Should condoms be illegal? (hypothetically)

  • Thread starter Thread starter karisue
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

karisue

Guest
I was just wondering what people’s thoughts are on this topic. One of my youth group students asked me whether I think all birth control should be outlawed. I said no, because I don’t have a non-religious reason to push for legislation against prophylactic birth control. Now I’m not so sure that was the right answer. I chose condoms for the poll b/c they’re everywhere, and they are not abortifacient.

[Maybe this belongs in the politics or apologetics forum; I don’t know.]

For the record:
  1. I know that this is totally hypothetical and will not be part of the political landscape in my lifetime. We have to get rid of abortion first, IMO.
  2. I am not suggesting we all start writing congressmen or anything like that. 🙂
I’d love your thoughts.
 
Hypothetically, yes.

But realistically, I think it would be too difficult to enforce. It’s an interesting question though. As a society, what sins do we permit, and what sins do we make illegal?

Obviously, the ability to enforce a law is one consideration. Another consideration is that we should respect the freedom of individuals to pursue truth – that is, freedom of religion. So we shouldn’t make a sin such as missing Mass on Sunday against the law.
Where exactly should the line be drawn? Ideas?
 
You’ve gotta be kidding! I would never want to live in a theocracy. Long live freedom and the Democratic way of life. God bless America and thanks be to God for our freedoms! No, I would never want to live in country that made condoms illegal.

http://www.lvaas.org/flag-small.jpg
 
I think that it was not that long ago that contraceptives were illegal, at least in some states. I believe that it was the supreme court decision in Griswold vs Connecticut in 1965 that overturned these laws, based upon an implied right of privacy. Several justices dissented on the basis that the constitution did not specifically provide for a right of privacy.

JimG
 
Here is the dissent by Justices Stewart and Black:

MR. JUSTICE STEWART, whom MR. JUSTICE BLACK joins, dissenting.

Since 1879 Connecticut has had on its books a law which forbids the use of contraceptives by anyone. I think this is an uncommonly silly law.

As a practical matter, the law is obviously unenforceable, except in the oblique context of the present case. As a philosophical matter, I believe the use of contraceptives in the relationship of marriage should be left to personal and private choice, based upon each individual’s moral, ethical, and religious beliefs. As a matter of social policy, I think professional counsel about methods of birth control should be available to all, so that each individual’s choice can be meaningfully made.

But we are not asked in this case to say whether we think this law is unwise, or even asinine. We are asked to hold that it violates the United States Constitution. And that I cannot do.
 
Is that the full dissenting opinion? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a SCOTUS opinion that short.
 
Tough question. I voted no for reasons outlined by milimac and WhiteDove. I surely understand why the vote is split evenly.
 
6 people would actually want to make condom use illegal? They already are illegal, BTW, under God’s law. 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.

There are countries in this world that DO dictate how to live out the spiritual life as their leaders see fit. Some examples are Saudi Arabia, Iran, Libia, etc and so forth. In Saudi Arabia they believe they are honoring God by not allowing women to drive, forcing them to dress a certain way, etc… Is that the type of thinking that some of you (hypothetically) would also like for the USA? 😦
 
40.png
milimac:
Hypothetically, yes.

But realistically, I think it would be too difficult to enforce. It’s an interesting question though. As a society, what sins do we permit, and what sins do we make illegal?

Obviously, the ability to enforce a law is one consideration. Another consideration is that we should respect the freedom of individuals to pursue truth – that is, freedom of religion. So we shouldn’t make a sin such as missing Mass on Sunday against the law.
**Where exactly should the line be drawn? **Ideas?
Click to expand...
Your post is EXACTLY what I’m trying to get at. Thanks!
 
40.png
digitonomy:
Is that the full dissenting opinion? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a SCOTUS opinion that short.
Click to expand...
I think so. I got it from here: law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/griswold.html . The dissent quoted is Justice Stewart’s. Justice Black also wrote a slightly longer dissenting opinion, but each joined in the others dissent.

It is noteworthy that it was this opinion which, in the view of the majority, first establised a “right of privacy” in the Constitution, apparently intended in this case to be a right of marital privacy.
In one of its more well known phrases, the majority opinion states:

The foregoing cases suggest that specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance. Various guarantees create zones of privacy.

It was this right of privacy that the Court later relied upon in Roe V Wade to establish a right to abortion.

Apparently Stewart and Black viewed it as simply not a constitutional matter. The Connecticut legislature, after all, was perfectly able at any time to repeal its 1879 law banning contraception, without recourse to any penumbras or emanations.

JimG
 
If we make condoms illegal, we’ll put out of work all those “health” teachers in public school whose only function in life seems to be to put condoms on bananas!

