| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Cary Kittrell" |
| Date: |
05 Apr 2005 07:02:21 PM |
| Object: |
Re: POPE GRAVELY ILL |
In article "\\ krp *" <web2457k@verizon.net> writes:
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:d2uj3j$nqj$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
Your beloved Pope was the cause of much misery and unhappiness.
The sad thing is the next "beloved Pope," is not likely to be much
different.
Probably SO with gay priests who wanted to KEEP sexual access to
altar
boys. To women who wanted abortions or to become priests. Other than that
he
brought freedom to millions of people.
Actually, he "brought millions of people", period. To countries
where grinding poverty dictates that most will die young, and
that the survivors are hardly more lucky. All because of
his inflexible opposition to birth control.
Russia? Poland? And Eastern Europe?
Central America. South America. Africa.
< AH I see, so if the Pope had ONLY
opened up MILLIONS of Abortion clinics then he would have been GOOD, eh?
FREE CONDOMS for everyone?
Exactly: the more condoms, the fewer abortions. More education,
fewer fetuses untimely ripped. Have some problem with that, do we?
Maybe a little euthanasia here, a little there...
And all would be ROSES... Right? It is all about LIFE for the Catholic
church. If you want to live with a culture of death, become a Islamic
extremist. There you too can fly airplanes into buildings or strap a bomb to
your ***** and blow up a lunch counter to SHOW the world how much you REALLY
CARE!!!!!!
Well, you have your fun, hear? But as for myself, I've spent a lifetime
taking great pains to be personally responsibile that I do not create
babies when it is inappropriate. And abortions aeren't necessary --
because I am fully educated about birth control.
That in spite of your late pope's wish that I were not.
-- cary
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: POPE GRAVELY ILL |
05 Apr 2005 09:08:50 PM |
|
|
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:d2unbt$lbq$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
Your beloved Pope was the cause of much misery and unhappiness.
The sad thing is the next "beloved Pope," is not likely to be much
different.
Probably SO with gay priests who wanted to KEEP sexual access to
altar
boys. To women who wanted abortions or to become priests. Other than
that he
brought freedom to millions of people.
Actually, he "brought millions of people", period. To countries
where grinding poverty dictates that most will die young, and
that the survivors are hardly more lucky. All because of
his inflexible opposition to birth control.
Russia? Poland? And Eastern Europe?
Central America. South America. Africa.
Much of Africa, or most of it is Muslim. Central and South America is
minimally Catholic in reality. Most Catholics in much of the Americas are
Catholics in name only. He didn't create the poverty, brutal dictators have.
Such as the one in Cuba. Good lab to see how a once affluent society with a
LARGE middle class can be brough down into grinding poverty almost
universally, all except for the few. And THEY are ATHEISTS!
< AH I see, so if the Pope had ONLY
opened up MILLIONS of Abortion clinics then he would have been GOOD, eh?
FREE CONDOMS for everyone?
Exactly: the more condoms, the fewer abortions. More education,
fewer fetuses untimely ripped. Have some problem with that, do we?
Yeah I have HUGE problems with simplistic PAP........... 1. It doesn't
work. And I don't need to get to number 2. Number 1 is enough.
Maybe a little euthanasia here, a little there...
And all would be ROSES... Right? It is all about LIFE for the Catholic
church. If you want to live with a culture of death, become a Islamic
extremist. There you too can fly airplanes into buildings or strap a bomb
to
your ***** and blow up a lunch counter to SHOW the world how much you
REALLY
CARE!!!!!!
Well, you have your fun, hear? But as for myself, I've spent a lifetime
taking great pains to be personally responsibile that I do not create
babies when it is inappropriate. And abortions aeren't necessary --
because I am fully educated about birth control.
I have taken great pains all my life to honor life. Cary almost
everyone knows how babies are made. It seems you have heard almost nothing
of what the Pope has said about all of that. If people listed to him,
abortions wouldn't be necessary. Just because you refuse to obey the main
part of the message doesn't mean that somebody else is responsible for the
consequences. If you confined sex to marriage, weren't into promiscuity,
you'd not need the condoms or have to worry about that 39th abortion.
That in spite of your late pope's wish that I were not.
