Should condoms be illegal? (hypothetically)

  • Thread starter Thread starter karisue
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
TO FORTIT-I used to work at a crisis pregnancy center. These are the stats we were given to use. If you must know I can retrieve the books we used. I am not skewing them in any way. By the way, a lot of girls came in wanting to have abortions after becoming pregnant while using all sorts of birth control religiously. no pun intended

also-synthetic hormones used in bc pills make you 3x more vulnerable to stds because of their supressive affect on the immune system. Do we have the “right” to give people poison?
 
40.png
WhiteDove:
You’re equating condom use with abortion? I beg to differ. Yes, I think abortion should be illegal because it takes away the life of another human being. But things that are merely a sin in the eyes of the Church should not be made illegal. Homosexuality, fornication, missing Mass on Sunday, spitting on the Bible, you name it, there are countless things that should be legal because we live in a free society. You can’t legislate freedom from sin.
Click to expand...
True! But at the same time…WHAT!!! If we didn’t have the seperation of Church and State we wouldn’t even have to discuss this! If people weren’t so
A-Moral…! Condoms are wrong! And for saying “no” is like saying abortion is wrong for me but I wouldn’t say its wrong for someone else. I voted “yes.” This is a very confusing issue…I see what both sides are saying but in a way you both are right and both wrong. Sex-ed is wrong…least the way schools consider sex-ed!
 
40.png
WhiteDove:
…But, to take away our autonomy as citizens to worship and believe as our concience dictates is out of the question, in my limited mind…

By autonomy do you mean free will? If so, we certainly have it and should exercise it. But when you speak of conscience I hope that you are referring to truth and not feelings.
Click to expand...
 
I Googled “HPV” and got over 1 million responses (Yikes). But I still think we are not in a “rights” discussion. The misuse of the philosophical term “right” is one of the biggest challenges of our time. There is no such thing as “animal rights”–my dog doesn’t have a single right, but as a human being I have responsibilities to my dog even though he has no rights. Requiring that my dog get a rabies shot may well be a prudent restriction of my liberty as a pet owner–I don’t have a “right” not to comply, because of the disproportionate harm that a rabid dog would cause. People don’t need “rights” to have prudent liberty.
 
the reason i voted undecided is because I am just unsure. I know it is evil like abortion however if it isn’t an abortificient i do not see it as equalivalent. I know logicall it can lead to abortion but so does intense hatred lead to murder, but i do not see how you can make that illegal. It seem confusing to me, abortion is always wrong and should be illegal. Contraceptives since they do not necessarily kill an already living human, do not seem to me to be as evil. However they are very destructive for society. but where is the line? where is the line between totalitarianism and anarchy?
 
I found this with a quick internet search for HPV + condoms. For what it’s worth, it appears that this may be more of a public health and public policy issue than anything else:

Public Law 106-554, signed by President Clinton in 2000, directed the CDC to issue by Dec. 21, a report detailing the best strategies to prevent the spread of human papillomavirus (HPV), the virus that causes cervical cancer.

The FDA was directed to ensure condom labels are “medically accurate” regarding the lack of effectiveness in preventing HPV infection. Neither agency has complied with these legal mandates. According to The Physicians Consortium, about 20 million Americans are currently infected with HPV, and an estimated 5.5 million Americans become infected with HPV every year. Nearly all cases of cervical cancer are associated with HPV infection. An estimated 13,000 new cases of invasive cervical cancer are diagnosed annually, and more than 4,000 women die of the disease every year in the United States. Tens of thousands of others will be treated for HPV related pre-cancerous conditions.

A 2001 report entitled “Scientific Evidence on Condom Effectiveness for STD Prevention,” prepared by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health …“concluded that there was no evidence that condom use reduced the risk of HPV infection.” “Congress passed this law precisely because CDC and FDA were failing to educate the public about the HPV epidemic,” said Hal Wallis, M.D., of The Physicians Consortium. "The HPV coverup continues now in clear breach of federal law, endangering the health of countless women. “We call on CDC and FDA to abide by the law and tell the public the truth that condoms do not protect against the cervical cancer virus.”
 
to add to the previous-obgyns didnt want this to be printed on condoms because they thought people would stop using condoms leading to more problems.
 
I also think that all Protestant churches should be closed, state troopers should enforce compulsory attendance at Sunday Mass, and any restaurant serving meat on Lenten Fridays should be burned to the ground.
 
Not even close! If condoms contribute to diseases in society then they shouldnt be legal. We have regulations in hospitals so they dont spread disease or contaminate people during surgery. I really do not see this as a religious issue, this is a health issue. If the government can mandate vaccines they surely can outlaw condoms.
 
Freedom is the ability to choose the good. Being able to choose the evil, or promoting evil detracts from our ability to choose the good. Therefore, it detracts from our freedom for condoms to be legal.
 
