ..found the part about Drs finding it so hard so moving ..they must be encouraged to leave these evil jobs ….and well done to your Gt Nephew too .It is funny how much other “”evils “”””you find out about isnt it .?….and also how people like sheep follow Iknow deeply devout people who believe in Medujorge and the gold Rosary happenings …sad really …Let us hope thanks to your and Christophers precious presence and sincere Prayer it registered somewhere out of this Earthly dimension of sin and pain and Babies were saved …wonderful …and doors may open at that hospital for these caring Drs to leave ….
    Also please anyone who HASNT signed the Petition to stop abortions on the NHS ..PLEASE do and ask others to as well it is a golden chance for us
    A huge WELL DONE to all who go outside this 40 Days for Life ..Thank you

    • Wendy,

      Yes, the news of the doctors was very heartening to hear – I only hope they plant as many seeds as they can in the minds of the abortionists, as it’s really important that more and more doctors get to the stage where they cannot perform these murderous operations.

      Perhaps if more abortionists were exposed to those who have given up the industry, it would help. Click here to read about one such doctor.

      I plan to return to the 40Days event in Glasgow so will leave this thread open until then and close after final report(s) – or at the end of the 40 Days vigil.

  45. I’m told that the pro-abortionists are planning a counter demonstration this coming Thursday to challenge the 40 Days for Life vigil. I’m planning to be there and my Great Nephew is keen to go along again, as well.

    I hope as many of our bloggers as possible, will attend. We’ll go along a bit earlier this week, in the hope of making it to the Balornock Mass as well.

  46. Update

    I went along again today to the Vigil and was disappointed to hear the “third mystery of light” announced on arrival. I approached the organiser to say that these new “mysteries of light” are meant to be an option, so perhaps it would be better, in future, to stick to the traditional rosary, revealed by Our Lady to St Dominic, as it was impossible for me to join in these new “mysteries”. None too pleased, but there it is. Can’t go anywhere these days without being confronted with the modernism imbued in Catholic souls today.

    Add to that the arrival of a young man, tall, dark and (well, two of three ain’t bad…) who stood in front of us and rattled off his opinion about us, causing trauma in the hospital, trauma to thee women who have made a serious decision blah blah, on and on until he described us a “horrible people” and suggested we go home. He went first.

    There will be a minibus leaving Immaculate Heart of Mary parish, Balornock, next Tuesday at 10 am, returning by 1 pm for anyone who would like to go along to the vigil from there.

%d bloggers like this: