Why is contraception immoral when abstinence isnt?

[refracted]

Umm, I am sorry, but Homosexual sexual acts are immoral. I dont care if you say if its inconsistency, but its my own personal views that does deserve at least some respect insted of criticism.

In reality, my own views, is that I believe that sex acts between a MAN and a WOMAN are considered moral as they form a sexual complementary. Same gender couples do not make a sexual complementary.


Well, I would like to apologise back there for that outburst because in my view and my mind that you are not respecting my views and thus just criticizing them which realy struck a cord on my nerve.

You mean you think homosexuality is immoral. Most homosexuals wouldn't care what you think, they would just put on a condom to stop the spread of AIDS.

 

[GenMarshall]

Posted a more respectable response below.

 

[warpus]

Heyyy, you forgot about my question.

 

[GenMarshall]

Well, since I decided to stick with Roman Catholicism. I would like to take another wack at this.

In regards to the power that the Church has. I acknowlage that they do have power and still does have temporal power. Though personaly I see that calling it a "power ploy" is kind of over exagurating things a bit (and I do apologise for getting defensive about it).

Now in regards, the Church believe that sex is to be open to the posibility of the creation of life. Now what about infertile male & female couples? Well to my belief, so long as the sperm is not spilt into infertile enviornments that it is still alright that infertile heterosexual couples can have sex. Eventhough they lost the ability to get pregnant by no fault of their own, weather by accident or natural causes, it is still moral to have heterosexual couples whom are infertile to have sex.

You mean you think homosexuality is immoral. Most homosexuals wouldn't care what you think, they would just put on a condom to stop the spread of AIDS.

Its not my fault that I view homosexual sex acts are immoral. I just see that they dont form a sexual complementary as heterosexual couples do. If there are homosexuals in the Catholic Church (and yes we do accept them), but they should follow the same rules as everyone else. If they dont like it, well they do have choices. They can eather:
1. Learn how to use self control and not act out on their temptations.
2. Leave the church for a more liberal religion.

 

[croxis]

Its not my fault that I view homosexual sex acts are immoral.

Ohhh yes it is. You, my good sir, have the power of free will and choice! You Choose to be Catholic and you Choose to believe what you do. You are fully accountable for your beliefs, your choices, and your actions.

There are few things that I hate more than people who try and place their accountability onto others.

 

[GenMarshall]

Ohhh yes it is. You, my good sir, have the power of free will and choice! You Choose to be Catholic and you Choose to believe what you do. You are fully accountable for your beliefs, your choices, and your actions.

I did indeed to chose to be Catholic because I believe it has the fullness of the truth. When I said that "It was not my fault that I view <such and such> is immoral". I am implying that it is not my fault that hold these views mainly due enpart of what the Church teaches about human sexuality.

 

[El_Machinae]

I would imagine that a homosexual could go to confession, too, right? There's no need to be celibate if confession is close enough. The Church is designed to allow sinners, and homosexuals are no different.

Anyway, what people are digging into is trying to get someone to admit that the CC makes the naturalist fallacy. The Church certainly does, and they make no apologies for it. The distinction between natural and artificial tools (to get a result) is often very important to them.

 

[ironduck]

Anyway, what people are digging into is trying to get someone to admit that the CC makes the naturalist fallacy. The Church certainly does, and they make no apologies for it. The distinction between natural and artificial tools (to get a result) is often very important to them.

If the church wants to have their distorted and archaic views on what is immoral that's their right, I just think it deserves pointing out that they are being entirely inconsistent about it. They pretend to have sound theological background for it, but in reality it's simply a sham to excuse some incredibly twisted rules. Clearly they don't take their own proclamations seriously.

 

[Pyrite]

I did indeed to chose to be Catholic because I believe it has the fullness of the truth. When I said that "It was not my fault that I view <such and such> is immoral". I am implying that it is not my fault that hold these views mainly due enpart of what the Church teaches about human sexuality.