My bet is that the Pope probably was blissfully unaware of your
existence. There is only one 100% effective birth control....
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: POPE GRAVELY ILL |
05 Apr 2005 09:48:12 PM |
|
|
In article <C7D4e.4638$3O2.1901@trnddc01> "\\ krp *" <web2457k@verizon.net> writes:
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:d2unbt$lbq$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
{prior attributions snipped, but not by me...}
FREE CONDOMS for everyone?
Exactly: the more condoms, the fewer abortions. More education,
fewer fetuses untimely ripped. Have some problem with that, do we?
Yeah I have HUGE problems with simplistic PAP........... 1. It doesn't
work. And I don't need to get to number 2. Number 1 is enough.
Birth control (preferably using more than one method at the same time)
does not work?
That leaves a rather largish amount of experimental data in want
of a new hypothesis...
Maybe a little euthanasia here, a little there...
And all would be ROSES... Right? It is all about LIFE for the Catholic
church. If you want to live with a culture of death, become a Islamic
extremist. There you too can fly airplanes into buildings or strap a bomb
to
your ***** and blow up a lunch counter to SHOW the world how much you
REALLY
CARE!!!!!!
Well, you have your fun, hear? But as for myself, I've spent a lifetime
taking great pains to be personally responsibile that I do not create
babies when it is inappropriate. And abortions aeren't necessary --
because I am fully educated about birth control.
I have taken great pains all my life to honor life. Cary almost
everyone knows how babies are made. It seems you have heard almost nothing
of what the Pope has said about all of that. If people listed to him,
abortions wouldn't be necessary.
I have neither listened to him, nor ever needed the services of an abortionist.
I happen to believe in personal responsibility.
Just because you refuse to obey the main
part of the message doesn't mean that somebody else is responsible for the
consequences. If you confined sex to marriage, weren't into promiscuity,
you'd not need the condoms or have to worry about that 39th abortion.
I've yet had to worry about my first. In no small measure because I
do not put off my responsibility for making moral decisions onto
someone else.
That in spite of your late pope's wish that I were not.
My bet is that the Pope probably was blissfully unaware of your
existence. There is only one 100% effective birth control....
There are two, in fact. Personally, I am interested in neither
celibacy nor death.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: POPE GRAVELY ILL |
06 Apr 2005 01:13:59 PM |
|
|
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:d2v12s$iq0$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
FREE CONDOMS for everyone?
Exactly: the more condoms, the fewer abortions. More education,
fewer fetuses untimely ripped. Have some problem with that, do we?
Yeah I have HUGE problems with simplistic PAP........... 1. It
doesn't
work. And I don't need to get to number 2. Number 1 is enough.
Birth control (preferably using more than one method at the same time)
does not work?
Not always, NO!
That leaves a rather largish amount of experimental data in want
of a new hypothesis...
Not really literature on it is abundant. You can get it from NARAL.
Planned Parenthood et al. At least when they testify in support of the
"ABSIOLUTE NECESSITY" for abortion being a "right."
Maybe a little euthanasia here, a little there...
And all would be ROSES... Right? It is all about LIFE for the
Catholic
church. If you want to live with a culture of death, become a Islamic
extremist. There you too can fly airplanes into buildings or strap a
bomb
to
your ***** and blow up a lunch counter to SHOW the world how much you
REALLY
CARE!!!!!!
Well, you have your fun, hear? But as for myself, I've spent a
lifetime
taking great pains to be personally responsibile that I do not create
babies when it is inappropriate. And abortions aeren't necessary --
because I am fully educated about birth control.
I have taken great pains all my life to honor life. Cary almost
everyone knows how babies are made. It seems you have heard almost
nothing
of what the Pope has said about all of that. If people listed to him,
abortions wouldn't be necessary.
I have neither listened to him, nor ever needed the services of an
abortionist.
I happen to believe in personal responsibility.
Then there is NO problem with the Pope's beliefs.
Just because you refuse to obey the main
part of the message doesn't mean that somebody else is responsible for
the
consequences. If you confined sex to marriage, weren't into promiscuity,
you'd not need the condoms or have to worry about that 39th abortion.
