Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Catholic Living in the Modern World => Topic started by: countrychurch on March 04, 2017, 04:12:59 PM
-
What is wrong with artificial birth control?
I have never believed in artificial birth control, even when I was outside the Church in my younger years, and not practicing my faith in any real way. I always thought it was un-natural and weird. But I can understand (sorta) people not getting the Church’s position on abc.. not understanding exactly why it is forbidden. A lot of people do not realize that the Church officially teaches that a.b control is not merely a sin, but a mortal sin. And I have no problem with that teaching of the Church or any other.
I always thought it was just weird to interrupt what should be a spontaneous act of love between married people to… use some artificial thing like a condom. And the pill messes up a woman’s system and can mess up her health, and again is un-natural, etc…
Are there any other reasons I am missing?
-
I would like to add a question to this topic as well, and that would be, how is Natural Family Planning able to be justified as okay and not a sin, versus a married couple not wanting children and choosing to either use a condom or artifical birth control , or having surgery to prevent pregnancy.
and then an open question to if anyone else seeing the Church as dictating when a married couple with in the Church or society as a whole is allowed to have sɛҳuąƖ relations with each other only during this time of N.F.P ? Why does or did the Church decide it necessary to control this aspect of a married couple when we are allowed to have free will.
-
A very quick answer to you both - God's purpose for marriage is the procreation and education of children to live with Him in Eternity. And so the Church teaches that every marital embrace should be open to the possibility of new life.
Knowingly stifling life is an insult and inimical to our Creator without Whom we ourselves would not have life and the chance to live with Him forever in Heaven.
-
Plus it reduces your spouse to the level of a prostitute.
"I want the pleasure you give me, but I DO NOT want your fertility."
NOTE: Couples who are infertile for other reasons (menopause, natural infertility, pregnancy, time of the month, etc.) do NOT give such an explicit, resounding NO to God's plan, nor do they explicitly limit the bounds of their union (Pleasure, yes. Possibility of kids, no.)
-
so the church expects couples to not engage in sɛҳuąƖ activity unless it is for procreation only. but side steps that by giving couples a brief time frame to engage in sɛҳuąƖ activity through NFP.. and the church sees sɛҳuąƖ intercourse between a couple as purely physical and nothing to do with marital bonding just some primitive act of self pleasure and nothing more. that is when it outside procreation. an if not then we are nothing more than common prostitutes, nice.
-
so the church expects couples to not engage in sɛҳuąƖ activity unless it is for procreation only. but side steps that by giving couples a brief time frame to engage in sɛҳuąƖ activity through NFP.. and the church sees sɛҳuąƖ intercourse between a couple as purely physical and nothing to do with marital bonding just some primitive act of self pleasure and nothing more. that is when it outside procreation. an if not then we are nothing more than common prostitutes, nice.
it's debatable whether NFP is a true Catholic practice
-
Also the Pope is recently noted as saying to help preserve the sustainablity of the planet , that not reproducing would be beneficial .
it is interesting to see that the Church sees intercourse as only a means of procreation and was not intended at all for pleasure between two married people.
Also what should one tell a priest if he is in favor in opinion that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs should be allowed to marry ? does one correct that priest on the spot or take it to the appropriate bishop ?
also for those in the no premarial sex boat, what is the rebuttle to either claims, or statistics or founded reports of ones mental development or being able to mature better and interact socially and responsibly by engaging in monogamous sɛҳuąƖ activity vs those who wait until marriage and may or have developed mental disabilities , insecurities , or E.D or physical problems as a result from following church teaching on waiting until one is married to have intercourse ( with the intent of having children ) .
how does faith correct what science and psychology prove other wise.
how does the church explain why God created humanity as a sɛҳuąƖ being with physical sɛҳuąƖ needs through the build up of hormones that we were created with. When God could have easily created us with the inherit instict to want to reproduce with out the sɛҳuąƖ nature or physical attraction behind it and have removed the chemicals in the human body that trigger things to be put into motion.
-
Why does or did the Church decide it necessary to control this aspect of a married couple when we are allowed to have free will.
