It means that women should not be forced by public pressure to live by the Hugh Heffner philosophy, nor accept the practical atheism that asserts with little proof that the morality is merely a matter of convention. Besides, in the context of the world of the First Century, or any century, the description of Paul in Ephesians 5: 21-32 represents an elevation of the stature of the married woman even above that of a noble Roman woman. of Republican days.
The slavery system worked just fine. Well, not for the slaves, but for the slavemasters. It is really easy to apply the “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” mantra to slavery.
Who is more a slave that the unborn child who’s very life depends on the whim of another. Like I said before, support killing babies. Be proud of yourself.
It was so terrible that you studiously avoided even pretending to try to rebut it.
Wow, great post. You went to the core of the issue: Love versus Anti-Love (selfishness)
Actually, this is the argument i use when progay people try to say homosexuality is ok because its found in nature.
Who are you to tell someone their purpose in life or what they were meant to be? And if you say it is God who is saying it, then would you accept a muslim badgering you about making a trip to mecca and how you need to be Muslim because that is your purpose in life?
I know you didn’t ask me, but, here goes anyway.
People very rarely say that, but those who are anti-gay have created a straw man fallacy in which they claim that something being natural doesn’t make it morally acceptable. This is true. However, very rarely will those supporting equality for homosexuals claim that it being natural makes it morally acceptable. They’re often just responding to the argument that homosexuality is unnatural.
What, exactly, is there to “indulge” in when it comes to cancer? Cancer leads to death and suffering. Nothing good comes from it.
See above.
Well, everything in nature is natural, obviously. But you are right in saying that not everything that is natural is morally acceptable. However, just because you believe something opposes your view of what the purpose of life is doesn’t make it so. That’s your opinion. It’s utterly worthless in this debate.
Actually its not just “my view” and not worthless in this discussion because everything in life is ordered for survival, wouldnt you agree? Cancer is not ordered for survival and neither is homosexual sex.
Its just the law of life, called survival. I think everyone agrees that every living organism’s purpose is to survive. It is instinct.
No, we don’t. We don’t have enough babies to adopt, because over 50 MILLION of them have been aborted since 1973. That is why people have gone to other countries to try and adopt babies. Not because of the bureaucracy - the lack of babies means many couples are just left with no options.
If you add up the money our government spends on subsidies…of any description or to anyone and then add up what this government spends in entitlements, you will see that the subsidies would be a drop in the bucket by comparison even if both giveaways have some small numbers of merit. All this ping pong about spending is going to be over soon my friend because it is totally unsustainable and the crushing debt will change our lifestyles and those of our children and grand children for a lot longer than I have to live. Why seemingly normal people…Catholic…non Catholic Christians and atheists can’t get this is a mystery to me. People who might not run up their personal credit to hopeless amounts…somehow think that the “government” can do it with impunity…because they are trying to “help” us taxpayers…the very people who are going to be ruined by all this…again…a mystery. Just like the Ponzi schemes which are repeated over and over…there will be a rude awakening.Like subsidies for Oil companies perhaps
So everything you do is based on your will to survive? How does talking on this forum fall into that category? What about watching TV?
Watchig tv or being on this forum does not threaten my survival
Cancer does though.Homosexuality, technically speaking, doesn’t threaten your survival either. You could say that promiscuous homosexuality does, but so does promiscuous heterosexuality. And if being a homosexual and not having kids threatens survival, so does becoming a priest or nun.Watchig tv or being on this forum does not threaten my survival
Homosexuality is sterile and if you believe in evolution, can threaten the survival of an entire species if everyone adopted that lifestyle.
Abstinence is sterile as well. If everyone became a priest it would threaten the survival of an entire species as well. But we don’t have to worry about that because there is no danger of everyone turning gay and not having kids. It is such a ridiculous argument. The Catholic view of people with SSA is they should be celibate which is just as sterile as homosexuality, so even if people were following church teaching they would STILL be sterile.
Youre confusing the arguments now. Our sub-discussion was just on Nature and what is Natural, and how things in nature can be unnatural in the sense that they go against what organisms are ordered for.