I've yet had to worry about my first. In no small measure because I
do not put off my responsibility for making moral decisions onto
someone else.
Good for you. Then there is no conflict with anything the Pope has said.
That in spite of your late pope's wish that I were not.
My bet is that the Pope probably was blissfully unaware of your
existence. There is only one 100% effective birth control....
There are two, in fact. Personally, I am interested in neither
celibacy nor death.
There is another. Confine activities to your legal mate.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: POPE GRAVELY ILL |
06 Apr 2005 05:52:03 PM |
|
|
In article <rgR4e.6615$Q26.3199@trnddc05> "\\ krp *" <web2457k@verizon.net> writes:
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:d2v12s$iq0$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
FREE CONDOMS for everyone?
Exactly: the more condoms, the fewer abortions. More education,
fewer fetuses untimely ripped. Have some problem with that, do we?
Yeah I have HUGE problems with simplistic PAP........... 1. It
doesn't
work. And I don't need to get to number 2. Number 1 is enough.
Birth control (preferably using more than one method at the same time)
does not work?
Not always, NO!
Not always, that is correct. Used correctly, the numbers vary
from the low 90%s to the upper 90%s, depending on the exact
method.
And if you are truly interested in reducing the number of abortions,
don't you think that providing information and access to methods
which could prevent, say, better than 90% of unwanted pregnancies --
many of which will be ended by abortions -- is a good thing?
That leaves a rather largish amount of experimental data in want
of a new hypothesis...
Not really literature on it is abundant. You can get it from NARAL.
Planned Parenthood et al. At least when they testify in support of the
"ABSIOLUTE NECESSITY" for abortion being a "right."
Maybe a little euthanasia here, a little there...
And all would be ROSES... Right? It is all about LIFE for the
Catholic
church. If you want to live with a culture of death, become a Islamic
extremist. There you too can fly airplanes into buildings or strap a
bomb
to
your ***** and blow up a lunch counter to SHOW the world how much you
REALLY
CARE!!!!!!
Well, you have your fun, hear? But as for myself, I've spent a
lifetime
taking great pains to be personally responsibile that I do not create
babies when it is inappropriate. And abortions aeren't necessary --
because I am fully educated about birth control.
I have taken great pains all my life to honor life. Cary almost
everyone knows how babies are made. It seems you have heard almost
nothing
of what the Pope has said about all of that. If people listed to him,
abortions wouldn't be necessary.
I have neither listened to him, nor ever needed the services of an
abortionist.
I happen to believe in personal responsibility.
Then there is NO problem with the Pope's beliefs.
Well, there is. He thinks I should not use such things as condoms.
Just because you refuse to obey the main
part of the message doesn't mean that somebody else is responsible for
the
consequences. If you confined sex to marriage, weren't into promiscuity,
you'd not need the condoms or have to worry about that 39th abortion.
I've yet had to worry about my first. In no small measure because I
do not put off my responsibility for making moral decisions onto
someone else.
Good for you. Then there is no conflict with anything the Pope has said.
Only if he has said something about birth control pills which escaped my
notice.
That in spite of your late pope's wish that I were not.
My bet is that the Pope probably was blissfully unaware of your
existence. There is only one 100% effective birth control....
There are two, in fact. Personally, I am interested in neither
celibacy nor death.
There is another. Confine activities to your legal mate.
The only way that confining your sexual activities to your spouse
will prevent pregnancies is if he or she has come to bore you
to death in bed.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: POPE GRAVELY ILL |
06 Apr 2005 11:57:38 PM |
|
|
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:d317k3$qen$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
FREE CONDOMS for everyone?
Exactly: the more condoms, the fewer abortions. More education,
fewer fetuses untimely ripped. Have some problem with that, do we?
Yeah I have HUGE problems with simplistic PAP........... 1. It
doesn't
work. And I don't need to get to number 2. Number 1 is enough.
Birth control (preferably using more than one method at the same time)
does not work?
Not always, NO!
Not always, that is correct. Used correctly, the numbers vary
from the low 90%s to the upper 90%s, depending on the exact
method.
Depending on the combination. Some combinations barely rise about
50%.Others may hit 97%.
