| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Sound of Trumpet" |
| Date: |
21 Mar 2007 08:15:00 PM |
| Object: |
Contraception: Why It's Wrong |
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1803121/posts
Contraception: Why It's Wrong
Catholic Culture ^ | 3/15/2007 | Dr. Jeff Mirus
Posted on 03/19/2007 5:46:55 AM PDT by markomalley
The recent debate over contraception between Fr. Thomas Euteneuer of
Human Life International and nationally syndicated talk-show host Sean
Hannity has brought to center stage an issue which most Americans-and
most Catholics-simply do not understand. Let's review what's wrong
with contraception.
The intrinsic moral issue of artificial contraception is a marriage
issue. Contraception has little or no intrinsic moral relevance
outside of marriage. This contributes to the difficulty our culture
has in understanding the problem, because our culture doesn't
understand marriage either. After all, only about half of all couples
are formally married. For this reason, it is perhaps best to start
with what we might call the extrinsic moral issues associated with
contraception, which apply to all sexual relations.
The Consequences of Contraception
I am using the word "extrinsic" to apply to the consequences of
contraception as opposed to its own essential moral character.
Catholics are not consequentialists, and we don't determine the
morality of an act by attempting to foresee all its consequences. But
we do determine the prudence of an act by assessing its potential
consequences. For this reason, it is highly instructive to examine the
extrinsic moral issues associated with contraception.
Even morally neutral acts can have good or bad consequences and should
be selected or avoided accordingly. It is a morally neutral act, for
example, to dam a river, but one wants to be pretty sure of the
consequences before one builds the dam. So too, many moralists have
argued (I believe correctly) that contraception is morally neutral in
itself when considered outside of marriage. But contraception
suppresses the natural outcome of sexual intercourse, and in so doing
it has two immediate and devastating consequences.
First, it engenders a casual attitude toward sexual relations. An
action which, because of the possibility of conceiving a child, makes
demands on the stability of the couple is stripped by contraception of
its long-term meaning. The mutual commitment of a couple implied by
the very nature of this intimate self-giving is now overshadowed by
the fact that the most obvious (though not necessarily the most
important) reason for that commitment has been eliminated. This
clearly contributes to the rise of casual sex, and the rise of casual
sex has enormous implications for psychological and emotional well-
being, personal and public health, and social cohesion.
Second, it shifts the emphasis in sexual relations from fruitfulness
to pleasure. Naturally-speaking, the sexual act finds its full meaning
in both emotional intimacy and the promise of offspring. For human
persons, sex is clearly oriented toward love and the creation of new
life. By eliminating the possibility of new life and the permanent
bonding it demands, contraception reduces the meaning of human
sexuality to pleasure and, at best, a truncated or wounded sort of
commitment. Moreover, if the meaning of human sexuality is primarily a
meaning of pleasure, then any sexual act which brings pleasure is of
equal value. It is no surprise that pornography and homosexuality have
mushroomed, while marriage has declined, since the rise of the
"contraceptive mentality". Abortion too has skyrocketed as a backup
procedure based on the expectation that contracepton should render sex
child-free. All of this, too, is psychologically, emotionally and
physically damaging, as well as destructive of the social order.
The Intrinsic Evil of Contraception
Now all of these evil consequences apply both inside and outside of
marriage. Within marriage, however, there is an intrinsic moral
problem with contraception quite apart from its horrendous
consequences. Outside of marriage, sexual relations are already
disordered. They have no proper ends and so the frustration of these
ends through contraception is intrinsically morally irrelevant.
Outside of marriage, contraception is to be avoided for its
consequences (consequences surely made worse by the difficulty of
psychologically separating contraception from its marital meaning).
But within marriage, the context changes and the act of contraception
itself becomes intrinsically disordered.
Within the context of marriage, the purposes of sexual intercourse are
unitive and procreative (as Pope Paul VI taught in his brilliant and
prophetic encyclical Humanae Vitae). It is worth remembering that
there is no proper context for sexual intercourse apart from marriage;
this is why it is impossible for human persons to psychologically
separate contraception from the marital context. But the point here is
that marriage has certain ends (the procreation of children, the
stability of society, the mutual happiness of the couple, and their
mutual sanctification) and so does sex within marriage. The purposes
of the marital act are the procreation of children and the progressive
unification of the spouses. These two purposes are intimately related,
for it is through marriage that a man and a woman become "two in one
flesh", both through sexual relations and, literally, in their
offspring.