I'm not sure I can even figure out what you are saying here. Free will gives one the choice of doing good or evil. It doesn't give one the power of deciding what is good or evil,
-
Why does or did the Church decide it necessary to control this aspect of a married couple when we are allowed to have free will.
I'm not sure I can even figure out what you are saying here. Free will gives one the choice of doing good or evil. It doesn't give one the power of deciding what is good or evil,
how does one decide to choose between good and evil, if one does not know what is good or what is evil. ? for those who do not rely on the church to spoon feed them on what is good and or evil they have to make that decision on their own, for the rest of us we either choose to abide by everything the church teaches and ignore the errors the church makes or we use what the church teaches as a guide an use our concscience to fill in the rest.
and why did or does the Church feel it necessary to control every aspect of humanity, which is including marriage, how a married couple should physically interact with each other in regards to sex.... i am not talking about things like being able to marry inanimate objects or ridiculous things one may one to counter as being a point. I am talking in rational decisions with the moral concscience we were given.
-
... that the Church sees intercourse as only a means of procreation
Who said that??? Are you making that up, GLC?
and was not intended at all for pleasure between two married people.
Ah... I do believe it was God himself who made sex pleasurable. :cheers:
-
... that the Church sees intercourse as only a means of procreation
Who said that??? Are you making that up, GLC?
and was not intended at all for pleasure between two married people.
Ah... I do believe it was God himself who made sex pleasurable. :cheers:
it is what i have been under the impression of for the longest time, that sɛҳuąƖ intercourse between two married catholics is only intended to procreate , the only option to have intercourse with out the intention of procreation is through NFP , and what I am getting at is that Church is going out of its' way to interfere with married catholics by placing limits on them on when they can and cant have intercourse. and then why would God make sex pleasurable but then tell us that we have to wait until we are married to experience it and then only at certain times. If that is the case why didn't God create us with an inherit time to procreate like other species do, and a sex drive that only kicks in during a time to procreate.
-
Sorry to say, like most of the world, you've been "judaized" GLC.
The Ten Commandments are very clear about our responsibilities to control our animal passions.
You have the option to rebel, like a Jєω, or you can save your soul by complying with God's Will.
That's the test and most don't pass it.
Now, get off this forum and go back to your cell... in Sector 3295. :cowboy:
-
Sorry to say, like most of the world, you've been "judaized" GLC.
The Ten Commandments are very clear about our responsibilities to control our animal passions.
You have the option to rebel, like a Jєω, or you can save your soul by complying with God's Will.
That's the test and most don't pass it.
Now, get off this forum and go back to your cell... in Sector 3295. :cowboy:
i have the option to rebel, like a Jєω,
grow up im done with listening to you if that is the level you resort to when you can't have any mature input to a tough question.
and humans have human passions , God didn't give humanity " animal passions ".
see, what mature people do that they don't agree with, is they either have something intelligent to say with out resorting to hate speech or name calling, or acting like they have control over a public internet forum and use all the mute, ignore options at their disposal, all you have done is shown that you care more about causing internet drama and acting a fool than trying to answer any real question.
-
... that the Church sees intercourse as only a means of procreation
Who said that??? Are you making that up, GLC?
and was not intended at all for pleasure between two married people.
Ah... I do believe it was God himself who made sex pleasurable. :cheers:
it is what i have been under the impression of for the longest time, that sɛҳuąƖ intercourse between two married catholics is only intended to procreate , the only option to have intercourse with out the intention of procreation is through NFP , and what I am getting at is that Church is going out of its' way to interfere with married catholics by placing limits on them on when they can and cant have intercourse. and then why would God make sex pleasurable but then tell us that we have to wait until we are married to experience it and then only at certain times. If that is the case why didn't God create us with an inherit time to procreate like other species do, and a sex drive that only kicks in during a time to procreate.
GLC, that impression (that sɛҳuąƖ intercourse between two married catholics is only intended to procreate), is mistaken. One does not have to have "the intention to procreate" but rather one has to be open to the possibility of life.
