Sioux City, Iowa, Nov 6, 2018 / 01:54 pm (CNA).- A New Mexico man says that an Iowa diocese neglected to tell him about the extent of abuse committed by a priest living in his home. Leaders in the diocese told CNA they tried to warn the man about the priest’s past, and that current leaders have attempted to do everything possible to manage the priest’s situation, within the confines of canon law.
Fr. Jerry Coyle is a priest of Sioux City, Iowa, but he has lived in New Mexico for 32 years. He moved to the state in 1986, to take part in a treatment program at a facility for priests run by the Servants of the Paraclete. He was sent there after telling Bishop Lawrence Soens that over 20 years of priesthood he had abused about 50 male adolescents.
Coyle was removed from ministry and his faculties were revoked after that admission; he was not dismissed from the clerical state.
After Coyle’s time with the Paracletes was completed, he remained in New Mexico. There, more than 10 years ago, he befriended Reuben Ortiz.
Ortiz is a pious and practicing Catholic: he and his family do pro-life ministry, go to homeless shelters, feed the poor, pray the rosary frequently, and even performed music at a World Youth Day. Until recently, Ortiz was a daily Mass-goer.
When Coyle got into a car accident last year, Ortiz invited the priest to move into his Albuquerque home, to live with him, his wife, and his three teenaged children. Coyle lived with the family until June 29.
In a recent Associated Press report, Ortiz’ attorney said that the diocese did not disclose important information about the priest until he was already living in the Ortiz family home. The diocese, however, told CNA that it repeatedly discouraged the Ortiz family from taking in the priest.
Ortiz acknowledged that when he invited Coyle, 85, to live in his home, he already knew that the priest had committed an act of sexual abuse.
“He had told us that he had fondled a kid, and that, it wasn’t, you know, that he knew, he went through treatment for it, and he, he was ok,” Ortiz told CNA.
Ortiz said that even though he knew the priest had sexually assaulted a minor, he wasn’t nervous about his own children.
“No, because he was very secure about the fact that he was wrong about it. And he was also very secure that he wasn’t ever going to do it again,” Ortiz said.
“Because we asked him right out, ‘Well Jerry, what does that mean for our kids?’ And he said, ‘No, no, no, that was wrong, that’s the reason why I’m not doing [active ministry] anymore, I’m not going and serving at Mass; they didn’t take away my priesthood, I’m good that way.’”
“He really, he did have a certain way about him that looked like it was okay. But for him to go and deceive us from the very beginning was already wrong,” Ortiz added.
‘Redemption and forgiveness’
In November 2017, shortly after Coyle got in a car accident and had his license revoked, Ortiz phoned Bishop Walker Nickless of Sioux City, to let the bishop know about Coyle’s accident, and to inform him that the priest had come to live with the Ortiz family.
“Reuben Ortiz called me after Jerry had his automobile accident, and wanted me to know he couldn’t drive any more, and he needed a place to live because he couldn’t take care of himself, and he wanted to take him into his own home, because they were good friends and he wanted to help Jerry recover from the accident, and he told me he can stay here as long as he wants,” Bishop Nickless recounted to CNA.
“I said to him, ‘Reuben, do you know his history?’ And he said, ‘Yes. Father and I have talked about it; I know that he has abused minors in the past, and I believe in redemption and forgiveness.’”
Nickless said the diocese told Ortiz that because his minor children lived at home, “we think … that is not a good place for Jerry to be, and we’d like him to move.”
“He clearly said he wanted to keep Jerry living with him. We asked him to at least inform his children of Jerry’s history – he said he hadn’t done that – and he said, ‘I’m not going to do that to my children.’”
The problem of where Coyle was to live was taken to the diocesan review board. The review board met Feb. 5, 2018, to discuss Coyle’s living situation, and suggested that he go to a nursing home in New Mexico.
“They immediately recommended that he leave the house,” Nickless said. “I told Reuben that.”
The Diocese of Sioux City encouraged Ortiz to look for a nursing home for Coyle in the Albuquerque area.
“He refused to do that,” Nickless explained. “He kept saying, ‘No, no, I want him here, I want him here, I want him here.’”
On Feb. 8, Fr. Brad Pelzel, vicar general of the Sioux City diocese, spoke with Reuben and his wife, Tania, on the phone, relating what the review board had decided.
