Absolutely. I'd be glad to make my point.
I'm just saying that I was here last time to make these points. I'm not sure what was said before I arrived, but I'd still like to make my points that I'm surprised that Madame Demers brought this motion, that she actually deposited it in front of this committee, when it is so factually incorrect. It's a very bad reflection on Madame Demers to not understand excommunication and to not understand about the role of the Vatican in this.
The point that I was making, Madam Chair, before I was interrupted, was that a nine-year-old girl cannot be excommunicated in this affair because she is not able to exercise her full consent. What is required for excommunication is very clear in canon law. So this is a very critical point, that the nine-year old girl is not excommunicated.
Secondly, the Vatican has made no pronouncement whatsoever on this issue, and it's very important to underline that. There was a bishop who actually commented on this affair, but he was responding to a question. When he commented on the affair, he wasn't asked if he was excommunicating anybody. He was asked what canon law says about excommunication in circumstances such as this. All he was doing was describing what is in canon law. He was not excommunicating her. So she has not been excommunicated, and neither has the mother or the doctors. No one has been excommunicated by fiat, by an actual declared statement. Instead there was some elaboration on canon law.
I think the third point, Madam Chair--