And if you are truly interested in reducing the number of abortions,
don't you think that providing information and access to methods
which could prevent, say, better than 90% of unwanted pregnancies --
many of which will be ended by abortions -- is a good thing?
No I don't think that. It is like the mistaken belief that if you tell
people about filter cigarettes you can eliminate lung cancer. What helps is
having a moral code that is the best preventtaive of unwated pregnancies,
STD's etc. The word NO!
That leaves a rather largish amount of experimental data in want
of a new hypothesis...
Not really literature on it is abundant. You can get it from NARAL.
Planned Parenthood et al. At least when they testify in support of the
"ABSIOLUTE NECESSITY" for abortion being a "right."
Maybe a little euthanasia here, a little there...
And all would be ROSES... Right? It is all about LIFE for the
Catholic
church. If you want to live with a culture of death, become a
Islamic
extremist. There you too can fly airplanes into buildings or strap
a
bomb
to
your ***** and blow up a lunch counter to SHOW the world how much you
REALLY
CARE!!!!!!
Well, you have your fun, hear? But as for myself, I've spent a
lifetime
taking great pains to be personally responsibile that I do not
create
babies when it is inappropriate. And abortions aeren't necessary --
because I am fully educated about birth control.
I have taken great pains all my life to honor life. Cary almost
everyone knows how babies are made. It seems you have heard almost
nothing
of what the Pope has said about all of that. If people listed to him,
abortions wouldn't be necessary.
I have neither listened to him, nor ever needed the services of an
abortionist.
I happen to believe in personal responsibility.
Then there is NO problem with the Pope's beliefs.
Well, there is. He thinks I should not use such things as condoms.
You shouldn't. He never said that the police should prevent you from
using them. He has taken a MORAL position that it is wrong. You are
absolutely free to be as AMORAL as you wish. Now IF the Pope had sent out
the religious police to poke holes in all your precious condoms.. THEN you'd
have a point.
Just because you refuse to obey the main
part of the message doesn't mean that somebody else is responsible for
the
consequences. If you confined sex to marriage, weren't into
promiscuity,
you'd not need the condoms or have to worry about that 39th abortion.
I've yet had to worry about my first. In no small measure because I
do not put off my responsibility for making moral decisions onto
someone else.
Good for you. Then there is no conflict with anything the Pope has
said.
Only if he has said something about birth control pills which escaped my
notice.
He says the same things about them as he does with condoms. He's morally
opposed to them.
That in spite of your late pope's wish that I were not.
My bet is that the Pope probably was blissfully unaware of your
existence. There is only one 100% effective birth control....
There are two, in fact. Personally, I am interested in neither
celibacy nor death.
There is another. Confine activities to your legal mate.
The only way that confining your sexual activities to your spouse
will prevent pregnancies is if he or she has come to bore you
to death in bed.
It does a great job of preventing STD's unless your wife is town *****.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: POPE GRAVELY ILL |
07 Apr 2005 12:36:16 AM |
|
|
In article <SH_4e.7652$%b1.4930@trnddc08> "\\ krp ~~~~" <web2457k@verizon.net> writes:
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:d317k3$qen$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
FREE CONDOMS for everyone?
Exactly: the more condoms, the fewer abortions. More education,
fewer fetuses untimely ripped. Have some problem with that, do we?
Yeah I have HUGE problems with simplistic PAP........... 1. It
doesn't
work. And I don't need to get to number 2. Number 1 is enough.
Birth control (preferably using more than one method at the same time)
does not work?
Not always, NO!
Not always, that is correct. Used correctly, the numbers vary
from the low 90%s to the upper 90%s, depending on the exact
method.
Depending on the combination. Some combinations barely rise about
50%.Others may hit 97%.
And of course it's multiplicative. If one method, say condoms,
is 95% and an independent method, say UIDs is 95%, then the
chance of pregnancy is one quarter of one percent.
Which, were each unwanted pregnancy to be terminated, would
mean 399 fewer abortions out of every 400 chances.
And if you are truly interested in reducing the number of abortions,
don't you think that providing information and access to methods
which could prevent, say, better than 90% of unwanted pregnancies --
many of which will be ended by abortions -- is a good thing?
