Vatican: Birth control pill pollutes environment

[billvon 3,072]

> ask yourself just how freeing you'd feel having to take that every day in
>order to supress a natural body function . . .

I have a friend who has to take pills every single day in order to suppress a natural bodily function. He loves the results; they keep him alive.

>indeed one of THE bodily function that identifies you and being a woman.

Surely you are not claiming that a woman past menopause is not a woman any more?

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

ONLY if you believe the CRAP these mad old fools feed you.....like the CRAP about birth control they continue to push onto the flock in the third world. People who dont know better listen to this shite and then get HIV.

I keep running into this same BS.

First of all, if you're listening to the Church, then you're not using condoms, but you're also not having sex with more than one partner your entire life. So if people did that, spread of HIV would stop.

IF you are having sex outside of marriage, you are not listening to the Church on that issue anyway, so what would stop you from using a condom?

And anyway the Catholic Church does not have the power to force or ban people from doing stuff.
Contrary to a certain Monty Python sketch, there is no such thing as the Church Police.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[micro 0]

>I have a friend who has to take pills every single day in order to suppress a natural bodily function. He loves the results; they keep him alive.

Your obviously talking about a man and taking the pill for some purpose other than to avoid pregnancy., i.e. you're changing the topic. Bad argumentation there billy boy.

>Surely you are not claiming that a woman past menopause is not a woman any more?

No, that is also a natural part of being a woman as well, part of the normal developmental process. Again, bad argumentation bill.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[jakee 1,563]

Quote

Quote

ONLY if you believe the CRAP these mad old fools feed you.....like the CRAP about birth control they continue to push onto the flock in the third world. People who dont know better listen to this shite and then get HIV.

First of all, if you're listening to the Church, then you're not using condoms, but you're also not having sex with more than one partner your entire life. So if people did that, spread of HIV would stop.

That's BS for 2 reasons.

1st, as I explained to micro, very few things in life are binary. The church doesn't have either complete influence or no influence over how people live.

2nd, the Church doesn't just say "We don't want you to use condoms for spiritual reasons." They say "We don't want you to use condoms for spiritual reasons, but even if you did they wouldn't do anything anyway, look at this research! [insert junk science here]"

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[nerdgirl 0]

I do think that you have, however, intentionally or inadvertently, gotten to the crux of the issue. It’s not about environmentalism, it’s about essentialistic definitions of the sexes and the roles that the Catholic Church (& other religions/cultures) expects one half of the world to fulfill. Sometimes these get one to unresolvable philosophical differences.

Given that you know something about microbiology, you most likely took a biochemistry course or two. Of all the physiological pathways/processes, why is one a “defining” characteristic? Why not ATP synthase? Why not serotonin synthesis? (One might argue the neurotransmitters and associated activity are more responsible for unique human characteristics than the placenta & mammalian egg.)

Or from another perspective, if women are defined by fertility (laying aside the issue of women who “naturally” are infertile – are they not women? – for a moment), what are men defined by? The penis? Is that really all you want to be reduced to? It is a reductionist argument. Men are a lot more than their external plumbing. Similarly women are a lot more than internal plumbing.

W/r/t suppressing or altering “natural bodily functions” – are diabetics any less human because they take insulin? How about those who are hyperthyroidic who take drugs to reduce the levels of hormones? There are lots of natural phenomena, from smallpox to cancer, which we’ve tried to suppress.

If one wants to base an argument on a physiological functions, those challenges must be reconciled. Dismissing them does not make them go away.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

They say "We don't want you to use condoms for spiritual reasons, but even if you did they wouldn't do anything anyway, look at this research! [insert junk science here]"

used condoms in the trash clog the landfills and choke the ducks

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,072]

>Your obviously talking about a man and taking the pill for some purpose other
>than to avoid pregnancy.

Correct. I was answering your question, which was "ask yourself just how freeing you'd feel having to take that every day in order to supress a natural body function." Ask Luke; he will tells you that it feels great to be alive.

>Bad argumentation there billy boy.

If you do not want an answer to a question, don't ask it.

>No, that is also a natural part of being a woman as well . . .

So are miscarriages. Indeed, women's bodies spontaneously end the pregnancy more than 50% of the time after egg fertilization. I guess by your argument, abortions are just a natural part of being a women as well.

One of the marks against the church (in my opinion) was its attitude that women were baby machines, subject to the will of the man in their marriage. There's been a lot written about the origin of that attitude, and it's been discussed before. I am disappointed to see that vestiges of that attitude remain.

