If life does not begin at conception why does Planned Parenthood hand out so many condoms?

[notsmart]

As others may have already said…the problem of not being able to procreate is not the obstacle in and of itself. It would be a problem if misrepresentation either via a lie or a failure to inform the prospective spouse of this fact occurred.

I understand I think. I have to find the Ask the Apologist thread I searched, where a man was impotent and wanted to be married in the Catholic Church, and was told he could not.
I can find it with patience, I suppose.

 

[RobHom]

I understand I think. I have to find the Ask the Apologist thread I searched, where a man was impotent and wanted to be married in the Catholic Church, and was told he could not.
I can find it with patience, I suppose.

I would find that somewhat amazing… especially considering that the following comes directly from the Catholic Catechism:

scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c3a7.htm About Matrimony.

**1654 Spouses to whom God has not granted children can nevertheless have a conjugal life full of meaning, in both human and Christian terms. Their marriage can radiate a fruitfulness of charity, of hospitality, and of sacrifice. **

The only impediment I can think of…would be to have the inability to procreate on one or the others part…and to deceive the other about it. In other words enter into the marriage fraudulently.

I have never heard of a “Procreation Requirement”…there certainly isn’t one in the Catechism…

This is a link to the entire Catechism…if you don’t already have one: scborromeo.org/ccc/ccc_toc.htm

 

[notsmart]

Thanks RobHom,

I have the hard copy CCC and the compendium.

I will try to either find it, or agree that I was wrong about what I saw. I am not trying to be argumentative, but really trying to get to the bottom of some things that I think I will understand properly if I am getting the right information.

I want a fully formed conscience, formed with truth that I can’t just make up as I go along. I need to trust for once in my life. I need to trust in something that God intended for me to rely on at times when I just can’t decide on my own.

I would find that somewhat amazing… especially considering that the following comes directly from the Catholic Catechism:

scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c3a7.htm About Matrimony.

**1654 Spouses to whom God has not granted children can nevertheless have a conjugal life full of meaning, in both human and Christian terms. Their marriage can radiate a fruitfulness of charity, of hospitality, and of sacrifice. **

The only impediment I can think of…would be to have the inability to procreate on one or the others part…and to deceive the other about it. In other words enter into the marriage fraudulently.

I have never heard of a “Procreation Requirement”…there certainly isn’t one in the Catechism…

This is a link to the entire Catechism…if you don’t already have one: scborromeo.org/ccc/ccc_toc.htm

 

[Sam_Maloney]

Going back to the original subject, I have to say I can’t imagine any pro abortionist being even momentarily stumped by this one.

They would answer that conception is the beginning of a process that leads to life, and that the idea of a ‘human’ being that conists of two or twenty cells is just plain silly.

Then they’d say that it really doesn’t matter, anyway: unless a woman has control of her body she is less than a full citizen, and therefore less than fully human.

Those are the arguements we have to address ourselves to and learn to refute.

My personal inclination is to point out that size isn’t related to humanity: a 1000 pound person [and they are out there] isn’t 10 times as ‘human’ as a hundred pounder. Nor is a 50 pound person only half as human. Therefore, humanity isn’t a function of size, so a single celled human is not impossible.

And secondly, every right has limitations: your right to swing your fist becomes null a tenth of an inch from my nose. Similarly, the right to control her own body doesn’t give a woman the right to destroy some one else’s body. Since the mother’s very real inconvenience has a natural expiration date at which point she can go back to ‘normal’ life, her needs are less important than those of the child, whose intrests are, shall we say, long term…

Lastly, I think we should point out that a humane society is one that gives the benefit of the doubt to its weakest members. If we are truely unsure as to when human life begins, the default position should be to protect the defenceless.

 

[Chris_LaRock]

“Women are not stupid … women have always known that there was a life there.”
Faye Wattleton, then President of Planned Parenthood

“No one, neither the patient receiving the abortion, nor the person doing the abortion, is ever, at any time, unaware that they are ending a life…”
Abortion provider William F Harrison, MD

“I have never denied that human life begins at conception. If I have a complaint about our society, it’s that we don’t deal with death and dying. Do we believe human beings have a right to make decisions about death and dying? Yes we do, and those decisions are made every day in every hospital.”
Clinic Counselor Tim Shuck

These people are just evil!