No I don't think that. It is like the mistaken belief that if you tell
people about filter cigarettes you can eliminate lung cancer.
Not parallel. Filter cigarettes do not reduce lung cancer. Birth
control, properly used, drastically reduces pregnancy rates.
And making birth control information and products available in third-world
countries does impact the rates of pregnancy, whether you'd care for it
to or not.
What helps is
having a moral code that is the best preventtaive of unwated pregnancies,
STD's etc. The word NO!
And intelligent use of birth control also drastically reduces
unwanted pregnancies.
And thus reduces abortions.
But you seem not to care about these abortions which never occurred.
Somehow, it seems, they were avoided improperly, so they don't "count".
A strange postition for someone who claims to be pro-life: we don't
care if you somehow reduce the number of abortions, if you don't go about
slashing that number in the manner we prescribe.
It's fewer bloody dead fetuses either way. But somehow that
part seems irrelevant in your eyes.
{...}
Then there is NO problem with the Pope's beliefs.
Well, there is. He thinks I should not use such things as condoms.
You shouldn't. He never said that the police should prevent you from
using them. He has taken a MORAL position that it is wrong.
Which is not only incorrect, it's absurdly incorrect.
But perhaps you'll explain to me exactly how condom use is immoral,
in words other than "{someone} has pronounced it so"?...
{...}
existence. There is only one 100% effective birth control....
There are two, in fact. Personally, I am interested in neither
celibacy nor death.
There is another. Confine activities to your legal mate.
The only way that confining your sexual activities to your spouse
will prevent pregnancies is if he or she has come to bore you
to death in bed.
It does a great job of preventing STD's unless your wife is town *****.
You said "There is only one 100% effective birth control...", and then
segued from there into "Confine activities to your legal mate."
Perhaps you'll also tell me what marital fidelity has to do with
100% effecitve birth control?
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: POPE GRAVELY ILL |
07 Apr 2005 09:11:40 AM |
|
|
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:d31va0$8dl$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
FREE CONDOMS for everyone?
Exactly: the more condoms, the fewer abortions. More education,
fewer fetuses untimely ripped. Have some problem with that, do
we?
Yeah I have HUGE problems with simplistic PAP........... 1. It
doesn't
work. And I don't need to get to number 2. Number 1 is enough.
Birth control (preferably using more than one method at the same
time)
does not work?
Not always, NO!
Not always, that is correct. Used correctly, the numbers vary
from the low 90%s to the upper 90%s, depending on the exact
method.
Depending on the combination. Some combinations barely rise about
50%.Others may hit 97%.
And of course it's multiplicative. If one method, say condoms,
is 95% and an independent method, say UIDs is 95%, then the
chance of pregnancy is one quarter of one percent.
Last I saw condoms were only rated at about 50% effective. The IUD was
at 80%/ No - they don't necessarily multiply.
Which, were each unwanted pregnancy to be terminated, would
mean 399 fewer abortions out of every 400 chances.
Huh? Don't we call "termination of unwated pregnancies" abortions???? Of
course we ccould talk about "assumed risks" here among adults, right?
And if you are truly interested in reducing the number of abortions,
don't you think that providing information and access to methods
which could prevent, say, better than 90% of unwanted pregnancies --
many of which will be ended by abortions -- is a good thing?
No I don't think that. It is like the mistaken belief that if you
tell
people about filter cigarettes you can eliminate lung cancer.
Not parallel. Filter cigarettes do not reduce lung cancer. Birth
control, properly used, drastically reduces pregnancy rates.
And condoms do NOT eliminate unwanted pregnancies OR STD's!! PERIOD!!!
And making birth control information and products available in third-world
countries does impact the rates of pregnancy, whether you'd care for it
to or not.
Again Cary you seem UNABLE to differentiate between taking a MORAL
POSTION of opposing something to be PROHIBITING IT! You are FREE to go in
and pass out all the CONDOMS you seem to NEED to in Honduras! MILLIONS AND
MILLIONS of them! BILLIONS! HUNRDEDS OF BILLIONS!
Knock yourself out.
What helps is having a moral code that is the best preventtaive of
unwated pregnancies,
STD's etc. The word NO!
