Need help rebutting an argument

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maxirad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Maxirad

Guest
What should I say to a certain person who believes that not supporting “prevention” will lead to an abortion or an abused unwanted child?
 
Well, think it through. If a condom is used there will be NO abortion.

Not everyone is Catholic and for non-believers sexual relationships are fine, so why NOT support preventative measures?

Unless I guess you want abortions.
 
Keep in mind that it’s intrinsically evil to use artificial contraception for purposes related to sexual intercourse.
 
Maxirad said:
Keep in mind that it’s intrinsically evil to use artificial contraception for purposes related to sexual intercourse.
Click to expand...
You would have to respond that the people should not be having promiscuous intercourse to begin with. Using an evil means to avoid an evil end does not make the means any less evil, as well.
 
How many abortions were there before the popularization of contraception? Let’s step back to 1930-ish, for example. Contraceptives were only just legalized…and how many abortions per year were there? (Best guess.)

Fast forward to 1960’s…contraception gains increasingly popular status…and what is the status of abortion? Suddenly, abortion has become legal.

Fast forward a few more years. Contraception and “safe sex” are promoted like it’s “health care”, and abortions are on the rise, year after year.

So, I would argue that promoting contraceptives has, even if indirectly, lead to abortions.

Realistically though, NOT promoting contraceptives has god nothing to do with whether a person chooses to kill an unborn baby. A person does not base his/her decisions to abort on whether or not you or I support contraceptives. They base it on the idea that they should have no consequences for their behavior and the fact that they do not recognize the life of the baby in the womb.
 
ahs said:
How many abortions were there before the popularization of contraception? Let’s step back to 1930-ish, for example. Contraceptives were only just legalized…and how many abortions per year were there? (Best guess.)

Fast forward to 1960’s…contraception gains increasingly popular status…and what is the status of abortion? Suddenly, abortion has become legal.

Fast forward a few more years. Contraception and “safe sex” are promoted like it’s “health care”, and abortions are on the rise, year after year.

So, I would argue that promoting contraceptives has, even if indirectly, lead to abortions.

Realistically though, NOT promoting contraceptives has god nothing to do with whether a person chooses to kill an unborn baby. A person does not base his/her decisions to abort on whether or not you or I support contraceptives. They base it on the idea that they should have no consequences for their behavior and the fact that they do not recognize the life of the baby in the womb.
Click to expand...
Are you not going to mention how rampant sexual diseases were in this golden age of abstinence? Quite interesting to study the spread of stds and how quickly they got around in times that supposedly had morals about sexual relations.
 
So we should support contraception to avoid abortions?

Then we should let our kids get drunk at home if they want, so they don’t do it on the sly in some dangerous place.
We should let them experiment with drugs at home rather than risk them being hurt by doing it elsewhere without supervision.
Let them shoplift: if we don’t they might resort to armed robbery to get what they want.

As a general principle if we know something is evil in itself, we must not condone that evil in hopes of avoiding some greater harm.
 
Paul89 said:
Are you not going to mention how rampant sexual diseases were in this golden age of abstinence? Quite interesting to study the spread of stds and how quickly they got around in times that supposedly had morals about sexual relations.
Click to expand...
Are there no stds today? Is there no AIDS?
 
Paul89 said:
Are you not going to mention how rampant sexual diseases were in this golden age of abstinence? Quite interesting to study the spread of stds and how quickly they got around in times that supposedly had morals about sexual relations.
Click to expand...
Reepicheep said:
Are there no stds today? Is there no AIDS?
Click to expand...
Thank you.

Paul, can you provide the credible and unbiased source that charts or otherwise details for us how rampant std’s were in the 1930’s, 1960’s, and up through today? All the information I have read shows that not only has number of occurrences of std’s increased, but also the number of unique illnesses has increased. I can say the same for divorce incase you want to bring that one up as well. The charts I have seen show divorce rates on the rise in correlation to contraceptive popularization…that is, until marriage rates finally dropped so low that there are few people getting married at all…slowly making divorce a moot point.
 
aemcpa said:
Which is why the rate of abortions is almost nil now that contraception is ubiquitous. Oh, wait…
Click to expand...
Oh wait Catholics teach against condoms. Also in developing countries they’re “helping”
 
This pretty much sums up my response to the argument…

It’s also worth pointing out that all forms of hormonal contraception have the potential to cause the loss of a fertilized embryo due to the fact that they thin the lining of the uterus. Reason compels us to recognize a fertilized embryo as a human organism, so the willful destruction of an embryo would be no less an act of murder than abortion at a later point.
 
Maxirad said:
Keep in mind that it’s intrinsically evil to use artificial contraception for purposes related to sexual intercourse.
Click to expand...
I would hasten to quality the quote by adding " in the context of sacramental marriage"

but that’s the point – the use of artificial contraception and practice of abortion is meant in secular society to liberate people from the constraints, commitments, and even the rewards of sacramental marriage.
 
sirach2v4 said:
I would hasten to quality the quote by adding " in the context of sacramental marriage"

but that’s the point – the use of artificial contraception and practice of abortion is meant in secular society to liberate people from the constraints, commitments, and even the rewards of sacramental marriage.
Click to expand...
The use of artificial contraception is intrinsically evil. The preceding sentence does not need to be qualified in any way.
 
Paul89 said:
Oh wait Catholics teach against condoms. Also in developing countries they’re “helping”
Click to expand...
So, do you assert that the Catholic teaching against contrceptives has decreased the use of contraceptives since the 1930’s? You’ll need to provide some credible and unbiased research data to support this.

Do you assert that contraceptive use in, Africa for example, had decreased the rate of HIV or other std infections? You’ll need to provide teh research to bakc that up…and you won’t find it I bet. From what I’ve been reading, even the opposition’s studies show that contrception has not only been ineffective, but has potentially made std rates worse. On the other hand, where the Catholic Church’s efforts are to reshape personal habits and practices, std rates have decreased.

I don’t believe that condoms are helping fight std’s or abortion in any country. I’ll welcome any credible and unbiased information that you wish to provide that shows anything to support your assertion that condoms do help.
 
aemcpa said:
Which is why the rate of abortions is almost nil now that contraception is ubiquitous. Oh, wait…
Click to expand...
Paul89 said:
Oh wait Catholics teach against condoms. Also in developing countries they’re “helping”
Click to expand...
Well yes, Catholics teach against condoms. Yet the rate of abortion has climbed at the same time condoms became more and more available.
Or to put it another way, Paul89’s reply in no way refutes Aemcpa’s point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top