All English schools, including Catholic schools, are now required by law to teach all 15 year old children how to use contraceptives outside marriage,

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdgspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Benedict108 said:
On the contrary the wiser thing to do would be to abstain. To feed children false ideas about safe sex is to do them a disservice, as they are essentially being taught to gamble with their lives. “Faithfully” had stated earlier some stats about the reliability of condoms and such assertions can be support by viewing publications from IPPF and the Guttmacher Institute.

Actions which teach contraception do nothing other than trivialize the sexual act and make it mundane, something than can be given away at a whim, but such programmes fail to realize the psychological ramifications of premarital sexual intercourse and reduce the human body to something common place, not made in the image and likeness of God.

The fact of the matter is if someone is not ready to have a child, they shouldn’t be participating in sexual intercourse, as reproduction is the natural consequence of the act. Essentially, children are being taught how to sin and only to compound their sinful behavior by trying to hide their sinful behavior by contraception. They are being open to a world of emotional issues because often times they are not mentally ready for such behaviors. Sadly, such programmes allow the lines between of love and lust to be blurred and contribute the corruption of our children.
Click to expand...
What you’re saying is common sense.

EVERYBODY knows that it would be easier to abstain, but that is not reality.

and if somebody is going to have sex, you can only control them for so long before they will go out and do what they want. and if thats having sex, then they need to use protection.
 
BlueShadow123 said:
Hahaha. Id rather some teenager used birth control than having an unwanted child.
Its just much wiser. And I have millions of people who obviously agree with me.
Click to expand...
It isn’t “wiser,” but I agree that millions of people obviously agree with you. I think I’ll take the narrow road…
 
OK, this thread should be locked up.
  1. The title of the thread bears no resemblance to what the articles actually say. The titles of the articles are about a possible future event, the title of this thread claims its already happened.
  2. As another poster pointed out, the issue at hand has been already rejected and will not be happening.
 
BlueShadow123 said:
What you’re saying is common sense.

EVERYBODY knows that it would be easier to abstain, but that is not reality.

and if somebody is going to have sex, you can only control them for so long before they will go out and do what they want. and if thats having sex, then they need to use protection.
Click to expand...
I wish what I had stated was ‘common sense’, but most people do not seem to follow what is obviously the wiser decision.

As far as controlling people, true education about sex and love is not about controlling others, but self mastery, which is seriously devoid in most contraception supporting sexual education programmes.

We are not mere subjects of our whims or concupiscence, but have the ability to transcend base emotions and rise to the call of our Creator.

There may people who have premarital sex, but to say we’ll teach you how to sin safely is tantamount to being complicit in that sin; further, people will lie, cheat, steal, kill, but we don’t necessarily teach them to do those actions safely. Essentially, programmes such as these teach children to make poor decisions by providing with poor information and encourage sinful behavior.
 
Two articles are linked to the opening post. While it is true that the second ,article linked there is from 2009, the first article linked there was published November 16, 2010. That means that the things seen in that article are happening right now. I provided the second article in the opening post simply to help fill in information as to what is occurring.
I am sorry that the second article from 2009 has been confusing and causing people to think this is not a current matter.
Kaninchen said:
My comment on this is that the stories linked-to are out of date. These proposals were dropped even before May’s General Election.

So, while getting cross about things is all very well, it’s not actually happening.
Click to expand...
 
Benedict108 said:
I wish what I had stated was ‘common sense’, but most people do not seem to follow what is obviously the wiser decision.

As far as controlling people, true education about sex and love is not about controlling others, but self mastery, which is seriously devoid in most contraception supporting sexual education programmes.

We are not mere subjects of our whims or concupiscence, but have the ability to transcend base emotions and rise to the call of our Creator.

There may people who have premarital sex, but to say we’ll teach you how to sin safely is tantamount to being complicit in that sin; further, people will lie, cheat, steal, kill, but we don’t necessarily teach them to do those actions safely. Essentially, programmes such as these teach children to make poor decisions by providing with poor information and encourage sinful behavior.
Click to expand...
I agree it would be nice if life was like that, but its not.🤷
 
mdgspencer said:
Two articles are linked to the opening post. While it is true that the second ,article linked there is from 2009, the first article linked there was published November 16, 2010. That means that the things seen in that article are happening right now. I provided the second article in the opening post simply to help fill in information as to what is occurring.
I am sorry that the second article from 2009 has been confusing and causing people to think this is not a current matter.
Click to expand...
No, one is from 5 November 2009 and the other from 23 February 2010 (look at the ‘By Graeme Paton’ line), the Telegraph is confusing you by putting the current date at the top of the page.

Ed Balls was a member of the Labour Government, we now have a Tory/Liberal Democrat Coalition Government. The proposals were dropped by the Labour Government before the election last May, they have not been revived by the new Government.
 