[Capt.Slog 0]

Quote

i personally don't think you're capable of carrying on a rational conversation about this topic, given the way you choose to express yourself.

however, i do ask you to do this... go read a package insert on any birth control pill. ask yourself just how freeing you'd feel having to take that every day in order to supress a natural body function, indeed one of THE bodily function that identifies you and being a woman, that is working properly.

.

That's as ridiculous as claiming pedophilia is a way of suppressing a priest's natural bodily function.

BTW, I take a pill every day to suppress my natural bodily function of overproducing cholesterol.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

used condoms in the trash clog the landfills and choke the ducks

And then there's the embarrassment when your dog digs through the trash and puts your evidence in the living room. There's a funny conversation with the parents.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Doesn't supprise me at all,

USA = 90 % (ish) belief in GOD

Rest of DEVELOPED world = less than a 30% belief in GOD

fuzzy numbers there...citation?

I don't believe the US is remotely nearly 90%, and you'd need to add a few more "ish"es for those have an idle belief in a god, but don't participate in a religion about it. As well as those who treat the church more as the social construct it is for many people.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

Doesn't supprise me at all,

USA = 90 % (ish) belief in GOD

Rest of DEVELOPED world = less than a 30% belief in GOD

fuzzy numbers there...citation?

I don't believe the US is remotely nearly 90%, and you'd need to add a few more "ish"es for those have an idle belief in a god, but don't participate in a religion about it. As well as those who treat the church more as the social construct it is for many people.

and then add in those that believe in things like "karma" etc that pretend it doesn't also fall into the 'irrational belief' category as well. and those that have a religious fanaticism about things like Obama, and Enviromentalism, and CrW, and 4 way, etc.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[micro 0]

You and Billvon are trying to pigeon hole me into something I did not actually say. I'm not being reductionistic by saying that a very integral part of a woman's very identity is tied up in her sexuality, her being able to conceive and bear children, just as a man's identity is inexplicably tied in with his ability to father children. Is it the totality of one's identity?

Of course not, and never did I say that.

Naturally, one of you will bring up exceptions like women who can't have kids, sterility and the like. These are just that, exceptions to what would have occurred but for some anomaly or diversion in nature, disease, etc. As an aside, it is obviously ludicrous to say that sterile men and women are less men or women just b/c they are sterile, however, they are are recognizably not whole, just as a diabetic is not whole, just as a person with any other defect or deficit is not whole.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[micro 0]

Quote

Quote

i personally don't think you're capable of carrying on a rational conversation about this topic, given the way you choose to express yourself.

however, i do ask you to do this... go read a package insert on any birth control pill. ask yourself just how freeing you'd feel having to take that every day in order to supress a natural body function, indeed one of THE bodily function that identifies you and being a woman, that is working properly.

.

That's as ridiculous as claiming pedophilia is a way of suppressing a priest's natural bodily function.

BTW, I take a pill every day to suppress my natural bodily function of overproducing cholesterol.

the overproduction of cholesterol is not a natural body function. that is hypercholesteremia, which is a medical condition requiring medical intervention, i.e. the taking of medication. it is not "natural." women ovulating IS a natural process and taking a pill every day to suppress a woman's fertility, which is working the way it was designed to work is NOT natural. it is going AGAINST nature.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[jakee 1,563]

Quote

I'm not being reductionistic by saying that a very integral part of a woman's very identity is tied up in her sexuality, her being able to conceive and bear children, just as a man's identity is inexplicably tied in with his ability to father children.

Inexplicably? I'm not sure that's what you meant to say, but I would agree that you're having great difficulty explaining it!

Quote

Naturally, one of you will bring up exceptions like women who can't have kids, sterility and the like. These are just that, exceptions to what would have occurred but for some anomaly or diversion in nature, disease, etc.

And does that make them less identifiable as men or women? No.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[micro 0]

Quote

>Your obviously talking about a man and taking the pill for some purpose other
>than to avoid pregnancy.

>>Correct. I was answering your question, which was "ask yourself just how freeing you'd feel having to take that every day in order to supress a natural body function." Ask Luke; he will tells you that it feels great to be alive.

No, you were changing the topic. It was quite obvious that I what was being referred to was the natural bodily function of a woman's fertility. You have a tendency to do that and you're being disingenious by not admitting to it.

>No, that is also a natural part of being a woman as well . . .

