| 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: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
29 Mar 2007 01:38:50 PM |
|
|
On 26 Mar 2007 13:14:46 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgenx32@yahoo.com> wrote:
The burden of proof is *ALWAYS* on the person making the positive
assertion. You assert, "god exists".
It's your funeral if I'm wrong.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
29 Mar 2007 03:23:14 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On 26 Mar 2007 13:14:46 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgenx32@yahoo.com> wrote:
The burden of proof is *ALWAYS* on the person making the positive
assertion. You assert, "god exists".
if I'm wrong.
You are wrong, puke.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
26 Mar 2007 09:54:39 AM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 15:23:14 -0400, Attila <<prochoice@here.now> wrote:
Why do you keep referring to a god when you have yet to prove one even
exists?
It's only logical.
Not an answer.
You can't refute it.
It isn't his job to refute your illogic. It's your job
to prove that something you claim exists really does
exist. There is no logical case for it at all.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
26 Mar 2007 01:52:36 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 14:54:39 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.com> wrote:
Why do you keep referring to a god when you have yet to prove one even
exists?
It's only logical.
Not an answer.
You can't refute it.
It isn't his job to refute your illogic.
Not only that, but he can't.
It's your job
to prove that something you claim exists really does
exist. There is no logical case for it at all.
God willed the universe into existence.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
26 Mar 2007 03:16:18 PM |
|
|
On Mar 26, 11:52 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 14:54:39 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-can...@excite.com> wrote:
Why do you keep referring to a god when you have yet to prove one even
exists?
It's only logical.
Not an answer.
You can't refute it.
It isn't his job to refute your illogic.
Not only that, but he can't.
Not his burden. It's your burden to support your claim. You can't.
In the absence of proof, the prudent course is to disbelieve.
It's your job
to prove that something you claim exists really does
exist. There is no logical case for it at all.
God willed the universe into existence.
No. That's just a fairy tale that you find comforting and emotionally
satisfying, but that's because your intellectual and emotional
development are retarded.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
27 Mar 2007 06:44:57 AM |
|
|
On 26 Mar 2007 13:16:18 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgenx32@yahoo.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1174940178.931856.294860@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> wrote:
On Mar 26, 11:52 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 14:54:39 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-can...@excite.com> wrote:
Why do you keep referring to a god when you have yet to prove one even
exists?
It's only logical.
Not an answer.
You can't refute it.
It isn't his job to refute your illogic.
Not only that, but he can't.
Not his burden. It's your burden to support your claim. You can't.
In the absence of proof, the prudent course is to disbelieve.
That is a burden all cultists reject. They cannot support their
position or their rants with any proof or evidence so they evade the
issue either by ignoring it or by any number of evasions. Especially
by trying to take the discussion in some other direction.
It is amazing how positions are taken and statements made that would
be considered insane with any other subject yet are expected to be
accepted without question if the subject is cults.
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
27 Mar 2007 04:26:27 PM |
|
|
On 26 Mar 2007 13:16:18 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgenx32@yahoo.com> wrote:
Why do you keep referring to a god when you have yet to prove one even
exists?
It's only logical.
Not an answer.
You can't refute it.
It isn't his job to refute your illogic.
Not only that, but he can't.
Not his burden. It's your burden to support your claim. You can't.
In the absence of proof, the prudent course is to disbelieve.
It's his eternal future, not mine. If he can't, so be it.
God willed the universe into existence.
No. That's just a fairy tale that you find comforting and emotionally
satisfying, but that's because your intellectual and emotional
development are retarded.
That's always the case when you get outsmarted, isn't it.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
30 Mar 2007 07:56:04 PM |
|
|
On Mar 27, 2:26 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On 26 Mar 2007 13:16:18 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Why do you keep referring to a god when you have yet to prove one even
exists?
It's only logical.
Not an answer.
You can't refute it.
It isn't his job to refute your illogic.
Not only that, but he can't.
Not his burden. It's your burden to support your claim. You can't.
In the absence of proof, the prudent course is to disbelieve.
It's his eternal future,
Rubbish.
God willed the universe into existence.
No. That's just a fairy tale that you find comforting and emotionally
satisfying, but that's because your intellectual and emotional
development are retarded.
