Agreed. Although all you have to do is have a death bead confession, and a Get Out Of Hell Free Card is given to you.
Good for those that have a deathbed. If you fall off a scaffolding or get a steering wheel pushed through your head, well bad luck, then. 
But if you get shot in Dealey Plaza and are dead a few minutes after you arrive at Parkland Hospital, your soul lingers in you body for another two hours until a priest can arrive to give extreme unction. At least that’s what the nuns told the kids later.
Do you admit that they support making abortion illegal, at least?
That article says it is mortal sin to use birth control (I agree by the way.) I was raised Catholic and while I’ve not been religious in decades there really is no doctrinal argument that it is anything but a grave sin. If you’re Catholic and just wave it off as “it’s a necessity” then you’re basically the definition of a Cafeteria Catholic.
However nothing in your article says it should be legally banned. There is a significant difference between a religious page stating what is doctrinal truth: the use of contraceptives puts you in a state of mortal sin if you are using them deliberately (and there is really no other way.)
I don’t doubt the Church is against any regulation that would require any Church dollars to subsidize contraception. Again, just trying to clarify for a Church I don’t represent, but their position is if they pay into a plan and the plan offers contraception, there is no way they can say they aren’t funding them. The reason the Obama compromise was rejected by the Catholic Bishops is because even though it put the cost burden on the insurer, as long as some Church dollars go to that insurance provider the fungible nature of the funds means it will obviously offset the cost to the insurer of contraception, even if it isn’t going directly into the account that provides them.
(I have no significant opinion on the whole contraception as part of insurance thing by the way, I genuinely don’t care if it is a mandate or not. I’m vaguely in favor of anything that promotes fewer unwanted pregnancies but I’m also not sure I support mandating employers provide any kind of benefit but that’s a whole other argument.)
Anyway, I’m still waiting for a cite to support the claim the Catholic Church wants to ban contraception. For most issues of moral conscience, the Catholic Church isn’t big (at least not in recent times) on getting behind laws that enshrine Catholic ideology. The Church is inflexible in its position and unwilling to waver even in cases where it might prevent things like the spread of HIV, but I’ve not yet seen any evidence the Church is advocating either explicitly or implicitly for a ban on contraceptives being legally purchasable.
Please see the other thread.
There is a group called “Priest for Life” which is a pro-life group ran by Catholic priests. I suspect the emphasis is on the “priests” because as individual citizens they are still allowed to form political interest groups as long as it is operated separately from the RCC. I don’t want to quibble so I’m also going to bet that the hierarchy of the RCC both tolerates and actively supports its priests being involved in political groups like this. Even though I doubt you’ll find clear and compelling evidence of that, I’m willing to concede its likelihood.
Pulled right from the pages of the Priests for Life website:
The Priests for Life pretty much do say they are for civil law outlawing abortion. For that matter I don’t doubt that the RCC is in favor of outlawing abortion, for the simple fact I don’t think the RCC sees abortion as a matter of private morality, but as a crime against an innocent. The RCC has always been much more active in going against what it views as State action against innocents. The RCC is clearly against the death penalty, against pro-choice laws, and generally is extremely anti-war under the argument that no war can be just and any killing in a war is a crime against both God and man. However, on issues like divorce, cheating on your spouse, and other failings of “personal morality” I’ve seen no real indication that the Church either explicitly or implicitly is in favor of Catholic teachings being enshrined in law.
The Priests for Life page makes it clear that genuine contraceptives (as opposed to things like the morning after pill) “prevent the creation of life” and thus are not morally in the same universe as abortion. So they support outlawing abortion because they oppose any law that kills any human (death penalty, declarations of war, abortion legalization etc) but I’ve not seen any evidence the Church wants to impose all of its views as law. This isn’t the Middle Ages, the Church (for all its ills) isn’t the Church of 500 years ago.
While I generally detest the fact most people lack the intellectual rigor to throw off the idiocy of belief in the supernatural, as far as organized religious groups go I think the RCC is a lot more moderate and willing to embrace the modern world than most.
