T
tafan
Guest
Aquinas argued that not all vices should be repressed by human law (newadvent.org/summa/2096.htm#article2). In particular he gave to conditions for which a vice should only forbid vices based on the following two conditions
Now, in this presidential election, the democrats have tried to make contraception and issue even though the republicans are certainly advocating no laws to inhibit contraception. Nevertheless, it has made me think again about Aquinas’s conservative position on the limits of human law. I certainly do not believe society can long be sustained with widespread use of contraceptions, and it seems obvious the breakdown of society from this widespread use is already occurring (eg the widespread availability of pornography, increased rape, prostitution,abortion, divorce being examples of the early breakdown).
So should contraception (discounting the politics of it) not be an issue? And I have come to the conclusion, looking at the contraception issue, that Aquinas was right.
First of all, the present day politics argue in his favor. An attempt to outlaw contraception would not be well received, any party favoring it would likely be hurt in the elections. This would be a case of Aquinas’ statement “Wherefore laws imposed on men should also be in keeping with their condition,”. A revolt against the GOP over contraception would not benefit society.
Secondly, if there is vice which the majority cannot abstain from due to their lack of virtue (to use Aquinas’ words) and it is not possible for society to function with that vice being widespread; then the law will not help matters. Society is doomed anyway.
Hence the solution is to improve people’s virtue, not to outlaw it.
But I would love to hear other’s thoughts on Aquina’s two conditions, not necessary to focus on contraception (that is just my example).
- Those vices which it is possible for the majority to abstain
AND - Those vices which hurt others, without the prohibition agains, human society could not be sustained.
Now, in this presidential election, the democrats have tried to make contraception and issue even though the republicans are certainly advocating no laws to inhibit contraception. Nevertheless, it has made me think again about Aquinas’s conservative position on the limits of human law. I certainly do not believe society can long be sustained with widespread use of contraceptions, and it seems obvious the breakdown of society from this widespread use is already occurring (eg the widespread availability of pornography, increased rape, prostitution,abortion, divorce being examples of the early breakdown).
So should contraception (discounting the politics of it) not be an issue? And I have come to the conclusion, looking at the contraception issue, that Aquinas was right.
First of all, the present day politics argue in his favor. An attempt to outlaw contraception would not be well received, any party favoring it would likely be hurt in the elections. This would be a case of Aquinas’ statement “Wherefore laws imposed on men should also be in keeping with their condition,”. A revolt against the GOP over contraception would not benefit society.
Secondly, if there is vice which the majority cannot abstain from due to their lack of virtue (to use Aquinas’ words) and it is not possible for society to function with that vice being widespread; then the law will not help matters. Society is doomed anyway.
Hence the solution is to improve people’s virtue, not to outlaw it.
But I would love to hear other’s thoughts on Aquina’s two conditions, not necessary to focus on contraception (that is just my example).