Celibacy, who else is practicing it?

BalconyBoy · June 30, 2010, 2:58pm

Revisit what you want. Being irresponsible isn’t a fact. You could think I am irresponsible in the way I handle money. That doesn’t mean it’s a fact or wrong. I stated there is a possibility. You assumed I meant this will happen. Your interpretation not my meaning. I think this statement says it all

Since there is no flexibility in your stance, everyone who does not agree with you and your opinions are wrong and you are right. End of story.

Baelor · June 30, 2010, 3:07pm

No. There is no problem in that whatsoever. I do that all the time. I have done that in this thread.

My only problem with your posts is your insistence that their opinions rely on assumptions and that yours do not, that theirs should be discarded because of lack of evidence, etc… This is false on a factual/empirical basis.

No you didn’t. I reposted your post RIGHT THERE. It is RIGHT ABOVE YOU.

It’s right there. You claimed that it was irresponsible, period. The only “possibility” is the increased possibility of abortion, which has no relevance to the absolute statement made in the previous post whatsoever. You can’t rewrite what is set in stone.

Duh. It’s called holding any beliefs at all. And given your asinine “OMG Catholics don’t follow ONLY the Bible and I do and I will never approach this issue differently despite the fact that my framework is totally irrelevant to Roman Catholicism” diatribe in the last thread, you’re one to talk.

BalconyBoy · June 30, 2010, 3:11pm

No it’s called myopic and narrow minded. Not having the ability or willingness to understand others beliefs and/or opinions sound a whole lot like what a guy in the late 1930’s thought and we all know how that ended.

Baelor · June 30, 2010, 3:17pm

Strawman alert! ERERERERERERERERERERERERERER!

Reading posts helps you KNOW WHAT THOSE WHO WROTE THEM ARE SAYING.

I UNDERSTAND other people’s beliefs. I LISTEN to them all the time. I just think they’re wrong. Sort of like you about Roman Catholics, except instead of listening or being able to understand, you just kept pulling random crap out of…a particular cavity.

Look, read all my posts. Then keep posting misinformation. At least then I’ll be content that someone suffered through them and then misinterpreted them versus voluntarily ignored them.

You don’t know what you’re talking about, clearly. I am obviously not “myopic and narrow minded.” I simply acknowledge that holding beliefs means you think other people are wrong, otherwise you would believe what they do. I am also always willing to hear what other people have to say, perhaps a product of living in areas where literally no one agrees with me (all my life).

Character assassination fail is fail. Move on to something that you can actually succeed at, like inventing nonsense against other Christian denominations.

BalconyBoy · June 30, 2010, 4:39pm

Yes you are willing to hear what other people say. Then you slam them over the head with your over the top opinions you spout as fact and tell them they are wrong because they don’t have the same opinion as you do. You are myopic and narrow minded. I can read very well and I do understand your stance. It’s real simple you are correct and everyone else is wrong. Attitudes like that are dangerous.

Baelor · June 30, 2010, 4:59pm

I’m sorry. You must be confused about how beliefs work.

Let me understand. You think this statement denotes narrow-mindedness, correct?

So you believe things, but at the same time believe that OTHERS are also correct? So, let’s say, you oppose abortion. Presumably, you believe that that view is correct. Yet at the same time, you do not believe that those who support abortion are wrong? Because that would be dangerous?

I’m surprised you have viewpoints at all, given that you yourself have stated that holding any beliefs at all constitutes a dangerous attitude.

In this thread I have not argued in favor of or against celibacy or contraception (at least in this most recent line of discussion). I have basically said the following:

1) Some people oppose contraception
2) Some people are absolutists
3) Ultimately, all of us need to make assumptions to reach a particular viewpoint

OMG! I totally see how that is “so over the top” and how those are “opinions [that I] spout as fact!” You’re right, I am SOOOO off-base here. I should be open to all opinions, especially ones that disagree with me! For example, “NO ONE believes that contraception is wrong,” and “NO ONE is an absolutist.”

Because that is pretty much the extent of my argument here.

Please go actually read my posts, and keep at it until you understand what I’m saying, because you are still talking about a problem that is not even here.

peter_parker_1 · June 30, 2010, 7:04pm

No one cares what ‘other people who aren’t present might believe.’

