Some clarification
I don't know how it is this all went so far.
It started with what I view as a personal attack and escalated when I decided to defend myself - go figure - I was not trying to be defensive but I don't feel personal attacks are fair, solve anything, or are appropriate in ANY sense, secular or religious.
Using condoms to stop the spread of HIV/AIDs, other STDs and unwanted prenancies is NOT A SIN. PERIOD.
What would be indeed a sin would be continuing to allow drug addicts to spread HIV and to have drug addicted babies.
THAT was why I was upset by the Catholic church's stance, nothing more, nothing less. It was not my intent to say or make people think that I believe abortions should be funded by the government (they should not - unless it is a case of rape and/or incest and the mother can't afford the help).
Going off on some band-wagon and accusing me of being for murder when all I was saying was that I think giving out condoms for free is a good idea is ludicrous - it is illogical. I was not talking about abortion - how do you equate the two? How does that work?
I am pro-choice - that does not make me pro-death and I am sick to fucking death of hearing that it does. The choice a woman has to make is personal, private and often painful. However it is her (and her partner's if he chooses to participate in the process) choice. How they come to that decision is entirely up to them.
Instead what has happened is that what I was talking about was taken out of context and turned into a battle about something else entirely - which I've lost miserably. Fine so be it.
I am going to continue to reserve my right to my opinion and to discuss it openly - without fear of being attacked, persecuted, or threatened. If it costs me something dear, again so be it.
It started with what I view as a personal attack and escalated when I decided to defend myself - go figure - I was not trying to be defensive but I don't feel personal attacks are fair, solve anything, or are appropriate in ANY sense, secular or religious.
Using condoms to stop the spread of HIV/AIDs, other STDs and unwanted prenancies is NOT A SIN. PERIOD.
What would be indeed a sin would be continuing to allow drug addicts to spread HIV and to have drug addicted babies.
THAT was why I was upset by the Catholic church's stance, nothing more, nothing less. It was not my intent to say or make people think that I believe abortions should be funded by the government (they should not - unless it is a case of rape and/or incest and the mother can't afford the help).
Going off on some band-wagon and accusing me of being for murder when all I was saying was that I think giving out condoms for free is a good idea is ludicrous - it is illogical. I was not talking about abortion - how do you equate the two? How does that work?
I am pro-choice - that does not make me pro-death and I am sick to fucking death of hearing that it does. The choice a woman has to make is personal, private and often painful. However it is her (and her partner's if he chooses to participate in the process) choice. How they come to that decision is entirely up to them.
Instead what has happened is that what I was talking about was taken out of context and turned into a battle about something else entirely - which I've lost miserably. Fine so be it.
I am going to continue to reserve my right to my opinion and to discuss it openly - without fear of being attacked, persecuted, or threatened. If it costs me something dear, again so be it.
posted by Colette at 1:08 PM
7 Comments:
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and not to berate or attempt to change someone else's. Philosophical arguements are one thing. I kind of enjoy those myself. However one's opinions don't make you less of a person. Anyone who chooses to think that way is simply a bigot!
"Using condoms to stop the spread of HIV/AIDs, other STDs and unwanted prenancies is NOT A SIN. PERIOD."
Let me play devil's advocate here: Suppose I were a Christian, and I therefore believe that any and all extra-marital sex is sin. I also believe that God has made what's right and wrong equally obvious to everyone. Wouldn't I then conclude that people are out having extra-marital sex, not because they have differing value systems, but because they want to blatantly disregard God's prohibitions? Unfortunately for such willful sinners, sexual sins have natural consequences built into them. People can't indulge without taking some considerable risks. Nevertheless, many choose to take these risks because they're determined to defy God. But wouldn't it be nice, these people think, if sinning were not only fun but also safe?
Making sexual sin easier and safer: that's the driving rationale behind the passing out of free condoms. Or at least that's the way many Christians see it.
And while most Christians will concede that it's unfortunate that there's such a thing as STDs and unwanted pregnancies, these can never be grounds to justify making things easier and safer for those who wish to sin with impunity. Christians are opposed to such measures _on principle_. By opposing the passing out of free condoms, Christians believe that they're being representative of righteous standards that the rest of the world ignores. They're not trying to impose their religious standards on others so much as they are standing up for what they believe is good and right and true. It also follows that if a Christian does NOT stand up for these things as he/she ought, he/she is sinning against God by compromising righteous standards.