At the request of the review board, Pelzel also wrote to Reuben and Tania Feb. 12, following up on their phone conversation. Pelzel’s letter urged that Coyle move to a nursing home. It was thought that one in New Mexico would be most appropriate, because the priest had lived there for so long.
The letter said that the review board was seriously concerned about “Coyle’s self-revealed history of sexual attraction to and contact with boys.”
“When he self-reported his situation … Fr. Coyle admitted that, for a period of about 20 years, he victimized approximately 50 school boys, varying from 7th to 10th grade,” Pelzel wrote.
“The Review Board is grateful to you and your family for your kindness and the Christ-like attention and care you have provided Fr. Coyle, most notably your willingness to welcome him into your home following his traffic accident,” Pelzel wrote.
“While acknowledging the grace of Fr. Coyle’s repentance and the 30-plus years of apparent success he has experienced in living out celibate chastity since moving to the Albuquerque area, the Review Board cannot condone the risk you take by allowing Fr. Coyle to reside in your home and recommends in the strongest of terms that the best form of assistance you can provide Fr. Coyle would be to help him find an institution with Assisted Living facilities.”
Ortiz said that it was shocking to see the letter that said Coyle admitted to abusing 50 adolescents. While he was comfortable with having Coyle around his family when he believed the priest had abused one or two adolescents, he felt he had been misled.
“You know the shock that was, what we took on? It traumatized us to see these pages of who this guy was. It shocked us to such a degree that I didn’t want to let my wife know how scared I was.”
He related that he slept downstairs near Coyle, while the rest of his family was upstairs, from the time they received the Feb. 12 letter until Coyle left in June.
Ortiz told CNA fears that Coyle could have abused his son, who is 15.
Financial matters
Although Ortiz chose not to help Coyle find a nursing home, he did accept money from his boarder. Ortiz told CNA he asked the priest for financial contributions to the family home.
According to Nickless, Coyle gave Ortiz almost $30,000 during the eight months he lived in the family home.
Nickless said that Ortiz first told Coyle he needed to buy a larger car to take him to Mass; his family and Coyle could not all fit into their existing vehicle.
Coyle gave Ortiz $25,000 to buy a new car, Nickless told CNA.
A few weeks later, Ortiz said he needed some more money to handle some expenses.
Coyle gave Ortiz another $2,000, Nickless said.
Later, Ortiz said he needed an additional $3,000, “at which point Jerry balked,” Pelzel told CNA.
“Then Reuben demanded that Jerry give him power of attorney and access to his saving and checking account,” according to Pelzel.
“So then Jerry called us and said, ‘This is strange, I think I’m coming back’,” Nickless said.
Asked how much money the priest had given him, Ortiz declined to answer.
“Let me ask you something, okay? What do you, how do you think money has anything to do with this? How does money come into play? I curse the day I ever met him and if I could take back every time that we met, and everything that was spent, both ways, I would do it, gladly, just to avoid that one meeting with him,” Ortiz told CNA.
After Coyle decided to leave, the diocese began making arrangements for Coyle to return to Iowa. Within five days, on June 29, Coyle left the Ortiz’ home.
Month after Coyle left his home, lawyers representing Ortiz told diocesan officials and reporters that the Diocese of Sioux City was guilty of a cover-up.
Ortiz agreed.
“You know what it’s like when you go to your Church officials and they do absolutely nothing for you?” He asked. “They are totally bankrupt when it comes to morals.”
While Nickless told CNA that he tried to explain to Ortiz the allegations against Coyle from the beginning, Ortiz disagreed.
“They’re accepting sin, in such a way that it’s ok, and so they are shameless in this sin to such a point that they think we are going to agree with a letter of that magnitude. See, they told me that; they had gone and said that he had abused; I said he told us he abused a couple kids, we don’t know the extent. But they said, well you know, they didn’t really make it quite clear until the letter … do you know how scary it is to have somebody like this in your home?”
Although he acknowledged inviting Coyle into his home, Ortiz maintains he was used.
“I was used, as far as I’m concerned. I was used for the purpose of people who released this into our society as a plague, and it upsets me, it does. I don’t think I’m ever going to recover from it.”
Ortiz also said that his spiritual director, whom he described as “no slouch in the priesthood” also failed him, because he did not sufficiently warn him not to allow an admitted perpetrator of sexual assault into his home.
Homecoming
When Coyle returned to Iowa, he was placed at Marian Home, a diocesan retirement home in Fort Dodge.