If the church said homosexuality was okay, what would you do?

This is without any changes in the bible.

 

[El_Machinae]

You mean you think homosexuality is immoral. Most homosexuals wouldn't care what you think, they would just put on a condom to stop the spread of AIDS.

Being homosexual is not immoral (to the Church). Partaking of homosexual activity is immoral, according to them.

Keep in mind that this is the same group that thinks that IVF is evil.

 

[croxis]

What boggles my mind is why anyone wants to be part of such a depressing religion. Don't do this and don't do that. Don't walk don't run. They are in our minds and our heads and they haven't the right.

5 exp for naming that movie

 

[ironduck]

Apparently a lot of people have a profound need to be told what to do.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

I'm not told what to do, I'm told what I should do - what has the best long-term consequences - and then am free to do it or not as I see fit.

 

[GenMarshall]

I would imagine that a homosexual could go to confession, too, right? There's no need to be celibate if confession is close enough. The Church is designed to allow sinners, and homosexuals are no different.

There is a confession that they can go to. But the thing is that they should stop commiting the sin. Since Jesus said to the adulterous women "Go and sin no more".

Being homosexual is not immoral (to the Church). Partaking of homosexual activity is immoral, according to them.

That is correct. Homosexual orientation in itself is not immoral. However partaking in any such homosexual activity is immoral.

If the church said homosexuality was okay, what would you do?

I would still view homosexuality acts as immoral. However, my reasoning would go along with the Shinto view on Homosexuality (Which I will explain later on when I get back to my own computer).

 

[ironduck]

I'm not told what to do, I'm told what I should do - what has the best long-term consequences - and then am free to do it or not as I see fit.

I should probably reword it. What I mean is that people seem to have a need to be told by others what is right and wrong. Subsequently they can then seek to follow the rules laid out by said authority. It strikes me as fundamentally being an authoritarian mindset.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Look at it in evolutionary terms. It is more efficient to belong to a group that has a leader who to some degree is the one determining the actions of the group. A band of hominids would probably be better off most of the time following a single individual than doing their own thing. This may not work in large societies, but the instinct is still there.

 

[ironduck]

Oh I understand the duality of group vs individual mentality in humans.. I was just trying to explain why so many people join these organized religions.

 

[Myzenium]

I'm gonna regret entering this debate; I know it.

If God really intended for every single sex act to end with a pregnancy, surely us.. mere mortals!!! would not be able to stand in his way.

How do you explain that?

If people intended to murder, would God forbid it? Check your local Bible; he did. A bit late in human history, but he did. If people intended to commit adultery, would God forbid it? Yes. So naturally sex fiends and God are going to be butting heads sometime in the near future.

Being able to do something doesn't make it beneficial to society.

I should probably reword it. What I mean is that people seem to have a need to be told by others what is right and wrong. Subsequently they can then seek to follow the rules laid out by said authority. It strikes me as fundamentally being an authoritarian mindset.

If people intended to give in marriage, would God forbid it? He didn't. People play lots of soccer. Did God forbid that? No. The list goes on and on. God didn't forbid lots of entertaining behavior. In fact, I'd say we've been given a lot of liberty, because God doesn't force any behavior on us; he doesn't pull our strings.

Now, who's calling God authoritarian? I'd poke fun at a politician before I started calling God that.

 

[Tenochtitlan]

So then, why is sex fun?

Because the people who don't enjoy it keep dying out.

 

[ironduck]

If people intended to give in marriage, would God forbid it? He didn't. People play lots of soccer. Did God forbid that? No. The list goes on and on. God didn't forbid lots of entertaining behavior. In fact, I'd say we've been given a lot of liberty, because God doesn't force any behavior on us; he doesn't pull our strings.

Now, who's calling God authoritarian? I'd poke fun at a politician before I started calling God that.

I think you have completely misunderstood what I said. I'm not talking about your god. I'm talking about organized religion in its various forms. Organized religion with all its rules and 'sins'.