exactly people who are housebound could watch mass on tv…TV is not in itself evil. Without it we could not watch EWTN or other programmes that can enlighten or educate us. Think of the joy you could be bringing to people, particularly people who may be housebound and use the TV as their window on the world.
Not at all a good analogy.Would you like to become a contraceptive pill distributer? Or perhaps a pornographic magazine distributer?
Knowing that there were women who benefited from the regulation of their hormones, and men enjoying the informative articles?
Even if 99% of the rest were ‘benefiting’ in another way?
Some comparable sorts of moral issues.
Some rare exceptions to the rule, doesn’t break the general rule and real result.
And so too, you’re never actually giving them something good without all the rest of the junk. Rather like distributing say, a Catholic leaflet, occasionally, in the pornographic magazines.
Sometimes the Catholic leaflet is good and sometimes it’s mediocre. But all the time, one could get the goods elsewhere in another form, without all the accompanying sin.
Of course, people will say, “People only have to change the channel,” which rather like with the magazines, “People only have to turn the page.”
But you are the one directly responsible for aiding in and providing it all.
So I guess you cooperated in evil when you bought your computer?Would you like to become a contraceptive pill distributer? Or perhaps a pornographic magazine distributer?
Knowing that there were women who benefited from the regulation of their hormones, and men enjoying the informative articles?
Even if 99% of the rest were ‘benefiting’ in another way?
Some comparable sorts of moral issues.
Some rare exceptions to the rule, doesn’t break the general rule and real result.
And so too, you’re never actually giving them something good without all the rest of the junk. Rather like distributing say, a Catholic leaflet, occasionally, in the pornographic magazines.
Sometimes the Catholic leaflet is good and sometimes it’s mediocre. But all the time, one could get the goods elsewhere in another form, without all the accompanying sin.
Of course, people will say, “People only have to change the channel,” which rather like with the magazines, “People only have to turn the page.”
But you are the one directly responsible for aiding in and providing it all.
Vast majority?Incorrect, the vast majority of TV programming contains content that it is immoral to display in one’s homes, and harmful to the soul.
Thus the analogies are spot on.
DirectTV is delivering content, not television sets to people’s homes. Which have their own issues in and of themselves.
A bad analogy is a bad analogy and yours was.Incorrect, the vast majority of TV programming contains content that it is immoral to display in one’s homes, and harmful to the soul.
Thus the analogies are spot on.
DirectTV is delivering content, not television sets to people’s homes. Which have their own issues in and of themselves.
I think that is a real stretch. If you are not setting up the programming on your own initiative that directs harmful material into people’s homes, and you are not, you have no guilt, immediate or remote, in what they chose to watch, or in what networks chose to broadcast. You would not be any more responsible for their choice of viewing–and any sin that flowed from that viewing–than if you sold TVs at Best Buy.I But then I thought maybe Catholics shouldn’t become a DirecTV installer because TV is a medium for watching lots of sinful things or waste of time. What do you think?
no you are not responsible in any way shape or form for the programming Dish carries.Wo
But you are the one directly responsible for aiding in and providing it all.