|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Hell: Trisagion and the Catholic Bishops - accessories to murder
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
Trisagion, if either you or the Catholic Bishops you were trying to defend gave a fuck about the abortion issue you would be completely in favour of contraception - especially the condom if you were paranoid about any possible minor abortifacient effect that hormonal contraception has.
However you do not do this. Instead you claim that all contraception is wrong, trying to wash your hands of any consequences. This despite the fact that (a) contraception is about number 4 on the list of effective public health interventions (behind only vaccination, sanitation, and basic nutrition) and (b) if you actually want to lower the abortion rate, banning or restricting it it only causes people to resort to coat hangers. On the other hand allowing people to have sex without getting pregnant by means of contraception actually lowers the abortion rate.
You, however, are so stuck on your own religious purity, and safeguarding the purity of others whether they want it or not (even to the point that 98% of Catholic women in the US admit to having used contraception). How many instances of what you consider murder is your religious purity worth? How many victims lying by the side of the road will you, like the priest and the Levite pass by due to your own purity before you realise what the right thing to do is? How long will you continue to prevent people healing and preventing disease and murder on the Sabbath?
But what is the textbook Roman Catholic excuse? The post-facto justification that it's a violation of so-called Natural Law. Never mind that so-called Natural Law is merely a textbook example of the Naturalistic Fallacy, that you claim it here shows that you simply do not care even about this principle. Humans are a very unusual species in that we don't go "on heat" and it is very hard to tell when a human is fertile. Which means that humans naturally have sex all the time. And because humans naturally have sex when infertile, any attempt to claim that sex is ordered to procreation is directly contrary to the principles of natural law; the natural ordering of the human body emphasises the social and unitive functions of sex while diminishing the procreative functions.
Not only are your beliefs leading to you supporting murder, you need to pervert your supposed moral reasoning in order to encourage people to die. All because you don't have either the humility or the decency as an organisation to admit that you have made a mistake even as people are dying for it.
You take actions that lead to and encourage what you consider to be murder, even when you need to pervert your supposed moral systems to support your actions. I therefore name you, the Catholic Bishops in question, and anyone else who believes that abortion is murder and still opposes contraception to be, under your own code of conduct, accessories to murder. You are taking actions (opposing contraception) that encourage people to, under your system of ethics, murder others through abortion - and killing others through your attempts to undermine public health.
[ 05. January 2015, 20:58: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
This is going to be bloody.
I don't suppose there is a link available to whatever interaction got this started?
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
But what is the textbook Roman Catholic excuse? The post-facto justification that it's a violation of so-called Natural Law. Never mind that so-called Natural Law is merely a textbook example of the Naturalistic Fallacy, that you claim it here shows that you simply do not care even about this principle.
What I've always wondered is why "artificial" birth control is such a bad thing when medical intervention to save life isn't. Shouldn't one be just as willing to accept God's will when God's will is that you die a miserable death as to accept God's will when God's will is that you get pregnant?
Let the hair-splitting begin.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
I don't think I've ever seen anybody call the whole Catholic Church to Hell.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
While I, on the other hand, have been waiting for this to happen since about p. 20 of the election thread in Purg.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I don't think I've ever seen anybody call the whole Catholic Church to Hell.
I'm not. Most of the Catholic Laity in practice ignore the murderous teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, with the commonly quoted (but deceptive) stat being that 98% of Catholic women in America have use birth control, and a more accurate stat being that Sixty-eight percent of sexually active Catholic women use highly effective methods: sterilization, with a further fifteen percent using condoms. That's at least 83% of sexually active Catholic women in America and their partners I am not calling to hell here.
And for the link, Trisagion had the sheer gall to complain that the Roman Catholic attempt to deny healthcare was "Not half so disgusting as redefining the conscientious objection to killing other human beings as unlawfully standing in the way of preventative care."
And a little hint just in case Trisagion is ignorant - only one of the commonly used forms of contraception is known to prevent implantation (the (copper) IUD, and that only when used as emergency contraception). The rest either prevent ovulation (the Pill, the Progesterone IUS), block the sperm (condoms, anything progesterone based), or kill the sperm (the IUD, condoms with spermicide). No anti-implantation method, let alone an actual abortifacient, has been demonstrated for any major method of contraception.
So in addition to his murderous ethics, encouraging the rise of the abortion rate, Trisagion was either lying or ignorant.
[ 15. February 2012, 00:52: Message edited by: Justinian ]
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Apocalypso:
While I, on the other hand, have been waiting for this to happen since about p. 20 of the election thread in Purg.