As Matthew already posted Couples who are infertile for other reasons (menopause, natural infertility, pregnancy, time of the month, etc.) do NOT give such an explicit, resounding NO to God's plan, nor do they explicitly limit the bounds of their union (Pleasure, yes. Possibility of kids, no.)
Church does not "interfere with married catholics by placing limits on them on when they can and cant have intercourse". This is decided by the couple freely.
why would God make sex pleasurable but then tell us that we have to wait until we are married to experience it and then only at certain times. If that is the case why didn't God create us with an inherit time to procreate like other species do, and a sex drive that only kicks in during a time to procreate.
To take up the practice of sex outside (or prior to) the married state has a name: it is called "fornication" which is a mortal sin, which will send a person to hell unless they repent and confess it.
Pleasure is not the purpose of the marital act; it is merely a bonus and an incentive.
why didn't God create us with an inherit time to procreate like other species do, and a sex drive that only kicks in during a time to procreate.
It's not for me to analyse why God did or didn't do this or that. God is omniscient, and Im a mere creature. But we DO have an inherent time to procreate. That is what NFP is based on.
And He gave us an intelligence which animals do not have, which are driven by instinct, which is why men and women are able to control their impulses, whereas animals cannot.
-
Also the Pope is recently noted as saying to help preserve the sustainablity of the planet , that not reproducing would be beneficial .
That is sheer nonsense. Do you have a reference for that? He may have said it but he has no competence to make such a claim.
Also what should one tell a priest if he is in favor in opinion that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs should be allowed to marry? does one correct that priest on the spot or take it to the appropriate bishop?
I would say give up going to that church. The man is not a Catholic priest. He is a fraud. Go to a traditional Catholic Mass. You can bet that the Bishop already knows what he says and thinks.
also for those in the no premarial sex boat, what is the rebuttle to either claims, or statistics or founded reports of ones mental development or being able to mature better and interact socially and responsibly by engaging in monogamous sɛҳuąƖ activity vs those who wait until marriage and may or have developed mental disabilities , insecurities , or E.D or physical problems as a result from following church teaching on waiting until one is married to have intercourse ( with the intent of having children ) . how does faith correct what science and psychology prove other wise.
Nobody develops mental problems by remaining chaste both inside and outside the marital state. There is no such valid research.
how does the church explain why God created humanity as a sɛҳuąƖ being with physical sɛҳuąƖ needs through the build up of hormones that we were created with. When God could have easily created us with the inherit instict to want to reproduce with out the sɛҳuąƖ nature or physical attraction behind it and have removed the chemicals in the human body that trigger things to be put into motion.
What is this need to question God?
-
pope comment on reproduction (http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/01/20/378559550/pope-francis-says-catholics-dont-need-to-breed-like-rabbits)
there is one link i was referencing nadir, i suspect the article is taking things out of context as I have rarely seen any reputable journalist write anything accurate about what any Pope comments on. Though there is the chance that it could be accurate. i dunno
either way it just leads to more debate.
i appreciate your comments thus far nadir on the subject , to me it seems that the church puts married couples in a corner of only being able to enjoy marital relations through NFP because the only other option is contraceptives or birth control ,and that is a no no,
fornication , sex before marriage , is a widely known topic to the rest of the world, it is rather hard to believe that young people are not engaging in pre marital sex at some point in their life , and i think it is a bit unfair to put this in a category of mortal sin, knowing how humanity is weak physically and spiritually when it comes to temptation.
as to the psychological aspects of waiting to engage in sex till after marriage , i suppose no one has really done any solid research to prove anything .
and what is the need to question God, easy enough to answer, because I, an others have tons of questions. I also want to know what is the point of having organs that once they go bad can be removed and we keep on ticking just fine, then was the point in having them in the first place ? and why in the world can we regrow finger nails, but we cant regrow a limb if we lose one, or we go bald but then grow too much hair on our backs. why is it too much to ask an why the heck is it so hard for God to answer things now instead of when we die and get to heaven and then answer is useless at that point because it wont even matter .