You assert other people are against contraceptives (and presumably you are) - but you haven’t give your or their reason why. (And their reason is Biblical literalism, the Pope’s proclamation based on the same Biblical reasoning , or Lord Zenu).

Hence, not one argument against contraceptives has stood up in this thread. Therefore, any reader of this discussion can only reasonably conclude that contraceptives are a useful tool, quite morally acceptable, or perhaps even morally required, that prevent pregnancy and STDs - including pregnancies that would bring individuals to poverty, ruin their life plans, or lead to an unwanted child living in an improper environment.

Actually, people who oppose the use of contraceptives (and what business of yours is it what anyone decides to wrap around their junk?) are very dangerous in our society because nothing is stopping them from reproducing and spreading their genes!

Johnson181 · June 30, 2010, 7:15pm

Baelor’s argument (please correct me if I’m wrong, Baelor) is that sex is solely for the purpose of procreation. Thus contraceptives are bad, as they prevent this.

peter-parker, while most of us on this thread think this idea is unbelievably ridiculous, Baelor is under no obligation to “prove” why he/she holds this belief.

If Baelor chooses to believe that it is better to get an STD than go against what he/she believes is God’s will, then who cares?

Not once has Baelor claimed that contraceptives should be illegal and banned. Until Baelor does so, Baelor is not infringing on us in the least bit.

<a href=“and%20what%20business%20of%20yours%20is%20it%20what%20anyone%20decides%20to%20wrap%20around%20their%20junk?”>quote</a>

[/quote]

Again, Baelor has said nothing about banning contraceptives. Just that he/she is against them for moral reasons.

It is the same as saying that I find abortion to be heinous, but I think it should be 100% legal.

Baelor · June 30, 2010, 8:14pm

That was the problem I was trying to solve. Before the discussion was hideously sidetracked.

I did. I gave a concrete and laid-out justification from an institution that probably includes the largest constituency of anti-contraceptive people.

^Johnson, that’s pretty much all correct except associating those views with me versus a generic person would be false. Again, I’m not trying to assert any view on contraception, merely draw attention to the fact that there are clinically sane, intelligent people (and tons of idiots) who oppose contraception, a fact which is largely ignored and/or not considered.

justtotalk · June 30, 2010, 8:30pm

Agreed. Although in this case if you don’t want to use contraceptives then just don’t. Whether you’re rational or insane doesn’t matter.

The real issues lie where there’s only one option and where liberals typically view the conservatives as completely irrational/stupid just because a segment of conservatives act a certain way. E.g. fiscal debates. Hicks support slashing social benefits to balance the budget ("cause my money is my money **** them lazy n******(I can’t believe this wasn’t censored so I censored it myself)). But so do many very intelligent citizens for very different reasons.

BalconyBoy · June 30, 2010, 9:05pm

I have read your posts. They are your opinions. Minimal actual facts.

Yes I think abortion is wrong. I think it is murder. Like I posted before, I don’t think pre-marital sex is good but if people are having pre-marital sex then contraception should be used. Why? To help prevent unwanted pregnancies. Do unwanted pregnancies lead to abortions? In my opinion, yes. And if I am not mistaken, the Catholic church does permit one form of birth control - the rhythm method - which could be considered a form of contraception.

That is over the top an narrow minded.

peter_parker_1 · June 30, 2010, 9:24pm

Johnson - as a prior post of mine mentioned, people who are against contraception because sex is solely for having children are ideologically inconsistent based on their actions and to a certain extent hypocritical.

Other than being “convinced” by the mere word of the Pope or the Bible, these people probably hold this anti-contraception stance because they associate contraceptives with loose women, promiscuous sex, a “no-consequences” mentality about sex, and less guilt in general surrounding sex (and we can’t have that!)

From the dawn of time, man and woman (and especially men historically) have been trying to control every last person’s sexuality and pinning down rules saying when its okay to have sex and with who. Some men in particular want women to remain virgins for as long as possible, or until a girl is “with them” at which point the woman is his property and must never stray or lust for another man again (even way before marriage).

Anyway, this contraceptive thing is another expression of that, no matter how misguided and futile. It promotes promiscuous or carefree sex! - so they say.

