Posted on 08/20/2011 1:53:21 PM PDT by wagglebee
Oh I just love when untruths are uncovered. Catholic religious education is called CCD or Catechism not Sunday School.
All Christian religions teach that sex is for within marriage only so yes they all say you should be a virgin before marriage.
Why isn’t abortion justified if it might eliminate a future Ted Bundy?
Natural Family Planning is effective. So yes abstinence does work in marriage.
It is not a given that a husband will always abandon his family after they have more than a certain number of children.
You should educated yourself. Until the 1930 Lambeth Conference all mainline Protestant Churches condemned artificial birth control.
You are ompletely lacking in any understanding of Christian Anthropology and might be surprised to learn there are Protestants who believe the use of artificial contraception is wrong. It is not just a Catholic issue.
Every one of your arguments could be used to support abortion. So why shouldn’t they be?
S
No.
You have chosen to never have a set of pudgy little arms wrap around your neck and hear a sweet mouth whisper "I love you Mommy".
You have chosen to never have a sweet trusting little face look at you like you can do ANYTHING.
You have chosen to never kiss a "boo-boo" and make it feel better.
You have chosen to never help a confused little person with homework and experience the moment of understanding.
You have chosen to never attend a recital and tell the little person that they were wonderful.
You have chosen to never be rewarded for love with a fistful of weeds they think are flowers.
You have chosen to never laugh, cry or share a victory with a child that you nurtured.
Because you have chosen YOU.
Have you ever traveled into Mt Everest, and sang songs with the monks high in the mountains? Below base camp?
Have you ever dove in the Galapagos, and swam with sharks, and also with a whole world of sealife that you only see in a National Geographic magazine?
Have you ever traveled to the USSR- when it was the Soviet Union?
Have you ever traveled the whole of Western Europe for months at a time? Your main goal of the day is what new wine you can sample?
Have you ever spent months in a RV being a ski bum?
Have you ever traveled into multiple Islamic countries, just for the hell of it?
Have you ever swam in the waters of Croatia, while the old city walls of Dubrovnik were behind you?
Have you ever traveled to major US cities- San Francisco, New York , Miami, Honolulu- just for the week or weekend?
Are you planning a trip to Alaska in the near future on a remote area lodge? I am.
I did all the above and more.
Maybe you find your life interesting, kudos to you. I would be bored.
That is the difference between you and I, and that is why I find it offensive that you would want to impose your values on people who think differently ( although conservative) than you.
There are a lot of decent people who vote democratic exactly because they associate conservatism with the repulsive ideas that some of us have been criticizing on this thread.
Well the entire scientific world is guilty of this charge. What in the world is Christian Anthropology? There is anthropology as a science, but as a religion [setting aside that some anthropology is liberal mumbo jumbo]? Or have you guys cooked up another set of mumbo jumbo code words for running a creationist thread under the radar.
Second, yes we know that this is not just a Catholic issue. In fact my presumption going in was that this was another fundamentalist issue gone nuclear in its extremity. Most of the folks on "your side" of the table are not Catholics, I am guessing, but hard core calvinists, since it all comes across as much more old-testament than new testiment in a way that Catholics are generally not guilty of. The lack of charity towards the human condition is a big sign. The need to tell other folks how to live according to your rules is another.
We already know that the issue of contraception is not that it prevents conception since you recognize "natural" planning. Indeed the issue is not the failure to be fruitful by conceiving at every imaginably possible moment because you recognize and advocate abstinence. Nor is it an issue of the inventions of modern science since "natural" planning is really only possible and accurate because of the understanding developed by modern science and the use of modern scientific instruments.
Let us add that abstinence is not "natural" and is certainly not conducive to a stable marriage. God did not create the human physiology wired up that way whatever "Christian physiology" might say on the subject, but rather the other way, which is why we reproduce at all. In fact in former times and in other places men used very violent methods to set asunder that which God untended us to join.
Finally you moral midgets cannot make the moral distinctions that most folks in this world can. Any reasoning person knows the enormous moral difference between not promoting conception at every imaginable instant, and aborting a conceived child. You are just talking two-faced gobbledygook to lay a guilt trip on the part of the population that is susceptible to your guilt-tripping ways. This behavior is repellent to a large fraction of decent human beings, most of whom are very much troubled by abortion. Because you work so hard to make off with the "conservative" label the number of folks who will have nothing to do with conservatism because they see you as the ugly human face of conservatism is considerable. So we go on with a welfare system and spending sprees that a good majority actually has a hard time accepting. You loose all of the conservative war because you want your way on an issue that you are just never going to get.
