The 7 new mortal sins

[That_one_guy]

It is still deliberate genetic engineering; the methods are merely different.

On the other hand, deliberate human genetic engineering was never acceptable, no matter how low-tech the methods were.

If genetically engineered seeds are patented, then BIG MONEY CORPORATIONS of don’t give a flying fish about the environment or people will control our food supply.

 

[Ed_Rand]

It is still deliberate genetic engineering; the methods are merely different.

On the other hand, deliberate human genetic engineering was never acceptable, no matter how low-tech the methods were.

But don’t the methods matter? Also, they have produced organisms that would never have occured through natural processes. There’s a difference. And it’s not just about human engineering. These people are fiddling with genetic codes, the foundations of life. They are combining genes from different species. It’s very different.

 

[That_one_guy]

But don’t the methods matter? Also, they have produced organisms that would never have occured through natural processes. There’s a difference. And it’s not just about human engineering. These people are fiddling with genetic codes, the foundations of life. They are combining genes from different species. It’s very different.

Very very different.
I agree!

 

[WatchfulPilgrim]

Don’t we play God in other ways too? What about heart surgery? Replacing limbs? Taking medicine? We are doing something to alter or fix a natural occurance (injury and illness). We were given dominion over creation but with that comes responsibility. We are being good stewards of God’s creation when we use it to promote life and well-being. It isn’t necessarily the method that is problematic but rather the motivation behind it and the results thereof. A gun can be good and useful but not when put in the wrong hands. Perhaps some genetic engineering will be good for mankind but in the wrong hands will be devastating when used for food and certainly desastrous when used for cloning. Plant and animal life have no soul and we are given dominion over them, but human life has an eternal soul and we are not free to do with humanity whatever we like. The motive must be preservation and life, not selfish gain which will lead to ruin.

 

[That_one_guy]

Don’t we play God in other ways too? What about heart surgery? Replacing limbs? Taking medicine? We are doing something to alter or fix a natural occurrence (injury and illness). We were given dominion over creation but with that comes responsibility. We are being good stewards of God’s creation when we use it to promote life and well-being. It isn’t necessarily the method that is problematic but rather the motivation behind it and the results thereof. A gun can be good and useful but not when put in the wrong hands. Perhaps some genetic engineering will be good for mankind but in the wrong hands will be devastating when used for food and certainly disastrous when used for cloning.

In 1990, His Holiness proclaimed that “the animals possess a soul and men must love and feel solidarity with our smaller brethren.” He went on to say that all animals are “fruit of the creative action of the Holy Spirit and merit respect” and that they are “as near to God as men are.” Animal lovers everywhere were overjoyed!

Plant and animal life have no soul and we are given dominion over them, but human life has an eternal soul and we are not free to do with humanity whatever we like. The motive must be preservation and life, not selfish gain which will lead to ruin.

In my mind stewardship, animal rights and anti-abortion are all pro-life.They are all interconnected.If you are pro-life then you should include ALL life.

Good (name removed by moderator)ut!

 

[Lujack]

But don’t the methods matter? Also, they have produced organisms that would never have occured through natural processes. There’s a difference. And it’s not just about human engineering. These people are fiddling with genetic codes, the foundations of life. They are combining genes from different species. It’s very different.

Corn never would have occurred through natural processes; neither would grain.

What about the big European war horses that you see knights riding? Those couldn’t have occurred naturally. We’ve always been fiddling with genetic codes, albeit on a more indirect level With regards to plants, there seems to be no ethical problems other than the dangers of something going wrong.

With regards to humans and animals, though, serious ethical problems start to creep in.

 

[That_one_guy]

Corn never would have occurred through natural processes; neither would grain.

What about the big European war horses that you see knights riding? Those couldn’t have occurred naturally. We’ve always been fiddling with genetic codes, albeit on a more indirect level With regards to plants, there seems to be no ethical problems other than the dangers of something going wrong.

With regards to humans and animals, though, serious ethical problems start to creep in.

from this link

online.sfsu.edu/~rone/GEessays/Why%20You%20Should%20Be%20Concerned%20About%20GEF.htm

The main environmental problem with genetically engineered food plants and animals is that, when they escape into the wild, they permanently disrupt ecosystems which are the products of billions of years of evolution (or, if you prefer, of God’s perfect creation). For example, the most recent conservative scientific estimates indicate that genetically engineered plants will probably cross-pollinate with wild relatives, thereby escaping into the wild and permanently disrupting ecosystems at about one percent a year. That means they will probably cause major environmental problems in about ten years.