And an added note about those Catholics who openly express disagreement with the Church's position on the above issue (or any other issue, for that matter): The Church allows people within its fold to disagree with the official rulings out of grace, and not because the Church recognizes any intrinsic "right" possessed by the people to such disagreements. To quote the late Pope John Paul II, "the Church is not a democracy." That the Church should be lenient and graceful does not make it okay for its people to presume on that grace. I think that American Catholics in particular are verging on presumption by so quickly, easily and vocally criticizing Rome wherever, whenever, they feel inclined to disagree. Today, as it has ever been in the past, the "good" Catholic is defined as someone who submits to the authority of Rome, someone who lives in harmony -- heart, mind, and soul -- with whatever the Church decrees. To do otherwise is bad faith.
Amen! My amen does not mean I agree with everything you said, or that I agree with the Catholic church, but it does mean that the issues you speak of I VERY much agree on! So here’s my encouragement, I felt it needed! Sorry I know I am not supposed to be responding on this blog, I just had to give my Amen though!
Organized religion in most forms just gives me the creeps!
I'm sure this will start a small flame war, but organized religion just seems a way to impose will on those with no mind to be free.
I grew up completely un-religious, and it doesn't seem to have affected my life in any way.
As far as the condoms thing goes, people are going to "sin" irregardless, at least giving them the condoms option will make them think a bit.
Catholics never liked any form of birth control because that would take away the chance to add more disciples to the world.
The world is GROSSLY overpopulated as it is.
Marissa and Ken.
Yes - you are right in your assessments of how Christianity views this - Ken it's not just a Catholic thing.
Marissa - you are ALLOWED to comment on my blog - you just have to play nice and not be vicious.
My point comes more from a health stand-point.
If the city is not asking the church to use its money for this then why should the church care?
As Liam points out (me as well) people are going to sin. (we all fall short of the glory of God, no?)
Now, that does not mean that it's OK - but it is also not OK to spread a disease like HIV/AIDs and it's not OK to have crack-addicted women having babies. And what sin is worse, not getting pregnant in the first place or termination?
I think we all agree the sin that is worse is abortion, right?
So - it's a city/state health issue - the government is not trying to be in the business of making moral dilemmas easier for people - but they in turn have to keep the public's welfare in mind and to me that is all that this is.
What happens morally to these people is between them and their God and their church.
I just feel that the city is taking a good step to help keep the populace at large protected from disease.
Now if you guys think that a plague should be visited upon sinners well that's your right to your opinion - I think it's kind of archaic but whatever. Again you are trying to assign a moral agenda to what boils down to a health issue.
Love you all!
C -
C.,
I just can’t sit this one out any longer. Let me make a few suggestions:
1. Government should not be in the business of passing out “free” condoms on street corners. New York City spent $720,000.00 taxpayer dollars on this program and I believe that more than a few of those taxpayers are Catholic, hence part of the Church’s interest/involvement.
2. Religious groups should continue to advocate for a higher moral tone in society. I think we all understand that no one leads a sin free existence; however, we should not allow our government to provide benign encouragement to act otherwise, especially when the consequences of doing so are so socially burdensome.
3. If you believe this is a critical healthcare issue and that there is a significant lack of condoms then organize a group of like minded individuals, provide the funds to purchase condoms and make them available to the community for free.
My inner Libertarian wants you to know that I could not possibly care less what consenting adults (animals, vegetables, various inanimate objects or inflatable toys) do behind closed doors and that I am equally opposed to government meddling in anyone’s bedroom affairs. I am in favor of giving people more “rights” than they can probably handle as well as keeping the government out of our wallets and our lives. We are all capable of making our own decisions; some of us will choose wisely and some of us won’t – and that’s as inevitable as sin.
Squire,
Like you - I consider myself somewhat of a Libertarian (a la Bill Maher).
Your suggestions/points are well taken however.
Teh Catholic Church is a non-profit organisaiton - I guarantee you they control where their money goes and that isn't church money being used - if it is then that's their fault NOT the city of NY's fault.
I am still going to maintain that the city of NY is looking at this form a health perspective and NOT a moral one - I agree it's not up to the city to make sure people are practicing safe sex - however, if it saves them millions in the long run, I see nothing wrong with that.
Post a Comment
<< Home