It is intrinsically immoral to frustrate either of these purposes. Let
me repeat this statement. It is immoral to choose deliberately to
frustrate either the unitive or the procreative ends of marital
intercourse. It is immoral to make of your spouse an object of your
pleasure, to coerce your spouse, or to engage in sexual relations in a
manner or under conditions which communicate callousness or contempt.
These things frustrate the unitive purpose. It is also immoral to take
deliberate steps to prevent an otherwise potentially fruitful coupling
from bearing fruit. This frustrates the procreative purpose.
Related Issues
Because it causes so much confusion, it is necessary to state that it
is not intrinsically immoral to choose to engage in sexual relations
with your spouse at times when these relations are not likely to be
fruitful. The moral considerations which govern this decision revolve
around the obligation married couples have to be genuinely open to
children insofar as they can provide for their material well-being and
proper formation. There is nothing in this question of timing that
frustrates the purposes of a particular marriage act.
Statistically, couples who avoid contraception find that their
marriages are strengthened, their happiness increased, and their
health improved. Some of these considerations are topics for another
day. But Fr. Euteneuer is clearly correct and Sean Hannity is clearly
wrong. Contraception is a grave evil within marriage and has grave
consequences not only within marriage but outside of marriage as well.
Both individual couples and society as a whole will mature into deeper
happiness by freeing themselves from the false promises of
contraception, and from its moral lies.
.
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
02 Apr 2007 10:10:42 PM |
|
|
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 14:29:15 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.con> wrote:
Not according to Matthew:
Ask, and it shall be given you;
seek, and you shall find;
knock, and it shall be opened to you.
For whoever asks, receives;
and he who seeks, finds;
and to him who knocks, the door is opened.
James 4:3 (New International Version)
Those aren't the words of Jesus, liar.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
03 Apr 2007 05:25:21 AM |
|
|
On 03 Apr 2007 03:10:42 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 14:29:15 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.con> wrote:
Not according to Matthew:
Ask, and it shall be given you;
seek, and you shall find;
knock, and it shall be opened to you.
For whoever asks, receives;
and he who seeks, finds;
and to him who knocks, the door is opened.
James 4:3 (New International Version)
Those aren't the words of Jesus, liar.
Revealed by God, put pencil to paper by man.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
03 Apr 2007 06:50:11 AM |
|
|
In article <tra413593ejhvpd12jkp0tnnj4u247k6m4@4ax.com>,
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On 03 Apr 2007 03:10:42 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 14:29:15 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.con>
wrote:
Not according to Matthew:
Ask, and it shall be given you;
seek, and you shall find;
knock, and it shall be opened to you.
For whoever asks, receives;
and he who seeks, finds;
and to him who knocks, the door is opened.
James 4:3 (New International Version)
Those aren't the words of Jesus, liar.
Revealed by God
satan made you say that,
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
03 Apr 2007 08:22:31 AM |
|
|
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On 03 Apr 2007 03:10:42 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 14:29:15 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.con> wrote:
Not according to Matthew:
Ask, and it shall be given you;
seek, and you shall find;
knock, and it shall be opened to you.
For whoever asks, receives;
and he who seeks, finds;
and to him who knocks, the door is opened.
James 4:3 (New International Version)
Those aren't the words of Jesus, liar.
Revealed by God,
Another lie.
--
Ray Fischer
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception:It's Wrong? Why??) |
03 Apr 2007 09:28:17 AM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On 03 Apr 2007 03:10:42 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 14:29:15 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.con> wrote:
Not according to Matthew:
Ask, and it shall be given you;
seek, and you shall find;
knock, and it shall be opened to you.
For whoever asks, receives;
and he who seeks, finds;
and to him who knocks, the door is opened.
James 4:3 (New International Version)
Those aren't the words of Jesus, liar.
Revealed by God,
No. Fabricated by dirty men in robes who ***** boys up
the *****. A complete, cynical fabrication.
You're fucked, puke. You're losing steam.
Chicken-hawks always do.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "hc23hc" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
30 Mar 2007 06:12:57 PM |
|
|
Rudy Canoza wrote:
"duke" [didn't write]:
Yep, I'm a bullshitter alright.
Yep.
I take it that God's been forcing you to commit forgery... right
Rube ?
..
..
..
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
30 Mar 2007 03:52:53 PM |
|
|
On Mar 29, 11:26 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 23:25:33 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-can...@excite.con> wrote:
People who have lost limbs pray to have their intact limb back, or to
grow a new one.