-
pope comment on reproduction (http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/01/20/378559550/pope-francis-says-catholics-dont-need-to-breed-like-rabbits)
there is one link i was referencing nadir, i suspect the article is taking things out of context as I have rarely seen any reputable journalist write anything accurate about what any Pope comments on. Though there is the chance that it could be accurate. i dunno
either way it just leads to more debate.
Ah yes! That incident is accurately reported I believe. It has been discussed here on this site. Francis makes many bad and insulting and faithless comments and sows confusion everywhere. But we won't go into that here.
i appreciate your comments thus far nadir on the subject , to me it seems that the church puts married couples in a corner of only being able to enjoy marital relations through NFP because the only other option is contraceptives or birth control ,and that is a no no,
You speak in the worldly way as if children are a curse. This idea comes straight from Satan. Children are a gift from God, every one of them precious. Ask any person who is unable to conceive, and they are many.
fornication , sex before marriage , is a widely known topic to the rest of the world, it is rather hard to believe that young people are not engaging in pre marital sex at some point in their life , and i think it is a bit unfair to put this in a category of mortal sin, knowing how humanity is weak physically and spiritually when it comes to temptation.
Every person here on this site is a sinner, maybe not be a fornicator or an adulterer, however he does have the possibility of defeating sin through the sacraments, prayer, fasting, etc
as to the psychological aspects of waiting to engage in sex till after marriage , i suppose no one has really done any solid research to prove anything .
and what is the need to question God, easy enough to answer, because I, an others have tons of questions.
* I also want to know what is the point of having organs that once they go bad can be removed and we keep on ticking just fine, then was the point in having them in the first place ?
*and why in the world can we regrow finger nails, but we cant regrow a limb if we lose one,
*or we go bald but then grow too much hair on our backs and coming out of ears and nose. :roll-laugh2:
I expressed myself badly. I should have said: what is the need to CHALLENGE God intimating that there could have been a better way (more pleasing to you). Such an attitude is a sign of pride, one of the seven deadly (mortal) sins.
The 3 questions which I have asterisked are merely a sign of healthy curiosity, but these are different from the challenges you have been making on this thread thus far.
why is it too much to ask an why the heck is it so hard for God to answer things now instead of when we die and get to heaven and then answer is useless at that point because it wont even matter .
Because sin makes us stupid ( so we have little understanding) and the more we sin the stupider we become.
The more we become focused on doing the Will of God the more we will understand in this life.
-
i express myself badly plenty enough, i do not though see children as a burden or some kind of curse , i just dont see why contraceptives between a married couple need to be considered sinful, i know the answer, i just disagree with it is all, but im not going to go out of my way to steer anyone in another direction and in person i would more likely stay away from answering such a question being that i disagree with it in the first place and send the person to a priest or someone more knowledgable.
But see there is the thing with the pope and even this topic of contraceptives or any other topic that draws debate and disagreeances , society as whole is for contraceptives and the practice of safe sex for those who are sɛҳuąƖly active, makes sense on a practical level but not on a spiritual one, an sometimes the current pope says or does things people dont like, an Popes have in the past, then we have a choice to make in the matter, do we stick with the Church through thick an thin, or do we cut an run in disagreeance. i dont see nothing wrong with disagreeing as long as one can abide by the rules.
-
i express myself badly plenty enough, i do not though see children as a burden or some kind of curse ,
When you say "it seems that the church puts married couples in a corner of only being able to enjoy marital relations through NFP because the only other option is contraceptives or birth control" it sounds like you think that the married couples are unable to enjoy marital relations if there is a possibility of conceiving a child. The Church does not demand anybody to use NFP. It may be used in certain circuмstances into which I will not go here. But if the primary purpose of marriage is the procreation and education of children why talk about the Church painting people into a corner?
i just dont see why contraceptives between a married couple need to be considered sinful, i know the answer, i just disagree with it is all,
Your disagreement means that your soul is at grave risk. One cannot call oneself Catholic and not (at least desire to) accept and abide by Catholic teaching. It will not go well for you when you come before the Judge of your soul.
