That’s the problem with the Catholic Church. It doesn’t change with the times. That’s why it took it so long to recognise that the earth revolves round the moon, and why (for some strange reason) it doesn’t think that women can be priests. It’s living in the past.
Except that you still refuse to address the issue of married, monogamous women catching HIV/AIDS from cheating husbands.
You have dodged this so many times, even after being called on dodging it, that I now assume that you are deliberately refusing to address it. Wonder why that might be?
How many Ambiens do you have to take to sleep? I seriously would need a dozen a night if I was pushing shit like this around here.
I think we should cut them some slack on that one.
What do condoms have to do with the point panache was making?
This is the problem. The church isn’t interested in saving lives. The church is interested in saving souls, and to many (not all, but many) it is worth infecting people here on earth and condemning them to die of AIDS to allow them to live for eternity in heaven. :(:mad:
Why? When a several learned men, including Galileo and Copernicus tried to put the Catholic Church right on the is matter they were condemned as heretics. They have the mindset that they are always right and everyone else is wrong.
Read what you said.
Galileo and Copernicus told the Church that the earth revolved around the moon?
:smack:
So sorry. Of course I meant earth around the sun. Stupid boy!
Apparently. I’m asking for my college fees back.
Since my defense here is limited to the Church’s actions with respect to condoms, I was sure that was what he was responding to.
Well, I suppose that’s a reasonable enough assumption. I mean, it’s not like these sorts of threads ever expand beyond their original topic.
We are not obligated to judge the church by its chosen standards of morality and we are not obligated to take as given their asserted beliefs, regardless of their claim of sincerity. If through empirical observation we find that the church is causing harm according to our sense of morality, we should condemn them. And if it is determined through empirical observation that such harm rises to the level of a public health crisis, the governments of the states in question should be empowered to take steps to stop the church. At first blush it seems to somewhat comparable to banning people from shouting “fire” in a crowded theatre or from carrying explosives in public buildings or on public modes of transportation. I would think, though, that this kind of restriction on speech would require very rigorous deminstration of the harm and proximity.
When you’re the only person on one side of a discussion, and many people are on the other, it’s difficult to answer every single point.
And so far as I can see, the point has been raised exactly twice in this thread: posts #9 and #42. How does that record justify calling my actions dodging it “so many times?” I guess “so many” is 2, eh?
Now here is my answer: it’s true that married, monogamous women catch HIV from their non-monogamous husbands. How does this fact contradict anything I have said above?
I’m going to bow out of this thread.
I cannot meaningfully engage every post here. If I miss a post, I’m dodging the issue. If I respond to every post, I’ll spend my day typing.
I think Bricker’s rape analogy is perfectly apt.
Our society feels that those who commit rape should be severely punished (some would even see death as a resonable punishment), and the same is true of the Catholic church in regards to premarital sex.
Not that it matters even a half of a whit what I think about the Catholic church and their teachings, but the fact is that they’re wrong about condoms. They have the wrong opinion on birth control and always have. I don’t care if the reasons are dogmatic, theologic or scientific. They’ve been against common sense since the inception of contraception, First for the prevention of unwanted/unplanned pregnancy and now for the prevention of disease. What a horrible and unholy stance to take. The fact is that HIV/AIDS can come from other sources including medical procedures. Say I’m a Catholic who’s had to have a blood transfusion when I’m 22, during which I unknowingly acquire HIV. At 25 I marry but cannot afford kids, yet wish to have sex with my wife, and condoms are cheap and plentiful but because I am a ‘good catholic’ I do not use them. My wife gets pregnant, 9 months later during tests we discover she is HIV positive, then we discover I am and then our child. Now three people have HIV and none of the silly-assed “abstention” programs have attended to our problems, however if the RCC and his Royal Popeness had the forethought to allow condoms to be used, perhaps the lives of my wife and the child she may one day bear won’t have an expiration date.
This man and this organization disgust me.
But what about the fact that rape is demonstrably harmful whereas sex outside the confines of marriage isn’t?
I’m not making Bricker’s argument for him, but you all seem to be overlooking – or rejecting – that the RCC thinks barriers to contraception are morally wrong. It’s like you guys think it becomes less morally wrong if the consequences of the belief are really, really bad. But that’s not how moral beliefs work, at least if they are absolute instead of situational.
Roman Catholics believe it is a sin to prevent contraception. The fact that lots of people can get a henious disease if they DON’T preven contraception is irrelevant to the larger moral question, which is: Is it morally wrong to prevent contraception, or not? If you answer is YES, it is morally wrong, in all cases, always, then it is wrong in all cases, always. And, frankly, no one is in a position to tell them that moral belief is “wrong” any more than you can tell someone it’s wrong to keep kosher or wear hijab or be a vegetarian for religious reasons.
And I have no problem with that. I have a problem when the Church goes beyond teaching that as a tenet of its own belief to its own practitioners, to actively discouraging condom use by spreading disinformation about the causes of AIDS and the efficacy of condoms in the prevention of HIV.
This isn’t intended to be a refutation of your argument, only a clarification, Jodi, but don’t you mean conception? Contraception is birth control.