 

[WatchfulPilgrim]

In 1990, His Holiness proclaimed that “the animals possess a soul and men must love and feel solidarity with our smaller brethren.” He went on to say that all animals are “fruit of the creative action of the Holy Spirit and merit respect” and that they are “as near to God as men are.” Animal lovers everywhere were overjoyed!

I was not aware of that but yes you are correct - I do see that quote when I do an internet search. That does open a lot of questions though - not to get o.t., but what about eating animals, animal sacrifice, etc. throughout the bible? Clearly there is a difference between humanity and animals. “You are worth more than many sparrows” But as a part of God’s creation, again, we have a great responsibility toward animals, as well they are innocent and sentient beings. But I’m not sure I’d expect to see them resurrected.

In my mind stewardship, animal rights and anti-abortion are all pro-life.They are all interconnected.If you are pro-life then you should include ALL life.

Yes I suppose. And I am an animal lover as well. I didn’t intend to convey the impression that man can do as he pleases with animals. For that matter we can’t do anything we please with any of God’s creation without repercussions. We must act responsibly with all of creation. So in that sense environmental issues naturally also fall into this realm b/c we are all connected. Certainly the difficulty is in not being able to predict what the repercussions of our actions will be. In trying to preserve humanity we often use methods that may in time destroy it. It’s all “progress” they say. That is why I appreciate simplicity of lifestyle. I could improve in that area as well.

The main environmental problem with genetically engineered food plants and animals is that, when they escape into the wild, they permanently disrupt ecosystems which are the products of billions of years of evolution (or, if you prefer, of God’s perfect creation). For example, the most recent conservative scientific estimates indicate that genetically engineered plants will probably cross-pollinate with wild relatives, thereby escaping into the wild and permanently disrupting ecosystems at about one percent a year. That means they will probably cause major environmental problems in about ten years.

Interesting… A good example of how our efforts to help ourselves can do just the opposite. Hopefully it won’t, but ignorance is not an excuse.

 

[That_one_guy]

… but what about eating animals, animal sacrifice, etc. throughout the bible? Clearly there is a difference between humanity and animals. “You are worth more than many sparrows” But as a part of God’s creation, again, we have a great responsibility toward animals, as well they are innocent and sentient beings.

I opened a post on this here

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=293313&highlight=animal+sacrifice

I,too,find this an interesting topic.

 

[WatchfulPilgrim]

Thanks for the link. I just made a small contribution to it.

 

[Ed_Rand]

Corn never would have occurred through natural processes; neither would grain.

Corn did occur through natural processes, humans helped those processes along as stewards, but nonetheless, the breeding was natural. I’ll say it again: The genetic engineering that is occuring today is completely different and we can’t talk about it the same way. They are combining DNA from different species. I can’t say it more plainly. There is a big difference.

 

[That_one_guy]

Go see post # 27
please?

 

[That_one_guy]

or here, I’ll make it easier

from this link

online.sfsu.edu/~rone/GEessays/Why%20You%20Should%20Be%20Concerned%20About%20GEF.htm

The main environmental problem with genetically engineered food plants and animals is that, when they escape into the wild, they permanently disrupt ecosystems which are the products of billions of years of evolution (or, if you prefer, of God’s perfect creation). For example, the most recent conservative scientific estimates indicate that genetically engineered plants will probably cross-pollinate with wild relatives, thereby escaping into the wild and permanently disrupting ecosystems at about one percent a year. That means they will probably cause major environmental problems in about ten years.

 

[That_one_guy]

Corn did occur through natural processes, humans helped those processes along as stewards, but nonetheless, the breeding was natural. I’ll say it again: The genetic engineering that is occuring today is completely different and we can’t talk about it the same way. They are combining DNA from different species. I can’t say it more plainly. There is a big difference.

from this link

ucgstp.org/lit/gn/gn052/blackhorse.htm

Terrifying look into the future

In Deuteronomy 28 God details the horror of a people stricken with the curse of famine. It demands our attention so we may understand what lies ahead for the world when the third horseman rides.

For disobedience, God says He would bring a nation from afar to besiege and blockade the cities. All the food stores would be forcibly taken. The resulting starvation would cause the social structure to unravel at a frightening speed. The results are horrifying to contemplate.