The basic reason for the Church's opposition to any sort of sinful action is because they are contrary to the nature God has given us. Jesus said about marriage,
And they two shall be in one flesh. Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
This applies to the the marriage act for centuries of Christian history and way back into Old Testament times. Even heretical sects agreed on this until the Anglican sect was the first to change in the 1930's I think.
In every form of unnatural birth control, there is a positive effort to destroy the procreative
potential of an act that God has given us as a unique sign of married love.
Contraception is a manifestation of the selfishness of the individual. It says "I will take pleasure in your body but I wouldn't want to produce another one like you". It is a sign of rejection of the complete person, while taking pleasure in the body alone. It denies the soul of the person who is being used. It is a hateful act.
but im not going to go out of my way to steer anyone in another direction and in person i would more likely stay away from answering such a question being that i disagree with it in the first place and send the person to a priest or someone more knowledgable.
But see there is the thing with the pope and even this topic of contraceptives or any other topic that draws debate and disagreeances, society as whole is for contraceptives and the practice of safe sex for those who are sɛҳuąƖly active, makes sense on a practical level
The only truly "safe" sex is between husband and wife.
safe sex for those who are sɛҳuąƖly active, makes sense on a practical level
Have you no idea about the prevalence of disease and death brought about by the abominable worldly "safe sex"?
but not on a spiritual one, an sometimes the current pope says or does things people dont like, an Popes have in the past, then we have a choice to make in the matter, do we stick with the Church through thick an thin, or do we cut an run in disagreeance. i dont see nothing wrong with disagreeing as long as one can abide by the rules.
How can you you reject and abide by the rules simultaneously? It's a contradiction and an impossibility
-
Your disagreement means that your soul is at grave risk. One cannot call oneself Catholic and not (at least desire to) accept and abide by Catholic teaching. It will not go well for you when you come before the Judge of your soul.
Actions speak louder than words though, and I don't usually ask for proof to back up a claim, but I will on this one, where does the Church site that one who disagrees yet abides by Catholic Teaching is at risk of anything.
It is nothing more than a disagreement I can accept to abide by what the Church teaches but there is nothing that says I have to actually like what the church teaches. By that logic that you gave it would be like saying I disagree with the laws of this country and thusly I am risk of penalty under law to be arrested and interrogated to find out exactly what i disagree with and then probably punished to some degree for that disagreement with the government, even though i have abided by the law and never broke a law.
You are basically saying that as a Catholic one has to be happy with all the Teachings of the Church, and Agree with all the teachings of the Church or else. Obedience to the law and being happy with laws are two different things that do not have to go hand in hand.
Now maybe God chooses to reward those more who agree with and are happy with everything that the Church does and teaches, who knows, that is something completely different.
it is very easy to not agree and to abide by a law at the same time, it is not an impossiblity or a contradiction. I can disagree and even hate that I have to legally stop at a stop sign out in the middle of no where , with no chance of ever seeing a vehicle pass by for hours or days on end, but I stop my vehicle at the stop sign, call BS on having to stop even though no one is around, and then continue on with my life. and then find a forum about driving laws and then complain about the absurdity of having to stop at a stop sign in the middle of no where , with no possible chance of a vehicle showing up.
What is a real contradiction and an impossibilty and hypocritical is to say Hi I am Catholic, I agree and like everything the Church teaches and does, but when no one is watching , i have sex with whom ever i choose when ever i want, I don't attend mass regularly , and I am a democrat who supports the politicals party view on abortion.
An the idea that death and disease is running rampant due to practicing safe sex, there is zero proof on that statement, just as there is zero proof on the psychological damage from someone restraining from engaging sɛҳuąƖ activity at a normal age for human development.
An as to how Jesus said about Marriage, that statement doesn't hold anything any more with how the Church turns around and allows for an annulment and divorce. An then Jesus even mentions divorce or the ability to write a bill of divorce..
An yes I am saying that Catholic Married couples are unable to enjoy marital relations while both people are fertile, because the purpose of intercourse is to pro create, an if the married couple wants to enjoy marital relations how are they supposed to do so if they do not want to or are not ready to have a child. An I am not for abortion either , I am just saying why have free will and then be told we are only to procreate and you cant use a condom or birth control if you are not ready to have a child. The church takes the decision out of the couples hands and removes that option from them out of their own debating.