Hypothetically it would be “wise” to outlaw anything sinful. However, because of the way reality works, we often have to tolerate some evil to let good flourish.

For example the freedom of speech. There is such a thing as sinful speech, and hypothetically it should be outlawed. However, experience has taught us that the reality of enforcing such laws brings about worse evils. Thus we have chosen to tolerate evil speech in order for good speech to flourish. This is why, whenever there is an “anti-catholic” statue, artwork, or display, I believe we, as Catholics, should not try to oppress it, but rather should use these displays as evangelical “spotlights”. Opportunities to teach the truth about Catholicism.

The next thing to consider is that the force of Law is ultimately the force of a gun. For every law in the books, ultimately a man in a blue uniform with a gun is hired to enforce it. We can kid ourselves by saying we will only use a fine as a penalty. But if you play out the recalcitrant criminal far enough, the officer will need to use a gun to get him to comply.

The whole premise that astounded the British over 200 years ago was the notion that a people could govern themselves. This didn’t just mean that we could hire the police that would bludgeon us into submission. This meant that we could govern ourselves without government.

Remember shame?
 
40.png
WhiteDove:
You’re equating condom use with abortion? I beg to differ. Yes, I think abortion should be illegal because it takes away the life of another human being. But things that are merely a sin in the eyes of the Church should not be made illegal. Homosexuality, fornication, missing Mass on Sunday, spitting on the Bible, you name it, there are countless things that should be legal because we live in a free society. You can’t legislate freedom from sin.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it’s quite that simple. First of all, saying something is “merely a sin in the eyes of the Church” implies that it’s only a sin because the Church says it’s a sin and that there aren’t any real reasons to prevent contraceptive use other than because it’s a precept of your religion.

We still haven’t defined the line. I think all can pretty much agree that taking away the life of another human being is a morality that should be legislated and that missing Mass on Sunday is something that should not.

But what about things such as recreational marijuana smoking (or cocaine or heroine for that matter), laws preventing smoking in certain places, driving the speed limit, insider trading, setting a daily size and number limit during fishing season, requiring the payment of taxes?

Should we be required to plead “conflict of interest” when trying to promote laws that restrict or prohibit abortion just because it also happens to be a teaching of our Catholic Church?

I think Black Jaque is getting close (7/6 3:52pm post), but the line still seems too vague. Do we allow certain sins because our culture has accepted it? How would we have voted in 1965 before the laws against contraception were overturned? Would we vote to overturn speed maximum laws since a vast majority usually drive faster than the posted max?
 
I don’t think that condoms should be made illegal. The point of the original Griswold case, I believe, was that they should be made available to married couples.

The real problem now is that they have been pushed almost as a panacea by the sex education lobby. This has resulted in more and younger persons engaging in pre-marital sex, and a consequent explosion in sexually transmitted diseases, some of which condoms are not effective in preventing, HPV in particular. As a society, we are puttimg our young people’s health in grave danger.

JimG
 
40.png
WhiteDove:
…I would never want to live in a theocracy…I would never want to live in country that made condoms illegal.
Click to expand...
I would not want to live in a theocracy. However, making condoms illegal does not have to be on religious grounds.

A better question is can a nation pass laws on morality without religion being the issue for its passage?

The answer is yes. Prostitution is illegal (in most states). The reason is for the good of society. Couldn’t condoms be made illegal for the better of society?
 
Let’s look at it from a different angle. If religious laws were to become state laws - but it so happened that the religion in question was not yours - then Muslims would be legally allowed to murder…

YOU

Still enthusiastic?
 
Hypothetically and realistically NO…

Are we forgetting free will here? MORE importantly are we forgetting that this Nation was founded on a Separation of Church and State.

While there are defensable postions against abortions that aren’t religious (many infact) I don’t know of any against birth control.

Do I believe that it leads to moral degredation? Yes, the Pope was keen (or blessed 👍 ) to pick up on this before people started realizing the decay. However I still don’t believe that we can legislate morality, not in a secular nation.

Joe
 
A bit off topic, although, during the Dessert Storm, my brother asked my dad to send him a bunch of condoms. My dad of course asked “WHY”??? It was to prevent the sand from clogging up the barrel of his gun. Knowing that, my dad sent as many as he could!
 
stoat100 said:
Let’s look at it from a different angle. If religious laws were to become state laws - but it so happened that the religion in question was not yours - then Muslims would be legally allowed to murder…

YOU

Still enthusiastic?
Click to expand...
Not to get OT–but, you’re speaking of radical Islam…all Muslims do not wish to murder those who are not Muslim. Murdering those who do not believe or follow Islam, and refuse to–is not a tenet of Islam.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top