While the board of directors at Marian Home wasn’t notified of Coyle’s past, several staff members at the residence were.
Pelzel says he told the activities director “explicitly what Jerry was accused of, and she promised to be vigilant.”
Marian Home is located across the street from both St. Edmond Catholic School and Fort Dodge Senior High. Students at St. Edmond’s sometimes visit Marian Home, but they did not have contact with Coyle as they do not go to the area in which he lived.
The schools were not informed when Coyle moved to the residence; “it did not occur to us that the school was there at that time,” Nickless said, acknowledging that “We made a mistake in not notifying the school … we should have done a better job of that.”
Coyle has since left Marian Home, and has been taken in by an acquaintance. Nickless said the priest is living “a life of prayer and penance.”
Nickless wrote a letter to the Sioux City diocese Oct. 31 discussing Coyle’s situation, noting that “No one presently at the diocese has firsthand knowledge about Jerry Coyle and that includes me. For the past few months, we have been attempting to put the pieces together about what happened during the 1980s with the files and records that we do have on Jerry Coyle.”
“During the ensuing 32 years, there were no complaints of any misbehavior by Jerry Coyle. Psychologists in Albuquerque advised the diocese that Coyle was highly motivated to change. We know that many disagree with this point, and so do I.”
The bishop wrote that police “were not contacted when Coyle self-admitted, but policies have changed since 1986. Now the policy is to contact civil authorities, which we will follow, since we have [now] named victims of Jerry Coyle.”
In a Nov. 6 statement, the diocese elaborated.
“The issue that is most important for the public to understand is that many of the allegations made in the past, prior to the 2002 ‘Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People’ were not followed up with an investigation by civil authorities. The Church often sent priests to treatment, in hopes that any actions of misconduct could be cured. We know now that is not the way to handle any allegation of sexual misconduct, and with the 2002 Charter to guide us, we have protocols in place to follow, which we do,” the statement said.
“As far as Jerry Coyle, he has had no criminal charges made against him. He self-admitted, and there was not one allegation until 1986, and this individual was an adult, so the statute of limitations had run out. We recognize that when Coyle self-admitted, each parish should have been notified, and we should have asked victims to come forward. We apologize that this did not happen under the leadership of the Diocese of Sioux City at that time.”
Nickless wrote to the diocese last month: “If you are a victim of Jerry Coyle or any priest or person associated with the Diocese of Sioux City, please come forward.” In recent weeks, several alleged victims of Coyle have come forward to the diocese.
But in 2002, when the diocese initially reviewed its records with local prosecutors, there were no identifiable victims of Coyle. Pelzel said that at that time, a student at a local university had made allegations against Coyle to another priest; but the allegation was anonymous and the diocese had no way to contact the alleged victim.
Another individual had said Coyle had acted “kind of weird” in the sacristy, but didn’t remember “anything else much.”
While Coyle was removed from ministry in 1986, he was not dismissed from the clerical state, and remains a priest of the Diocese of Sioux City. As such, the diocese is obliged under canon law to provide housing and board for him. The diocesan conduct review board is now discussing the possibility of pursuing a dismissal from the clerical state for Coyle.
However, “once a priest is elderly and frail and sick, as Fr. Coyle is, most of the time it’s recommended [by the Vatican] that he live a life of prayer and penance,” Nickless explained.
In fact, the Sioux City diocese attempted to have another elderly priest dismissed from the clerical state, but the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith refused, citing his advanced age.
The review board has also been discussing the preparation and release of a list of credibly accused clerics of the diocese, especially how to make sure that such a list would be accurate. The diocese has stated that a list of credibly accused priests will be published “as soon as we know we have all of the information we need to move forward.”
The Nov. 6 statement said that Coyle’s case raises important questions about how the Church addresses sexual abuse.
“Bishop Nickless inherited many issues from the past. These are the ones we are dealing with today. One of the most difficult issues is this: where do we put known alleged abuser priests that are still alive, but have no charges against them? What do we do with these men? We know that you do not want them in your community. Many care facilities will not, or cannot, take them. Their families sometimes will take them in, but not always. They cannot go to a prison, as civil authorities say that the statute of limitations has run out to prosecute them. This leaves us with very few choices. We understand that the many members of the public are anxious and fearful about sex offenders, because the crime is so egregious. However, if they are not charged and sent to prison, there are few options for housing them.”