You're kidding............right?
No, duck, I'm not.
No, you can't possibly be serious.
Yes, puke, I am serious,
No, you can't be serious.
Yes, puke, I'm serious.
You've never met a person that did that.
How would you know, puke?
You're a liar, puke. The passages in the buy-bull
don't say anything about "need".
What buy bull?
The buy-bull you stupidly accept as the word of "god", when it was all
written by deceitful men.
How many prayed, in the name of Jesus, to have a new limb grow back in?
How many prayed, in the name of jesus, to have the
cancer cured?
MILLIONS prayed for both, puke. We both know it. Cut
the lame *****, puke. Your "god" hates bullshitters.
Yep, I'm a bullshitter alright.
Yes, you sure are, puke.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception:It's Wrong? Why??) |
29 Mar 2007 03:17:56 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 23:25:33 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.con> wrote:
People who have lost limbs pray to have their intact limb back, or to
grow a new one.
You're kidding............right?
No, duck, I'm not.
No, you can't possibly be serious.
Yes, puke, I am serious,
No, you can't be serious.
Yes, puke, I am serious. People who have lost limbs
have prayed to be made whole. You know it. Stop
lying, shitchriststain.
You're a liar, puke. The passages in the buy-bull
don't say anything about "need".
What buy bull?
Matthew 7:7 "Ask, and it shall be given you"
Nothing in there about "need", little puke.
How many prayed, in the name of Jesus, to have a new limb grow back in?
How many prayed, in the name of jesus, to have the
cancer cured?
MILLIONS prayed for both, puke. We both know it. Cut
the lame *****, puke. Your "god" hates bullshitters.
Yep, I'm a bullshitter alright.
We know, puke, you little shitchriststain
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
29 Mar 2007 04:20:47 PM |
|
|
O
People who have lost limbs pray to have their intact limb back, or to
grow a new one.
You're kidding............right?
No, duck, I'm not.
No, you can't possibly be serious.
Yes, puke, I am serious,
No, you can't be serious.
Yes, puke, I am serious. People who have lost limbs
have prayed to be made whole.
They've prayed in the name of Jesus to have a new limb grow back?
You're kidding?
You're a liar, puke. The passages in the buy-bull
don't say anything about "need".
What buy bull?
Matthew 7:7 "Ask, and it shall be given you"
Nothing in there about "need", little puke.
Ask "in his name" and you will receive. But it'll be what you need, not what
you want.
God always answers our prayers.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception:It's Wrong? Why??) |
29 Mar 2007 04:29:02 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
O
People who have lost limbs pray to have their intact limb back, or to
grow a new one.
You're kidding............right?
No, duck, I'm not.
No, you can't possibly be serious.
Yes, puke, I am serious,
No, you can't be serious.
Yes, puke, I am serious. People who have lost limbs
have prayed to be made whole.
They've prayed in the name of Jesus to have a new limb grow back?
Not so hard to believe, puke. You *know* they have,
puke. You're lying, as always.
You're a liar, puke. The passages in the buy-bull
don't say anything about "need".
What buy bull?
Matthew 7:7 "Ask, and it shall be given you"
Nothing in there about "need", little puke.
Ask "in his name" and you will receive. But it'll be what you need, not what
you want.
No, you made that up, puke. The passage doesn't say
that, and no other passage says it. You made it up,
puke, because it's obvious that the passages, as
written, are lies.
You're a liar, puke. It's a fundamental tenet of
christ-stain-anity to lie.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
30 Mar 2007 07:23:46 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 21:29:02 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.con> wrote:
They've prayed in the name of Jesus to have a new limb grow back?
Not so hard to believe, puke. You *know* they have,
puke. You're lying, as always.
Atheists don't, and Christians won't.
Matthew 7:7 "Ask, and it shall be given you"
Nothing in there about "need", little puke.
Ask "in his name" and you will receive. But it'll be what you need, not what
you want.
No, you made that up, puke. The passage doesn't say
that, and no other passage says it.
James 4:3-4 (New International Version)
3When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you
may spend what you get on your pleasures.
God always answers prayer in his name. We get what we need.
You're a liar, puke. It's a fundamental tenet of
christ-stain-anity to lie.
So speaks an atheist wannabe.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
30 Mar 2007 03:23:39 PM |
|
|
On Mar 30, 5:23 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 21:29:02 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-can...@excite.con> wrote:
They've prayed in the name of Jesus to have a new limb grow back?