I was disappointed that rather than open a simmilar thread, Ken chose to commit (forum) Suicide-by-admin.
[ 15. February 2012, 00:54: Message edited by: Justinian ]
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
If this thread had been started on the 22nd of February, it would have presented a rather useful exercise. Pity.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
If this thread had been started on the 22nd of February, it would have presented a rather useful exercise. Pity.
Why? And do you have anything actually useful to say?
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
If this thread had been started on the 22nd of February, it would have presented a rather useful exercise. Pity.
So mark your calendar and wait a week. I have a feeling people will still be waiting here for your devastatingly insightful contribution.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
Why?
Consider it an insider joke...
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
And do you have anything actually useful to say?
Possibly, but not at 2 am.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
quote:
Originally posted by Apocalypso:
While I, on the other hand, have been waiting for this to happen since about p. 20 of the election thread in Purg.
I was disappointed that rather than open a simmilar thread, Ken chose to commit (forum) Suicide-by-admin.
Not suicide; just an illness. He'll be back.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
Why?
Consider it an insider joke...
I looked it up. It's Ash Wednesday, the beginning of Lent...when people give things up.
Ingo, holding that back as an insider joke is a bit shabby...and doesn't exactly help the reputation of Catholics.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Well, I knew it was Ash Wednesday. The ash is a sign of mourning and repentance.
When I first read the OP, Justinian, I thought you were just using irony again (or maybe hyperbole?) to make a point. The point being that from your point of view it is just as possible to call "murderer, anti-life" those who link the choices of abortion and contraception together as the same "wrong" as it is to call "murderer, anti-life" those who believe abortion and contraception are both matters of choice. Even more possible? A better form of moral outrage?
That is really the point you're making, isn't it? Provocatively, of course. Wouldn't expect anything else.
But ..
Perhaps this morning it doesn't look as "smart" as it did yesterday? Too obscure? Makes you look a bit smart-snobby as well? And sanctimonious?
Get those ashes out. You know it makes sense.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
Barnabus,
If I'd been calling you rather than Trisagion to hell I'd have used words of one syllable.
I wasn't even being slightly hyperbolic when I called Trisagion and the Catholic Bishops accessories to murder. Or talking about it being a matter of choice. As you are apparently too stupid to follow the chain of logic in the OP, I'm going to lay it out for you.
1: Some people, including Trisagion and the Catholic Bishops in question believe abortion is murder.
2: Banning abortion does nothing to lower the abortion rate. I linked evidence for this.
3: Easy access to contraception lowers the abortion rate. No access to contraception increases it. I linked evidence for this.
4: Trisagion (and others) are trying to restrict access to contraception. This, combined with point 3 means that Trisagion is trying to take an action which will increase the abortion rate.
5: Trisagion might claim he's trying also to restrict abortion. But from point 2 this is irrelevant. It won't prevent abortions, merely safe abortions.
6: Trisagion is, through his actions, attempting to increase the number of abortions that are carried out (as shown by points 4 and 5). He believes abortion to be murder (point 1). Therefore he is attempting under his own ethics to encourage murder, making him an accessory.
This has nothing to do with your half-assed and incompetent reading about it being a matter of choice. This is to do with actions and conseqences. The consequence of the actions Trisagion wants are considered, by Trisagion, to be murder. He's therefore trying to encourage murder, making him an accessory. Is that clear enough for you?
And do you really think it obscure? Or is it simply that in the cold light of day, what you wrote now looks incredibly stupid?
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
Barnabus
This looks like as good a place as any to put in a plea for the poor guy's name to be spelled properly. He's not some kind of cross between a cowshed and a double-decker.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
Barnabus
This looks like as good a place as any to put in a plea for the poor guy's name to be spelled properly. He's not some kind of cross between a cowshed and a double-decker.
Barnabas, for misspelling your name I apologise unreservedly.
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Justinian
Nope. Not all that silly, really, given a recent thread on which you and I participated. I just thought the whole post was your own version of "A Modest Proposal". Which of course also had a serious point, but Swift did not expect his remedies to be taken seriously. Since you made that observation on another thread, I thought that was the kind of "kick" you were on. Sorry I didn't take you literally, but that was why. It was a misreading, sure, but not all that half-assed.
I don't agree with the Catholic positions on either contraception or abortion, and I'm not convinced by your argument. You jump to too many conclusions for me - as you did for the reasons behind my post.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
PS As I did for the reasoning behind yours.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
The fact that there is inverse correlation between two variables does not mean that anyone who wishes A to decrease must also wish B to increase. The person who wishes A to decrease may wish that other factors would come into play that would affect the relationship between A and B.