And intelligent use of birth control also drastically reduces
unwanted pregnancies.
No not indiscriminately screwing does that better!
And thus reduces abortions.
And chastitity does it infallibly!
But you seem not to care about these abortions which never occurred.
Hard to bleed from a cut that never happened.
Somehow, it seems, they were avoided improperly, so they don't "count".
Count for what? Your rationalizations are much akin to a pilot who had
just napalmed a villiage saying "well I didn't nuke them!" Yes the analogy
works if you think about it. Two wrongs Cary...
A strange postition for someone who claims to be pro-life: we don't
care if you somehow reduce the number of abortions, if you don't go about
slashing that number in the manner we prescribe.
Cary you can eliminate the number of abortions by simply doing a
hysterectomy on females at age 10. POOF NO PROBLEM!!!! Aint that GREAT????
It's fewer bloody dead fetuses either way. But somehow that
part seems irrelevant in your eyes.
Sure it is because of the WAY it was done. Your logic is "wqe have to
destroy the villiage in order to save the villiage."
Then there is NO problem with the Pope's beliefs.
Well, there is. He thinks I should not use such things as condoms.
You shouldn't. He never said that the police should prevent you from
using them. He has taken a MORAL position that it is wrong.
Which is not only incorrect, it's absurdly incorrect.
What is incorrect? Does the Pope REALLY REALLY REALLY have "religious
police" out there to snatch all your CONDOMS? Let me know, I'll slip you a
few.
But perhaps you'll explain to me exactly how condom use is immoral,
in words other than "{someone} has pronounced it so"?...
Phew!! In this forum? The issue is FAR more complex than for this
limited bandwidth, and I don't have the time it would take to properly
explain it. I could say because it trivializes sex and cheapens the human
experience and sex. Regardless of your NEED to experience pleasure
irrespective of harm, sex has a specific purpose. That's the design, Cary.
Some people are slaves to their sex organs. That isn't healthy. In fact MOST
of the current attitudes on sex are DESTRUCTIVE to people's souls, but first
you have to believe that people HAVE a soul. You seem NOT to believe in
that. You appear to be a man who is a slave to his own ejaculation. Such a
limited view on life, such a limited view on marriage and a relationship
with another human being. No SOUL in it anywhere, just the ORGASM. Some day
you may learn, as I did, that the Orgasm isn't enough, isn't all, and isn't
even necessary. Too bad all this gets in the way of the REAL things and
helps decay society and the institution of marriage. When I was a kid the
divorce rate had shot all the way up to 19% and everyone thought that was
awful. Today it is nearing 80%. People change spouses like they change
socks. Cary it is a very deep and complex subject, I am not at all sure I am
capable of doing it justice. Oh but when you finally find it . . even if you
can't explain it Cary - you understand WHY the Pope has said what he said. I
can't make you believe it, and don't want to. It wouldn't work even if I
could. I just feel very sorry for you that you CANNOT understand.
It does a great job of preventing STD's unless your wife is town
*****.
You said "There is only one 100% effective birth control...", and then
segued from there into "Confine activities to your legal mate."
Yep that too. The issue was "UNWANTED PREGNANCIES." Now I am in an age
range were a pregnancy is a bit improbable, and a place where slowing down
is in the front of my mind. BUT - if it happened -- - - well it would NEVER
be "unwanted." Inconvinient as hell, but NEVER "unwanted" but then I have a
good marriage.
Perhaps you'll also tell me what marital fidelity has to do with
100% effecitve birth control?
Again complex. First it confines the acts to being with ONE person and
not THE WHOLE TOWN! Secondly married couples can work things out, but again
the issue is UNWANTED pregnancies.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Erickson" |
|
| Title: Re: POPE GRAVELY ILL |
25 Apr 2005 05:36:16 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 23:57:38 GMT, "\\ krp ~~~~" <web2457k@verizon.net>
wrote:
I'm a little curious. I someone decides to have sex outside of
marriage, is it better for them to use a condom or not?