Not so hard to believe, puke. You *know* they have,
puke. You're lying, as always.
Atheists don't, and Christians won't.
You said that ***** before, puke. It's a variant of the No True
Scotsman fallacy. It's *****. You can't define christ-stains that
way, puke.
You're fucked, puke.
Matthew 7:7 "Ask, and it shall be given you"
Nothing in there about "need", little puke.
Ask "in his name" and you will receive. But it'll be what you need, not what
you want.
No, you made that up, puke. The passage doesn't say
that, and no other passage says it.
James 4:3-4 (
An example of buy-bull contradiction - exactly why thinking people
reject it.
God always answers prayer in his name. We get what we need.
Some man told you that, puke. A child molester, probably.
You're a liar, puke. It's a fundamental tenet of
christ-stain-anity to lie.
So speaks
a truthteller.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
31 Mar 2007 06:27:27 AM |
|
|
On 30 Mar 2007 13:23:39 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgenx32@yahoo.com> wrote:
Atheists don't, and Christians won't.
You said that ***** before, puke.
And now you know the biblical answer behind it.
An example of buy-bull contradiction - exactly why thinking people
reject it.
Thinking people understand the bible. You should pray for understanding.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception:It's Wrong? Why??) |
01 Apr 2007 11:54:28 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On 30 Mar 2007 13:23:39 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgenx32@yahoo.com> wrote:
Atheists don't, and Christians won't.
You said that ***** before, puke.
And now you know the
Now, you know the contradictory ***** in it. You
also know that it was all written by child molesters
with a dirty agenda.
An example of buy-bull contradiction - exactly why thinking people
reject it.
Thinking people understand the bible.
Right. That's why they reject it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception:It's Wrong? Why??) |
31 Mar 2007 01:28:21 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On 30 Mar 2007 13:23:39 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgenx32@yahoo.com> wrote:
Atheists don't, and Christians won't.
You said that ***** before, puke.
And now you know the biblical answer behind it.
No, puke. You had to go to a completely different
book. Pure *****.
An example of buy-bull contradiction - exactly why thinking people
reject it.
Thinking people understand the bible.
Right. Blind stupid zealots like you only imagine you
understand it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
01 Apr 2007 06:44:02 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 18:28:21 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.con> wrote:
Atheists don't, and Christians won't.
You said that ***** before, puke.
And now you know the biblical answer behind it.
No, puke. You had to go to a completely different
book. Pure *****.
It's all one book. You didn't know that, did you.
An example of buy-bull contradiction - exactly why thinking people
reject it.
Thinking people understand the bible.
Right. Blind stupid zealots like you only imagine you
understand it.
You're the one that got caught in your ignorance, not me.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception:It's Wrong? Why??) |
01 Apr 2007 11:58:05 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 18:28:21 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.con> wrote:
Atheists don't, and Christians won't.
You said that ***** before, puke.
And now you know the biblical answer behind it.
No, puke. You had to go to a completely different
book. Pure *****.
It's all one book.
Matthew and James. Two completely contradictory books.
It's *****: proved.
An example of buy-bull contradiction - exactly why thinking people
reject it.
Thinking people understand the bible.
Right. Blind stupid zealots like you only imagine you
understand it.
You're the one that
You're the one who got caught repeating the words of
homo child molesters as gospel. Well...the gospel *is*
the words of homo child molesters.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception:It's Wrong? Why??) |
01 Apr 2007 11:36:27 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 18:28:21 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.con> wrote:
Atheists don't, and Christians won't.
You said that ***** before, puke.
And now you know the biblical answer behind it.
No, puke. You had to go to a completely different
book. Pure *****.
It's all one book.
No, fuckwit. The book of Matthew says "ask and it
shall be be given". You had to ask the local
child-molester what book had the other *****.
It's all *****.
An example of buy-bull contradiction - exactly why thinking people
reject it.
Thinking people understand the bible.
Right. Blind stupid zealots like you only imagine you
understand it.
You're the one that
I'm the one that pointed out it's all *****. You
had to go ask a child-raper for another contradictory
passage.
You take the advice of child-rapers. You're fucked.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
02 Apr 2007 05:14:48 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 04:36:27 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.con> wrote:
It's all one book.
No, fuckwit. The book of Matthew says "ask and it
shall be be given". You had to ask the local
child-molester what book had the other *****.
It's all *****.
