Contraception And Abortion

[icelandic_iceskater]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1696490' date='Nov 7 2008, 01:38 AM']I don't believe that it's moral relativism. I believe that it's tolerating one evil to prevent another.[/quote]Either contraception is wrong or it isn't. It can't be wrong except when using it to prevent an abortion. THAT is moral relativism. Believing that its ok to tolerate one evil to prevent another ignores the fact that contraception is inherently wrong. You're allowing one inherently evil act to prevent another. The end does not justify the means. Both are inherently wrong and both should be avoided. Did you catch the word [i]inherently[/i]?

When voting for a presidential candidate in support of embryonic stem cell research who is running against a candidate who is pro-choice- the principle of double effect comes into play.
-The action (voting for a candidate who supports ESCR) in and of itself is at least indifferent
*we can judge this by looking at the circumstances and the intention.
-You have the right intention (keeping a pro-choicer out of office)
-you are not doing evil so that good may result.
*we can judge this by looking at the level of cooperation. Proximate mediate. Your object or intention is not that of the person committing the evil act, but you are aware of the act. Your culpability here would depend on your intentions and circumstances.
-And the good effect (keeping a pro-choicer out of office) balances the evil effect (voting for someone who supports ESCR)

The situation is morally permissible.

Contraceptives are always used to prevent human life. Even if it is a life that will later be terminated, it is still inherently wrong.

If you aren't open to a child- try NFP or abstain. Its do-able. I promise.

[eagle_eye222001]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1696490' date='Nov 7 2008, 12:38 AM']I don't believe that it's moral relativism. I believe that it's tolerating one evil to prevent another.[/quote]

Same difference. Moral relativism is where an act may be bad, but it is okay in the view it is the lesser of two evils. We can change the language, but at the end of the day, you are asking for an evil to be okay or better in the view that another evil is being avoided.


[quote]Believe me, i understand that consequences to that logic. However, I'm just frustrated with the inaction of the pro-life movement. If you wait around forever for the "perfect" solution, millions of babies still die.[/quote]

Best solution is abstinence, and if you are married NFP as far as I know.

[quote]If you accept a less than perfect solution, millions less could die in the process of working towards complete illegality. I know that the best solution is to not cooperate with any evil in the process. But, i don't see any other suggestions right now. And I believe that, though no abortion at all is best, fewer babies dying is better than more.[/quote]

Again, you are asking for moral relativism to be okay. So your real issue here is why moral relativism is not okay.

[Barbarus]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1696524' date='Nov 7 2008, 01:09 AM']As I pointed out, I'm quite aware of all of this. It's been hashed out before.

What I am concerned about are ways of reducing abortion while also working to completely end it. Catholics seems to have one part right, wanting to end it, but no way to work towards it except moping around and mourning the losses.[/quote]
See, I don't think you are aware of it. You think of contraception as being the "lesser of two evils" when in fact it is directly correlated to abortion. More and more social data is supporting the correlation between contraception and the social morays that lead to abortion, as well as the more direct links I point out above. For a really marvelous survey of this issue, there was an article in a recent First Things about the secular studies that are proving out the predictions Pope Paul VI made in Humanae Vitae.

Abortion is the awful effect of contraception. Until contraception is socially unacceptable, abortion will be socially acceptable.

I think the big problem with Catholics today is that there are too many people who think like you, that contraception is "not that bad" and that if kids are going to be having sex anyway, we might as well protect them from the temporal consequences of their sin. No offense to anyone who has already posted in this thread with that view, but I think that is an absolutely horrible parenting philosophy. I think too often we forget that the end goal here is holiness that leads to salvation, not preventing suffering. But I digress.

As I said, the fact that more people do not see the clear connection between abortion and contraception is one of the main reasons there is not a clearer plan in place to end abortion. Catholics contracept at a rate similar to the general population. I think we purposefully blind ourselves to the connection between abortion and contraception, because embracing that connection means taking a hard look at our own behavior, and having very hard conversations with people we love about their sexual habits. Our culture has adopted the view that people's sexual behaviors are private and not open to the review of the larger community -- that whole "right to privacy" thing. In order to kill the culture of death, it is this very "right to privacy" that we have to attack.

People's sexual behaviors matter to the entire community. Whether or not they contracept matters. Who they sleep with matters. It is our business, and there are behaviors that are simply not conducive to true health and human flourishing. Addressing this stuff means we have to start in our own marriages and in our own bedrooms, and that is why truly addressing abortion is so hard to do. It's far, far easier to talk about all those other people who are making poor life choices than looking at the stock of contraceptives in our own medicine cabinets.

[rkwright]

What makes this different from say the lessor of two evils in an election is that there is a viable third choice; abstinence.

Abstinence is 100% effective at preventing abortion, sexually transmitted diseases, and its sin-free.

Thats why contraception isn't an option. There is a very realistic third choice.

I know the response is 'abstinence doesn't work'. Abstinence works just fine. Its people that don't work. Just because people can't control themselves, doesn't mean we should tolerate another sin.