 

[mapleoak]

And yet the Catholic Church prohibits the use of barrier methods. I see no reasoning in this.

Because it frustrates the procreative aspect of the marital embrace. Good reason.

I have read all about the intent of the sexual participants, the so-called Marital Embrace, the openness to conception, etc., etc. It seems to me that the Church holds each and every reliable method of birth control in total contempt.

It doesn’t seem so, it is so. The use of any type of artificial birth control, reliable or unreliable, is an affront to the holy and natural order of marriage. It is intrisically evil and disordered and therefore the Church is quite justified in holding such things in total contempt.

It is my understanding that a good number of American Catholics disagree with this Church teaching, as well as Catholics from many other countries.

Sad, but true. Thankfully the Church is not majority rule.

And because condoms can reduce the number of cases of infectious diseases being spread through sexual activity, how is that a bad thing?

Murder can have good side effects. Bank robbery can have desirable side effects…how is that a bad thing?

Maybe God just wants some of us to kill ourselves through syphilis and HIV/AIDS

Commandment number five applies to killing ourselves as well. Follow God’s commands in all things, and you don’t have to worry about killing yourself. You wouldn’t be putting yourself in the promiscuous position to begin with.

• for every 1,000 who die, it gives room for 1,000 new babies on the planet. The trade-off makes pathetic sense to me.

These numbers make absolutely no sense. Also, since when does room need to be made?

 

[mapleoak]

God wants everyone to die - how else are we to join him in the Hereafter?

marietta

This is of course consistent with your acceptance and promotion of abortion. Since you hold man as responsible for life and death, you extend that to the unborn as well. The truth is however, God is the master of life and death, and it is entirely His to determine when to call someone from this world.
Perhaps I am giving you to much credit though. That was just a cheap shot you made.

 

[marietta]

Sam Maloney:

Your response did not address the likelihood that, in addition to giving people the means to better control their reproductive lives, perhaps Planned Parenthood is also giving them the means to better control the spread of infectious disease.

Condoms are not just for preventing procreation.

marietta

 

[mapleoak]

“Women are not stupid … women have always known that there was a life there.”
Faye Wattleton, then President of Planned Parenthood

Interesting quote. Along the lines of the current topic “If life does not begin at conception…” I had posted a thread titled “Pro-Choice folks, do you believe that women are ignorant” last week which of course as I had expected, received almost no feedback. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=264193

I believe that in both cases the truth is either to hard to admit or the pro-abortion forces are ashamed to reveal that they disrepect women to the degree that they view them as cattle to farmed as their gold mine. Pregnant women equals money from abortion. Get lots of women pregnant and herd them into their clinics.

 

[mapleoak]

Sam Maloney:

Your response did not address the likelihood that, in addition to giving people the means to better control their reproductive lives, perhaps Planned Parenthood is also giving them the means to better control the spread of infectious disease.

Condoms are not just for preventing procreation.

marietta

Haha, that is hilarious to think that planned parenthood give a rat’s rear about people catching infectious disease. They are in business for one reason. Killing helpless people and making lots of money doing it.

 

[marietta]

mapleoak:

Poster’s Myopia.

marietta

 

[mapleoak]

mapleoak:

Poster’s Myopia.

marietta

I know, the truth is hard to swallow. Admit it. Myopia would apply if one were to ignore the big picture and focus on the unimportant details directly in front of them. Since the matter at hand is not an unimportant or trivial detail, but the henious and outrages slaughter of unborn children, it is fully justifiable to direct all focus to that matter since it overshadows any big picture. The big picture itself is murder. The claim that planned parenthood has any other motive than to make money by killing helpless people is nothing more than myopic self deceit. Truth.

 

[Sam_Maloney]

Sam Maloney:

Your response did not address the likelihood that, in addition to giving people the means to better control their reproductive lives, perhaps Planned Parenthood is also giving them the means to better control the spread of infectious disease.

Condoms are not just for preventing procreation.

marietta

My response had nothing to do with either condoms or Planned Parenthood: it was purely a proposal as to how to frame the case against abortion in a form that might possibly be productive for that small part of the pro-choice crowd that might still be capable of thinking about the issue rationally.