Yes you are, Cano.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception:It's Wrong? Why??) |
02 Apr 2007 09:28:58 AM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 04:36:27 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.con> wrote:
It's all one book.
No, fuckwit. The book of Matthew says "ask and it
shall be be given". You had to ask the local
child-molester what book had the other *****.
It's all *****.
Yes I am,
Yes, indeed. You're completely *****, puke.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
02 Apr 2007 01:40:56 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 14:28:58 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.con> wrote:
It's all *****.
Yes I am,
Yes, indeed. You're completely *****, puke.
po' widdle boy needs to change my post in a desperate attempt to offer a point.
Failure - canova's first name.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
02 Apr 2007 03:07:39 PM |
|
|
On Apr 2, 11:40 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 14:28:58 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-can...@excite.con> wrote:
It's all *****.
Yes I am,
Yes, indeed. You're completely *****, puke.
po' widdle boy
You're completely *****, puke. You're a child-molesting
*****. Your religion is *****.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
02 Apr 2007 04:28:01 PM |
|
|
On 2 Apr 2007 13:07:39 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgenx32@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 2, 11:40 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 14:28:58 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-can...@excite.con> wrote:
It's all *****.
Yes I am,
Yes, indeed. You're completely *****, puke.
po' widdle boy
You're completely *****, puke. You're a child-molesting
*****. Your religion is *****.
No thanks, I'll stick with God.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
02 Apr 2007 04:53:47 PM |
|
|
In article <9at213dk188qbrb0psgap699pvb82m2b6e@4ax.com>,
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
No thanks, I'll stick with God.
what makes you think she wants you?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
02 Apr 2007 05:19:52 PM |
|
|
On Apr 2, 2:28 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On 2 Apr 2007 13:07:39 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 2, 11:40 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 14:28:58 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-can...@excite.con> wrote:
It's all *****.
Yes I am,
Yes, indeed. You're completely *****, puke.
po' widdle boy
You're completely *****, puke. You're a child-molesting
*****. Your religion is *****.
No thanks, I'll stick with dirty men in robes who ***** boys up the *****.
You would, puke - you would.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
02 Apr 2007 05:37:18 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 16:28:01 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<9at213dk188qbrb0psgap699pvb82m2b6e@4ax.com> wrote:
On 2 Apr 2007 13:07:39 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgenx32@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 2, 11:40 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 14:28:58 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-can...@excite.con> wrote:
It's all *****.
Yes I am,
Yes, indeed. You're completely *****, puke.
po' widdle boy
You're completely *****, puke. You're a child-molesting
*****. Your religion is *****.
No thanks, I'll stick with God.
Why? You have not even proven one exists.
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
03 Apr 2007 05:22:13 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 18:37:18 -0400, Attila <<prochoice@here.now> wrote:
You're completely *****, puke. You're a child-molesting
*****. Your religion is *****.
No thanks, I'll stick with God.
Why? You have not even proven one exists.
All evidence demands it, chicken boy.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
03 Apr 2007 05:54:31 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 03 Apr 2007 05:22:13 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<ila413penbktjc0gb9eqr4770s4as10akd@4ax.com> wrote:
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 18:37:18 -0400, Attila <<prochoice@here.now> wrote:
You're completely *****, puke. You're a child-molesting
*****. Your religion is *****.
No thanks, I'll stick with God.
Why? You have not even proven one exists.
All evidence demands it, chicken boy.
Nonsense. That is too broad a statement to be anything other than
another evasion.
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
03 Apr 2007 02:37:11 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 03 Apr 2007 06:54:31 -0400, Attila <<prochoice@here.now> wrote:
On Tue, 03 Apr 2007 05:22:13 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<ila413penbktjc0gb9eqr4770s4as10akd@4ax.com> wrote:
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 18:37:18 -0400, Attila <<prochoice@here.now> wrote:
You're completely *****, puke. You're a child-molesting
*****. Your religion is *****.
No thanks, I'll stick with God.
Why? You have not even proven one exists.
All evidence demands it, chicken boy.
Nonsense. That is too broad a statement to be anything other than
another evasion.
That's your problem. There is NO evidence that God doesn't exist.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Question for duke: Why does god hate amputees? (Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why??) |
03 Apr 2007 04:17:47 PM |
|
|
In article <h6b513lu264hae3bb3iannf4de96tdq2r2@4ax.com>,
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
There is NO evidence that God doesn't exist.
you better confess that whopper, dukie.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