“Local Bishops do not have the authority to ‘defrock’ a priest, properly known as laicization. Laicization is a complicated process that is handled by the Vatican; however, a Bishop can remove a priest’s ability to function as a priest, and this has been done. Additionally, once laicized, Diocesan officials lose all ability to supervise formerly accused clergy,” the statement added.
“The Diocese of Sioux City does follow the Charter’s guidelines for all claims of abuse in the present day. As we follow up on past cases, we want to do that in a way that helps victims to feel that have some peace and justice. We set up a meeting on December 6, 2018 with the Attorney General of Iowa to discuss matters further. A list of credibly accused priests will be published, as soon as we know we have all of the information we need to move forward.”
[…]
A very good response to a very difficult reality by Katie Yoder CNA. She deserves plaudits. Despite the tragedy of a ten year rape victim we can penalize the life of a human being formed in God’s image. The monster who raped her deserves death in my opinion.
With today’s legal system compromised by Leftist judiciary financed by George Soros he may well be sentenced for a short term in prison, and Biden and co will exploit this to further abortion.
Correction: We cannot penalize the right to life [the infant in the womb] of a human being formed in God’s image. The rapist of the ten year old has forfeited that right.
Apparently, the rapist in this case is the boyfriend of the victim’s mother. She is defending him. You are right to be concerned that he will not receive serious punishment for his foul deed.
Having worked as a Parole Officer for 14 years.I have seen the family members blame the minor victim for ” breaking up” the family by going to the police and reporting her Rape by a Family Member,especially if they are the primary source of financial support.Sadly this is not uncommon.
The very thought of forcing a child to give birth to a rapists baby -with NO consideration of the risk to her life or mental health- sickens rational adults. As the survivor of a home invasion rape, near murder at age 11, I am outraged at MALE priests claiming abortion is a “greater trauma” than months of psychological torture followed by guaranteed C section birth. I am outraged at your absurd claim that ANY traumatized 11 year old CHILD CHOSE to give birth. Of course you’ll never publish this. At least one of you had to read it.
My son’s middle school had so many pregnant 11-15 year old girls that they had to hire a fulltime faculty member to tutor them.
So, yes very young girls do choose to give birth. As sad as the situations behind those pregnancies may have been at least they weren’t compounded by the taking of innocent life.
I’m so very sorry to read about the trauma you suffered. God bless you.
This is a painful subject to discuss. I am not pro-abortion. However I dont believe that even the most pro-life of my friends and acquaintances would insist a child of that age be forced to spend 9 months of her life to bear her rapists child.Sometimes one needs to choose the lesser of two evils. The few minutes it took to rape the child will be a horrific memory for the remainder of her life. Are we also suggesting she be the subject of cruelty and speculation from her peers for 9 months? Or maybe just lock her up someplace away from everyone for that time? The church would ask she spend 9 months like this? Then, be subjected to the pain and bloodiness of childbirth, while still being a child herself? THAT is a trauma. Fortunately pregnancy as a result of rape remains a rarity so the option of abortion need seldom be considered. Irrational positions like this when promoted by the church give the lie to a church of love and instead presents one of rigidity where the rules trump reality and mercy. Where, in fact, is the church’s mercy being extended to the child in this scenario?? The church can claim it’s position is correct in this instance all it wants, but in the end it will be preaching it to empty pews.The baby is POTENTIAL life; the CHILD is living here and NOW. Her needs must be considered first. Much like the birth control pill when it was made available, the church had the opportunity to take a realistic moral stand and declare its legitimate use in defined situations by MARRIED couples. Instead, it declared it illicit for ALL people in ALL circumstances and as a result, they were ignored, and millions fled the church. The church lost its position of moral leadership on the issue and there are NO recognized societal limits on its use today. Its all well and good to present the case for how many angels dance on the head of a pin, and be absolutely RIGHT theologically. But human reality is a lot more messy than theology. The church needs to see that in some instances, 9/10 of a loaf is better than none. However the church usually unrealistically insists on the full loaf, and as a result, gets no loaf at all.To save the life of the mother, medical procedures which result in abortion are performed legitimately. Would not forcing a child this age to carry a pregnancy result in a life-long mental breakdown? In my opinion it most certainly would. Insisting small children carry a rape pregnancy to term is a losing argument which makes church leaders look irrational and cruel. A significant reality check is needed.
LJ, I certainly have respect for the views of a woman who has had children. Although, the issue here is life or death, either or for the innocent infant in the womb, or the child rapist.