--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
2: Banning abortion does nothing to lower the abortion rate. I linked evidence for this.
3: Easy access to contraception lowers the abortion rate. No access to contraception increases it. I linked evidence for this.
4: Trisagion (and others) are trying to restrict access to contraception. This, combined with point 3 means that Trisagion is trying to take an action which will increase the abortion rate.
And if Catholic teaching were consequential (and assuming of course your figures are correct), you might even have a point.
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
Make that "consequentialist". And what Erroneous Monk just said.
[ 15. February 2012, 12:34: Message edited by: Chesterbelloc ]
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235
|
Posted
Yawn.
--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse
Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
Yorick.
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Caissa
Shipmate
# 16710
|
Posted
Ken probably didn't deserve two weeks of shore leave but the Roman Catholic church sure does for its position on contraception and abortion.
Posts: 972 | From: Saint John, N.B. | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Trisagion.
Bollocks.
If you think I'm going to waste my time dealing with a half-arsed argument that is neither logically consistent (see the posts of Chesterbelloc and Erroneous Monk) nor supported by respectable independent evidence - even the bloody BBC refer to the Guttmacher Institute (an offshoot of the US government's abortionist of choice, the PPFA ) as 'a pro-choice reproductive think tank' - then you are very much mistaken.
--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse
Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Caissa:
Ken probably didn't deserve two weeks of shore leave
Ken was suspended for a C6 infraction, and the subject of the thread it happened on is irrelevant to that call. And any further discussion of it should take place in Styx, or not all all. OK?
quote:
but the Roman Catholic church sure does for its position on contraception and abortion.
What, are you suggesting we ban every Catholic Shipmate for two weeks because of a doctrine of the church they happen to be members of? ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
Because I'm pretty sure the RCC itself isn't a member of this board. And even if it was, we don't ban people just for their beliefs. And all in all, I think that your post was just a massive exercise in shit-stirring by a fuckwit who's damn lucky I'm not signing this off as a Host.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Caissa
Shipmate
# 16710
|
Posted
Did I say 2 weeks? The Roman catholic Church deserves two millenia to repent its misogyny.
Posts: 972 | From: Saint John, N.B. | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Caissa:
Did I say 2 weeks? The Roman catholic Church deserves two millenia to repent its misogyny.
Fuck off, shitbrain.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Trisagion:
If you think I'm going to waste my time dealing with [stuff, ironically with which I deal herein] you are very much mistaken.
Better than a yawn, I suppose, but hardly persuasive.
Bwaaark-bwark.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Trisagion:
even the bloody BBC refer to the Guttmacher Institute (an offshoot of the US government's abortionist of choice, the PPFA ) as 'a pro-choice reproductive think tank'
Not only but also.
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Caissa
Shipmate
# 16710
|
Posted
Fuck off you alliterative, Martian.
Posts: 972 | From: Saint John, N.B. | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
ooo, where's that popcorn?
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Caissa:
Fuck off you alliterative, Martian.
Listen, cockfart - you don't often get away with questioning adminly rulings down here. Especially not rulings about C6 violations. And calling for people to be banned (especially as part of said questioning of an adminly ruling) isn't welcomed either, because that's our call not yours. I chose mockery over official censure, and you should be damn happy about that.
But to carry on calling for such a banning - and thus continuing your questioning of the adminly ruling - over the ridiculous, braindead opinion that opposition to contraception equates to misogyny is so fucking stupid that it makes me question if there's actually anything in your cranial cavity to damage.
Get with the sodding programme before I have to dust off the host tag, you stupid fuck. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Better than a yawn, I suppose, but hardly persuasive.
Bwaaark-bwark.
This is Hell, darling, I don't have to be persuasive nor was I seeking to be.
[ 15. February 2012, 14:20: Message edited by: Trisagion ]
--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse
Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Trisagion:
This is Hell, darling, I don't have to be persuasive nor was I seeking to be.
Too bad for you the rules aren't the same in Purgatory.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
Several years ago I made a concerted effort to understand the Roman Catholic position on contraception by following closely the arguments set forth by IngoB and several other RCs here. I read several pages of discussion, tried to wrap my mind around Natural Law, tried mightily to understand why timing/rhythm was okay but barrier wasn't (weren't both intended to avoid conception and both able to fail?), and it still made no sense to me. It's just one of those "'cause we say it's so" things. It still makes no more sense to me than Six Day Creation, which is "The Bible says it's so" rather than "The Church says it's so".
