On outlawing abortion, contraception, and sodomy

[Bradski]

All types of “personal” issues are regulated by law.

Well, let’s ask the question again: Do you think that some sexual acts between consenting adults should be made illegal? And if so, which ones?

And if you feel carrying the explanation on to its logical conclusion, you could explain how the law would be upheld.

 

[Nate13]

Well, let’s ask the question again: Do you think that some sexual acts between consenting adults should be made illegal? And if so, which ones?

And if you feel carrying the explanation on to its logical conclusion, you could explain how the law would be upheld.

Contracepting was never made illegal, the purchasing and distribution of contraception was. Looking at porn was never illegal, the purchasing and distribution of it was. The point of the laws was not to go after the activity directly, but rather discourage them indirectly. Although doing these things may be in the best interest of society I don’t find that to be a great enough reason to make them illegal. Making large sodas might be in the best interest of society as well, but I do not support the government intruding into those kinds of decisions. I do wish to end all government funding or promotion of contraceptives though.

I have to ask you though why you think its so wrong for people to want the government to make these things illegal if they believe that is in the best interest of society? Your supporting the same principle when you support the government funding and promoting contraceptives, because by doing so your saying its ok for the government to be involved with these issues and saying they have a legitimate interest in them. If you believe making them illegal is an intrusion of the government you should also believe funding and promoting them is an intrusion of the government. You can’t only cry government intrusion when it works against you.

 

[Bradski]

You can’t only cry government intrusion when it works against you.

Good point. But I don’t necessarily agree with governments being involved in contraception (there are exceptions).

I do think that there are many areas where government should involve themselves. No-one except an anarchist could disagree, surely. But what happens in my bedroom, or anyone else’s, is not one of those areas.

So does anyone want to suggest that certain sexual acts between consenting adults should be made illegal?

 

[fix]

Well, let’s ask the question again: Do you think that some sexual acts between consenting adults should be made illegal? And if so, which ones?

The laws against sodomy were on the books for decades and decades. I see no problem there.

And if you feel carrying the explanation on to its logical conclusion, you could explain how the law would be upheld.

The way it was upheld all that time before the SC reversed them.

 

[JaKael02]

Contracepting was never made illegal, the purchasing and distribution of contraception was. Looking at porn was never illegal, the purchasing and distribution of it was. The point of the laws was not to go after the activity directly, but rather discourage them indirectly.

This is a point well made. Good job. Well said.

 

[Lochias]

I can’t believe that that is a serious question.

There never was a time when someone tried to decide what should be legal in regard to what people get up to in the bedroom. People were actually dumb enough at one time to try to make things illegal that consenting adults could do in private, but we’ve moved on from there.

And hey, guess what. I have sex with my wife sometimes when we don’t actually have intercourse. Yeah, I know, shocking isn’t it. What do you think everyone should do? Missionary position only when you want to conceive? Is anything else acceptable?

Would you like to see anal sex made illegal?

I see you weren’t able to answer the question. We can therefore conclude that there is no real need for anal sex, and given that the logistics of the act was never meant to work in the first place, sure, I wouldn’t mind it being made illegal.

 

[Lochias]

How can you justify having that much control over someone’s life? That’s just so personal it’s beyond the control of the law.

I love how nobody is ever able to answer the question: “What need do we have for anal sex?”

“I want, I want, I want!” Didn’t work in childhood. Boggles my mind that people think it should work now.

 

[JaKael02]

I see you weren’t able to answer the question. We can therefore conclude that there is no real need for anal sex, and given that the logistics of the act was never meant to work in the first place, sure, I wouldn’t mind it being made illegal.

The issue is whether or not the Gov’t should support the immoral practice. If someone in the privacy of the bedroom wants to perform acts contrary to their intended purpose, that is their free will to commit sin.

But the gov’t shouldn’t endorse the practice or make it illegal. Contraception “endorses” the act which we stat is intrinsically evil.

Thoughts? Kindly - James

 

[ValPal]

I love how nobody is ever able to answer the question: “What need do we have for anal sex?”

Definitions are important here. The Church has spoken on the matter on anal sex, which is defined to be completing the act. However, on the matter of anal penetration in the context of foreplay (referred to as stimulation, not sex), there is no opinion.

The Church is not viewing it from the point of “need,” but rather is it prohibited in some fashion. Forcing the discussion into the context of “need” takes it outside of the realm of the Church and into the realm of personal opinion. When people starting legislating personal opinion…well, welcome to modern day America.

 

[Regular_Atheist]

Well, they used to be illegal here, as was abortion, yet the USA was not then thought a Christian theocracy.

But it was still a very Christian nation, with a strong Christian bias. Those laws were only held in place because of Christianity. Of course, America has never been a Christian theocracy - it was founded as a secular nation.

Up until very recently they were illegal and
they no longer are.

Sure.

All types of “personal” issues are regulated by law.

Possibly, but there is certainly a limit. Besides, there’s not really a reason to outlaw sodomy or contraception. It’s a bit much.

I love how nobody is ever able to answer the question: “What need do we have for anal sex?”

“I want, I want, I want!” Didn’t work in childhood. Boggles my mind that people think it should work now.

It’s a purely pleasurable thing, obviously. And adult humans aren’t children, now, are they? They’re free to make their own choices - good or bad.