Some moral decisions are extremely difficult. For one, whether you as a Christian were asked to deny your faith in Christ while a Muslim holds a blade to your throat. Yes you live in denial of Christ. No you die a martyr. We’ve had a multitude of such martyrs in recent years. Insofar as Justice, here a heinous crime was committed. A penalty is deserved. Would Justice be served if we kill the unborn child while the assailant is permitted to live?
Father, my interest in abortion is personal. Not because I have had one. But because my husband and I were fortunate to adopt two children after many painful years of infertility. I love them dearly and am forever grateful to the women who chose to give them birth when abortion existed as an option for them. This case here is a situation where there are two potential victims. The pregnant child and the fetus. In the end only one can be saved.Which will it be: the fetus which is POTENTIAL life, or the living child who exists here and now? It must be obvious that forcing a child to bear their rapists child for 9 months will result in life-long psychic trauma, from which they may well not recover. The fate of the rapist does not play into this decision. It is not a case of choosing if the rapist suffers or the fetus. It is a matter of saving the obvious victim , which is the pregnant child. Again, the church need not even “approve” of the abortion . The church can acknowledge the loss of the fetus is a tragedy, yet advancing the necessity of mercy for the child, as the lesser of two evils. As a mother who adopted her children, this choice pains me more than I can say. However I think the concept of advocating a child victim bear her rapist’s child is unconscionable, and continues to undermine the moral authority of the church. At some point, reality must intrude upon theology.
Your response is of course compelling LJ [a fetus in Latin Means prenatal infant]. Using the term fetus doesn’t diminish the reality of an unborn infant as indicated. We’re addressing an innocent human life. As difficult as it is the Church cannot permit the killing of an innocent life. We don’t know precisely how the 10 year girl may respond. We do know that if she receives the love and care she deserves she may do quite well.
Saint Maria Goretti was 11 when a 20 yearold man wanted to rape her and she resisted pleading God doesn’t want this, leading to her martyrdom. We may say here killing the infant in the 10 year old’s womb that “God doesn’t want this”.
Father, I respect your point of view. And I am aware a fetus is an unborn infant. However if I were asked to have to choose between one or the other I would chose the health and well being of the living child.The church makes it’s pronouncement and walks off. The child is in the hands of it’s parents and peers, who may or may not be kind.The child will be subject to all sorts of public speculation and a lack of privacy, (which surely all rape victims want,) just as it is in the media right now, exposed by adults scoring political points. I know the story of Maria Goretti, most catholic women do. I would point out that protecting your purity is much different than spending an agonizing 9 months having a baby, and then LIVING with the aftermath of the experience for the remainder of her life. Goretti is a saint for several reasons, her forgiveness being one of them. Most people are not that forgiving. Were you not the one advocating for the death of the rapist? Most of us would instead opt to prevent more pain for the child. That would mean ending the pregnancy before more permanent physical and mental damage is done to her. If the church plans to spread the word of Jesus by pushing a rigid point of view advocating pregnancy for raped 10 year olds I would suggest you will find no takers. This sort of merciless position, sadly, can only give the church a black eye. And I think the church is already trying to recover from several of those. Where, in fact, is the mercy of Jesus in this position? Again , bear in mind I am an adoptive mother and not pro-abortion. Its impossible for me to understand the church position in a case like this.
I love the comment above by Lj and want to add some thoughts. I’ve had two children as an adult. The second birth almost killed me and my daughter because they missed a dangerous umbilical cord defect. My body has not recovered from giving birth 4 and 8 years ago. I did not get all those checks everyone else got for themselves and children during the pandemic because something was wrong or missing from a form, either. A pregnancy is potentially life threatening to a ten year olds mental and physical health both. The article en espanol said she was 9 when the rape happened so it’s a girl who turned ten in the last 6 weeks. Most women who get abortions don’t want to and feel they need to. Argue with them. Don’t argue with a girl who was raped at 9, and also don’t believe for a second he didn’t do it more than two times as the news reports. Imagine if you were that girl, she probably can’t watch tv or go online now without her mom looking at every screen, lest she see an article like this. What if she’s catholic? Katie Yoder. Imagine you’re that little girl and you are catholic and just read this and are crying. Now respond to yourself as the real adult you. Council her in a reply to this comment about how every life is precious and the baby in her was a innocent bystander. I’d love to read your response because it would make you think to write it.
No, the child was violated twice. Once by the rapist & secondly by the abortionist. Adding one act of violence to another is not justice.
