Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Vester]

This is the thread that never ends,
It goes on and on, my friends.
People started posting it, not knowing what it was,
And people kept on posting forever just because...

*Song to the the tune of the song that never ends*

Another example is the active denying or hindering the use of medical treatments and techniques because they go against the faith (even if they are meant for people who are not followers of that faith) because they are sinful/wrong/depraved by the standards of the religion.

Specifically, condoms in Africa, and stem cell research.

The contraceptives thing is Pope Pius's fault, and I think it'll be fixed within the next decade (when we get a new, more liberal Pope), the stem cell research I believe comes from a slippery-slope based fear.

EDIT: A pretty unfounded fear, actually. Baby farms? No such thing.

[Osmosis Jones]

Another big thing with the condoms in Africa had nothing to do with the catholic church.  Rather, there were cases of American (I think Baptist, bit fuzzy on the details) Christian lobby groups who were trying to ensure that not only were American aid dollars to Africa spent purely on abstinence based methods of contraception (which is a categorical failure ouside of small groups, as humans are horny little bastards), but that it also only went through charities run by that faith (and hence would be partially diverted to funding missionary work as well).

[Vester]

What. I didn't know about that. How do they spend money on abstinence? Do they pay them to not screw?

(The Catholic position on contraceptives in general is relatively ancient, dating from around the mid-60's, but it governs current practice. Which angers me, in general, because these things could save lives where they're needed.)

[RAM]

Should I take this 'oath', then the only thing about my religion that would make me back down would be God explicitly telling me to. Himself.

That is demeaning to any earthly presence your god may maintain and still lacks commitment to your oath.

And what makes you think I'd consider any of my higher ups my 'master'? Of course God is my master, I wouldn't think of slapping that term on anyone else. You start calling your boss 'master', see how he takes it. Sure, I'd be loyal to my boss, but I wouldn't consider him my 'master', excessive inverted commas.

Master and boss are interchangeable, they both decide where you go and what you do whenever they choose to, it is just a matter of what language you are comfortable with.

As for agreeing to obey, that's a fairly restrictive term. What do you mean by obey? As in, do whatever the person you are obeying wishes, no matter what it is?

To the extent of the oath that you took, yes!
For example, if you take an oath to uphold the laws of a country then it would be lying if you were willing to ignore those laws to maintain your religious convictions. If you join a military that expects you to obey orders without hesitation then you really can't do so honestly without undermining your efforts to choose a religiously valid existence, as you give up the opportunity to choose.

What exactly makes you think that we believe in a literal Armageddon?

Nothing, it is an extreme case that I was using to make a clearer example. The fact is that to a christian their god's will overrides any intention to do good deeds and any argument to the contrary is just silly.

And even if it happened, our belief is that God is kind and forgiving. If he punished those who comfort those are being 'left below', if such a ridiculous thing were to occur, then he is not the God I believe in, and therefore not someone I'd worship.

Is that so? What possible verification could you have as to the nature of that which you worship? Is your love conditional? Because that is enough for your infinitely forgiving god to cast you into oblivion... The christian god is not reasonable!

EDIT: A pretty unfounded fear, actually. Baby farms? No such thing.

Ever hear of IVF? It is that thing where they generate a bunch of human embryos, pick their favourite, and throw away the rest, this is where we currently get embryonic stem cells from. If there is no such thing then where do they come from?

[Vester]

I have no idea which side you're on anymore, so let's do this one by one.

That is demeaning to any earthly presence your god may maintain and still lacks commitment to your oath.

Who said God maintains an earthly presence? I know Jackrabbit didn't. Demeaning? Who says what's demeaning? An observer, or the person being dealt with?

Master and boss are interchangeable, they both decide where you go and what you do whenever they choose to, it is just a matter of what language you are comfortable with.

Semantics. Master has an entirely different connotation than boss, depending on how it's used. There is an emotional undercurrent.

To the extent of the oath that you took, yes!
For example, if you take an oath to uphold the laws of a country then it would be lying if you were willing to ignore those laws to maintain your religious convictions. If you join a military that expects you to obey orders without hesitation then you really can't do so honestly without undermining your efforts to choose a religiously valid existence, as you give up the opportunity to choose.

Your country's military wants you to obey orders without hesitation? Okay, let's gun down some innocent civilians! Or hey, let's gas some prisoners of war. That's not even within the realm of religious conviction anymore, that's just conscience. Conscience is universal, unlike what you seem to think.

Nothing, it is an extreme case that I was using to make a clearer example. The fact is that to a christian their god's will overrides any intention to do good deeds and any argument to the contrary is just silly.

Yes, that's called building a strawman. It's a logical fallacy that involves changing the other side's position so you can attack it more easily.

