A truly "Roman Catholic" hospital cannot have it both ways. If a seven month fetus is not a person, they have no argument to halt abortions and must get on board the obama baby-killing bandwagon.

The hospital is simply using civil law to defend itself. The government says a fetus isn´t a person, so even though the hospital thinks it is, if they can use the law to give the law a slap in the face I say go for it. The government is the one in an untenable position.

In the olden days, those Catholic hospitals were truely Catholic, with Sisters of Mercy and other orders running the various hospitals.
In these days, it is difficult, if not impossible, to find a nun at a Catholic hospital. Those hospitals now are run by civilian (lay) administrators and lawyers.

Scott Peterson, among others, was convicted of the murder of two human beings, one being his pre-born son.

I can´t see a problem. I thought it was settled law that fetuses are not people.

Haven´t we all be told that what one´s religious beliefs have no place in government, schools or courts?

I believe the hospital´s position is that the government that´s prosecuting them has ruled repeatedly that the unborn are not people, rather than what the commies At USA Today want you to think...

Dittos, #2. Morality and the law are not the same thing. "Under Colorado law, a fetus is not a ´person´ and plaintiff´s claims for wrongful death must therefore be dismissed." The problem is the law, unless you´re trying to create an awkward situation for the hospital.

I can understand the technical reason, but is it worth the furthering loss of moral authority by the church. Supporters of the church do it no favors by blindly supporting the church no matter how hypocritical or horrible (molestation), and no I don´t hate the church. This is just another sign of the churches corruption, which is very sad, as the church helps millions of people as evidenced by Catholic Charities and it´s worldwide outreach to help with hunger and poverty.

I´m glad to hear these clarifications. I was sucked in by the headlines but your points are well taken that it is the state´s position that is in question.

The details regarding the pregnancy and events leading up to her hospitalization are in an article in Westword.com ... it looks like it may be a Denver newspaper site.

Lori Stodghill weighed more than 400 lbs., suffered cardiac arrest and there were no fetal heartbeats.

This is clearly an attack on the Church under the general category of hypocrisy. Had there been even a chance of saving the lives of the unborn children, they could collect donations from their flock to the woman´s heirs. I sent an e-mail to the Catholic Advocate to encourage a public response.

#2 gets it. I´m not so sure of some others.


Girl´s Hubby

Separation of Church and State and the old "give to Caesar...." only applies when anyone wish to berate the Catholic Church. And what about equal treatment under the Law? It is phenomenal that the pro Abortionists are yelling "morally untenable" when they are doing exactly the same thing!!! The whole case is in fact demonstrating that the law IS an ass!!! You can use it to force Catholic organizations to enforce abortions but you can also deny it when when you wish to sue for medical "malpractice" The Catholic Church did not make the law: