Simple question?

I remember way back in my late teens
I had a GF who thought she lived in
a haunted house. It was an old farmhouse
and they were told the basement was
haunted and believed it.

So when we would go down there to
play ping pong, the girl was always
wary. Being young and impressionable,
I was wary too and came to believe it
was haunted as well. Every noise, every
movement, was spooky and exciting.
There was a ghost down there for sure.

That's how religion works. Convince the
young and gullible that god lurks around
every corner, and you hook them for life.
They love to give you their 'testimony'
of all the 'proof' they've compiled in their
active imaginations. It's hilarious and sad
all at the same time..

So this question is a true hypothetical, by which I mean it actually happens.

If a woman comes to see you who is in early pregnancy but has also been diagnosed with an aggressive cancer which upon advice of her physicians likely cannot wait out the many months of no treatment without likely killing her what is the position of the Church?

If good isn't relative, what is the correct non-relative answer?

Quote: rxwine

So this question is a true hypothetical, by which I mean it actually happens.

If a woman comes to see you who is in early pregnancy but has also been diagnosed with an aggressive cancer which upon advice of her physicians likely cannot wait out the many months of no treatment without likely killing her what is the position of the Church?

If good isn't relative, what is the correct non-relative answer?

How much money does she have?

Quote: petroglyph

How much money does she have?

I don't know. Does it matter?

Quote: rxwine

I don't know. Does it matter?

Money provides more options.

Quote: rxwine

So this question is a true hypothetical, by which I mean it actually happens.

If a woman comes to see you who is in early pregnancy but has also been diagnosed with an aggressive cancer which upon advice of her physicians likely cannot wait out the many months of no treatment without likely killing her what is the position of the Church?

If good isn't relative, what is the correct non-relative answer?

Wait for the treatment. If she has an aggressive cancer then likely the treatment won't cure her. If it is not aggressive then it won't matter.

Quote: kenarman

Wait for the treatment. If she has an aggressive cancer then likely the treatment won't cure her. If it is not aggressive then it won't matter.

Aggressive cancers caught early enough are usually just as treatable of any other cancers. Besides I already specified it was determined that the recommendation is that if she gets treatment later it will increase her mortality significantly.

Besides, I don't care about any options where there is not any obvious potential personal moral conflict.

Quote: rxwine

Aggressive cancers caught early enough are usually just as treatable of any other cancers.

The statistics don't back that up. It is the official line of the cancer industry but not true. The death rate from cancer has not fallen that much. What has changed is the cure rate. This stat is mostly bullshit because they include all the cancers that they now find with the increased testing. A large percentage of these cancers were never going to kill anyone for a very long time if ever. The cancer industry likes to promote the increase in the 5 year survival rate that includes all these non aggressive cancers we never even knew we had before. Compare this to the very small drop in the death per 100K people and it becomes obvious we are not making any serious dent in the number of people dying.

Hopefully we will eventually figure it out but in the mean time you have to keep that grant money flowing even if there is no serious decrease.

Quote: kenarman

The statistics don't back that up. It is the official line of the cancer industry but not true. .

Depends on what we're talking about. Treatable is the word I used. If you don't think removing an early patch of skin cancer is good idea, feel free to ignore it completely.


RBG got here pancreatic cancer treated early in 2009. She's still around. I doubt if she would still be around if she hadn't. Yup, she was lucky as they caught it fairly easy almost by accident.

Quote: kenarman

The statistics don't back that up. It is the official line of the cancer industry but not true. The death rate from cancer has not fallen that much. What has changed is the cure rate. This stat is mostly bullshit because they include all the cancers that they now find with the increased testing. A large percentage of these cancers were never going to kill anyone for a very long time if ever. The cancer industry likes to promote the increase in the 5 year survival rate that includes all these non aggressive cancers we never even knew we had before. Compare this to the very small drop in the death per 100K people and it becomes obvious we are not making any serious dent in the number of people dying.

Hopefully we will eventually figure it out but in the mean time you have to keep that grant money flowing even if there is no serious decrease.

Good post !