WeAreTheKey

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/ ... 55,00.html

Leave it to the paupacy to proclaim ridiculously archaic messages to the people. Benedict stated recently that condoms are not approved.
CONDOMS. Apparently (though I failed to locate his actual statement in direct quote) Condoms are a sin against god...

Why? Well.. who really knows?

These types of statements on behalf of religious leaders, or various others who are in similar positions of power that further lead to illness, ill will and overall furthering a level of destruction on behalf of the human race..

This whole we cant have condoms, or safe sex taught to people cause theres this magical thing called abstinence is mindbogglingly ridiculous..

Alot of people have the personal strenght to abstain, Alot of people dont. Alot of people practice safe sex and Alot dont.

Lets just face the facts.. people are still on a level animals.. We are on a level controlled by our instincts, if you dont tech two children anything about sex, it doesnt mean they wont figure it out on accident, if you teach people to be abstinent, even the most devout follower can succumb to emotions and instinct, So many people having accidental children, so many having too many children, so many having childrne in loveless unions, so many people having STD's so many people giving away their bodies, or even having them taken from them..

People make mistakes, people make intended decisions.. How the pope or anyone for that matter can say that preventing disease or preventing the existence of a child-BEFORE- it is concieved is a 'sin against god' is unfathomable. Lets just take the child result of sex.. The church is adament about abortion being wrong, and I would say, at least in some manner they have a good reasoning for being against it..(Not taking specific sides, )But condoms.. condoms dont take life..they dont hurt anyone.. they arent going to Kill anyone.. So...

Yeah..
And from the STD side of things, the only excuse I could see them saying is either that the disease is a "wrath' issue, or a reason why to abstain.. wrath=bull shit
Reasoning, has some validity but is not a fool proof plan..as per biology..
Perhaps they want to take 'go forth an multipy 'as ther reasong.. wellwe multiplied.. now, let us chillax a little bit and maybe not perpetuate the overpopulation thing, and maybe not destroy the earth with our over compensation...

Also didnt the last pope say birthcontrol (which would infact include condoms in a sense)were NOT sins against god?


http://www.time.com/time/world/article/ ... 55,00.html

The 'reason' they are against it is that the believe that sex should only ever EVER be had when you are trying to have children. Since that's the reason for sex in the first place, they believe that any other use of sex i.e., for pleasure, for romance, for love etc.... all just equates to "lust", and is therefore sinful.
Since condoms take away the 'children' aspect of sex, that leaves no reason to have it. Therefore, if people ARE having it, they must do so without the condoms.
The logic is almost comically absurd.

If the Pope can go so far in denying the literal nature of the Bible as to say that evolution is "more than a hypothesis" (high-five, JP II!), then it shouldn't be a stretch to allow the freaking use of condoms, especially when rampant, deadly disease is part of the equation.

Alluscion, when did you become a Catholic?
I wouldn't have had any idea that a statement by the head of the Catholic church that simply reaffirms their old stance on birth control would have such an affect on you.

I know that those little pieces of bread and tiny glasses of wine look really yummy, but don't be tempted, it's not worth it...They taste like crap (no offense, Jesus, because normally I really like the taste of human flesh).

Oh, no Catholic isnt my dish....

Though it has on a subtle level affected my life, due to several family members having been catholic, or brought up in that manner..

It isnt the effect it has on MY life that upsets me so, it is simply the fact that the Catholic church has such a HUGE influence on the psyche of the planet, it influences not only its followers, but in alot of ways other religious sects of Christianity..

I find it brutally dissapointing that with what forward steps John Paul had taken to bring the Catholic Church into a more reasonable, rational and humanitarian light Benedict is seemingly stomping all over to pull the stance back into the "good ole days"light..

Im not saying JP was fantastic, just what little I know of him was more like what it seems to me the church should act...

And as for the Holy sacrament.. havent ever had the wafer.. but in the one church i did go to used REAAALLLY good bread instead.. far superior! And excellent grape juice-I wasnt old enough for the wine...