-
This guy is clueless. :facepalm:
-
how does the church explain why God created humanity as a sɛҳuąƖ being with physical sɛҳuąƖ needs through the build up of hormones that we were created with. When God could have easily created us with the inherit instict to want to reproduce with out the sɛҳuąƖ nature or physical attraction behind it and have removed the chemicals in the human body that trigger things to be put into motion
God did not create us this way. The concupiscence of the flesh, as well as any other disorder of passions, is the direct result of the Original Sin caused by our first parents, Adam and Eve. We must fight against any trace of sin, given that it is sin, and nothing else, which separates us from God and Eternal Life. We are different from the beasts in that we are able, with the Grace of God, to master our disordered passions restraining ourselves when it is due.
This whole talk about NPF and contraceptives cringes precisely upon a single point: the inability to restrain ourselves amidst a complete societal glorification of sɛҳuąƖ appetite. If you do not want any children, then do not engage in any sɛҳuąƖ activity. As simple as that. Chastity, even between spouses, is such a worthy virtue to pursue!. To the world, this is a hard teaching, it would seem impossible, but the Church is clear upon this point. The Church teaches that sex and the procreation of children are completely intertwined, whereas the world want them separate, as to enjoy all the pleasure without any of the responsibility.
-
This guy is clueless. :facepalm:
no im not clueless you just decided to make a foolish comment with out trying to explain things as Cantarella did.
GLCsector3295 said:
how does the church explain why God created humanity as a sɛҳuąƖ being with physical sɛҳuąƖ needs through the build up of hormones that we were created with. When God could have easily created us with the inherit instict to want to reproduce with out the sɛҳuąƖ nature or physical attraction behind it and have removed the chemicals in the human body that trigger things to be put into motion
God did not create us this way. The concupiscence of the flesh, as well as any other disorder of passions, is the direct result of the Original Sin caused by our first parents, Adam and Eve. We must fight against any trace of sin, given that it is sin, and nothing else, which separates us from God and Eternal Life. We are different from the beasts in that we are able, with the Grace of God, to master our disordered passions restraining ourselves when it is due.
This whole talk about NPF and contraceptives cringes precisely upon a single point: the inability to restrain ourselves amidst a complete societal glorification of sɛҳuąƖ appetite. If you do not want any children, then do not engage in any sɛҳuąƖ activity. As simple as that. Chastity, even between spouses, is such a worthy virtue to pursue!. To the world, this is a hard teaching, it would seem impossible, but the Church is clear upon this point. The Church teaches that sex and the procreation of children are completely intertwined, whereas the world want them separate, as to enjoy all the pleasure without any of the responsibility.
Ty for the reply Cantarella , I do understand the and have at least i thought i pointed out that there is the intertwining of sex and procreation, i thought that was obvious enough, what I am arguing is that God did create us physically with a biology that naturally tells a person when it is time to engage in sɛҳuąƖ activity now if the Church wants to tie into that we are only to procreate with that act I disagree , I think we should have the ability to decide if we are ready for a family or not but that sex shouldnt be treated as casually as to say well if you create a life there is an option to stop that life since you feel you made a mistake. The Church has a funny way of taking a perfectly natural human biological action that takes place in the body and to then twist it into that being a " disorder " and thusly a sin.
The Church could have easily as stated that if ones kidney fails and has to be removed it is a sin, and that would be the end of the discussion just as easily as it is in regards to sex between two married people. To say that purity between a couple is good, is fine and noble to work towards, but to demand that it must be that way I can not agree as to be fair, and I cant see as being fair that the Church decides that a biological action in the body which releases all kinds of chemicals, and then to just decide that is merely a " disordered and sinful " reaction to want to find intimacy with ones married partner and then to say it is for the better of humanity... Because then the Church should inturn decide what causes one to love another and why and what causes a physical attraction to the other person and then make a determination if that attraction is going to lead to a healthy marriage which will in turn lead to procreation, or is it just lust. Why does the Church only go so far and then just expect everyone to not ask questions. It is no different than how society at the time felt that if you were born with a deformity that you were guilty of some kind of sin, or from the sinfulness of ones parents, and it was true, why, because at that time everyone believed it,Until Jesus came along and gave solid proof that it was wrong to believe that; But since God is too busy with other things evidently, and cant spare 5 minutes to make things clearer than day, discussions like this will continue on outside of the Church between people who have no interest in what the Church says on anything. An then those who do speak up with in a Catholic community go two turn tables round the outside.