 

[mlchance]

Planned Parenthood hands up substandard condoms because it’s a way to drum up further business. Condom use creates the illusion of safety. Consequently, it actually increases incidents of STDs and pregnancy, events for which Planned Parenthood is more than happy to sell a solution, especially if it involves an abortion for an African-American.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[PLAL]

Jill Stanek will be on the Mancow Show in about a half hour (9AM central) talking about “Born Alive Infants Protection Act”.

You can find your station here…

mancow.com/stationfinder

jillstanek.net/

 

[Dale_M]

Jill Stanek will be on the Mancow Show

Good Lord, is she that desperate?!

 

[PLAL]

Jill Stanek will be on the Mancow Show in about a half hour (9AM central) talking about “Born Alive Infants Protection Act”.

You can find your station here…

mancow.com/stationfinder

jillstanek.net/

[images.mancow.com/images/icons/speakericon.gif](javascriptlayer(’/site/preview?pref=100&pid=1002’,‘520’,‘390’,‘player’)) The Mancow Madhouse is on the air live right now. [Click here to listen to the show live](javascriptlayer(’/site/preview?pref=100&pid=1002’,‘520’,‘390’,‘player’)). Don’t forget to call in: 888-2-MANCOW

 

[SeekerJen]

I understand I think. I have to find the Ask the Apologist thread I searched, where a man was impotent and wanted to be married in the Catholic Church, and was told he could not.
I can find it with patience, I suppose.

The difference is between impotence and infertility. The former is a complete inability to have normal sexual relations. The latter has an ability to complete normal relations, but has difficulty or impossibility in producing children.

I think that impotent people cannot marry not only because of the absolute impossibility of producing children due to the lack of sexual ability, but also because an unconsummated marriage can be presumed sacramentally invalid (I think).

 

[Janet_S]

Talk about ‘not getting it’…

What the ‘life begins at conception’ crowd doesn’t get is that more than 50% of all fertilized human eggs fail to implant - naturally, not due to birth control devices…

So if life begins at conception, there are more souls in limbo than in heaven, hell and purgatory combined.

To what purpose?

From where did you get this information, that 50% of all fertilized eggs fail to implant? It may be true, but how in the world did you find this out?

Limbo? This is not a doctrine of the Church-- Pope Benedict wrote about this about a year ago. But if 50% of all fertilized eggs fail to implant, yes, they do have souls, so they are somewhere. And your point is? That heaven, hell, and purgatory hold only a finite number of souls?

I understand the point of your post is to show how hypocritical pro life people are because they aren’t doing enough to ensure that every fertilized egg implants in the uterus and comes to full term. Pro-life people do assist pregnant women in getting prenatal care. What more do you suggest they do, especially since they have no way of identifying either the mothers or the embryos?

Of course, not all embryos will implant. That is nature. But I’m not sure how one uses the statement of “many embryos die before they are implanted” to justify the statement of “since many embryos die, naturally, before implantation, then it’s morally permissible to prevent an embryo from implantation.” Isn’t that the same as saying “since people die every day, naturally, it is morally permissible to assist a dying person along by euthanasia.”

With Catholic morality, you have to consider the intention. It is never permissible to intentionally extinguish an innocent human life at any point–from conception to natural death. In nature, people still die, and embryos sometimes fail to implant. But we can’t take on ourselves the duty of hastening either of these processes. To do so is a grave sin.

Life does begin at conception. That is an objective fact, not a religious belief. Why doesn’t the “life begins whenever we say it begins” crowd get this?

 

[Janet_S]

Yes, it is unbelieveable things that make people walk from Jesus.

Like- This is my body----

Many left over that one.

BTW, this is how this popular pro-abortion slogan “Women must have control over their own bodies” started:

The “pro-choice movement’s” emotionally compelling slogans – fierce rallying cries of the most successful political marketing campaign in modern history, which made abortion-on-demand legal in the U.S. – have been powerful rhetorical weapons for fighting off efforts to reverse Roe v. Wade, coming up on its 30th anniversary next month.

“I remember laughing when we made those slogans up,” recalls Bernard Nathanson, M.D., co-founder of pro-abortion group NARAL, reminiscing about the early days of the pro-abortion movement in the late '60s and early '70s.

“We were looking for some sexy, catchy slogans to capture public opinion. They were very cynical slogans then, just as all of these slogans today are very, very cynical.”

pregnantpause.org/abort/remember-naral.htm