Slobbering Skeleton
.
|
|
|
| User: "{krp}" |
|
| Title: Re: POPE GRAVELY ILL |
25 Apr 2005 12:10:13 PM |
|
|
"Paul Erickson" <paul.erickson@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:ob0p61todcjmg55pstg1hinnmte3uonro6@4ax.com...
On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 23:57:38 GMT, "\\ krp ~~~~" <web2457k@verizon.net>
wrote:
I'm a little curious. I someone decides to have sex outside of
marriage, is it better for them to use a condom or not?
Hmm if a person decides to stick their head into a tree shredded it is
better to comb their hair first?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "FAR_FAR" |
|
| Title: ENVIA CORREOS ANONIMOS A DIRECIONES CUBANAS |
25 Apr 2005 07:19:58 AM |
|
|
ENVIA CORREOS ANONIMOS A DIRECIONES CUBANAS
http://cf.geocities.com/imperialsat/miembros/www/cubaqueoprime_correo2.html
NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.4.108.20
Salgo por Proxy
minint.cu
"Paul Erickson" <paul.erickson@softhome.net> a écrit dans le message de
news: ob0p61todcjmg55pstg1hinnmte3uonro6@4ax.com...
On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 23:57:38 GMT, "\\ krp ~~~~" <web2457k@verizon.net>
wrote:
I'm a little curious. I someone decides to have sex outside of
marriage, is it better for them to use a condom or not?
Slobbering Skeleton
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mephisto" |
|
| Title: Re: POPE GRAVELY ILL |
05 Apr 2005 09:39:04 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:08:50 GMT, "\\ krp *" <web2457k@verizon.net>
wrote:
I have taken great pains all my life to honor life. Cary almost
everyone knows how babies are made. It seems you have heard almost nothing
of what the Pope has said about all of that. If people listed to him,
abortions wouldn't be necessary. Just because you refuse to obey the main
part of the message doesn't mean that somebody else is responsible for the
consequences. If you confined sex to marriage, weren't into promiscuity,
you'd not need the condoms or have to worry about that 39th abortion.
Life's too short for that sort of idiocy.
It's about time you woke up to the reality of the situation. People
are not going to suddenly start listening to religious extremists who
want to ban fun and stop them from having funky sex. It's not going to
happen. It never has in the past and it never will. Even the Catholic
priests can't keep their hands to themselves, so you can't really
expect everyone else to - at least most people restrict themselves to
having consensual sex with adults rather than molesting children.
Given that reality, we have to deal with the consequences. This leaves
you with two choices: promote contraception, or take responsibility
for the consequences (starving or abandoned children, abortions). It's
basic cause and effect.
You may be willing to sacrifice one of the greatest pleasures in life,
but you and your extremist buddies have no right to try and impose
that pointless self-sacrifice on the rest of the world - least of all
people whose lives are considerably less privileged than yours.
Mephisto
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: POPE GRAVELY ILL |
06 Apr 2005 01:09:24 PM |
|
|
"Mephisto" <mephisto@go.away> wrote in message
news:9g0651dm16v0v7511n5kj7g2phvknhr8p5@4ax.com...
I have taken great pains all my life to honor life. Cary almost
everyone knows how babies are made. It seems you have heard almost nothing
of what the Pope has said about all of that. If people listed to him,
abortions wouldn't be necessary. Just because you refuse to obey the main
part of the message doesn't mean that somebody else is responsible for the
consequences. If you confined sex to marriage, weren't into promiscuity,
you'd not need the condoms or have to worry about that 39th abortion.
Life's too short for that sort of idiocy.
What?
It's about time you woke up to the reality of the situation. People
are not going to suddenly start listening to religious extremists who
want to ban fun and stop them from having funky sex. It's not going to
happen. It never has in the past and it never will. Even the Catholic
priests can't keep their hands to themselves, so you can't really
expect everyone else to - at least most people restrict themselves to
having consensual sex with adults rather than molesting children.
Then FINE here is a simple CLUE for you - do NOT become a Catholic!
Given that reality, we have to deal with the consequences. This leaves
you with two choices: promote contraception, or take responsibility
for the consequences (starving or abandoned children, abortions). It's
basic cause and effect.
