Catholic church and condoms

[Mister Emu]

And the history of the Church has what bearing on the current situation?

 

[wednesday]

Thought there might be something in regards to the Church's teachings behind the statement...


It is anti-sin...

Sure it is a sin but as stated more people will die of STD's and AIDS, surely the catholics would rather let people wear a condom than watch them die wouldn't they?

 

[gnostic]

Sure it is a sin but as stated more people will die of STD's and AIDS, surely the catholics would rather let people wear a condom than watch them die wouldn't they?

Perhaps the Catholics think they are martyrs if they die of STDs and AIDs? Do they really care if people are dying from diseases?

Their interests may be that people should breed like rabbits so they can convert more into their church (like the Muslims do in the Middle East and Asia) and tax them with tithes.

 

[Smoke]

Perhaps the Catholics think they are martyrs if they die of STDs and AIDs? Do they really care if people are dying from diseases?

They prefer that the specter of disease be hanging over the heads of anyone who dares to violate the church's restrictions on sexual relations. Gives people more incentive to obey.

 

[gnostic]

Then people with the diseases should be able to sue the Vatican and sue God for their ill-reputed and ill-informed policies.

 

[GabrielWithoutWings]

I find the word "condom" to be vulgar and crude. Here's my top ten alternative names for the condom...

You forgot Scumbag.

 

[doppelganger]

And the history of the Church has what bearing on the current situation?

It has this bearing: trading in human suffering so that one can sit back and smugly and self-righteously talk about "sin" is repulsive. And using the government to try to force one's personal religious values on matters between consenting adults demonstrates a lack of respect for the opinions of others (one that that brings disdain and scorn on the Christianity from the mockery it makes of the Gospel), especially when lives are at stake. The history of the RC Church back to the time it sold itself to the Roman Empire is replete with this fundamental trade giving up the Gospel for power.

Sorry, but the Church is anything but "anti-sin." It's pro-dogma at the expense of immense human misery - and that is disgusting.

 

[blackout]

It has this bearing: trading in human suffering so that one can sit back and smugly and self-righteously talk about "sin" is repulsive. And using the government to try to force one's personal religious values on matters between consenting adults demonstrates a lack of respect for the opinions of others (one that that brings disdain and scorn on the Christianity from the mockery it makes of the Gospel), especially when lives are at stake. The history of the RC Church back to the time it sold itself to the Roman Empire is replete with this fundamental trade giving up the Gospel for power.

Sorry, but the Church is anything but "anti-sin." It's pro-dogma at the expense of immense human misery - and that is disgusting.

Wow. I can't even try to follow that up.:bow:

 

[Ratiocinative]

The Bible admits it doesn't contain everything about Jesus's time on earth...

While I'm not sure what that has to do with sex, I guess I can respond with John 20:30-31. John basically says that Jesus did a whole bunch of other stuff that he didn't bother to write down and that he other wrote down what was needed to show that Jesus was the messiah so that people could believe and has life in his name. More wasn't included about Jesus because it wasn't needed.

 

[Francine]

While I'm not sure what that has to do with sex, I guess I can respond with John 20:30-31. John basically says that Jesus did a whole bunch of other stuff that he didn't bother to write down and that he other wrote down what was needed to show that Jesus was the messiah so that people could believe and has life in his name. More wasn't included about Jesus because it wasn't needed.

Or maybe John got writer's block and couldn't think up any more stuff.

 

[rheff78]

Any method of birth control that prevents fertilization is also fine.

If you are referring to the church's stance, that is absolutely false.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Unfortunatley the writer does not know what he's talking about. The Catholic Church believes that sex is used for one purpose, to procreate. If you do something that would hinder such act, it is not right. Hence, wearing condoms or taking the pill or any otehr form of birth control is not allowed. People could practice natural family planning for this. Regardless of your feelings about this, it is the Church's stance.

I was under the impression that the Church considers two purposes of sex to be valid:

- procreation, like you said
- physical expression of love between a husband and wife

AFAIK, it's just that the Church considers it wrong to dissociate these two purposes from each other: no physical expression of love without potential for procreation; no procreation without a physical expression of love.

It's a small distinction, but I feel that it's important.

Am I wrong? I can cite some references to the Catechism if you want me to provide support.

"Procreation" is not an act, but an event. What the Church is striving to unhinder is an "act of God," not of man.

Hmm.

I'm not sure that "Almighty" is the first adjective to come to my mind to describe a God whose acts or Holy Will could be hindered by a fraction of a millimetre of latex.

 

[rheff78]

I was under the impression that the Church considers two purposes of sex to be valid:

- procreation, like you said
- physical expression of love between a husband and wife

.

You're right, I left that out. But you do so with the knowledge that becoming pregnant is a possiblity and you you don't use anything that would thwart that act.

 

[Autodidact]

Unfortunatley the writer does not know what he's talking about. The Catholic Church believes that sex is used for one purpose, to procreate. If you do something that would hinder such act, it is not right. Hence, wearing condoms or taking the pill or any otehr form of birth control is not allowed. People could practice natural family planning for this. Regardless of your feelings about this, it is the Church's stance.

I really don't care what their belief or position is, as long as they don't try to impose it on the rest of us. The problem is not their extremely odd belief, it's the fact that they want the right to impose it on non-Catholics. That is something that they do not, and should not, have.

 

[Autodidact]

They have a voice too. Are there opinions not as important as others? Ireland is a Catholic (and part of my ancestry BTW, just thought I'd throw that in), so why not voice thier concerns. Unless this was done in Northern Ireland. But I thought most Protestant religions shared the same thought about birth control, I could be wrong about that.

No, they don't. Why on earth should the Catholic Church have the right to demand that non-Catholics conform with Catholic rules? The comparable example would be that Orthodox Jews belief it is against the will of God to eat bacon, should they have the right to impose legislation making it illegal for YOU to eat bacon?

 

[sandandfoam]

I really don't care what their belief or position is, as long as they don't try to impose it on the rest of us. The problem is not their extremely odd belief, it's the fact that they want the right to impose it on non-Catholics. That is something that they do not, and should not, have.

Exactly.

 

[rheff78]

That's the thing. They are not imposing it on anyone. They are voicing their opinion. It's just the same as almost any other Christian religion.

 

[sandandfoam]

That's the thing. They are not imposing it on anyone. They are voicing their opinion. It's just the same as almost any other Christian religion.

They're trying to.

Seperation between church and state isn't what it should be in this country.

 

[rheff78]

They're trying to.

Seperation between church and state isn't what it should be in this country.

How? By saying we don't agree with this? This is imposing their beliefs on others? Someone can tell me that they don't believe in God, they are voicing their opinion but I don't think they are trying to impose their beliefs on me.

 

[sandandfoam]

How? By saying we don't agree with this? This is imposing their beliefs on others? Someone can tell me that they don't believe in God, they are voicing their opinion but I don't think they are trying to impose their beliefs on me.

The RC Church runs most of the schools in this country.
They run many of the hospitals.
Since the foundation of the state they have influenced governments. For years they behaved like Irelands Taliban, watching kids at dances, lecturing people on what they could and couldn't do,taking children off unmarried mothers, runnning Magdeline launderies, industrial schools etc etc. When I was a teenager condoms were illegal as a direct result of RC influence.
My daughter who attends a state school is going to be twiddling her thumbs for most of next year in a school where the main focus of her class is preperation for first holy communion.
If you think they are not trying to impose their beliefs you are mistaken. This condom thing is just the latest.