😛
 
LOL, yes that would be a great loss to the world. They did that at our school district and I didn’t find out about it till years later. I asked my sons, did they really have you do that? They said yes. I couldn’t believe it! Of course, they wouldn’t have told me at the time. It was co-ed too. Needless to say, my daughters will not be allowed to attend sex-ed classes, I don’t care how weird it makes them feel!
 
Condoms help prevent the spread of AIDS. Of course, abstinence is best (factually) in many cases.
 
40.png
WhiteDove:
You’ve gotta be kidding! I would never want to live in a theocracy. Long live freedom and the Democratic way of life. God bless America and thanks be to God for our freedoms! No, I would never want to live in country that made condoms illegal.

http://www.lvaas.org/flag-small.jpg
Click to expand...
Then do you think abortion should stay legal, because that is our freedom?

I voted yes, because I think if it were harder to get contraceptives then the teachers at school would be more obligated to teach abstanance because they have to teach what is supposedly safe. If there were no condoms or anything else there would be no way to teach the kids how not to have disease and pregnancy other than to not do it. I think society makes it too easy to have premarrital relations. Also I think teen pregnancies would go down because if there is no “safety net” people are less likely to walk the tight rope. I understand that it isn’t realistic, but I look at society before Abc was made legal, and it was much better IMHO, there were less devorcises, less affairs, ect. ABC has made are culture kind of evil and without morals.
 
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.
 
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...
But recall that contraception was almost universally condemned in the United States, and by all Christian denominations, up until 1930. That, I suspect, is why there were still laws against condoms on the books. Most people thought it was appropriate legislation. Once contraception was commonly accepted, abortion soon followed.

JimG
 
I think with St. Thomas Aquinas we have to make the distinction between FREEDOM and LIBERTY. I am FREE to do God’s will as an image of God; anything I do which is sinful is not a true exercise of freedom but rather the ABUSE of my freedom. I have the LIBERTY to abuse my freedom in all kinds of creative ways. I generally don’t want the government restricting my freedom OR my liberty. To say that condoms should be even hypothetically illegal in the 21st century is a big departure philosophically, in that it would be an enormous restriction of liberty among educated, educable people. They may include a whole lotta sinners, but they are educated, educable sinners who deserve their liberty.

P.S. It is getting harder and harder to answer polls phrased this way, e.g. “expect the whole country to abide by my morality.” One can answer “no” and still believe in Natural Law!
 
Aside from the religious point of view, there is a good reason for condoms not to be allowed-THEY DONT WORK!
Ok, they do to some degree, but not how people are told they do. Besides, they do not protect against the rampant STD HPV! This disease will kill more women through cancer than AIDS. Most people do not even know they have this diseases. It is almost among 70% of the 15-24 age group. So you people who think you are impeding on others rights, THINK AGAIN!

AND BY THE WAY-
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO THINK THAT CONDOMS HELP ELIMINATE STDS HERE IS A FACT- THERE WERE THREE STDS BEFORE CONDOMS WERE WIDE SPREAD. THERE ARE OVER 75 NOW. DO THE MATH!! THIS IS A LIE FROM THE LIAR HIMSELF!!!

ONE MORE THING - CONTRACEPTION IS THE ROOT TO ABORTION, WE WILL NEVER HAVE ANYSUCCESS TRYING TO DEFEAT THE PROABORTS UNTIL WE CONVINCE THEM OF THE EVILS OF CONTRACEPTION. TO THEM THIS IS JUST ANOTHER FORM OF B.C…
 
40.png
sweety:
Aside from the religious point of view, there is a good reason for condoms not to be allowed-THEY DONT WORK!
Ok, they do to some degree, but not how people are told they do. Besides, they do not protect against the rampant STD HPV! This disease will kill more women through cancer than AIDS. Most people do not even know they have this diseases. It is almost among 70% of the 15-24 age group. So you people who think you are impeding on others rights, THINK AGAIN!
Click to expand...
A “right” is a whole separate philosophical argument. I buy a whole bunch of defective plastic stuff (um…NOT condoms); it does not follow that the defective plastic stuff should be illegal OR that I have a protected right to buy it. It can be prudent to allow liberty for all kinds of things that I don’t have a right to. It’s hard to argue that I have a right to use the Internet–it started as a Department of Defense communication system and could easily have stayed that way. But I’m glad I enjoy this liberty, especially on these forums.🙂

Do you have a source for your statistics? I think HPV stands for Human Pappilo (sp?) Virus? Again sticking to philosophy, the definition of prudent liberty would change if you could demonstrate that the liberty was causing a disproportionate harm. But you would need very solid, demonstrable statistics to do so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top