And morally the problem is that for all of your moralizing you don't have a solution and have washed your hands of finding a solution because you claim that God told you the solution. But you know what. He didn't and you are no better than the rest of us. In fact, because your ears are stopped and your heart is black with pride and arrogance you are not better only not better, but far far worse than other people.
Here is an example of your ignorant self absorbed thoughtlessness. You state "It is not a given that a husband will always abandon his family after they have more than a certain number of children." So you yourself recognize the strain on a marriage of more children than you have the resources (financial, emotional, etc.) to raise. But you think that it is ok to call for measures that will destroy marriages through popping out all the children that God intended them to have, or destroy marriage by abstaining from sex because it "is not a given that this will always occur." Your ill-chosen conditional demonstrate that you are all too aware that this actually occurs all to frequent.
Many of the sins in this world are the result of what happens outside of stable marriages. Why, therefore, do you seek to interfere in what goes on between man and wife in a stable one? Why? What real evil are you preventing by doing that?
You aren't a moral human being. You are simply a voyeur.
“ideas”??? plural?
I only see one “idea” here that seems to be causing a problem. I haven’t read all of your posts, so maybe there are more that you find troublesome.
So...how many of these people do you think would become republicans if the pope would just change the church’s position in order to pacify everyone?
I find it hard to believe these people you speak of are so petrified of this one idea that they would throw their support behind the likes of Obama.
If you vote Obama you must have “other” issues as well.
I’m trying to think of catholic politicians who have stated they would attempt to make artificial birth control illegal....hmmmmm.......can you think of any? I can’t.
I don’t know what to tell you Andy - would you like these catholics to stop calling themselves “conservatives” just because you say there are people out there who don’t like them?
There are lots and lots of "ideas" here. One is that you should go sticking your nose into what goes on in stable marriages and tell people what to do and how to spend their money - just like liberals.
I find it hard to believe these people you speak of are so petrified of this one idea that they would throw their support behind the likes of Obama. If you vote Obama you must have “other” issues as well.
I vote conservative, and am not the least bit worried that this will ever go anywhere politically. My worry is that it is an enormous noisy distraction that prevents politically resolvable issues from being resolved by the political process because folks in political fora spend this kind of energy on issues that politicians can't, won't and should not try to solve.
But, I also spend a lot of time talking to very smart and well-educated people who find the fact that the arguments on this thread even go on troubling enough to side with Democrats. They believe that it is bad enough that you would even think that these issues (what goes on in the sex lives of happily married people) are any of your business. It is frightening actually. This voyeurism is an American Calvinist trait. It is very off-putting. It is a shame that [some] American Catholics have picked it up too. I grew up with the former, and surround myself with the latter because, fortunately, most are not actually that way.
Normal Christians, wanting to know what God intended, go to Church, or pray, or study the bible. They don't go and ask their next door neighbor, who is most probably just as lost a soul as they are. Nor do they stick their nose over the fence to find out what is going on over there. And they certainly don't quote scripture to him as a way of telling him what to do.
Christian morality and ethics have deep roots in Greek philosophy. St. Luke was Greek before he was Christian. The beginning of John's Gospel is pure Greek philosophy. The Church fathers were great students of Aristotle. Classical ethics start by analyzing particular situations in the light of general principles, to elucidate the one and better understand the other. It has nothing to do with this American Calvinist attempt to take one (overly simplistic) rule and apply it to all situations.
The New Testament parables are nothing if not examples of analyzing the specifics of individual situations to understand the [Christian] ethical way. But that is not the way shown here. Christ set an example of breaking the old-testament model of rigid conformance to strict old-testament laws. Christains place Christian Charity before the Torah not after it.
would you like these catholics to stop calling themselves “conservatives” just because you say there are people out there who don’t like them??
I would like people to stop confusing religious labels and political labels. Is conservatism a thing that is divisible among various religions, a piece of conservatism that is Catholic, a piece that is evangelical, a piece that is Jewish? How do you feel about atheist conservatism? If someone ran as such every religious conservative would shun him.
Yes you can be catholic and be a conservative or a Jew and a conservative, etc. But if we cannot have a conservatism based upon moral principles that all decent people agree on, based upon fiscal restraint, etc. etc. then we cannot have conservatism. What we cannot have is a fish stew of religious conservatism. Almost no one will eat it.
Do you ever wonder why you cannot get more than a small fraction of Jews to vote other than Democratic. This thread is exactly why.
None of what you listed sounds like real life. Or real fun. It sounds like constant pursuits of self pleasure. Endless travel to please self and ease boredom isn't the purpose of life. But you are certainly free to madly dash from one useless experience to another searching for that next thrill to try and fill the void.