>>So are miscarriages. Indeed, women's bodies spontaneously end the pregnancy more than 50% of the time after egg fertilization. I guess by your argument, abortions are just a natural part of being a women as well.

Spontaneous abortions, i.e. miscarriages, are, but not abortions by which someone directly seeks to end the life of healthy, growing unborn child.

>>One of the marks against the church (in my opinion) was its attitude that women were baby machines, subject to the will of the man in their marriage. There's been a lot written about the origin of that attitude, and it's been discussed before. I am disappointed to see that vestiges of that attitude remain.

I totally agree with you, unless you're insinuating that such a vestige exists in me. That is not an attitude I hold, and it is an erroneous assumption to conclude I hold that position just b/c I do not believe that forms of birth control are morally licit. Women are not chattle. They are free moral agents, equal in every way as men. And it's my position, and the position of others, that the pill, while it may appear to have granted women the sort of sexual freedom that men have enjoyed, has actually further enslaved women.

And this isn't directed towards Bill, but those who have a particular dislike for things Catholic and Christian...

I fully recognize this isn't a popular position here. That doesn't bother me at all. I'm completely comfortable in my beliefs, having read and evaluated and studied for many years. I didn't come by these beliefs easily, like many people assume: that people in Jesus Fly-Over Land just blindly follow the pontifications of a Roman Dictator.
So, if you're reading this and thinking of responding, please don't waste your time by being crass, by ridiculing or by denegrating or what have you. It really does nothing for the discussion. I haven't always been respectful of other people in the past and for that I'm sorry. I really do try, and I ask you do the same. I've had some very good discussions here with people and I've learned an awful lot. I've learned the most from people I disagree with the most...

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[micro 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm not being reductionistic by saying that a very integral part of a woman's very identity is tied up in her sexuality, her being able to conceive and bear children, just as a man's identity is inexplicably tied in with his ability to father children.

Inexplicably? I'm not sure that's what you meant to say, but I would agree that you're having great difficulty explaining it!

.

Sorry, I meant inextricably... I'm in the airport watching CNN and the Blago/Burras fiasco as I'm typing... whoops.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[dmkellett 0]

Birth control pill = FURTHER ENSLAVEMENT OF WOMEN?????????

I think you have this back to front, how on earth can something that allows women increased freedom and choice be a method of enslavement?

only if you listen to the vatican can you possibly believe this. It goes against everything the modern world stands for and does nothing for humanity. Much like most of the other crap from religious people in power....threats of suffering in order to control (enslave) the flock. cant you see this??

[billvon 3,072]

> It was quite obvious that I what was being referred to was the natural
>bodily function of a woman's fertility.

And I was talking about the natural bodily function of Luke's immune system.

A woman who chooses to not have children is still a complete woman. A man who chooses to suppress his own immune system is still a complete man. A volleyball player with one hand is still a complete volleyball player. Someone who donates eggs, a kidney or part of a liver is still a complete person.

>Spontaneous abortions, i.e. miscarriages, are, but not abortions by which
>someone directly seeks to end the life of healthy, growing unborn child.

Right. Sometimes it's a conscious decision. More often, the woman's body makes the decision to end the life of a perfect, healthy, growing unborn baby. Yet I think you would have no problem with interfering with that natural process, if a couple wanted to have kids and sought to take drugs to increase her chances of ovulation or implanatation.

In any case, we've established you think it's OK to interfere with natural processes by taking pills; everything else is quibbling over details.

>They are free moral agents, equal in every way as men.

Agreed. However, claiming a woman is worth less as a woman because she takes birth control contradicts that statement.

>the pill . . .has actually further enslaved women.

>please don't waste your time by being crass, by ridiculing or by denegrating or
>what have you.

Those two statements are somewhat ironic, coming as they do in the same post. I think if someone else posted that freedom to choose religion = slavery you'd be all over them, and call their post "ridiculous" or some such.

[Capt.Slog 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

i personally don't think you're capable of carrying on a rational conversation about this topic, given the way you choose to express yourself.

however, i do ask you to do this... go read a package insert on any birth control pill. ask yourself just how freeing you'd feel having to take that every day in order to supress a natural body function, indeed one of THE bodily function that identifies you and being a woman, that is working properly.

.

That's as ridiculous as claiming pedophilia is a way of suppressing a priest's natural bodily function.

BTW, I take a pill every day to suppress my natural bodily function of overproducing cholesterol.

the overproduction of cholesterol is not a natural body function. that is hypercholesteremia, which is a medical condition requiring medical intervention, i.e. the taking of medication. it is not "natural."