[thessalonian]

Contraception is not the grave moral evil that abortion is. No question about that. But it's kinda like do you want to run in to a brick wall at 100 miles per hour or at 75. Either way you've made shipwreck of your soul.

Edited November 7, 2008 by thessalonian

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='eagle_eye222001' post='1696540' date='Nov 7 2008, 12:33 AM']Same difference. Moral relativism is where an act may be bad, but it is okay in the view it is the lesser of two evils. We can change the language, but at the end of the day, you are asking for an evil to be okay or better in the view that another evil is being avoided.




Best solution is abstinence, and if you are married NFP as far as I know.



Again, you are asking for moral relativism to be okay. So your real issue here is why moral relativism is not okay.[/quote]
I'm admitting they are evil. That's not relativism. If i was saying that they were all the same difference, that would be relativism. I'm saying that one is much more gravely evil, and it is better, when there are no other options, to choose the less evil one than the more evil one - i.e. personal sin of birth control over killing of a baby.

[quote name='Barbarus' post='1696556' date='Nov 7 2008, 01:51 AM']See, I don't think you are aware of it. You think of contraception as being the "lesser of two evils" when in fact it is directly correlated to abortion. More and more social data is supporting the correlation between contraception and the social morays that lead to abortion, as well as the more direct links I point out above. For a really marvelous survey of this issue, there was an article in a recent First Things about the secular studies that are proving out the predictions Pope Paul VI made in Humanae Vitae.

Abortion is the awful effect of contraception. Until contraception is socially unacceptable, abortion will be socially acceptable.

I think the big problem with Catholics today is that there are too many people who think like you, that contraception is "not that bad" and that if kids are going to be having sex anyway, we might as well protect them from the temporal consequences of their sin. No offense to anyone who has already posted in this thread with that view, but I think that is an absolutely horrible parenting philosophy. I think too often we forget that the end goal here is holiness that leads to salvation, not preventing suffering. But I digress.

As I said, the fact that more people do not see the clear connection between abortion and contraception is one of the main reasons there is not a clearer plan in place to end abortion. Catholics contracept at a rate similar to the general population. I think we purposefully blind ourselves to the connection between abortion and contraception, because embracing that connection means taking a hard look at our own behavior, and having very hard conversations with people we love about their sexual habits. Our culture has adopted the view that people's sexual behaviors are private and not open to the review of the larger community -- that whole "right to privacy" thing. In order to kill the culture of death, it is this very "right to privacy" that we have to attack.

People's sexual behaviors matter to the entire community. Whether or not they contracept matters. Who they sleep with matters. It is our business, and there are behaviors that are simply not conducive to true health and human flourishing. Addressing this stuff means we have to start in our own marriages and in our own bedrooms, and that is why truly addressing abortion is so hard to do. It's far, far easier to talk about all those other people who are making poor life choices than looking at the stock of contraceptives in our own medicine cabinets.[/quote]
I didn't say I agree, I said I understood your viewpoint.

[quote name='rkwright' post='1696635' date='Nov 7 2008, 08:01 AM']What makes this different from say the lessor of two evils in an election is that there is a viable third choice; abstinence.

Abstinence is 100% effective at preventing abortion, sexually transmitted diseases, and its sin-free.

Thats why contraception isn't an option. There is a very realistic third choice.

I know the response is 'abstinence doesn't work'. Abstinence works just fine. Its people that don't work. Just because people can't control themselves, doesn't mean we should tolerate another sin.[/quote]
Realistic to whom? Catholics? Of course. But Catholics aren't the ones having the abortions. It's not a realistic solution for the rest of the country. What is more important to you? A man and woman sinning by using a condom, or a man and woman sinning by having an abortion and killing the baby?

[quote name='thessalonian' post='1696638' date='Nov 7 2008, 08:10 AM']Contraception is not the grave moral evil that abortion is. No question about that. But it's kinda like do you want to run in to a brick wall at 100 miles per hour or at 75. Either way you've made shipwreck of your soul. [/quote]
It's true, and that's the major problem with what I'm saying. However, I'd liken birth control to crashing at 35 mph and abortion as crashing at 100 mph. One is less evil than the other, even though they are both evil.

Edited November 7, 2008 by fidei defensor

[icelandic_iceskater]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1696696' date='Nov 7 2008, 11:34 AM']I'm admitting they are evil. That's not relativism. If i was saying that they were all the same difference, that would be relativism. I'm saying that one is much more gravely evil, and it is better, when there are no other options, to choose the less evil one than the more evil one - i.e. personal sin of birth control over killing of a baby.[/quote]So what exactly is moral relativism, then?

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='icelandic_iceskater' post='1696719' date='Nov 7 2008, 10:13 AM']So what exactly is moral relativism, then?[/quote]
From Wikipedia:

"In philosophy moral relativism is the position that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect objective and/or universal moral truths, but instead make claims relative to social, cultural, historical or personal circumstances. Moral relativists hold that no universal standard exists by which to assess an ethical proposition's truth."

