Catholic Cardinal Pushes for Condoms

[fix]

I’m getting a sense of jamais vu here, I don’t know about you?
Since we have come back in a circle this confirms my diagnosis of death.

R.I.P.

I sense you perceive this line of argument as circular because you either do not have all the information or you do not accept what the Church teaches in this matter.

With all repspect you may want to talk to a priest and do some reading. Start with the CCC and read the footnotes.

Here is a good article:

Contraception and Catholic Sexual Ethics

[

](lifeissues.net | Contraception and Catholic Sexual Ethics)

 

[jack_hawkins]

A condom is wrong even if subjectively infertile. That is part of the point. The act is to be as God ordained.

That wasn’t the point I was trying to make, but you have made your position even more absurd and illogical.

 

[fix]

That wasn’t the point I was trying to make, but you have made your position even more absurd and illogical.

Now, what are your accusations based on? What is absurd or illogical about the teaching? It seems you have not read what the Church teaches or why She teaches as She does in this matter.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I suggest you get your facts right. And address your own Christian failings, as well as your reading ability.
I have never stated “if it feels good, it must be okay”. I would sort out that beam.

I suggest you get your facts right. And address your own Christian failings, as well as your reading and reasoning ability.

Condoms are used for illicit sex – period. To expect the Church to warp its teachings because some people want to have illicit and dangerous sex is simply not going to fly.

 

[Nohome]

So, if somene said that “Genocide is never appropriate”, you would consider there to be 'realistic" exceptions to that moral rule??

Your comments are tangential and do not contribute to the discussion.

 

[mikew262]

I suggest you get your facts right. And address your own Christian failings, as well as your reading and reasoning ability.

Condoms are used for illicit sex – period. To expect the Church to warp its teachings because some people want to have illicit and dangerous sex is simply not going to fly.

If I remember the stats correctly, “some” people equals over 90% of American Catholics (on all ABC, not just condoms at 1 time or another), married and unmarried.

I think most people agree that abstaining from sex before marriage and if you are diseased is preferrable and should be emphasized. However, to dismiss condoms as a proven aid against STDs and AIDS, if abstaining is not being followed, flows against common sense and the Church needs to re-visit it.

 

[Nohome]

If I remember the stats correctly, “some” people equals over 90% of American Catholics (on all ABC, not just condoms at 1 time or another), married and unmarried.

I think most people agree that abstaining from sex before marriage and if you are diseased is preferrable and should be emphasized. However, to dismiss condoms as a proven aid against STDs and AIDS, if abstaining is not being followed, flows against common sense and the Church needs to re-visit it.

Do I see a ray of light in the darkness of rhetoric? An island of insight in an ocean of absurdity? Look out man, you’ll be voted off the island!

Nohome

 

[fix]

If I remember the stats correctly, “some” people equals over 90% of American Catholics (on all ABC, not just condoms at 1 time or another), married and unmarried.

I think most people agree that abstaining from sex before marriage and if you are diseased is preferrable and should be emphasized. However, to dismiss condoms as a proven aid against STDs and AIDS, if abstaining is not being followed, flows against common sense and the Church needs to re-visit it.

Actually, the Church’s teaching is good sense and good medicine. What is flawed is the idea we each should act as we want while disregarding God’s will because we find it difficult. In many ways it really is that simple.

 

[mikew262]

Do I see a ray of light in the darkness of rhetoric? An island of insight in an ocean of absurdity? Look out man, you’ll be voted off the island!

Nohome

Oh, I’ve fought this battle before. I’ve got the scars to prove it.

 

[vern_humphrey]

If I remember the stats correctly, “some” people equals over 90% of American Catholics (on all ABC, not just condoms at 1 time or another), married and unmarried.

I have pointed out many times that God is not an elected official. We cannot vote Him out of office if we do not like the way He runs His universe. No matter how many people commit a sin, that doesn’t make it morally acceptable and not a sin.

I think most people agree that abstaining from sex before marriage and if you are diseased is preferrable and should be emphasized. However, to dismiss condoms as a proven aid against STDs and AIDS, if abstaining is not being followed, flows against common sense and the Church needs to re-visit it.

The Church’s position is clear – if people want to sin, the Church has no obligation to encourage them or facilitate their sins.

 

[mikew262]

Actually, the Church’s teaching is good sense and good medicine. What is flawed is the idea we each should act as we want while disregarding God’s will because we find it difficult. In many ways it really is that simple.

I’ll repeat what I said earlier, “the Church needs to revisit it”.

I’m not advocating necessarily dropping it’s ban against contraception all together, but in certain instances, where contraception has been proven to ease disease and suffering in 1 way or another, then it needs to be revisited.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I’ll repeat what I said earlier, “the Church needs to revisit it”.

