Condoms vs. abortions

  • Thread starter Thread starter bengal_fan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
newbetx said:
If you think both are sins, then yes, they are equivalent in the final analysis. What do you think God’s consideration is?
Click to expand...
well, the catholic understanding is that there are levels to sin. you do have the simple mortal and venial. but i would guarantee that the penance for the use of a condom would be less than for having an abortion.
 
hasikelee said:
Your logic structure is incorrect.
Click to expand...
nope, it’s correct. that is the way some people think so that is the way i worded it. no lack of logic.

the statistics i have seen is that condoms fail 10% (not 15-35 but maybe there are new statistics). i have also seen the statistics of dramatic decline in AIDS in countries that adopt condom use as a policy and ensure their population has access to them (uganda is a great example of this).
 
bengal_fan said:
well, the catholic understanding is that there are levels to sin. you do have the simple mortal and venial. but i would guarantee that the penance for the use of a condom would be less than for having an abortion.
Click to expand...
But that’s not the issue. The issue is justifying using a condom by saying it prevents abortion. That’s rationalization.
 
bengal_fan said:
would you be opposed to the use of a condom if the woman would use abortion as birth control otherwise?

basically, if a woman (or couple) would abort the baby should pregnancy occur, would you rather them have used a condom to avoid the pregnancy (and eventual murder) in the first place?
Click to expand...
They will do what they will do and you can bet they would not ask nor accept my opinion.
 
mlchance said:
And yet no one has actually said that. Well, except for you.
Click to expand...
which is why i said “in a practical sense” for the answers would all end with the outcome i stated.
mlchance said:
“We allow”? Who is this “we” you keep talking about? It certainly doesn’t include me. I’m not allowing (or not not allowing) them to do anything. They’re responsible for their actions; not me.
Click to expand...
you are right in that you are not responsible for some one else’s sin. i was using the word “allow” in that you let it happen without intervening. not in the “i give permission” sense. God allows us to sin, but He doesn’t allow sin.
 
bengal_fan said:
nope, it’s correct. that is the way some people think so that is the way i worded it. no lack of logic.

the statistics i have seen is that condoms fail 10% (not 15-35 but maybe there are new statistics). i have also seen the statistics of dramatic decline in AIDS in countries that adopt condom use as a policy and ensure their population has access to them (uganda is a great example of this).
Click to expand...
Funny, the effect in Botswana is just the opposite. That nation now has 40% AIDS/HIV.
 
gardenswithkids said:
I know you aren’t the only one. I commented earlier to a similar accusation by the op. I don’t have much tolerance today for people in cyber-space commenting on how we don’t live in the “real world” or how we don’t have sympathy for those who struggle with real problems.
Click to expand...
my accusation was because of the answers (or lack thereof) i was receiving to the question. people were just giving me the ideal (and changing the situation presented). i was asking for a practical answer.

i don’t remember saying people didn’t have sympathy.
maybe i did, and i would be wrong for saying that.
 
bengal_fan said:
not to be crass, but it is the end of the story (at least here on earth) for that baby.
Click to expand...
Yeah that is the sad part that PP and the rest of the pro-murder world would like you to think. There is the mother and father who are left with the pain.
 
vern_humphrey said:
But that’s not the issue. The issue is justifying using a condom by saying it prevents abortion. That’s rationalization.
Click to expand...
but it does have the ability to prevent an abortion in the specific situation i am citing.

this is not a “society as a whole” question. i am asking a SPECIFIC question about a SPECIFIC situation. basically which is worse… the use of a condom or an abortion. the only possible answers are:
  1. the use of a condom is worse than an abortion.
  2. getting an abortion is worse than the use of a condom.
  3. they both carry equal weight and therefore neither can be condoned.
the third one is tantamount (in this situation) to a higher potential for an abortion ( as is the first one).
 
st_lucy said:
Yeah that is the sad part that PP and the rest of the pro-murder world would like you to think. There is the mother and father who are left with the pain.
Click to expand...
no, that is the sad part that is reality. when the baby is aborted, it dies. it no longer lives which would mean the end of it’s story here on earth.

yes, the mom and dad can go on and eventually experience healing, but the baby is still no longer alive (except hopefully in heaven with the Lord).
 