If you believe we should only keep things legal if they serve some kind of purpose, then by that logic you would have to outlaw masturbation, frot (if that doesn’t count as sodomy) and any other sexual acts that are only for pleasure. There are plenty of things that we have no need for, such as fatty foods, alcohol, tobacco and so on. These things only cause harm, and yet people don’t seem to care about making these things illegal. The reason? Because the only motives behind criminalizing things such as contraception are religious ones.

 

[Lochias]

Because the only motives behind criminalizing things such as contraception are religious ones.

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Twilight Zone…

 

[fix]

The issue is whether or not the Gov’t should support the immoral practice. If someone in the privacy of the bedroom wants to perform acts contrary to their intended purpose, that is their free will to commit sin.

But the gov’t shouldn’t endorse the practice or make it illegal. Contraception “endorses” the act which we stat is intrinsically evil.

Thoughts? Kindly - James

There are plenty of things one could say to your point, but the first thing I will say is that every sin committed, in private or not, has effects on the rest of us. In the same way illicit acts committed in private can certainly effect society.

Just because some bad act happens where no one can see it does not mean the ill effects are confined to that one room.

 

[JaKael02]

There are plenty of things one could say to your point, but the first thing I will say is that every sin committed, in private or not, has effects on the rest of us. In the same way illicit acts committed in private can certainly effect society.

Just because some bad act happens where no one can see it does not mean the ill effects are confined to that one room.

You make a good point. I agree.

The extent you make each private sin an illegal act that is enforced by the state seems like an expensive and unattainable goal for Gov’ts? So maybe the Gov’t should just focus on discouraging and outlawing certain explicit immoral acts? Just some thoughts off the top of my head.

Agree or disagree?

 

[Regular_Atheist]

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Twilight Zone…

I haven’t seen anything to suggest otherwise. The only argument you’ve given me against sodomy is that it’s wrong because it has no use. Well, great, but we don’t ban everything that is useless. So it’s a worthless argument. It requires special pleading. You don’t apply that kind of logic to anything but sodomy.

There are plenty of things one could say to your point, but the first thing I will say is that every sin committed, in private or not, has effects on the rest of us. In the same way illicit acts committed in private can certainly effect society.

Just because some bad act happens where no one can see it does not mean the ill effects are confined to that one room.

But sins are a religious idea. You can’t ban something because it’s a sin, no matter how much you think it will encourage other evils.

Maybe we should just go the full way and make blasphemy and atheism illegal?

 

[fix]

But sins are a religious idea. You can’t ban something because it’s a sin, no matter how much you think it will encourage other evils.

Maybe we should just go the full way and make blasphemy and atheism illegal?

I mentioned sin, but I also mentioned that any bad act has effects regardless of where it is committed.

 

[fix]

You make a good point. I agree.

The extent you make each private sin an illegal act that is enforced by the state seems like an expensive and unattainable goal for Gov’ts? So maybe the Gov’t should just focus on discouraging and outlawing certain explicit immoral acts? Just some thoughts off the top of my head.

Agree or disagree?

I am not saying make illegal because it is a sin. I am saying make it illegal because it is a bad act with bad consequences.

 

[Regular_Atheist]

I am not saying make illegal because it is a sin. I am saying make it illegal because it is a bad act with bad consequences.

Maybe. But you’d also have to ban, say, alcohol and tobacco under such logic. Catholics, however, never seem to bothered about either of these things so I’m quite sceptical as to whether those are your true motives for banning sodomy. People are allowed to make bad choices. People are also allowed to enjoy things that can be potentially harmful.

At the moment, I really believe it’s just a way to act against gay rights groups.

 

[JaKael02]

Maybe. But you’d also have to ban, say, alcohol and tobacco under such logic. Catholics, however, never seem to bothered about either of these things so I’m quite sceptical as to whether those are your true motives for banning sodomy. People are allowed to make bad choices. People are also allowed to enjoy things that can be potentially harmful.

Good point. To add, that is why the gov’t should discourage bad behavior and allow society to operate freely elsewhere.

To determine what is bad or good, they gov’t must determine it based upon some known or revealed truth. Historically, the gov’t grandfathered morality in from English morality; which grandfathered it from Catholic Canon Law.

Now days, truth is based upon popular opinion rather than a revealed truth. This works as long as the society is moral and upright.

Thoughts? Agree/Disagree? Kindly - James

 

[fix]

Maybe. But you’d also have to ban, say, alcohol and tobacco under such logic. Catholics, however, never seem to bothered about either of these things so I’m quite sceptical as to whether those are your true motives for banning sodomy. People are allowed to make bad choices. People are also allowed to enjoy things that can be potentially harmful.

At the moment, I really believe it’s just a way to act against gay rights groups.

I do not see why that would be the case? Alcohol has good uses. That it may be misused does not mean it ought to be banned. What good use is there for sodomy?

 

[Bradski]

I do not see why that would be the case? Alcohol has good uses. That it may be misused does not mean it ought to be banned. What good use is there for sodomy?

This has to be the most facile argument that I’ve seen in regard to a sexual act: It serves no purpose, therefore it should be made illegal.

But hang on. Maybe you think that all this useless sex is only perfomed between two men or two women. When you say you want to ban all useless acts, do you mean just between gays?

Because if it’s between men and women as well it covers everything that everyone does all the time that doesn’t directly involve conception. No oral sex either? How on earth do you personally decide?