Everyone does realize that if the Church said from the start, that contraceptives are okay for a Catholic married couple to decide if they want to use or not, instead of using other methods that are natural, that no one would be complaining.
Alright again thanks for the response Cat ; I get it, I just dont agree with it is all and im not going to worry over it either cause it isn't my mission in life to change things nor compeletey understand every minute law ever written into existance.
I do though find it hypocrtical of others to feel like I don't understand anything, when plenty of Catholics are out there not agreeing with the Pope and being very judgemental of him to be able to debate and agree on any forum as a Catholic that the Pope is doing something wrong is absurd. An one thing that I feel is evident when it comes to leaders who can not be questioned is to let the burden be on them. The decisions that the Church makes, that Bishops, Cardinals, and a Pope makes, is on them, they are clearly not interested in honestly listening to anyones complaints so the best I can do as a follower is to just let them handle that burden, pray for em and let it go. Nothing in the Ten Commandments or straight from Jesus that says I have to enjoy what rules are imposed upon me.
-
no im not clueless you just decided to make a foolish comment with out trying to explain things as Cantarella did.
Please tell us what the foolish comment was.
-
no im not clueless you just decided to make a foolish comment with out trying to explain things as Cantarella did.
Please tell us what the foolish comment was.
nice try at baiting me, wont work. grow up.
-
Nadir said
Have you no idea about the prevalence of disease and death brought about by the abominable worldly "safe sex"?
GLCsector3295 said
An the idea that death and disease is running rampant due to practicing safe sex, there is zero proof on that statement, just as there is zero proof on the psychological damage from someone restraining from engaging sɛҳuąƖ activity at a normal age for human development.
Here are the statistics for 2013.
https://www.cdc.gov/std/stats/sti-estimates-fact-sheet-feb-2013.pdf
If the marital act was reserved for marriage, where it belongs, there would be not be these epidemics of STIs.
And with the use of contracption you have grave health risks, including death, for the woman, and death to newly conceived infants through the abortion which you claim you are not in favour of. Contraceptive pill is abortifacient.
You need to inform yourself on these issues before you came on here claiming Catholicity. Listen and learn.
Have you no love of God at all? “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.”
-
Nadir said
Have you no idea about the prevalence of disease and death brought about by the abominable worldly "safe sex"?
GLCsector3295 said
An the idea that death and disease is running rampant due to practicing safe sex, there is zero proof on that statement, just as there is zero proof on the psychological damage from someone restraining from engaging sɛҳuąƖ activity at a normal age for human development.
Here are the statistics for 2013.
https://www.cdc.gov/std/stats/sti-estimates-fact-sheet-feb-2013.pdf
If the marital act was reserved for marriage, where it belongs, there would be not be these epidemics of STIs.
And with the use of contracption you have grave health risks, including death, for the woman, and death to newly conceived infants through the abortion which you claim you are not in favour of. Contraceptive pill is abortifacient.
You need to inform yourself on these issues before you came on here claiming Catholicity. Listen and learn.
Have you no love of God at all? “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.”
that wasn't the information i was asking about when i asked for proof, I am informed , i am just not taking the time to explain every tiny little thing i say and so it is only causing you confusion, and just because YOU THINK I am NOT a CATHOLIC, doesn't mean you are right, you are far from right about your thoughts on me. IT is called a difference of opinion, people have them, i have already explained my self well enough that it able to be figured out , i have said at least twice that i am not for abortion, just get over it already and stop super imposing your opinions about me on to me, you don't know me. bye.
-
Should we start with your appalling ignorance of English grammar?