HelenRose said:
They will do what they will do and you can bet they would not ask nor accept my opinion.
Click to expand...
i am not asking if they would ask… i am asking.

try to think hypothetically…

they DID ask you… what do you say?
(besides don’t have sex, you have the opportunity here to create a situation where an abortion, to use the statistics of another on this thread, is up to 85% less likely to happen)
 
bengal_fan said:
but it does have the ability to prevent an abortion in the specific situation i am citing.
Click to expand...
Which is a prime example of sophistry.

I should have the right to kill people with an ax, since if you don’t let me use the ax, I’ll “have to use” a flamethrower.
bengal_fan said:
this is not a “society as a whole” question. i am asking a SPECIFIC question about a SPECIFIC situation. basically which is worse… the use of a condom or an abortion. the only possible answers are:
Click to expand...
So am I asking a SPECIFIC question about a SPECIFIC situation. Should it be moral for me to use an ax, so as to not be forced to use a flamethrower?
bengal_fan said:
  1. the use of a condom is worse than an abortion.
  2. getting an abortion is worse than the use of a condom.
  3. they both carry equal weight and therefore neither can be condoned.
Click to expand...
  1. the use of an ax is worse than a flamethrower .
  2. using an flamethrower is worse than the use of a ax…
  3. they both carry equal weight and therefore neither can be condoned
bengal_fan said:
the third one is tantamount (in this situation) to a higher potential for an abortion ( as is the first one).
Click to expand...
Bogus argument. Both are wrong, and we do not promote evil because people say, “If you don’t let me kill this guy with my ax, I’ll have to use my flamethrower.”
 
let me say something…

i would LOVE it if people stopped having pre-marital sex.
i am totally AGAINST abortion.
i agree that the increased availability of birth control (especially condoms) has caused an increase in sexual promiscuity.

i am just asking a hypothetical question (although these people do exist in the world with this line of thinking).
 
hasikelee said:
Your logic structure is incorrect.

It should be:

“They WILL use a condom AND abort the child.”

Even the CDC ruled that with 100% perfect use (and assuming the condom is of the American-used brand), failure rates are around 15-35%. That means at best a condom works 85% of the time. Other brands have not been tested and some that have been tested are even worse.

If the couple about to engage in sexual intercourse will abort the child, they will do so whether a condom is used or not. 🤷
Click to expand...
Condoms were developed during the 19th century for use by whores. If they got pregnant, they found it harder to make money, plus they had to care for a child. Middle-class people began to take up the practice for reasons no more noble.
 
i am sorry but the axe and flamethrower analogy is not the same. in your example, they both cause death. in mine only one causes physical death (to an innocent i might add). yes, the condom could cause a spiritual death, but it is a conscious choice made by the couple.

it’s just not the same.
 
bengal_fan said:
which is why i said “in a practical sense” for the answers would all end with the outcome i stated.
Click to expand...
You’re assuming here that sex = pregnancy 100% of the time, which is not the case.
you are right in that you are not responsible for some one else’s sin. i was using the word “allow” in that you let it happen without intervening. not in the “i give permission” sense. God allows us to sin, but He doesn’t allow sin.
Click to expand...
If I had that kind of power over this hypothetical couple in that my “permission” was needed before they would use a condom or not, then I would simply exercise that power and NOT ALLOW them to have sex in the first place. Problem solved!

But if this hypothetical couple is as obstinate as you seem to imply, then nothing I say would make a difference anyway – so I would encourage them to do the moral thing and abstain from sex, because I could not, in good conscience, encourage them to sin.

And if their condom-less union did result in a pregnancy, I would offer to adopt the baby in lieu of their aborting it.
 
vern_humphrey said:
Bogus argument. Both are wrong, and we do not promote evil because people say, “If you don’t let me kill this guy with my ax, I’ll have to use my flamethrower.”
Click to expand...
but there is the idea of going for the lesser of two evils.

if there were two pro-choice candidates, but one didn’t want to allow partial-birth abortions, you would choose the lesser of two evils right? or would you just not vote?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top