Do you have any idea just how stupid that comparison is? You really must be a nutcase.
2007-05-15 04:48:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by Janet H 24 2
·
1⤊
5⤋
This is what I think. I may not be right. It would be better to consult a good priest on this. Contraception defeats God's purpose which is to send human beings into the world, to create new life. Whereas when you are ill with cancer you must treasure this life that God has given you and treat the cancer. Whether the treatment saves you or not, depends on God's Will. If the medical attention helps you, it helps you go on with your natural flow of life. If it doesn't, God's will be done .....natural end to the flow of life. :)
2007-05-17 09:06:36
·
answer #2
·
answered by Pat 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
All mammals apart from humans show the perfectly natural tendency to both interrupt the conception cycle if it is not favorable and secondly to abort their unborn if conditions dramatically deteriorate.
Sadly, many of your answerer's indicate by their responses that they do not understand this, or refuse to recognize both as perfectly normal and part of nature.
Simply, to consider every conception must lead to a birth and every sexual act should be for a conception is ignorant of life on planet Earth. Far from being "pro-life" which is a slogan, such madness would see virtually every species in every environment experience destructive overcrowding, disease and often death and extinction during extreme famine and drought.
So given these are the kinds of things that happen when such insane policies are put in place, you have to ask yourself why the Catholic Church pursues such madness, when it is totally against the laws of nature, therefore the laws of God?
Maybe the 20 centuries of evil and crimes against humanity by the Vatican is an indication?
See: The Almanac of Evil
http://one-faith-of-god.org/final_testament/end_of_darkness/evil/evil_0190.htm
Certainly the religious madness has promoted extreme poverty, has helped the spread of AIDS in poor nations and increased the global level of human misery.
Is there something else at work here? Is this what they ultimately want?
2007-05-17 12:08:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Your premise ignores a few basic tenants of Christian belief:
1) Jesus healed the sick, exorcised demons, and even brought a couple of people back from the dead. By these God sanctifies the morally proper healers in the field of medicine.
2) Sickness is a result of sin; the fallen nature of mankind. Therefore, it is not wrong to treat those suffering from disease.
3) Sickness and death, while they are physical realities of the temporal realm in which we live, are meant to be overcome in passing on to the eternal spiritual realm; where neither sickness not death exist.
Contraception...the Church is not against all forms of artificial contraception if the sole purpose of it's use is to prevent the conception of a human being.
You cannot ignore the natural reality of things; the fact that the natural purpose of the sex act is the procreation of the human reace.
Of course, sex is more than just about procreation. It is also an expression of love between spouses. And, in order for it to be an authentic expression of love, it must be done without the interference of artificial birth control.
In order for the sex act to be an authentic exchange of one's self-giving to the other, the act must remain open to the possibility of the conception of life.
Having said that, this does not mean a couple can't use Natural Family Planning, even abstinence, as forms of birth control/regulation. When done properly, NFP is at least as effective as any artificial birth control technique. And, let's face it - abstinence is 100% guaranteed not to result in the conception of a human being.
Point being, to withhold medical treatment brings about the natural flow of death, not life. And you equate this with thwarting attempts to even procreate, how? You simply cannot compare the two.
The only way you can morally equate the reality of sickness/death with thwarting procreation is that - in both circumstances, one is morally obligated to rule in favor of life.
2007-05-16 04:21:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by Daver 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Actually, the common denominator is that the Church is pro-life. This is why it's against contraception, against abortion, against capital punishment, suicide, and euthenasia, but for the treatment of disease. If God truly wants a person to die, there is nothing we can do to prevent that. Until that day, however, we should continue to strive to do His will on Earth. And that means being alive.
2007-05-16 04:37:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by Caritas 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Pay attention, this is simple:
Cancer is a disease; pregnancy is not. While both are quite natural, one is by consent and free will of the participants.
If you allow for morality (humans elect to engage in sex rather than as animals who respond to biological cycles), why would you have sex with someone other than who you'd want to reproduce with?
Sex is a spiritual gift, not a recreational pastime.
2007-05-15 04:52:49
·
answer #6
·
answered by gilariverrider 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
What puzzles me about this issue of Catholics and contraception and I am not a Catholic or a supporter but why do people keep wanting the Pope to sanction the use of contraception like condoms to battle STDs like HIV.
Why would it matter for most people who are having promiscuous sex with multiple partners and risking STDs what the Pope thinks about condoms?
If you are sleeping around then worrying about keeping to the Catholic faith of no contraception would seem mute and hypocritical.
And can the Pope overturn what he regards as God's law and defended it?
2007-05-15 04:50:20
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
Contraception prevents life.
Cancer can terminate life
Both unnatural
2007-05-15 05:50:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by Plato 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Pregnancy is not a sickness.
Jesus healed people of sickness not pregnancy.
We are to use our God-given talents and ingenuity to heal sickness and injuries.
Catholics have supported medical advances for the healing of sickness for centuries.
With love in Christ.
2007-05-15 19:00:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by imacatholic2 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
The problem is that pregancy is really seen as a disease, or as some dangerous side-effect of sex.
Is that normal?
2007-05-15 08:48:16
·
answer #10
·
answered by the good guy 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
at the end of the day god will decide,if your time is up then thats it,i believe it is preordained
2007-05-15 05:29:51
·
answer #11
·
answered by rebel 4
·
0⤊
0⤋