I'm not saying that there is no standard, I'm not saying that both are equal. I can see what you're suggesting about social circumstances and the like, but I'm asking, what is more important? The lives of unborn children or someone using a condom?

[icelandic_iceskater]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1696746' date='Nov 7 2008, 12:44 PM']I'm not saying that there is no standard, I'm not saying that both are equal. I can see what you're suggesting about social circumstances and the like, but I'm asking, what is more important? The lives of unborn children or someone using a condom?[/quote]
[i]"In philosophy moral relativism is the position that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect objective and/or universal moral truths"[/i]

So saying that contraception is permissible because it prevents abortion still keeps in mind that contraception is inherently wrong? Or does it deny the Truth...?

You're basically saying that yes you see that contraception is wrong, but [i]compared[/i] to abortion its the lesser of two evils. Relatively speaking.

Fact: They are both inherent evils. The importance is irrelevant. There is a third option.

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='icelandic_iceskater' post='1696757' date='Nov 7 2008, 10:58 AM'][i]"In philosophy moral relativism is the position that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect objective and/or universal moral truths"[/i]

So saying that contraception is permissible because it prevents abortion still keeps in mind that contraception is inherently wrong? Or does it deny the Truth...?

You're basically saying that yes you see that contraception is wrong, but [i]compared[/i] to abortion its the lesser of two evils. Relatively speaking.

Fact: They are both inherent evils. The importance is irrelevant. There is a third option.[/quote]
When have I said that they aren't objectively wrong? I haven't.

However, I already pointed out that I'm trying to reconcile two ideas here. The desire to avoid "murdering" babies at any cost, and the immorality of contraception.

[icelandic_iceskater]

a) until you understand why contraception is wrong in and of itself, you will not be able to understand why it is wrong to use as a means to prevent abortion.

b) If you want to avoid murdering babies at any cost- why can't you try NFP or abstain?

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='icelandic_iceskater' post='1696765' date='Nov 7 2008, 11:08 AM']a) until you understand why contraception is wrong in and of itself, you will not be able to understand why it is wrong to use as a means to prevent abortion.

b) If you want to avoid murdering babies at any cost- why can't you try NFP or abstain?[/quote]
a) I do understand the reasoning. I was Catholic for a long time. And not just a cafeteria Catholic, either.

b) I'm talking about ending abortions in general, not just Catholics. As I said, Catholics aren't the ones having the abortions. You need to think in terms of the rest of society and their likely habits. You can't be wishfully thinking and say "they shouldn't have sex outside of marriage and they shouldn't use birth control" and mean that these things won't happen. They will and do happen.

Edited November 7, 2008 by fidei defensor

[icelandic_iceskater]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1696778' date='Nov 7 2008, 01:25 PM']a) I do understand the reasoning. I was Catholic for a long time. And not just a cafeteria Catholic, either.

b) I'm talking about ending abortions in general, not just Catholics. As I said, Catholics aren't the ones having the abortions. You need to think in terms of the rest of society and their likely habits. You can't be wishfully thinking and say "they shouldn't have sex outside of marriage and they shouldn't use birth control" and mean that these things won't happen. They will and do happen.[/quote]
a) So you understand then that contraception is an inherent evil?

b) go back and read [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?s=&showtopic=87098&view=findpost&p=1696516"]Barbarus's post[/url]. S/he explained it better than I could. If you're working to end abortion- start at the root. That is, with the mentality that sex is merely for pleasure.

[thessalonian]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1696778' date='Nov 7 2008, 12:25 PM']a) I do understand the reasoning. I was Catholic for a long time. And not just a cafeteria Catholic, either.

b) I'm talking about ending abortions in general, not just Catholics. As I said, Catholics aren't the ones having the abortions. You need to think in terms of the rest of society and their likely habits. You can't be wishfully thinking and say "they shouldn't have sex outside of marriage and they shouldn't use birth control" and mean that these things won't happen. They will and do happen.[/quote]


Contraception has merely increased the need for abortion. Surely you can see that. Couples don't associate sex with love and marriage anymore in large part due to Contraception. Then when they get pregnant and are not married they "have" to do something that is even more irrespoinsible. Abort the child. Contraception has also increased promiscuty, i.e. increasing greatly the frequency of sex among the unmarried. People are addicted to sex. When you increase the freequency due to the addiction that changes of a "failure" of the contraception or just plain being careless in using it greatly increases. Your throwing fuel on the fire that needs to be put out.

[jkaands]

All of these arguments are a waste of time.

Fidei, why do you bother?

Fornication was been around since the beginning of time, long before contraception. Illegitimacy rates are what led to the development of contraception, along with uncontrolled birth rates and high maternal deaths from illegal abortion.

Opposition to contraception is like pouring gasoline on the fire of abortion. Most Catholics in the US and Europe realize this. The vast majority of Catholics in this country and Europe practice contraception. 54% of Catholics in the US voted for Obama, despite his moderate stand on abortion.

Y'all can yell and scream all you want to; virtually no one is listening to you.