Of course it's natural. A huge percentage of the population does it quite naturally. It doesn't "require" intervention.

Same would apply to pills that lower blood pressure. High blood pressure is quite natural, it's just not healthy.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

the pill, while it may appear to have granted women the sort of sexual freedom that men have enjoyed, has actually further enslaved women.

I'm curious as to the foundation of your belief in this regard. Frankly, although Humanae Vitae asserts this, it does so in an essentially conclusory way, without explaining the foundation for how it concludes that Point B logically results from Point A. Here's how it speaks to that issue in Paragraph 17:

Quote

Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.

Now that's a presumption, and a conclusion, but it's not an explanation or a foundation. Please discuss, with principal focus on the foundation for your own belief.

[micro 0]

Quote

Birth control pill = FURTHER ENSLAVEMENT OF WOMEN?????????

I think you have this back to front, how on earth can something that allows women increased freedom and choice be a method of enslavement?

only if you listen to the vatican can you possibly believe this. It goes against everything the modern world stands for and does nothing for humanity. Much like most of the other crap from religious people in power....threats of suffering in order to control (enslave) the flock. cant you see this??

actually, that's not the case. there are many, many people who are not catholic who disagree w/ artificial birth control for many reasons. athiests who disagree w/ taking "medications" for unecessary reasons, not wanting to subject themselves to the harsh side effects of BC pills, non-catholics, jews, etc. btw, thanks for continuing your ranting and denigrating of people's beliefs.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[micro 0]

Quote

Quote

the pill, while it may appear to have granted women the sort of sexual freedom that men have enjoyed, has actually further enslaved women.

I'm curious as to the foundation of your belief in this regard. Frankly, although Humanae Vitae asserts this, it does so in an essentially conclusory way, without explaining the foundation for how it concludes that Point B logically results from Point A. Here's how it speaks to that issue in Paragraph 17:

Quote

Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.

Now that's a presumption, and a conclusion, but it's not an explanation or a foundation. Please discuss, with principal focus on the foundation for your own belief.

on the road now for work... here is an article that is may answer your questions...

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/sexuality/se0002.html

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[Andy9o8 2]

Thanks. Long article, and I'm about ready to crash. I'll read it tomorrow.

[jerryzflies 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

i personally don't think you're capable of carrying on a rational conversation about this topic, given the way you choose to express yourself.

however, i do ask you to do this... go read a package insert on any birth control pill. ask yourself just how freeing you'd feel having to take that every day in order to supress a natural body function, indeed one of THE bodily function that identifies you and being a woman, that is working properly.

.

That's as ridiculous as claiming pedophilia is a way of suppressing a priest's natural bodily function.

BTW, I take a pill every day to suppress my natural bodily function of overproducing cholesterol.

the overproduction of cholesterol is not a natural body function. that is hypercholesteremia, which is a medical condition requiring medical intervention, i.e. the taking of medication. it is not "natural."

Of course it's natural. A huge percentage of the population does it quite naturally. It doesn't "require" intervention.

Same would apply to pills that lower blood pressure. High blood pressure is quite natural, it's just not healthy.

50% of European males have hypertension, and 60% of German males.

By ANY definition of normal,male hypertension is a normal, if undesirable, condition. So taking pills to lower blood pressure is by micro's definition thwarting a natural bodily function and immoral.

If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

[micro 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

i personally don't think you're capable of carrying on a rational conversation about this topic, given the way you choose to express yourself.

however, i do ask you to do this... go read a package insert on any birth control pill. ask yourself just how freeing you'd feel having to take that every day in order to supress a natural body function, indeed one of THE bodily function that identifies you and being a woman, that is working properly.

.

That's as ridiculous as claiming pedophilia is a way of suppressing a priest's natural bodily function.

BTW, I take a pill every day to suppress my natural bodily function of overproducing cholesterol.

the overproduction of cholesterol is not a natural body function. that is hypercholesteremia, which is a medical condition requiring medical intervention, i.e. the taking of medication. it is not "natural."

Of course it's natural. A huge percentage of the population does it quite naturally. It doesn't "require" intervention.

Same would apply to pills that lower blood pressure. High blood pressure is quite natural, it's just not healthy.

50% of European males have hypertension, and 60% of German males.

By ANY definition of normal,male hypertension is a normal, if undesirable, condition. So taking pills to lower blood pressure is by micro's definition thwarting a natural bodily function and immoral.

Ugh... you guys are just impossible. Give me a break.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...