So what about overpopulation?

[Contarini]

But I donlt see how they arent? I mean I just showed you in my post beforehand that not all people feel this way. So how is it not just an opinon?

What’s all this “just” an opinion? Opinions are some of the most powerful and important things there are. Nothing is “just” an opinion.

If all people felt the same way, we wouldn’t need to talk about the subject, would we? We’d just all feel the same way and move on to something else.

The underlying question here is: if we separate sexuality from procreation, what do we do to sexuality? I think there is abundant evidence that sexuality becomes barren, narcissistic, and in the end unsatisfying. Look at all the talk about “sexless marriages.” Look at the huge scale of pornography use. (Admittedly, the much lower tolerance for male infidelity in our society compared to more traditional ones may have something to do with that latter.)

Edwin

 

[WillieWonka]

I’m sorry - I’m old. Go back to the 1950s and 1960s. The blockbuster book in 1971 was “The Coming Ice Age”. Huh.

Anyway, science has no cure for my cancer. I trust in God. May you be spared the test of your faith.

Yes, there were a few. What’s your point? At the same time the few were writing books like you cite, the many were ignoring them and working on serious matters.

 

[WillieWonka]

Show me what part of that post is personal opinion …with quotes please, so that words aren’t twisted into something they are not.

No need to twist.

“But love is about sacrifice and total self giving.”

 

[WillieWonka]

It’s not just her opinion. I suppose not everyone finds this vision of human personhood compelling, and you’re right–it’s pretty hard to argue with those who don’t. But you need to recognize that this is a widely held view among conservative Christians, eloquently expressed by Pope John Paul II, and in keeping with both Christian tradition and the instincts of a lot of non-Catholics and non-Christians who care about living in a simpler and more natural way. You may not care about these things–probably don’t, based on your other posts. Your loss.

Edwin

I recognize it is an opinion widely held among conservative Christians. So what?

Do you agree with some of the posters that those who disagree with this opinion lack common sense?

My loss? Sounds like your opinion.

 

[WillieWonka]

What’s all this “just” an opinion? Opinions are some of the most powerful and important things there are. Nothing is “just” an opinion.

If all people felt the same way, we wouldn’t need to talk about the subject, would we? We’d just all feel the same way and move on to something else.

The underlying question here is: if we separate sexuality from procreation, what do we do to sexuality? I think there is abundant evidence that sexuality becomes barren, narcissistic, and in the end unsatisfying. Look at all the talk about “sexless marriages.” Look at the huge scale of pornography use. (Admittedly, the much lower tolerance for male infidelity in our society compared to more traditional ones may have something to do with that latter.)

Edwin

Unsatisfying? To whom? You? More opinion.

Or, perhaps conservative Christians are easily dissatisfied?

 

[luvmykids]

No need to twist.

“But love is about sacrifice and total self giving.”

So in your definition of love, it isn’t about sacrifice and total self giving? It’s a good thing Jesus didn’t have that “opinion” about love.

 

[luvmykids]

So in your definition of love, it isn’t about sacrifice and total self giving? It’s a good thing Jesus didn’t have that “opinion” about love.

sorry about the double post.

 

[WillieWonka]

So in your definition of love, it isn’t about sacrifice and total self giving? It’s a good thing Jesus didn’t have that “opinion” about love.

My definition has nothing to do with the fact that yours is an opinion.

How did Jesus define love? “With quotes please, so that words aren’t twisted into something they are not.”

 

[luvmykids]

My definition has nothing to do with the fact that yours is an opinion.

How did Jesus define love? “With quotes please, so that words aren’t twisted into something they are not.”

I can see that this discussion is going no where, but His actions spoke for Him.

 

[TexCatholic4JMJ]

How many years is it good for? And remember, each year that population keeps growing and growing and growing because god wants more and more and more people. Do the math.

I don’t have the exact years, but it was in the hundreds of years as I recall. Also that
is assuming that we won’t have rain to add to it. Parks, etc are being watered with “gray”
water as are homes with large lawns. Watering also attracts rain.

Um, people also die and you are being a smart aleck, and I say that kindly. For us it is
spelled G-o-d, thank you very much.

 

[WillieWonka]

I don’t have the exact years, but it was in the hundreds of years as I recall. Also that
is assuming that we won’t have rain to add to it. Parks, etc are being watered with “gray”
water as are homes with large lawns. Watering also attracts rain.

Um, people also die and you are being a smart aleck, and I say that kindly. For us it is
spelled G-o-d, thank you very much.

People do die. They have for a long time. But, we still observe increasing population. So, are you advocating a stable population or an increasing population? If it’s an increasing population, what do you do when Texas is filled up?

 

[WillieWonka]

I can see that this discussion is going no where, but His actions spoke for Him.

Ah, no quotes to ward off twisting? So, perhaps we don’t know what his opinion was? What did his actions say, and on what quotes do you base that opinion?

Do those who fail to share your opinions lack common sense?

 

[po18guy]

Yes, there were a few. What’s your point? At the same time the few were writing books like you cite, the many were ignoring them and working on serious matters.

The point is that science is a fickle discipline. It disappoints in every age - unless your expectations are extremely low. I’ll put a lot more stock in science when they can cure the common cold.