Just for the devils advocate: if sex is only for the pursuit of children.. then why does one have to be married before they have sex? If love is taken out of the act, then why some much focus on the act of marriage as a precursor.. is it only so there is a mother/father present? Why does Lust get so mixed up with love?
Does the church have a litmus test for what is love and what is lust?

So that there will be a male and female parent/caretaker for each child. The male to provide shelter, resources and protection, the female to provide nurture, care, and meals etc... both have been historically important for the successful raising of a child into an adult, the church obviously recognized the benefits of such an arrangement, and so build their moral laws around them.

I think that's why marriage is so linked with religion. Not for the aspect of love itself, but for the underlying familial structure that it creates for the successful raising of children. Thereby perpetuating the species. Love is really nice, but I doubt it has as much to do with marriage as we tend to think, from a religious standpoint of course...

So, if you're not married, they don't want you having sex, period. No condoms, no BC Pills, nothing. Just be abstinent and control your urges in other ways. Oh, but not with masturbation, porn, stripclubs, or lusting after any women in any way whatsoever. Just deal with it it other ways.

Like umm.......ummmmm..................uhh.....

Any ideas?

Eunich...

nuns?

apparently the only way some how?

Response to Devil's Advocate (God's Advocate??):

In terms of Christianity and child-bearing, what might be considered as "love" does not even factor into the mix. In most cultures throughout history, including Western Christian cultures, marriage was a way of maintaining social structure and harmony. Women were child-bearer/raisers who were connected to a man through marriage. The man provided food/shelter/and maybe money. Plus, the children had the obvious necessary mother/father dual parental guidance that has always been recognized as important for child development. It's not hard to understand why a society, especially one with no concept of birth control, wouldn't want women (or men) being "lusty" and sleeping around and having children outside of the family structure.

Also, historically, in most cultures, including biblical, marriage was planned by the parents, so the idea of dating, falling in love, and getting married was foreign to them, and has really only slowly come about as common practice within the past couple hundred years.

As for modern times, I would agree with you that an official "Marriage" is in no way necessary for healthy child-rearing, as long as you have loving parents that are committed to providing a loving home and guidance. And with the development of birth control in modern society, the societal need for waiting for marriage has definitely changed.

Also, your question about why lust gets so mixed with love is quite curious, in the assumption that you are reffering to the love between a man and woman (as opposed to family or the "love" that you have for your "buddies"). Certainly, lust happens all the time without the attachment of love. And Love definitely has an infinite number of other factors than lust. However, attraction, physical contact, and wanting are important aspects of two people being "in love" with each other. The biological, emotional, and psychological connectedness that two people "in love" share through their sexual feelings are definitely an important part of the "love" mixture, IMO.

HEY MAN - GO FIND YOUR OWN ORIGINAL IDEAS, ALRIGHT?!?!
IF YOU WANNA XEROX MY POSTS AT LEAST ASK FIRST, DUDE.



Funny.

Yes, after I submitted my post I saw that you beat me to the punch. So, I did not consiously steal your post, but subconsiously I tapped into your brainwaves and stole your ideas as you were typing them. HAHAHAHA!!!! Unknowing Subconsious Thought Stealing Man! Pure Evil takes new form!!!!

Awesome, now I can just lay in bed all day and think thoughts of work, so you can steal them and perform my job flawlessly.
Unknowing Subconsious Thought Stealing Man goes from villain to hero...
The audience won't like it.
But I will.
Thumbs up.
Straight to dvd...

Ummmmmmmmm.....I'm not sure you thought the plot through very well. If I'm doing your job, it means that I went to your work and am sitting at your desk (I'm sure your boss won't notice). And it would also mean that you would have to come to my work and do my job for me. So, we would both still have to be working while at the same time submitting brain-wave messages to each other. That seems like a lot MORE work than it has to be.

Definitely straight to DVD.

ummm.. whoa....

Yeah, what she said!