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
Make that "consequentialist". And what Erroneous Monk just said.
Seconded Chesterbelloc, and thirded Erroneous Monk.
Roman Catholic morality is both objectivist and absolutist, see here for an explanation. Furthermore, it strictly obeys the principle "never do evil that good may come of it". That principle is of course biblical, St Paul explicitly states it in Romans 3.8.
It follows that Justinian's argument against Trisagion / the RCC instantly crumbles. Since intentional contraception (in marriage) is identified as an absolute and objective evil by the RCC, and evil may not be done to achieve good, she cannot advertise contraception in order to reduce abortion. Naturally, people holding other moral views or using other moral systems may think otherwise. But that is not the argument of the OP, which tries to claim that Trisagion and the RCC at large are murderously inconsistent in their morals. They are not. EOD.
I would like to make one specific point though. It is under-appreciated that the RCC has not outlawed contraception. She has officially outlawed only contraception in marriage. There are of course many conservatives who would like to generalize this, and often enough they will not make this distinction in their arguments. However, this is the actual situation. In consequence, it is for example possible by RC morals for a rape victim to use any means to avoid conception (but not to kill an already fertilized egg, which is in the moral realm of abortion). Indeed, the Church has apparently in the past allowed the use of the pill as preventive contraception for nuns operating in a war zone, where they were likely to be raped. Likewise, one can on current official RC doctrine argue that people should use contraception in extra-marital sex, and as it happens that is my opinion. Of course, people shouldn't have any extra-marital sex in the first place, as far as the RC is concerned. But if they do, one can validly suggest the use of contraceptives to reduce the harmful effects of the sin.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
The fact that there is inverse correlation between two variables does not mean that anyone who wishes A to decrease must also wish B to increase. The person who wishes A to decrease may wish that other factors would come into play that would affect the relationship between A and B.
Ah, yes. You can whine about "correlation does not imply causation" as much as you like.
Except that in this case you are whining about utterly irrelevant bullshit. The way contraception lowers the abortion rate is obvious. You don't get pregnant, you don't need an abortion. The causation is clear. And the correlation demonstrating that it happens this way is also clear.
And you are creating a minor strawman. I didn't say that the Catholic Church actually deliberately wants the abortion rate to increase. Merely that they don't in practice give a rats arse about the abortion rate and are taking actions to increase it. It's not the desired consequence - but it's a trivially forseeable one and therefore one they are responsible for.
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
And if Catholic teaching were consequential (and assuming of course your figures are correct), you might even have a point.
And there we have it. The Catholic teaching doesn't give a rats arse about the actual consequences of its teachings. What is important is that it keeps to its moral purity rather than helping the bleeding and dying.
That it doesn't care about consequences at all as you are claiming, is yet another demonstration of quite how morally bankrupt the Catholic teachings are.
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Trisagion:
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Trisagion.
Bollocks.
If you think I'm going to waste my time dealing with a half-arsed argument that is neither logically consistent (see the posts of Chesterbelloc and Erroneous Monk) nor supported by respectable independent evidence - even the bloody BBC refer to the Guttmacher Institute (an offshoot of the US government's abortionist of choice, the PPFA ) as 'a pro-choice reproductive think tank' - then you are very much mistaken.
Disguise your moral and intellectual cowardice however you like, Trisagion. In some ways I have sympathy - it must be hard to be called on to defend the obviously indefensible.
But seriously, the arguments you're hiding behind show how threadbare your position is. An irrelevant appeal to a logical fallacy is something you shouldn't be trying to support. And neither is accepting the argument that what the Catholic Church does is just fine because it doesn't give a damn about the consequences.
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235
|
Posted
Justinian, going and do some reading about what consequentialism is before you make a fool of yourself.
--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse
Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
quote:
The Catholic teaching doesn't give a rats arse about the actual consequences of its teachings. What is important is that it keeps to its moral purity rather than helping the bleeding and dying.
That it doesn't care about consequences at all as you are claiming, is yet another demonstration of quite how morally bankrupt the Catholic teachings are.
And as you were writing that last post, Justinian, IngoB was already furnishing it with its P45.
[ 15. February 2012, 15:12: Message edited by: Chesterbelloc ]
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Roman Catholic morality is both objectivist and absolutist, see here for an explanation. Furthermore, it strictly obeys the principle "never do evil that good may come of it". That principle is of course biblical, St Paul explicitly states it in Romans 3.8.
It follows that Justinian's argument against Trisagion / the RCC instantly crumbles.
