Abortion Discussion, Part the Fourth

ohnonotgmail

CerebralCortex wrote: »

Or how protestant Irish people have become.

up to no good as usual

Cabaal

lazygal wrote: »

I didn't have much sympathy for parents who brought their children to mass to be indoctrinated and then complained that their children heard the Catholic position on reproductive rights.

Neither do I,
My response is its the church's club house, they can say what they want.
If you don't like it stay home, its not stopping you believeing in a god.

lazygal

It was hard to stomach the complaining from parents I know. And they certainly didn't take kindly to being asked why they were having their children indoctrinated if they disagreed with the church on almost every social issue.

CerebralCortex

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Yes, because there are apparently only those two options here in 1820.

I don't know what that means.

smacl

CerebralCortex wrote: »

I don't know what that means.

Not everyone in this country is Catholic or Protestant as was the case a couple of centuries back. This is clearly illustrated by the fact you're posting on an atheist and agnostic forum.

CerebralCortex

smacl wrote: »

Not everyone in this country is Catholic or Protestant as was the case a couple of centuries back. This is clearly illustrated by the fact you're posting on an atheist and agnostic forum.

I was just pointing out how the majority of people in Ireland who put down Catholic as their creed don't really take the rules of membership seriously.

Igotadose

CerebralCortex wrote: »

I was just pointing out how the majority of people in Ireland who put down Catholic as their creed don't really take the rules of membership seriously.

You're probably in the wrong thread pointing that out. Go bother the Christianity threads.

CerebralCortex

Igotadose wrote: »

You're probably in the wrong thread pointing that out. Go bother the Christianity threads.

I'm sorry, didn't realise I was bothering people.

Bannasidhe

Igotadose wrote: »

You're probably in the wrong thread pointing that out. Go bother the Christianity threads.

Mod

Bit snarky. Could have been a genuine comment. Do try and be civil.

Thanking you.

Bannasidhe

CerebralCortex wrote: »

I'm sorry, didn't realise I was bothering people.

You aren't.
You made the 'mistake' of popping into an often contentious thread and dropped a one-liner that ruffled feathers - my own included.

Perhaps a wee bit more context next time. Saves feathers and explanations later.

Hotblack Desiato

I think it's been apparent for a very long time now that most self-declared Irish catholics (SDICs?) would be more doctrinally (if not socially) at home in the CoI.

e.g.

- use contraception
- don't believe in papal infallibility
- don't believe in the immaculate conception (if they know what it is)
- don't believe in transubstantiation (if they know what it is)

Although CoI isn't, afaik, exactly hot on sex before marriage, cohabitation or divorce - but unlike the RCC they don't think that that means the law should ban them for everyone else as well. Similarly, didn't campaign in favour of the 8th amendment in 1983, but did (rather weakly) state that they weren't in favour of its repeal either... go figure.

Given that a survey commissioned by the catholic bishops found that 10% of SDICs don't believe in god at all, and some larger percentage I can't remember aren't at all sure on the issue, it's no wonder that so many either don't know or don't care what the doctrines are of the church they claim to belong to.

smacl

CerebralCortex wrote: »

I was just pointing out how the majority of people in Ireland who put down Catholic as their creed don't really take the rules of membership seriously.

I wasn't aware that the question on the census asked whether they take the rules of membership seriously, merely how they self identify in terms of religion.

aloyisious

CerebralCortex wrote: »

I was just pointing out how the majority of people in Ireland who put down Catholic as their creed don't really take the rules of membership seriously.

Just a technicality but Protestants are catholic, just not members of the Roman Catholic version of the christian faith.

robindch

aloyisious wrote: »

Just a technicality but Protestants are catholic, just not members of the Roman Catholic version of the christian faith.

Doesn't the BCP require protestants to say that they're "Catholick", with a 'k'?

aloyisious

robindch wrote: »

Doesn't the BCP require protestants to say that they're "Catholick", with a 'k'?

You had me worried there for a bit. I thought you were placing the K at the front.