You may be willing to sacrifice one of the greatest pleasures in life,
but you and your extremist buddies have no right to try and impose
that pointless self-sacrifice on the rest of the world - least of all
people whose lives are considerably less privileged than yours.
I don't have to sacrifice anything. My wife is Cubana. You seem to be
one of the SCORE counters who tries to compensate with numbers for what they
can't get with quality. You are chasing smoke.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: POPE GRAVELY ILL |
05 Apr 2005 10:23:12 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:08:50 GMT, Kenneth R. Pangborn "krp "
<web24...@verizon.net> wrote:
I have taken great pains all my life to honor life. Cary almost
everyone knows how babies are made. It seems you have heard almost
nothing
of what the Pope has said about all of that. If people listed to him,
abortions wouldn't be necessary. Just because you refuse to obey the
main
part of the message doesn't mean that somebody else is responsible for
the
consequences. If you confined sex to marriage, weren't into
promiscuity,
you'd not need the condoms or have to worry about that 39th abortion.
In soc.culture.cuba, alt.atheism, milw.general, Mephisto
<mephi...@go.away> wrote on Tue, 05 Apr 2005 22:39:04 +0100
Local: Tues, Apr 5 2005 2:39 pm
<<Life's too short for that sort of idiocy.
It's about time you woke up to the reality of the situation. People are
not going to suddenly start listening to religious extremists who want
to ban fun and stop them from having funky sex. It's not going to
happen. It never has in the past and it never will. Even the Catholic
priests can't keep their hands to themselves, so you can't really
expect everyone else to - at least most people restrict themselves to
having consensual sex with adults rather than molesting children.
Given that reality, we have to deal with the consequences. This leaves
you with two choices: promote contraception, or take responsibility for
the consequences (starving or abandoned children, abortions). It's
basic cause and effect.
You may be willing to sacrifice one of the greatest pleasures in life,
but you and your extremist buddies have no right to try and impose that
pointless self-sacrifice on the rest of the world - least of all people
whose lives are considerably less privileged than yours.>>
Thank you, Mephisto. It is gratifying that there are those who do
not shrink away from the facts in this regard.
"A few years ago, it seemed quite
probable that Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston would have to face trial
for his appalling collusion in the child-rape racket that his diocese
had been running. The man had knowingly reassigned dangerous and
sadistic criminals to positions where they would be able to exploit the
defenseless. He had withheld evidence and made himself an accomplice,
before and after the fact, in the one offense that people of all faiths
and of none have most united in condemning...
Anyway, Cardinal Law isn't going to face a court, now. He has fled the
jurisdiction and lives in Rome, where a sinecure at the Vatican has
been found for him. (Actually not that much of a sinecure: As
archpriest of the Rome Basilica of St. Mary Major, he also sits on two
boards supervising priestly discipline - yes! - and the appointment
of diocesan bishops.) Even before this, he visited Rome on at least one
occasion to discuss whether or not the church should obey American law.
And it has been conclusively established that the Vatican itself -
including his holiness - was a part of the coverup and obstruction of
justice that allowed the child-rape scandal to continue for so long."
--Christopher Hitchens
http://www.slate.com/id/2116085/
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: POPE GRAVELY ILL |
06 Apr 2005 01:18:01 PM |
|
|
<lanruvi2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1112739792.574369.163680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
<<Life's too short for that sort of idiocy.
It's about time you woke up to the reality of the situation. People are
not going to suddenly start listening to religious extremists who want
to ban fun and stop them from having funky sex. It's not going to
happen. It never has in the past and it never will. Even the Catholic
priests can't keep their hands to themselves, so you can't really
expect everyone else to - at least most people restrict themselves to
having consensual sex with adults rather than molesting children.
Given that reality, we have to deal with the consequences. This leaves
you with two choices: promote contraception, or take responsibility for
the consequences (starving or abandoned children, abortions). It's
basic cause and effect.
You may be willing to sacrifice one of the greatest pleasures in life,
but you and your extremist buddies have no right to try and impose that
pointless self-sacrifice on the rest of the world - least of all people
whose lives are considerably less privileged than yours.>>
Thank you, Mephisto. It is gratifying that there are those who do
not shrink away from the facts in this regard.
FACTS? Or beliefs Lannie?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