Bollocks. What follows is that Roman Catholic "morality" is shown to not be suitable for dealing with this imperfect world. It's a way for the Roman Catholic Church to stay pure no matter how much evil happens in her name, washing her hands of the consequence of her beliefs.
quote:
But that is not the argument of the OP, which tries to claim that Trisagion and the RCC at large are murderously inconsistent in their morals. They are not. EOD.
No. My argument isn't that the RCC is murderously inconsistent. It's that it is quite simply murderous, more than happy to sacrifice the lives of innocents for the sake of its own religious purity.
And my second point is that this approach of the RCC is precisely equivalent to the actions of the Priest and Levite in the Parable of the Good Samaritan. Or the objections to Jesus healing on the Sabbath. In every case the objection was to doing evil (touching blood or breaking the Sabbath) that good (healing) may result.
Cite the writings Saul of Tarsus all you like. But when Saul of Tarsus's writinggs would have condemned the actions of Jesus Christ (for, as I said, breaking the Law to heal on the Sabbath when breaking the Law is an evil) you might, just possibly, have the wrong end of the stick.
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
quote:
The Catholic teaching doesn't give a rats arse about the actual consequences of its teachings. What is important is that it keeps to its moral purity rather than helping the bleeding and dying.
That it doesn't care about consequences at all as you are claiming, is yet another demonstration of quite how morally bankrupt the Catholic teachings are.
And as you were writing that last post, Justinian, IngoB was already furnishing it with its P45.
Of course he was. He explicitely accepted that the Roman Catholic Church doesn't give a damn about consequences. And demonstrating that the Roman Catholic Church operates in opposition to the actions and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth that I had already cited on the thread.
If "We accept we don't give a sparrow's fart about who dies as a conseqence of our actions" is a counter to "people are dying as a consequence of your actions" then yes he was countering it. For some value of countering that looks like a child's first attempt at judo, attempting to make the attacker stronger.
Unfortunately for IngoB, I fail to see where the throw comes in. Rather than, as he appears to, accepting that murder is a consequence of the Roman Catholic approach and that he simply doesn't care.
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
My argument isn't that the RCC is murderously inconsistent. It's that it is quite simply murderous, more than happy to sacrifice the lives of innocents for the sake of its own religious purity.
I.e., in the context of your OP, to sacrifice the lives of innocent pre-borns for the sake of not condoning marital contraception, right?
So you're opposed abortion and think it murder then, do you? Because if not and you're using the argument above, that makes you a hypocritical jerk.
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
He explicitely accepted that the Roman Catholic Church doesn't give a damn about consequences.
So you can't distinguish between not being morally consequentialist and not giving a damn about consequences? Seriously?
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
And demonstrating that the Roman Catholic Church operates in opposition to the actions and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth that I had already cited on the thread.
And if you really think that's what you've done, I'd have another think if I were you.
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Justinian, you are doing two things on this thread.
First of all you are ignoring the fact that it is perfectly possible to hold that whilst certain ends are desirable means to those ends may not be. I, personally, think that it is a rather good thing when the wiles of Al Qaeda are thwarted but I believe that it would be completely wrong for the fuzz to start torturing terrorist suspects in the course of their wile thwarting activities. The Catholic Church views contraception as a means of preventing abortion as being akin to using torture as a means of preventing terrorism. I think that this is immensely silly but it is more intellectually coherent than accusing the Catholic Bishops of being murderers! murderers, I tell you! on the grounds that they believe that it is wrong to carry out a morally wrong act to a good end, a position the Catholic Church has held since the end of the Counter Reformation. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
You'd be on stronger grounds if you pointed out that at the very least the Catholic Church ought to have urgently revisited it's teachings on this score given the obvious advantages that contraception has in preventing abortion (the Czech abortion rate halved when cheap and effective contraceptives appeared in the shops after the fall of communism) and set a crack team of Jesuit casuists to finding instances when the use of contraception might be acceptable. But that would hardly warrant your over excited rhetoric, would it. Which brings me to my second point.
The other thing you are doing is sounding like a Jack Chick from an alternate earth who doesn't believe in God and who has a fairly good grasp of science but otherwise has retained all his prejudices intact. Given the fairly open goal that Catholic teaching and praxis so often presents to the hostile critic your track record of volleying the ball into Row G is distinctly impressive.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Caissa
Shipmate
# 16710
|
Posted
I called for the banning of the Roman Catholic Church not Roman Catholic shipmates, M & M. Okay, you red planetted prick. Read often?
Posts: 972 | From: Saint John, N.B. | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thread closed
Printer-friendly view