CerebralCortex

smacl wrote: »

I wasn't aware that the question on the census asked whether they take the rules of membership seriously, merely how they self identify in terms of religion.

Doesn't it have implications tho for policies related to the Catholic Church?

Bannasidhe

aloyisious wrote: »

Just a technicality but Protestants are catholic, just not members of the Roman Catholic version of the christian faith.

Ian Paisley is now spinning in his grave.
:pac:

ohnonotgmail

aloyisious wrote: »

Just a technicality but Protestants are catholic, just not members of the Roman Catholic version of the christian faith.

is it not more that the CoI consider themselves catholics but i dont think that automatically applies to all protestant faiths. somebody else mentioned Ian paisley and we could probably solve world energy problems by describing him as catholic.

aloyisious

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

is it not more that the CoI consider themselves catholics but i dont think that automatically applies to all protestant faiths. somebody else mentioned Ian paisley and we could probably solve world energy problems by describing him as catholic.

It's probably because people take/use the word catholic differently. AFAIK the CoE also uses the word catholic in reference to itself but in the way the word links to universal: eg as part of the christian faith, just not that held by the Roman or Orthodox sections of the faith. The Rev Ian's church could be an example of differing usage of words, that one probably being of a PROTESTANT declaration of differing opinion to other Protestant and christian churches [though not being a member of his particular church or au fait with it I'm making an assumption there].

aloyisious

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Ian Paisley is now spinning in his grave.
:pac:

Though not for turning.

ohnonotgmail

aloyisious wrote: »

It's probably because people take/use the word catholic differently. AFAIK the CoE also uses the word catholic in reference to itself but in the way the word links to universal: eg as part of the christian faith, just not that held by the Roman or Orthodox sections of the faith. The Rev Ian's church could be an example of differing usage of words, that one probably being of a PROTESTANT declaration of differing opinion to other Protestant and christian churches [though not being a member of his particular church or au fait with it I'm making an assumption there].

this is why the CoI consider themselves catholic

The Church of Ireland is Catholic because it is in possession of a continuous tradition of faith and practice, based on Scripture and early traditions, enshrined in the Catholic Creeds, together with the sacraments and apostolic ministry.

ohnonotgmail

aloyisious wrote: »

Though not for turning.

he could be spinning head over heels. bit difficult to do in a coffin mind.

aloyisious

CerebralCortex wrote: »

Doesn't it have implications tho for policies related to the Catholic Church?

Yes. The church has also [afaik] looked at the modern understanding [by some Christians] of the meaning of the word abortion in respect to its medical definition when it comes to terminations, and come to accept there is a difference there, as distinct from that held by persons of strong intensely-held belief within it's particular part of the Christian faith, who hold that the words abortion and termination are inextricably linked and not capable of different interpretation.

aloyisious

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

this is why the CoI consider themselves catholic

Have to say that I didn't know, until I entered my mums CoI church for her funeral service, that the CoI believed in communion similar to the RC here. First and only time there, and a revelation when I realised we humans were arguing over human interpretations of human words, so stupid, but I digress there.

Hotblack Desiato

aloyisious wrote: »

Just a technicality but Protestants are catholic, just not members of the Roman Catholic version of the christian faith.

Anglicans (Church of Ireland, Church of England, etc.) are - there are many other churches which we collectively call Protestant which are not.

https://www.ireland.anglican.org/our-faith/what-we-believe

We are Catholic in holding all the Christian faith in its fullness and being part of the one worldwide Church of God.

Igotadose

Never saw this thread before. Very articulate discussion on how to prevent abortions, written by a Mormon mother of 6 children. Worth the read:

https://twitter.com/designmom/status/1040363431893725184

Bredabe

Igotadose wrote: »

Never saw this thread before. Very articulate discussion on how to prevent abortions, written by a Mormon mother of 6 children. Worth the read:

https://twitter.com/designmom/status/1040363431893725184

I read this when it came out first and the woman speaks a lot of sense, even if its not obvious to a lot of people at first read.
I refer all my girls to this when they are coming to the life stage when thinking about things like this, so they have a counterbalance to the iona and co.

