A Conversation for How to Get Pregnant and How Not to
Just zis Guy, you know? † Cyclist [A690572] :: At the 51st centile of ursine intelligence Started conversation Nov 18, 2000
The one thing I can't understand about the Roman Catholic Church is that they will fully endorse a system to allow sex within marriage without pregnancy - the rhythm method, otherwise known as "Vatican Roulette" - but refuse to allow the use of barrier methods (including condoms) even where the population is growing out of control.
Surely an unwanted child is more immoral than married people using a condom?
Byzantine Posted Nov 20, 2000
May I reccomend "Monty Python's Meaning of Life" for a more detailed explanation of this particular theological ideology.
And there was I thinking it was beyond parody.
Deabolik Posted Nov 22, 2000
Personally I agree with you on this. Though the reasoning that I can se behind this idea is that one should only be haveing sex with someone that you are married to and as the catholic church seem to thing that the purpose of marrage is to create babies (as imputence is ground for devorce) then a baby will make a marrage. I know that this is weak but it is one of the only arguments that I can see the catholic church putting up in its defence of this idea, as well as the fact that condoms and other forms of contricepion stop the work of god by killing the life.
It's internally inconsistent, though. They support one fomr of contraception, but not another. Daft, if you ask me.
Roza Posted Dec 8, 2000
Ahem, I'm no expert at theology, but I'm sure if you ask a doctor, they would not rank the rhythm as a contraceptive... And that is also behind the argument of the Vatican. They condemn ANY kind of contraceptive method, because God has given the earth to mankind to multiply etc. And the purpose of marriage, according to the, IS to procreate. But the rhythm method does not kill an embryo, it does not make the meeting of sperm and egg impossible, it is just sort of a taking-chances method. I mean, how could you tell if the couple was just not having sex those days by sheer chance? And they are not supporting it, as far as I know. They are just not condemning it along with the other methods.
What I personally find more strange and even horrible, is that the Roman Catholic Church comdemns the use of the morning-after pill for rape victims Of course, I mean, in the love of God, and the child is not responsible, and all that stuff, but come on, there's also the woman, not just the child... Who may even become an outcast from society, as there are many places still where rape is considered to be the woman's fault... Not to mention a shame on the family if they still support her... So is the humiliation of the rape not enough, will they have to suffer all this if it is found out? AND bear the child as a reminder ever after...?
The Frood (Stop Torture: A455528) Posted Dec 9, 2000
I think that the main idea against contraception is the killing of the sperm and such.--Aside-- Though I do have a lot of Catholic ideas (no abortion, no death penalty, etc...), I don't think contraception is wrong. --/Aside-- Anyway, I think it does accept the Pill, or did. I read an article about it on the New Yorker. The reason was that all it did was change the cycle a bit and helped women reduce the risk of certain types of cancer.
That is because it is killing. I have no solid opinion about the morning-after pill. It hasn't happened to anyone I know... but should the child-to-be die because the father was a bad man? Why should it be a shame that she was raped? It was not her fault, someone did that to her. Frankly, anyone who thinks that it is the woman's fault that she was raped should be hit with a stick.
Hope that made sense
Researcher 142275 Posted Jan 22, 2001
Actually the Catholics have taken quite a beating on this issue. I belive that the Catholic church, which reccomends the "rhythm method" to those who wish to decrease their chances of pregnancy actually only officially supports abstinance as a form of contraception.
One might ask why they officially support abstinance as a form of contraception and not other methods... such as latex barriers, spermicides, menstration altering drugs, abortion, or child sacrifice?
You have to draw the line somewhere. They prefer to draw it *before* the fun begins.
Researcher 172975 Posted May 8, 2001
The Catholic Church has many many skeletons in it's closet about this, there was an Incident in Ireland where priests where having sexual relations with nuns , because they saw themselves as, the children of God, A religion isn't perfect but the catholic religion, i think does more good than harm.
I am a non practising catholic
Fulgentius Posted Jun 25, 2002
I used to know a mother of three children and her youngest was a girl of about seven years old. This woman, once she got acquainted with someone (which didn't seem to take long) would tell people in 'confidence' that her youngest daughter was the product of the violent rape of her by a work associate and also imply that this was the reason the young girl had certain behavioural problems. It seemed, in the end, that everyone around, except this little girl, knew the nature of her conception. I can't imagine anyone being able to grow up to be a balanced individual under those circumstances. I don't really think that it's the fact that non-consentual sex started someones life that will damage them, I don't believe that there is a gene for rape that manifests itself in some kind of deviant behaviour in a subsequent generation. I'm certain that, in most cases, whatever good intentions the mother has regarding the child of a rape, it's impossible not to let it affect the child's life.
Incidentally, in defence of the woman I'm specifically talking about, she was very emotionally disturbed and, I think, was desperate to tell her secret in the hope that someone could help her free of what was tormenting her.
Fleur5221 Posted Apr 11, 2007
The Morning After Pill is not a form of abortion because it prevents fertilization process from even starting, PREVENTING pregnancy in the first place. There is a separate abortion pill for pregnancies already started. Please stop being misinformed!
Key: Complain about this post
- 1: Just zis Guy, you know? † Cyclist [A690572] :: At the 51st centile of ursine intelligence (Nov 18, 2000)
- 2: Byzantine (Nov 20, 2000)
- 3: Just zis Guy, you know? † Cyclist [A690572] :: At the 51st centile of ursine intelligence (Nov 20, 2000)
- 4: Sho - employed again! (Nov 22, 2000)
- 5: Deabolik (Nov 22, 2000)
- 6: Just zis Guy, you know? † Cyclist [A690572] :: At the 51st centile of ursine intelligence (Nov 22, 2000)
- 7: Roza (Dec 8, 2000)
- 8: The Frood (Stop Torture: A455528) (Dec 9, 2000)
- 9: Researcher 142275 (Jan 22, 2001)
- 10: Researcher 172975 (May 8, 2001)
- 11: Fulgentius (Jun 25, 2002)
- 12: Fleur5221 (Apr 11, 2007)