That's always the case when
It's always the case for fuckwitted believers in superstition like
you, puke.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
27 Mar 2007 06:40:39 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 13:52:36 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1i5g03p4a0ifmn8kmvn2jnqqs3re7d3aqp@4ax.com> wrote:
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 14:54:39 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.com> wrote:
Why do you keep referring to a god when you have yet to prove one even
exists?
It's only logical.
Not an answer.
You can't refute it.
It isn't his job to refute your illogic.
Not only that, but he can't.
It's your job
to prove that something you claim exists really does
exist. There is no logical case for it at all.
God willed the universe into existence.
You have yet to prove any god even exists.
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
27 Mar 2007 04:26:57 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 07:40:39 -0400, Attila <<prochoice@here.now> wrote:
God willed the universe into existence.
You have yet to prove any god even exists.
You'll change when you grow up.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
27 Mar 2007 06:57:21 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:26:57 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<b03j0357b8p44f4hthclpg7rt53als8l5l@4ax.com> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 07:40:39 -0400, Attila <<prochoice@here.now> wrote:
God willed the universe into existence.
You have yet to prove any god even exists.
You'll change when you grow up.
I was born before Hitler invaded Poland.
When will I grow up?
You still have yet to prove any god exists.
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
26 Mar 2007 09:54:02 AM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 07:15:48 -0400, Attila <<prochoice@here.now> wrote:
It's wrong because women are supposed to be barefoot and pregnant and
not have any rights whatsoever.
Martin
No, because it's people using artificial methods to get around God's way.
Why do you keep referring to a god when you have yet to prove one even
exists?
It's only logical.
It's not logical. It's illogical and irrational.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
26 Mar 2007 01:53:01 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 14:54:02 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.com> wrote:
It's only logical.
It's not logical. It's illogical and irrational.
I believe in God.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
26 Mar 2007 03:16:35 PM |
|
|
On Mar 26, 11:53 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 14:54:02 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-can...@excite.com> wrote:
It's only logical.
It's not logical. It's illogical and irrational.
I believe in God.
Irrationally.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
27 Mar 2007 04:27:31 PM |
|
|
On 26 Mar 2007 13:16:35 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgenx32@yahoo.com> wrote:
I believe in God.
Irrationally.
The alternative is painful and eternal.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Smiler" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
27 Mar 2007 07:27:50 PM |
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:913j03dph0ssg37592hbusk2jjso9jl9lv@4ax.com...
On 26 Mar 2007 13:16:35 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgenx32@yahoo.com> wrote:
I believe in God.
Irrationally.
The alternative is painful and eternal.
You can't get it through your thick skull that, as we don't believe any god
exists, we have nothing to fear.
Your threats of eternal damnation mean nothing to us, other than the
rantings of a lunatic.
Smiler,
The godless one
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
29 Mar 2007 01:36:15 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 00:27:50 GMT, "Smiler" <Smiler@Joe.King.com> wrote:
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:913j03dph0ssg37592hbusk2jjso9jl9lv@4ax.com...
On 26 Mar 2007 13:16:35 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgenx32@yahoo.com> wrote:
I believe in God.
Irrationally.
The alternative is painful and eternal.
You can't get it through your thick skull that, as we don't believe any god
exists, we have nothing to fear.
Until you find out one moment after you die that he does.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Smiler" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
29 Mar 2007 05:43:20 PM |
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:8o1o03h11kiba7rd818srv6t2rbuieg4ne@4ax.com...
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 00:27:50 GMT, "Smiler" <Smiler@Joe.King.com> wrote:
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:913j03dph0ssg37592hbusk2jjso9jl9lv@4ax.com...
On 26 Mar 2007 13:16:35 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
I believe in God.
Irrationally.
The alternative is painful and eternal.
You can't get it through your thick skull that, as we don't believe any
god
exists, we have nothing to fear.
Until you find out one moment after you die that he does.
I'd rather take that chance and be sane than believe and be like you.
Smiler,
The godless one
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
29 Mar 2007 05:24:40 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 13:36:15 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<8o1o03h11kiba7rd818srv6t2rbuieg4ne@4ax.com> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 00:27:50 GMT, "Smiler" <Smiler@Joe.King.com> wrote:
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:913j03dph0ssg37592hbusk2jjso9jl9lv@4ax.com...
On 26 Mar 2007 13:16:35 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgenx32@yahoo.com> wrote:
I believe in God.