Wrong answer.
YOU are the one who is claiming that Baby Joseph is "brain dead" even though he is breathing on his own. That means YOU have the burden of providing an accepted definition of brain death which includes the ability for a person to breathe on their own.
Actually that was another posters assertion. But statistics that I posted stated that 66% of divorces are childless couples.
At least 66% of all the divorced couples in America are childless. This is also one of the main reasons of getting divorced according to experts. Statistics also reveal that couples with children have lower chances of getting divorced than a couple who is childless.
Again, NOBODY on this thread has ever suggested banning contraception. This thread is about the FACT that contraception has not decreased abortion.
I am also sure that every child in this country is the perfect person, and not one has ever committed rape, murder, abuse, comitted crimes. What if if you were Ted Bundy’s mother?
Would you still love your child then? I would not.
This is your reason?
Obviously, you have grave doubts about your ability to be a parent if you believe there is a real likelihood that your child would grow up to be like Ted Bundy.
That is what I mean by finding out that I would not like my child as a person, if said child was a creep.
I'm guessing it's far more likely a child would think you were a creep.
I also feel that I have a right to criticize the Catholic religion. If I was not a ex Catholic, I would feel it is none of my business. However- I was baptized,had communion, confirmation, and Sunday School in the Catholic Church.
You're embarrassing yourself here. The Catholic Church DOES NOT HAVE AND NEVER HAS HAD a program of religious education/study called "Sunday school" and someone who was raised Catholic would know this.
I do think you are like the Taliban. Take for example a woman- virgin at marriage. The only acceptable birth control you preach is abstinence ( does not work in a marriage), rhythmn method, condoms.
So, now you say that conservatives are like the TALIBAN for thinking that people should abstain from sex before they are married? You are really on the wrong forum.
What a vapid life you have described. I wouldn’t take all that, plus all the tea in China for one hug from my son. I pity anyone who doesn’t understand that.
“There are lots and lots of “ideas” here. One is that you should go sticking your nose into what goes on in stable marriages and tell people what to do and how to spend their money - just like liberals”
I’m not sure which part of Humanae Vitae does that. I don’t recall ever getting a letter from the pope telling us how to spend our money.
No one has stuck their nose into our marriage. The church HAS presented it’s position -and we have the freedom to accept it...or not.
There ARE a ton of liberals in the church though!
But they don’t appear to be the ones you find repulsive.
I’m confused by your concern with nose-sticking, nosiness, and this seeming epidemic of voyerism.
I don’t know anyone like this. At all.
Of course...I don’t frequent these threads much. I used to years ago and realized that once people pick their side -that’s it. Years later, the arguments are the same only with different names.
Years from now - it’ll still be the same.
I don’t think that -what is going on in one small section of cyberland is affecting any election outcome.
“But, I also spend a lot of time talking to very smart and well-educated people who find the fact that the arguments on this thread even go on troubling enough to side with Democrats”
These well educated people just learned that the Church is opposed to artificial birth control? Really? What exactly clued them in?
When did all of this become NEWS to anyone?
“I would like people to stop confusing religious labels and political labels. Is conservatism a thing that is divisible among various religions, a piece of conservatism that is Catholic, a piece that is evangelical, a piece that is Jewish? “
That’s a good question. In the catholic church there is a great divide between liberal and conservative catholics.
On issues regarding birth control, female priests, gay marriage (or “civil unions”),abortion,”social justice”
Yes - 2 camps. Some people find a gray area between the 2 camps, but the trend is....the more you agree with the Church on these issues - the more likely it is you will be pulling the “R” lever.
I would suppose an atheist conservative would be a business minded, supply sider. I would even expect them to be anti-abortion (ex:godlessprolifers)
I have read many threads on FReerepublic about the jewish vote. I have also read many news articles as well.
Not once have I seen it presented that jews vote democrat because the catholic church opposed artificial birth control.
If I were to guess ....I wouldn’t think they’d lurk on these threads or pay much attention to that at all.
Humane Vitae is not the issue. It is what folks have said on this thread that is the issue. And the issue is not particularly about Catholics either.
Well said, wagglebee.
Where do these people come from?
Liberal dens of thought.
I concur. Banning only brings gubmint interference, which is nearly always a bad thing. I want us to morally call this wrong. What happens to your soul is more critical than a fine or gubmint punishment and what happens to society’s moral soul as a whole is fundamental
I have not quoted doctrine at you, but given what I believe to be logical explanation for why contraception is wrong for society
I will not comment on your own personal decision for the reasons I've given above, but I will say that contraception is bad for society as a whole and one can directly see this around us
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.