We can’t read the victim’s mind & no one is attempting to argue with her. All life is sacred in every stage of development & ability. Period.
This is insanity.
This is cruelty on top of more cruelty.
I think it is safe to say a ten year old (as a matter biology and safety) cannot bring a pregnancy to full term without it causing severe life long health issues… if not potentially death for the sexually assaulted child.
And if you do force a child like this is forced to carry the pregnancy to term what do you do when there are inevitable complications t her small body as the fetus develops… do you give her a cesarean section?!
How mentally and physically scarring is that? How many doctors would want to carry out that kind of procedure on a regular basis?!
If cases like this occur and abortion is denied as an option, it will cause a severe political backlash. Full stop. Most Americans are not Catholic. Many Americans do not support the church on cases like this and because there is no national ban on abortion what could happen is so called pro-life politicians in many states will be voted out of office and pro-life laws will be removed from the books.
This isn’t an issue of so called pro-life morality, this is an issue of biology and the fact that public policy is still subject to public opinion. I wish the borderline integralists would get that.
I think it is safe to say a ten year old (as a matter biology and safety) cannot bring a pregnancy to full term without it causing severe life long health issues… if not potentially death for the sexually assaulted child.”
**********
That’s really a question for medical professionals but I do know that my son’s middle school had a number of pregnant students, the youngest being 11 years old & they all did just fine carrying & delivering their babies. It was a sad situation because in many cases you had the same scenario alleged in the case of this 10-year-old: molestation by the mom’s live-in boyfriend. But because the African American community there did not support the taking of unborn lives the girls at least were supported during their pregnancies & the school offered them tutoring so they could continue their education.
Why would a be girl biologically capable of getting pregnant at nine if it would cause her harm? I’m not advocating that, just saying that the human body is designed for it. Ditto for boys who are old enough to impregnate. We were created for life.
This comment shows woeful ignorance of how the human body works. Puberty doesn’t begin and end when you get your first period. It’s a years-long process and it takes time to develop a body strong enough to safely give birth. The fact of the matter is, it’s extremely dangerous for kids that young to give birth, whether or not you believe it “shouldn’t” be or not isn’t relevant, because it is. Facts don’t care about your religious beliefs.
Abortions carry risks as well, including harm to the reproductive organs. Honestly, I would think a skilled surgeon could perform a c-section much more safely than an abortionist an abortion
Wrong. Abortions are much, much safer than pregnancies. Especially when most abortions these days are done just by taking a pill.
I’m actually the descendant of a 12-year-old bride. Twelve is older than 10 but I’ve heard the same sort of argument used that would have justified feticide for my great-grandmother.
The only positive thing that could come out of a tragedy like the one this 10-year-old faced is the saving of another life.
I think we shouldn’t try to be medical experts or psychologists here. I have heard about Latin American girls this age successfully carrying a pregnancy & delivering a child. The one I’m thinking of did not want to have her baby killed. Which is more psychically traumatic, knowing your child was destroyed by an abortionist or that you & your family chose life for it?
You can name a case or two when pregnancy this extreme situation resulted in a birth. I wonder how many resulted in people with life long mental illness or death? Those cases tend not to make the news, nor have survivors live to tell the tale.. In addition, there is a whale of a physical and mental difference difference between a 10 year old and lets say a 14 or 15 year old. While such outlier cases may happen , it might be well to recognize why our states for the most part do not allow the marriage of children so young. Its because neither their minds nor their bodies are mature. They cannot give informed consent nor can their immature bodies generally survive the resultant physical effects of sexual activity and pregnancy/birth.
“What a young woman needs in such a situation [pregnancy] is the support of family and friends, along with the reassurance that ‘we can get through this together,’” he said. “What she really needs is the love, hope and compassion that buoys up anyone facing uncertainty about her own future.”
I absolutely agree!! I myself raised 2 children on my very own, without much of ANY OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED. And yes, absolutely, I could have made very good use of all the above, and not just from family and friends, but also from the entire society. Well… I guess, what doesn’t kill you makes your stronger…. You know, who needs that anyway, after all, all three of us made it quite successfully WITHOUT!!!
Now, what did I get instead?
What I hear is that if I would have chosen differently, because been absolutely terrified to face the challenge of raising 2 children on my very own, without much of any of the above mentioned, I would have been a murderer – correct?
I get that. And, THANKS for incredible valuable educational aspect of that!!!