“You shall eat the fruit of your own body, the flesh of your sons and your daughters … in the siege and desperate straits in which your enemy shall distress you. The sensitive and very refined man among you will be hostile toward his brother, toward the wife of his bosom, and toward the rest of his children whom he leaves behind, so that he will not give any of them the flesh of his children whom he will eat, because he has nothing left in the siege …” (Deuteronomy 28:53-55).

Famine-induced cannibalism is the lowest depth of depravity to which a nation can sink. Yet scenes like this have occurred in history —and God says they will happen again. Reading this in the light of today’s reported tragedies is profoundly sobering. But such deeply distressing events inevitably occur when men and women become entrenched in their disobedience to God’s laws.

Again, I am emphasizing the genetic manipulation of plants and the potential hazard they pose due to there mutated strains of pollen finding our way into the food supply.

 

[Sam_Maloney]

Pope Benedict has declared 7 new deadly sins.The new deadly sins include polluting, genetic engineering, being obscenely rich, drug dealing, abortion, pedophilia and causing social injustice.
As Catholics, is this going to help us rally to the front.Or will this just give us more stuff to talk about in confession?
The Church is well known for its stand drugs,abortion,pedophilia, and social injustice.What about pollution?Is the church going to go green?
What about genetic engineering?Does this include patented seeds?
And a myriad of other issues comes to mind.

You do realize that the ‘7 NEW deadly sins’ is a complete falsehood, right?

Speaking only for myself, I find it very offensive when people pass along such ‘information’ without verifing it. Understanding Catholic thought [and living according to it] is hard enough without having to constantly separate what the Church actually teaches from the false claims of lazy reporters and would be visionaries, and social radicals who want to co-opt the Church’s authority for their own agenda.

Why are we even discussing these ‘sins’ as though they had some legitimacy?

 

[damianlaura]

These aren’t “new” in any way. As we know it has always been a sin to kill, whether this is humans or the earth. The Pope didn’t create ANY new rules, he is simply applying our ancient dogmas to new situations that we are encountering in recent times.

 

[Sam_Maloney]

These aren’t “new” in any way. As we know it has always been a sin to kill, whether this is humans or the earth. The Pope didn’t create ANY new rules, he is simply applying our ancient dogmas to new situations that we are encountering in recent times.

For the sake of clarity: ‘He’ in this instance wasn’t even the pope, it was just a bishop giving an interview to a newspaper, in which he speculated about how the unchanging laws of God applies in these modern times.

I know some cradle Catholics who are very upset at what they see as a hard left turn by the Church over this. Much harm has been done by the irresponsible media, and we all ought to work at setting the record straight.

Proof, if anyone needs it:
zenit.org/article-22029?l=english

 

[That_one_guy]

You do realize that the ‘7 NEW deadly sins’ is a complete falsehood, right?

Speaking only for myself, I find it very offensive when people pass along such ‘information’ without verifing it. Understanding Catholic thought [and living according to it] is hard enough without having to constantly separate what the Church actually teaches from the false claims of lazy reporters and would be visionaries, and social radicals who want to co-opt the Church’s authority for their own agenda.

Why are we even discussing these ‘sins’ as though they had some legitimacy?

Hi,Sam.Good to see you over here,too!I appreciate your provocative (name removed by moderator)ut.It nice that some likes to play devil’s advocate!

 

[That_one_guy]

For the sake of clarity: ‘He’ in this instance wasn’t even the pope, it was just a bishop giving an interview to a newspaper, in which he speculated about how the unchanging laws of God applies in these modern times.

I know some cradle Catholics who are very upset at what they see as a hard left turn by the Church over this. Much harm has been done by the irresponsible media, and we all ought to work at setting the record straight.

Proof, if anyone needs it:
zenit.org/article-22029?l=english

Informative link.
It does not negate the expediency of the issues,however,be they old ideas or not.

 

[Sam_Maloney]

Informative link.
It does not negate the expediency of the issues,however,be they old ideas or not.

I’m sure you are a very fine person TOG, and I don’t doubt your good intentions. But between citing PETA as an authoritive source and starting threads about the [non-existant] 7 new mortal sins, I’d say you may need to be a little more careful about where you get your information.

The topics are fine, and can certainly be discussed rationally and productively, but not if one side keeps posting information with little basis in reality.