BlueShadow123 said:
Well I agree there shouldn’t be a bunch of homophobes running around.
If somebody is going to have sex outside marriage- then they should without a doubt, use protection.
and abortion is just reality. Its not right, but its reality and millions of them happen daily. =/
Click to expand...
Please define, in clear terms, what it means to be a homophobe.
 
irishpatrick said:
Please define, in clear terms, what it means to be a homophobe.
Click to expand...
Bullying gay people and being ‘afraid’ or grossed out to be around a so-called gay person. That is so homophobic and its sick. I bet God would never bully a person who was considered gay especially if they thought they were born that way. and he sure wouldn’t be afraid to be around him. This so called gay person is your brother and/or sister. there is no excuse to act like a jerk to them. That is homophobic.

Some scientists say that people are born gay, other say they are not. We don’t know yet. And since there is a possibility that they are born gay then I think being rude to them is just wrong.

I don’t care if they’re gay or not. Nobody deserves to be bullied.
 
BlueShadow123 said:
Bullying gay people and being ‘afraid’ or grossed out to be around a so-called gay person. That is so homophobic and its sick. I bet God would never bully a person who was considered gay especially if they thought they were born that way. and he sure wouldn’t be afraid to be around him. This so called gay person is your brother and/or sister. there is no excuse to act like a jerk to them. That is homophobic.

Some scientists say that people are born gay, other say they are not. We don’t know yet. And since there is a possibility that they are born gay then I think being rude to them is just wrong.

I don’t care if they’re gay or not. Nobody deserves to be bullied.
Click to expand...
That is not a phobia. Phobias typically contain some level of fear. Being grossed out is not the same as fear. I have a problem with the term “homophobe” because when people use it they are including people who simply disagree with a homsexual lifestyle. Disagreement is NOT fear and it is NOT a phobia.

What you desribe is terrible behaivor, not a phobia.
 
irishpatrick said:
That is not a phobia. Phobias typically contain some level of fear. Being grossed out is not the same as fear. I have a problem with the term “homophobe” because when people use it they are including people who simply disagree with a homsexual lifestyle. Disagreement is NOT fear and it is NOT a phobia.

What you desribe is terrible behaivor, not a phobia.
Click to expand...
Actually incase you are unaware, people who aren’t even afraid of gays, but just don’t like them are considered homophobic. Its one of those terms that has an un-writen meaning.

Not sure you ever heard of people use it like that, but i do all the time.

and yes, i know what a phobia is.
 
The definition of homophobe often gets stretched out even more than that. I know plenty of people who will call you a homophobe simply for being anti-sodomy.
 
BlueShadow123 said:
Actually incase you are unaware, people who aren’t even afraid of gays, but just don’t like them are considered homophobic. Its one of those terms that has an un-writen meaning.

Not sure you ever heard of people use it like that, but i do all the time.

and yes, i know what a phobia is.
Click to expand...
Unwritten? What are you talking about? Have you ever looked it up? It’s available in any dictionary:
Definition of HOMOPHOBIA
Click to expand...
: irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals
— ho·mo·pho·bic adjective
Click to expand...
The point of the usage of this term is to cast people who believe that homosexual acts are sinful as “irrational.” Catholics who use this term in reference to faithful Catholics are claiming their own Church is irrational.

Well, now, isn’t that special…and who exactly is behind these attacks on Christ’s Church? Oh, I don’t know…could it be…
 
rlg94086 said:
Unwritten? What are you talking about? Have you ever looked it up? It’s available in any dictionary:

The point of the usage of this term is to cast people who believe that homosexual acts are sinful as “irrational.” Catholics who use this term in reference to faithful Catholics are claiming their own Church is irrational.

Well, now, isn’t that special…and who exactly is behind these attacks on Christ’s Church? Oh, I don’t know…could it be…
Click to expand...
Apparently you didn’t read a thing I said.

I know what homophobe means but most people tend to use it to categorize anybody who just doesn’t want to be around gays period. That doesn’t mean they’re ‘afraid’ of them, they just don’t want to be around them all because they’re ‘gay’. And thats just dumb.
That would be like me not wanting to be around somebody because they’re black. And im talking about situations like for example: you’re on a bus, and you notice a gay person on the bus, and there is a free seat next to them, but the person chooses not to sit to the gay person only because they are gay. That is an example of being homophobic. That is just wrong.

And yea, I think everybody knows what christians feel on the matter of homosexuality. Its a sin because God says its a sin. We all know what God says about it. Its no big surprise. But just because God says engaging in homosexual relations is wrong does not mean that we can just go around and bully gay people. Being jerks to them isnt going to want to make them come around.

Now im not here to debate you. I’m just telling you how I feel on the matter. If you disagree with me, thats fine. That is your right. But I’m not going to sit here and debate you. 👍
 
BlueShadow123 said:
Actually incase you are unaware, people who aren’t even afraid of gays, but just don’t like them are considered homophobic. Its one of those terms that has an un-writen meaning.

Not sure you ever heard of people use it like that, but i do all the time.

and yes, i know what a phobia is.
Click to expand...
It is the wrong word.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top