 

[WillieWonka]

The point is that science is a fickle discipline. It disappoints in every age - unless your expectations are extremely low. I’ll put a lot more stock in science when they can cure the common cold.

Well, you don’t make a general point about science by citing an aberration.

What are your disappointments? Computers? Internet? MRIs? Heart transplants? Pace makers? Artificial hips? Disease resistant crops? Cell phones?

What were your expectations?

 

[TEPO]

This thread gets way too much attention.
Visit my thread here on CAF -“Catholocism, globalization, interdependence”
-I’m going straight for the meat-
(sorry for the solicitation)

 

[totallylost]

-This thread by it’s very title is related to “overpopulation”.

-The solution for “overpopulation” is “contraception” and “abortion” as well as “gay marriage”.

-Catholic Church is against “contraception”.

First of all, Catholic Church is NOT against contraception. Catholic Church APPROVES it.
Before many Catholics would bash me, please read on. Natural Family Planning, NFP IS contraception to me. (Correct me if I’m wrong )

But what are the “contraception” meant by those who “wants to control world population”?

It’s using condoms, sterilization, etc. What’s the purpose? Is it for controlling world population?

No, it’s to enjoy sex without wanting to take responsibility of taking care of the new life created during sex. It’s for the pure pleasure purposes. Then they use an excuse “to control world population”.

Abortion? It’s to escape responsibility of taking care of the new life created during sex, when condom failed. It’s for the self-ish purposes. And then they use the excuse “to control world population” to approve it. Using a “holy, thinking for other humans” excuse for self-ish purposes.

Pregnancy after raped? This is another tough issue. Someone stole my money, and I have no money to eat for the next 3 days, does it make it morally acceptable to steal someone else money so I will have food to it? No. Same goes to abortion after raped. Oh well, many condemn pro-life that they’re only doing the talking. Who wants to keep the baby? There are many more married couple who couldn’t have any child and is more than happy to adopt one.

Gay marriage? Another “nature” to prevent overpopulation? Or it is another “self-ish” desire, to have sex with the same sex?

all of the 3 ways (that mentioned above) to control world population, I see it as “to fulfill self-ish desire”. To enjoy sex freely not for love, but for pleasure. Not even one of them cares of world population, human starving or pollution. They (most of them, not all) will never give a single cent for someone who is hungry.

 

[WillieWonka]

-This thread by it’s very title is related to “overpopulation”.

-The solution for “overpopulation” is “contraception” and “abortion” as well as “gay marriage”.

-Catholic Church is against “contraception”.

First of all, Catholic Church is NOT against contraception. Catholic Church APPROVES it.
Before many Catholics would bash me, please read on. Natural Family Planning, NFP IS contraception to me. (Correct me if I’m wrong )

But what are the “contraception” meant by those who “wants to control world population”?

It’s using condoms, sterilization, etc. What’s the purpose? Is it for controlling world population?

No, it’s to enjoy sex without wanting to take responsibility of taking care of the new life created during sex. It’s for the pure pleasure purposes. Then they use an excuse “to control world population”.

Abortion? It’s to escape responsibility of taking care of the new life created during sex, when condom failed. It’s for the self-ish purposes. And then they use the excuse “to control world population” to approve it. Using a “holy, thinking for other humans” excuse for self-ish purposes.

Pregnancy after raped? This is another tough issue. Someone stole my money, and I have no money to eat for the next 3 days, does it make it morally acceptable to steal someone else money so I will have food to it? No. Same goes to abortion after raped. Oh well, many condemn pro-life that they’re only doing the talking. Who wants to keep the baby? There are many more married couple who couldn’t have any child and is more than happy to adopt one.

Gay marriage? Another “nature” to prevent overpopulation? Or it is another “self-ish” desire, to have sex with the same sex?

all of the 3 ways (that mentioned above) to control world population, I see it as “to fulfill self-ish desire”. To enjoy sex freely not for love, but for pleasure. Not even one of them cares of world population, human starving or pollution. They (most of them, not all) will never give a single cent for someone who is hungry.

It is quite possible to advocate for sex without responsibility while being concerned about global population control. There is nothing mutually exclusive about them.

 

[lil_flower_luv]

all of the 3 ways (that mentioned above) to control world population, I see it as “to fulfill self-ish desire”. To enjoy sex freely not for love, but for pleasure. Not even one of them cares of world population, human starving or pollution. They (most of them, not all) will never give a single cent for someone who is hungry.

Very true. Not using ABC, having an abortion, or giving into homosexual desires, is selfless, the way God intended us to be.

Oh, and about your NFP comment: The Church looks at NFP as being a selfless act of abstinence and most certainly supports it.

 

[Contarini]

I recognize it is an opinion widely held among conservative Christians. So what?

Do you agree with some of the posters that those who disagree with this opinion lack common sense?

I could write a long post about the meaning of the phrase “common sense,” but I spare you. Suffice it to say that whenever there is a serious disagreement within a society about something, by definition no “sense” with regard to that issue can be said to be “common.”

Edwin

 

[lil_flower_luv]

It is quite possible to advocate for sex without responsibility while being concerned about global population control. There is nothing mutually exclusive about them.

Ah, but if you “advocate for sex without responsibility,” is your vision marred on how to truly be responsible?