I’m not advocating necessarily dropping it’s ban against contraception all together, but in certain instances, where contraception has been proven to ease disease and suffering in 1 way or another, then it needs to be revisited.

The Church has revisited this issue – and reaffirms its traditional morality.

What is your motive for coming on a Catholic forum and attacking Catholic morality? Are you smarter and wiser than the rest of us? Do you hope that by a combination of arrogance and sophistry you can get us to abandon that “old, outdated Catholic morality” and “move forward?”

 

[mikew262]

I have pointed out many times that God is not an elected official. We cannot vote Him out of office if we do not like the way He runs His universe. No matter how many people commit a sin, that doesn’t make it morally acceptable and not a sin.

The Church’s position is clear – if people want to sin, the Church has no obligation to encourage them or facilitate their sins.

I’m not throughly convinced that contraception is a sin, especially the type that can not accidently cause abortions. The 1 piece of scripture (brother refusing to lay with his sister-in-law) that I’ve seen referred too in defense of this ban is certainly open to a different interpretion than the one the Church has taken. If there are others that more accurately reflect the church’s position, then pls show me.

 

[Brendan]

Your comments are tangential and do not contribute to the discussion.

I was expounding on your premise that moral imperatives that are ‘never’ to be done always include exceptions, for the sake of being ‘realistic’…

Do you hold that premise to be true?

 

[mikew262]

The Church has revisited this issue – and reaffirms its traditional morality.

What is your motive for coming on a Catholic forum and attacking Catholic morality? Are you smarter and wiser than the rest of us? Do you hope that by a combination of arrogance and sophistry you can get us to abandon that “old, outdated Catholic morality” and “move forward?”

Vern, this is a forum. Pls look up the definition. The purpose of a forum is to discuss ideas, openly. The vast majority of American Catholics use or have used contraception. This makes this subject a perfect topic for discussion. We even have a Cardinal pushing for the use of condoms, as the thread title implies.

No, I am not smarter or wiser than the rest of you, however I am entitled to my opinion. You are certainly welcome to rebutt my opinion. However, if you feel you can’t stomach this discussion anymore, and can’t contribute anything else useful to the discussion, then maybe you should go on silent mode.

 

[Nohome]

I was expounding on your premise that moral imperatives that are ‘never’ to be done always include exceptions, for the sake of being ‘realistic’…

Do you hold that premise to be true?

When and where did I say that? Comments in this thread are numbered, so just list the number.

Nohome

 

[vern_humphrey]

I’m not throughly convinced that contraception is a sin, especially the type that can not accidently cause abortions.

What you or I think is right or wrong is not really relevant on a Catholic forum. When the Church speaks, she does so with authority and Catholics are bound by it. The Church has spoken on this issue, and all the debate in the world won’t change it.

The 1 piece of scripture (brother refusing to lay with his sister-in-law) that I’ve seen referred too in defense of this ban is certainly open to a different interpretion than the one the Church has taken. If there are others that more accurately reflect the church’s position, then pls show me.

The Catholic Church espouses both Scripture and Tradition (the oral teaching handed down by the Apostles.) It is very clear that the Church has opposed abortion, birth control and infanticide from the earliest times. The Church has also always considered homosexual acts to be sinful as well.

 

[Nohome]

What is your motive for coming on a Catholic forum and attacking Catholic morality?

You have come on a Catholic debate forum to attack Catholic morality and are surprised that people reject the “if it feels good, it must be okay” brand of morality?

So Vern, what is CAF? You used both the words “forum” and “debate”, but you want everyone to agree with you?

Sheesh, what a yawning festival that would be!

Nohome

 

[vern_humphrey]

So Vern, what is CAF? You used both the words “forum” and “debate”, but you want everyone to agree with you?

It is a forum committed to the study and advancement of Catholicism.

I don’t agree with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. But I would not go on a Mormon forum and attack their beliefs. That would be both arrogant and counter-productive.

Sheesh, what a yawning festival that would be!

Nohome

If you are here merely for entertainment, then you cannot claim to be debating honestly, now can you?

 

[iserve]

There is plenty of room for debate on some things, but the truth is not one of them. Vern doesn’t have an opinion here, either, as he must accept it whether he like it or not in order to lay claim to being a Catholic… The term “Catholic” implies many things, not the least of which is discipleship. As the word intends, this makes one a follower, not associate, contemporary,team member etc. Protestants and reformers “interpret” Scripture for themselves, and this has often clashed with Catholic theology. Nothing new under the sun, here, just the same thing that’s been going on for 500 years.

The “forum” discussion can include arguments about these subjects, but the arguments are outside of the Church, which has confirmed, ad nauseum, its’ stand on life issues. Argue away, but be sure to call it what it is- a *protest. *Catholics have tolerated this for long enough not to have been persuded yet.