Is that so? What possible verification could you have as to the nature of that which you worship? Is your love conditional? Because that is enough for your infinitely forgiving god to cast you into oblivion... The christian god is not reasonable!

You ask him how he knows the nature of what he worships, then you go around telling him its nature? A little odd of you, don't you think?

Ever hear of IVF? It is that thing where they generate a bunch of human embryos, pick their favourite, and throw away the rest, this is where we currently get embryonic stem cells from. If there is no such thing then where do they come from?

"Baby farms" is a misleading term used to spark feelings of revulsion and outrage.

IVF is In Vitro Fertilization. That involves fertilizing an egg cell outside the womb, with a sperm cell. Said egg is then transferred to a womb. So I'm pretty sure you don't know what you're talking about.

(and we get embryonic stem cells from embryos. Where else would we get them?)

[IndonesiaWarMinister]

What? Baby farms? We have them now?? GREAT![/sarcasm]

[Cheeetar]

I, for one, welcome a future with baby-driven immortality.

[Leafsnail]

The reason multiple embryos are created during the process of IVF is because the success rate of the procedure is fairly low.  Several embryos sometimes need to be created in order to have a reasonable chance of success.

And when you say "Pick their favourite" you're acting as if they're eugenically screening for embryos that will develop a certain eye colour, for instance.  They aren't.  That is illegal.  It is only legal to -

1. Select embryos who aren't afflicted with a genetic disease, such as cystic fibrosis, which has a terrible effect on anyone who has it.
2. Select the gender of an embryo in a family prone to genetic diseases that only (usually) effect men, such as hemophilia.

This isn't anything like "designer babies".

[Neonivek]

I am out of this conversation, but I have been thinking a lot of what has been said.

For the most part Religion hasn't been attacked by Athiesm, it has been more or less attacked by secularism as well as a fear.

Mind you I am not leaving over what has been said, I just don't want to lose control of myself in a conversation that is not really all important. It really has turned into a blame game. That and I can't keep track of the conversation so I have to read a lot just to know what is currently being discussed.

THAT and also because this conversation is very United States focused and a lot of the complaints don't apply over here. Giving a translation error.

The Catholic position on contraceptives in general is relatively ancient, dating from around the mid-60's, but it governs current practice. Which angers me, in general, because these things could save lives where they're needed

Not sure what you mean. You mean Condoms? because if you do you probably should read more into the subject because it isn't so cut and dry. I rarely see people oppose the Church's possition on Condoms in Africa while also understanding where they are comming from.

If it is Birth Control, I don't know enough about it. I've heard it was relatively safe but at the same time I have also heard that they are basically abused. (Also that they add Estrogen to the water supply... That I got oddly enough from a science textbook trying to explain possible reasons for low fertility rates in Toronto)

If you mean Stem Cell Research then it only applies to Embrionic Stem Cells. Adult Stem Cells and ones received from Child Birth are open game and are more stable.

Ohh well, see you guys later.

[Chutney]

Master and Boss both mean the same by definition maybe, but in context, and the connotations of 'master' make them wildly different.

Calling your boss your 'master' is comparing yourself to a slave.

[Cthulhu]

Calling your boss Master is going to get you some very funny looks.

If she's a woman, calling her Mistress is going to get you a sexual harrassment lawsuit.

[Leafsnail]

"Master" implies that you're owned by them, while "Boss" implies that you are answerable to them and should do what they say if you don't want to lose your job.

[Vester]

I am out of this conversation, but I have been thinking a lot of what has been said.

The Catholic position on contraceptives in general is relatively ancient, dating from around the mid-60's, but it governs current practice. Which angers me, in general, because these things could save lives where they're needed

Not sure what you mean. You mean Condoms? because if you do you probably should read more into the subject because it isn't so cut and dry. I rarely see people oppose the Church's possition on Condoms in Africa while also understanding where they are comming from.

If it is Birth Control, I don't know enough about it. I've heard it was relatively safe but at the same time I have also heard that they are basically abused. (Also that they add Estrogen to the water supply... That I got oddly enough from a science textbook trying to explain possible reasons for low fertility rates in Toronto)

Humanae Vitae, written in 1968 (my mistake, not Pius but Paul. Pius was the anticommunist one.) Pope Paul gathers doctors and theologians to study the problem of birth control.

Pope Paul ignores their findings and goes with ahead with the Humanae Vitae anyway.

I'm Catholic. I should know how and what to oppose.

[Neonivek]

Keep going there is more to it then that. They have a legit logical arguement on their side.

[penguinofhonor]

Keep going there is more to it then that. They have a legit logical arguement on their side.

Only if "condoms cause AIDS" is a logical argument.