Mark Hamill

Igotadose wrote: »

Never saw this thread before. Very articulate discussion on how to prevent abortions, written by a Mormon mother of 6 children. Worth the read:

https://twitter.com/designmom/status/1040363431893725184

Ehh... Are you sure it isn't satire? e.g:

Mormon Woman on Twitter wrote:

women can only get pregnant about 2 days each month

Lol what?

Mormon Woman on Twitter wrote:

men are 100% responsible for unwanted pregnancies

Her entire argument for this claim, which is what the whole twitter thread is trying to support, seems to be that 100% of all unwanted pregnancies are entirely the result of men pressuring women to have sex without condoms (or sneaking them off during sex) and then not pulling out at the end, because of the slight increase of pleasure it affords men. She also says:

Mormon Woman on Twitter wrote:

Women enjoying sex does not equal unwanted pregnancy and abortion. Men enjoying sex and having irresponsible ejaculations is what causes unwanted pregnancies and abortion.

If she didn't start with "I'm a Mormon" I would have assumed she was some kind of repressed religious nut, given the level of bonkers, gender-imbalanced views on sex she is spouting.
At first glance, it might seem like she is giving the power in sex to women (women can have all the sex they want etc.) but it is actually giving it to men, by implying that men are ones who are entirely responsible for all sex.

Mormon Woman on Twitter wrote:

If you actually care about reducing or eliminating the number of abortions in our country, simply HOLD MEN RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS.
What would that look like?
[SNIP]
Put a castration law on the books, implement the law, let the media tell the story, and in 3 months or less, tada! abortions will have virtually disappeared.

Mormon Woman on Twitter wrote:

how about this prevention idea: At the onset of puberty, all males in the U.S. could be required by law to get a vasectomy.

If this isn't satire, then she is nuts.
Condoms never fail? Women never take sexual chances?

Bredabe

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Ehh... Are you sure it isn't satire? e.g:


Lol what?


Her entire argument for this claim, which is what the whole twitter thread is trying to support, seems to be that 100% of all unwanted pregnancies are entirely the result of men pressuring women to have sex without condoms (or sneaking them off during sex) and then not pulling out at the end, because of the slight increase of pleasure it affords men. She also says:


If she didn't start with "I'm a Mormon" I would have assumed she was some kind of repressed religious nut, given the level of bonkers, gender-imbalanced views on sex she is spouting.
At first glance, it might seem like she is giving the power in sex to women (women can have all the sex they want etc.) but it is actually giving it to men, by implying that men are ones who are entirely responsible for all sex.




If this isn't satire, then she is nuts.
Condoms never fail? Women never take sexual chances?

I consider it to be a jaundiced view of men's sexuality from a woman's point of view.
Of course women take sexual chances, but if sperm isn't involved there is no chances in the situation. I know grown men who still say that condoms are 110% reliable even tho they know well its not true, its a line to get people into bed with them.

Mark Hamill

Bredabe wrote: »

I consider it to be a jaundiced view of men's sexuality from a woman's point of view.
Of course women take sexual chances, but if sperm isn't involved there is no chances in the situation. I know grown men who still say that condoms are 110% reliable even tho they know well its not true, its a line to get people into bed with them.

And if women aren't involved, then there is no chance (for the man) either, so you haven't really made the point you think you are making.

Look I don't deny that such men might exist (minority they may be), and that an extra emphasis on educating girls and women about the possibility of encountering such men is an (unfortunately necessary) requirement. I have a 3yo daughter, and when she grows older, her sex education will include how she might get pressured from boys to do things which are more unsafe for her than them.

But you can't take the one valid point that someone makes and that you agree with and jump to taking their whole spiel as true. That woman on twitter is spectacularly, even dangerously wrong on many of her points.
Going by her claim, if you are only fertile 2 days of the month then you don't need condoms the other 26 days, do you? If women actually followed that, how many unwanted pregnancies would there be? And whose fault would that be? Still men's, or that twitter idiot's fault for spreading false information?