Religious and abstinence promoting groups in the 50s and 60s would have posters trying to promote this among adults, the evils of premarital sex – why would they try to tell a grown man or woman whether they could have sex? Well, see above. Anyway the posters were all about DISEEASSE!! And that anyone having sex was necessarily loose, easy, amoral, and plagued with diseases. EVERYONE could give you AIDS, and probably has the disease already!

It doesn’t take a sociologist to tell you why this group would despise contraceptives and condoms. It hurts the stick they try to use to control people.

Johnson181 · June 30, 2010, 9:45pm

peter_parker- I know all of this. I’ve studied women’s history quite extensively, and contraceptives are obviously a decent chunk of women’s history.
And in case it’s not obvious, I’m fairly pro-contraceptives… hell, I’m pro maximizing the number of contraceptives you’re using to reduce the risk of unwanted pregnancy, std’s, you name it.

But you’re missing the part where I pointed out that Baelor has never claimed that contraceptives should be banned. So who cares what Baelor thinks (or the “hypothetical person” Baelor mentioned, even though Baelor himself/herself said that they personally would prefer their own kids not to use contraception if they chose to have premarital sex)?
So long as someone’s not trying to push their own moral views on you, it doesn’t matter if they want to believe something that you do not.

Baelor · June 30, 2010, 10:23pm

Okay. Your unsubstantiated “points” speak for themselves. More evidence plz.

It permits all natural contraceptive methods.

It is the definition of believing in something, as I’ve already explained and as you’ve conveniently ignored. Next.

Uhm, this is obviously false. Because I am most familiar with Catholicism, let me go through that post.

Only relevant if one accepts the Bible as sole arbiter of morality, not even all Christians do.

“Correct.”

“Correct.”

“Sex is unitive and procreative. The couple must be open to life, i.e. sex must come with WILLINGNESS to have children.”

“Correct.”

“Incorrect – as long as oral sex is foreplay and the man ejaculates in the woman.”

“Incorrect – it is the willingness to have children that is relevant. One cannot use artificial contraception because it inherently warps the meaning of sex, blahblahblah Whereas one can have sex not during ovulation and still be open to life.”

You really need to get a reality check. I at least realize that many don’t share my beliefs. You don’t seem to understand that there are people who live WAY differently than you do. So when you say “NO ONE lives like that,” I can only imagine that you mean “NO ONE I know lives like that,” because I know PLENTY of people who do.

People who oppose contraception can be entirely internally consistent.

peter_parker_1 · June 30, 2010, 11:28pm

I never said “no-one” lives like that. You obviously are against contraception yourself, among plenty others, or this debate wouldn’t even happen.

I said no one actually followed my ridiculous hypothetical rules - including no sex during pregnancy, no oral sex, no sex during ovulation.

You clarified the Catholic Church’s stances on each of these - they do permit oral sex in the correct spirit and I assume they permit sex after conception, though that stance is much tougher to reason, heh.

I see many of the logic behind these “stances” more along the lines of what I have been saying - people pick and choose what they want to believe. Hey, everybody does it, including myself, when it comes to political ideologies and so forth.

Hey, I was raised a Catholic myself - and know more than most about it, though, admittedly, I can’t speak intelligently about the Church’s political and moral positions on a host of items. I’d wager that the majority of Catholics would be hard pressed to speak at length about Biblical passages, its reasoning, the beatitudes, or even the ten commandments. People accept what they’re willing to accept. Hence all the denominations, for that matter.

Hey, I don’t care about people’s beliefs and I’m not out to destroy anyone’s.

I just think contraceptive education as well as abstinence education (or encouragement, I suppose) should both be centerpieces in schools. It doesn’t hurt anyone - it only helps. Everyone can decide for themselves whether they want to use them - after speaking with their partner, of course.

Baelor · June 30, 2010, 11:56pm

And that is what I mentioned. My entire last post was an explanation of how people do indeed follow your “ridiculous hypothetical rules.” Historical revision at its best:

But your last post is good enough as an endpoint for me. Perhaps BalconyBoy will concoct some new attack on my posts being unsupported or some such nonsense; otherwise, I’m happy to end here.

silence_kit · July 1, 2010, 12:46am

we’ve talked about this before . . . recall this post that you read in a previous life:

there’s nothing wrong with disagreeing with someones opinion as long as you realize that it is a matter of opinion. you aren’t above having opinions!

BalconyBoy · July 1, 2010, 7:02am