N
Nmc
Guest
i’d go further and say its intrinsically evil.
- Status
N
Nmc
Guest
As for dysfunctional single parent- it may have been a cause in the past but today its probably a result of the culture and education system - actively telling children sex is essentially an indoor sport.
T
Thorolfr
Guest
Would it be a serious sin for a gay man to use a condom? After all, it’s not as if the condom would be interfering in a procreative act. The sex itself would undoubtedly be considered a sin by the Church, but would using a condom in that case make the sin worse?
Last edited:
N
Nmc
Guest
I think its less they are ignorant and more that they have been deceived. A deception that begins in grade school. Evidence “Parents in Britain are outraged after more than 240 primary schools introduced lessons on “self-stimulation” for children as young as six as part of their sex education program. “ That is straight up grooming.
N
Nmc
Guest
If a thief makes sure he leaves no finger prints is that a sin? Yes. Committing a sin in the safest way possible is not a virtue by any means.
Last edited:
T
Thorolfr
Guest
As Petra noted above, Pope Benedict had a more nuanced view:
There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants.
A
Aquinas11
Guest
Unbiased source, please.
What makes you think I would use a definition of another poster? Then engage in false speculation by presuming I’m using that definition. The logic chain in these posts is abysmal.
A
adgloriam
Guest
That’s a wild analogy, sex is generally consensual, an act of the will by both parties.
Also, there’s emotion and affection involved, which does cloud the judgement and influences the will.
You need to have sinned after conversion and full awareness of the moral law, to understand just how strong a role the above elements -which do not yet equate to charity, but can contribute towards it- contribute to determining acts.
A
adgloriam
Guest
@Thorolfr I was actually surprised to realize the definition of “near occasion of sin” given in the Baltimore catechism. Which is: if you get in that situation, you are going to sin (meaning: the situation can be deterministic)!! Meaning, even a devout catholic can get “into a situation” where he hasn’t yet materially sinned, but he’s gotten himself into a place past the “point of no return”.Nmc:
As Petra noted above, Pope Benedict had a more nuanced view:
There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants.
(Afterwards he’ll shake his head saying:“how did I do that, and how did things get that far??” And that’s when a catholic needs a condom, should he already have made the mistake of finding himself “in near occasion of sin” it might just be beyond him to “get up and leave” at that point.)
Q
QwertyGirl
Guest
You should have prefaced your statement with “in my opinion”. Instead, you stated it as fact. Please be careful with this. We have some readers here who believe what they read.
A
adgloriam
Guest
I’ve done more insane stunts on a motorbike than I care to admit. Plenty of them were life threatening and I was well aware of the risk. It’s a miracle I’m still alive. Praised be God.
Last edited:
J
JimG
Guest
All sin, including sexual sin, has deleterious spiritual effects. The effects are a darkening of the intellect, weakening of the will, and an increased degree of concupiscience. Unless sin is repented and counteracted, the effects can be cumulative, spiraling downward. That’s one reason the culture continues its decline.
T
thistle
Guest
Not for Catholics!!
P
PetraG
Guest
Ok, let’s rephrase that:
The only safe sex is chaste sex.
The only safe sex is chaste sex.
N
Nihilo
Guest
STD is present in some humans, and absent in the others.
ALL cases of humans with STD involved promiscuity directly or indirectly.
And all cases where no promiscuity was involved either directly or indirectly, NO STD in those humans either.
Human promiscuity is objectively incorrect.
ALL cases of humans with STD involved promiscuity directly or indirectly.
And all cases where no promiscuity was involved either directly or indirectly, NO STD in those humans either.
Human promiscuity is objectively incorrect.
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
That’s not technically true to the non-religious.
Last edited:
I
I_trust
Guest
Would using the condom make homosexual sex more sinful…No.
Would carrying a condom to antisipate and facilitate sexual sin be sinfull… I would say yes.
You would be purposely putting yourself in the near location of sin.
Would carrying a condom to antisipate and facilitate sexual sin be sinfull… I would say yes.
You would be purposely putting yourself in the near location of sin.
T
thistle
Guest
Neither are you qualified to speak for Catholics!!That is their problem. But it is incorrect to say that the ONLY fail-safe sex is abstinence.You are not qualified to speak for everyone.
P
PetraG
Guest
Chastity is not an arbitrary virtue.
Z
Zaccheus
Guest
All contraceptive methods have a failure rate. The only exception I know of is (for women) total hysterectomy and (for men) removal of the testicles so he can’t produce sperm. (And removal of the testicles sort of misses the point.)thistle:
Why is this nonsense still around? There are many, totally fail-safe sexual methods.
I am aware of vasectomy and tubal ligation but those procedures have failure rates too, if usually low ones. Contraception can reduce the chance of pregnancy but not to zero.
Further, contraception does not eliminate the risk of STD. Except for condom use, contraception doesn’t even reduce the risk of STD.
Last edited:
- Status