Irrationally.
The alternative is painful and eternal.
You can't get it through your thick skull that, as we don't believe any god
exists, we have nothing to fear.
Until you find out one moment after you die that he does.
Cult by intimidation.
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
30 Mar 2007 06:19:16 PM |
|
|
On Mar 27, 2:27 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On 26 Mar 2007 13:16:35 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I believe in God.
Irrationally.
The alternative is
Rational.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
30 Mar 2007 07:56:51 PM |
|
|
On Mar 27, 2:27 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On 26 Mar 2007 13:16:35 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I believe in God.
Irrationally.
The alternative is painful and eternal.
No.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
27 Mar 2007 06:46:06 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 13:53:01 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<sj5g03drteg5aarqebmb70lte26s1a1c16@4ax.com> wrote:
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 14:54:02 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.com> wrote:
It's only logical.
It's not logical. It's illogical and irrational.
I believe in God.
So what? That proves absolutely nothing other than you seem to accept
as real things that have not been proven to exist.
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
27 Mar 2007 04:28:40 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 07:46:06 -0400, Attila <<prochoice@here.now> wrote:
It's only logical.
It's not logical. It's illogical and irrational.
I believe in God.
So what? That proves absolutely nothing other than you seem to accept
as real things that have not been proven to exist.
It's your funeral. Enjoy it if you can.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
27 Mar 2007 06:58:52 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:28:40 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<p23j03htpt2ovuuobp8dvn06s3928mhlrp@4ax.com> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 07:46:06 -0400, Attila <<prochoice@here.now> wrote:
It's only logical.
It's not logical. It's illogical and irrational.
I believe in God.
So what? That proves absolutely nothing other than you seem to accept
as real things that have not been proven to exist.
It's your funeral. Enjoy it if you can.
Covered previously. You are repeating yourself uselessly yet again.
Which does nothing to refute my point.
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
26 Mar 2007 11:33:31 PM |
|
|
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.com> wrote:
It's only logical.
It's not logical. It's illogical and irrational.
I believe in God.
You worship yourself.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
27 Mar 2007 04:27:46 PM |
|
|
On 27 Mar 2007 04:33:31 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
I believe in God.
You worship yourself.
Nope.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
27 Mar 2007 10:27:28 PM |
|
|
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On 27 Mar 2007 04:33:31 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
I believe in God.
You worship yourself.
Nope.
You attribute your own pronouncements to God. You treat your very
farts as messages from God.
--
Ray Fischer
.
|
|
|
| User: "Smiler" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
28 Mar 2007 06:45:19 PM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <> wrote in message
news:4609e0a0$0$14074$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On 27 Mar 2007 04:33:31 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
I believe in God.
You worship yourself.
Nope.
You attribute your own pronouncements to God. You treat your very
farts as messages from God.
His farts probably make more sense than messages from god.
Smiler,
The godless one
.
|
|
|
| User: "•R L Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
29 Mar 2007 04:30:57 AM |
|
|
In article <j6DOh.24719$0Z1.11837@newsfe7-win.ntli.net>, "Smiler"
<Smiler@Joe.King.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" < > wrote in message
news:4609e0a0$0$14074$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On 27 Mar 2007 04:33:31 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
I believe in God.
You worship yourself.
Nope.
You attribute your own pronouncements to God. You treat your very
farts as messages from God.
His farts probably make more sense than messages from god.
• Are flatulent messages from God sent in Morse code ?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Smiler" |
|
| Title: Re: Contraception: It's Wrong? Why?? |
29 Mar 2007 05:45:28 PM |
|
|
"•R L Measures" <r@somis.org> wrote in message
news:r-2903070230570001@192.168.1.101...
In article <j6DOh.24719$0Z1.11837@newsfe7-win.ntli.net>, "Smiler"
<Smiler@Joe.King.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" < > wrote in message
news:4609e0a0$0$14074$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On 27 Mar 2007 04:33:31 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
I believe in God.
You worship yourself.
Nope.
You attribute your own pronouncements to God. You treat your very
farts as messages from God.
His farts probably make more sense than messages from god.
• Are flatulent messages from God sent in Morse code ?
As no atheist gets messages from any god, you'd have to ask puke that one.
Smiler,
The godless one
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