Furthermore, it would have been the right of the public to judge and persecute me of killing my own child(ren), in the court room and way beyond. GREAT!!!
I get that!!
Now, here is my question: THIS is how YOU PROVIDE LOVE, COMPASSION, HOPE, etc.?
Well, I get that as well, because that sounds about right, considering the rich history of the Catholic Church and its teaching!!! By the way, I am Catholic!!
Do you know what the CATHOLIC CHURCH did in the past, when elsewhere abortions became legal? Oh, by the way I was around at one of such occasions, before I got pregnant, and witnessed that!! Well, guess what, they shut down their pregnancy crisis centers because these were no longer needed!!! OK, they called it differently: THEY could no longer do that job (of providing HOPE, COMPASSION, SUPPORT etc.) because this would have supported abortions. This is not a joke.
Now, explain to me how I, from where I am standing, having raised 2 children with not much of any of the ABOVE MENTIONED, should understand this other than that you are hopelessly hypocritical! HAVE YOU LEARNED ANYTHING AT ALL FROM HISTORY???
I am not pro abortion, I love my children and I raised them quite successfully, despite the largely absence of any of the ABOVE MENTIONED, and never thought one second of choosing differently! And, would do it ALL OVER AGAIN – there is absolutely NO QUESTION!!!
However, it makes me absolutely sick to watch what is going on currently with that “making abortions illegal” thing!!!
Is this really the only you can possibly come up with to tackle the dilemmas that naturally come with pregnancies????? And then call that: PROVIDING LOVE, COMPASSION, HOPE, and SUPPORT, and that even IN the name of GOD?
UNBELIEVABLE!!!
Frankly, if I were to become pregnant (again, if I were younger, so this would be possible), it would NOT be the fear of having another child WITH the LARGELY ABSENCE OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED that would scare me to death and make me question how I should “choose LIFE”.
Raising kids, DONE THAT, BEEN THERE, CAN DO IT, DESPITE of the largely ABSENCE of the ABOVE MENTIONED!!! Some call this grit, and I suspect I must have a lot of that…
Instead, that I would be forced to do it, and the uncertainly of getting adequate help if something were to go wrong with my pregnancy, out of fear of persecution, which would scare me to death. Up to 1 out of three pregnancies end in natural miscarriage. Statistically, I would be due for that….
What would be my chance of survival and NOT being publicly persecuted? I am not so sure, but certainly substantially lower than when I had my children, at a time when abortion was LEGAL!!! Excellent job guys!!!
Yes, MOTHERS, especially those who struggle, are in desperate need of a lot of LOVE, COMPASSION, HOPE, and SUPPORT, but the understanding of WHAT that IS, appears to be in YOUR EYES very different from MY understand!!!
You don’t need a live baby as evidence for SA. Actually, if rapists can’t “cover their tracks” with abortion, you know what they do instead? They force their victims to give birth at home so that the hospital doesn’t ask questions, posing even more danger to the victim. It’s happened before. The argument that a little girl should be forced to give birth because it’d provide evidence of assault is completely asinine. The “second trauma” isn’t abortion, it’s being forced to give birth. It’s being forced to do something with your body you don’t want to do, you know, like the rape was.
Are those girls who were forced to give birth ACTUALLY glad they were, or do they just say that so their religious families and priests don’t call them selfish monsters?
“When a 10 year old girl becomes pregnant from rape, responding to her trauma by offering a second trauma makes no sense.” I’ll tell you what trauma is…being sexually molested by your parish priest.
Both are obviously traumatic. But nice attempt at scoring cheap points.
It’s essential to have open discussions about unwanted pregnancies and the available options. Being able to buy MTP Kit online or the Abortion pill pack can be a lifeline for some women. Let’s break the silence and offer support.
I understand the situation of this lady. I still remembered my incident of pregnancy, in which I had to abort due to financial issues and family pressure. I was in high school and I went to party with my boyfriend and we were to high. And accidentally, we end up with an unwanted pregnancy. It was a tough decision to abort my pregnancy, but I had no other option. My dad searched for more information about the abortion process and came across a few websites that sell abortion pills illegally but at a cheap price. DaynightHealthCare247, OnlineGenericPillrx.com, Planned Parenthood—these were the websites we came across. We got the order from the onlinegenericpillrx.com website, which was quite fast. My condition was horrible, and I had to take that step. But after that, my life was changed completely.