What’s strange is Protestants are so “okay” with contraception. Virtually no Protestant church teaches that contraception is a sin any longer. Starting in the 1930s Protestants dropped that ideology. I think most of them preach that any pre-marital sex is a sin, and that you need to always practice abstinence, but I’ve noticed they remain silent on contraception. The Protestants were actually the ones who had advocated for anti-contraception laws to be put on the books in the late 19th and early 20th century.
On most issues like science, education, economics, health care, and the environment the Catholic Church is essentially a leftist’s wet dream (in fact in communist countries in South America there was often strong associations between socialists and the RCC.)
The Oklahoma state legislature recently passed a “personhood” bill that declares embryos from the moment of conception to be persons with individual rights. If implemented, this will, in fact, ban some forms of contraception. Granted, that’s not the same thing as banning all contraception, but it’s not correct to state that there’s only an issue with Obama’s health care mandate. There’s also the many attacks on Planned Parenthood, which provides contraception to the poor.
You do realize that many versions of the “pill” not only prevent egg release but inhibit egg implanting and thus are still “abortion” according the church?
I understand your pride in maintaining a belief for thousands of years, and I am to be honest more “respectful” of religions who are consistent.
However, the statistics don’t lie, educating women about sex and access to birth control have reduced the number of partners women have and also the amount of unwanted births.
In this country the highest pregnancy rates are among the more religious areas, and they also tend to have more partners.
Add in that actually giving women control over reproduction is one of the MOST effective way to help people get out of poverty.
So I realize that your faith tells you that it is wrong, and I respect it but I am more interested in harm reduction so the fact you have faith is irrelevant you cause more suffering with your beliefs.
Unfortunately, in my view, for millions around the world, suffering is not necessarily a bad thing in the catholic religion.
Most protestants do not have that, for them the suffering is an evil and so it is understandable that they may have a different dogma than you.
Most localities have regulations that call for the embalming and funeral for deceased persons. By the “reasoning” of OK, miscarriages must be accorded the same respect. We used to think that miscarriages were rare, turns out, they aren’t.
a 55/45 split is a massive landslide in politics. The 2008 and 2010 elections were essentially split like this (the presidential was a little closer, it was about 47/53).
So you don’t need conservatives to be 20% of the public. if the best they could do was 45%, that means they would become at best an obstructionist party.
But who knows. I have heard baby boomers say they thought the same thing would happen with their generation. now they are the ones pushing for regressive social policies and militant foreign policies (people who are 50-70).
Age is a huge factor though. Diehard conservatives tend to be older, young people tend to be more liberal. By the 2020s millennials will be 30-40% of the electorate and most of the audience of talk radio, fox news and the tea party (where average age is mid 60s) will be dead.
Don’t diss geezers, puppy! We are many. We have a very long…ah, a very long…you know, that thing where you put something in your brain so you can get it later?
You have a lot of passion on this issue. But passion is not an argument.
That sounds a lot like predictions of a future Democratic hegemony made in the 70s, when it was expected that the Baby Boomers would change from hippie peaceniks to reliable Democratic voters. Didn’t exactly work out that way, as the boomers and the country lurched to the right in the 1980s.
But ad hominems are?
I still haven’t seen where Catholics want to make birth control illegal. They think it is a sin, yes, but none of the cites in this thread state that they want to outlaw birth control any more than they want to outlaw eating meat on Fridays, working on Sundays, or outlawing any other religion except Catholicism.
They certainly did in Ireland, for one example. Contraception was illegal there until 1980, largely because of Catholic pressure. Even after it was allowed, the law was very limited - again, largely because of Catholic pressure.
Until further notice, I will assume all “the GOP is dead/dying!” threads are parodies.
They can’t be. This MB has its center of gravity solidly on the left of the political spectrum, and it has been established (on this MB) that the left is a reality-based political philosophy. QED.
Where’s the center, John? If we are all so left-leaning, there must be a center to compare us to, right? I’ve had pretty much the same views for forty years now, views that were very, very unpopular. Then. Not now.
Do you know where the “center” is? You sure?