- Joined
- Dec 21, 2013
- Messages
- 13,309
- Reaction score
- 1,307
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
According to Catholic beliefs and precepts. Correct?
Correct.
According to Catholic beliefs and precepts. Correct?
Correct.
Your continued misuse of that word is noted.
How does it do that.
The act is still the same act.
I'm not against loving human relationships. I'm against unnatural sexual relationships.
As you just quoted me saying, contraception is immoral and should be outlawed.
Fornication is also wrong, although I'm not sure it would be best to outlaw it. Although unmarried open cohabitation should probably be outlawed.
a and c) I already gave the proof. If you wish, refute it.
b) The natural law prohibits abortion.
I have never advocated a theocracy.
There is natural law.
I didn't say that the act of fornication is unnatural. It is irrational because humans naturally have permanent mates.
Marriage occurred 1000 years ago.
The dictionary is your friend.
I advocate a Catholic confessional state, not a theocracy.
Laws would be guided by Catholic teaching.
The government would be run by Catholic laypersons.
So the Catholic beliefs would be law. Sounds theocratic to me but even if not, it sounds horrific and very very few people would ever want to be 'ruled' by those beliefs.
Not even most Catholics I bet, since most good Catholics do not need laws to force them or encourage them to follow their faith....they do so because they believe it's the right thing to do, God's desires for them on Earth. Someone is not much of good Catholic, Christian, or anything else if it takes anything more than their own free will to obey God's Law.
Your idea of desiring to force your offensive Catholic beliefs, which are even immoral IMO in some cases, is indeed horrific to myself and those others that God clearly TOLD had free will. (Heh, not to mention the Constitution).
Laws would be guided by Catholic teaching.
no sex out side of marriage is ok
the act is not the same one is an act f sex that can result in procreation the other is not
Yes it is.
no its not
their similar as their both hetero sexual acts but their different as 1 can result in procreation and the other cant 1 or 2 of true people engaging in the non fertile heterosexual sex are physically different then their counterpart in the hetero sexual sex between 2 fertile people
if you ignore that then homosexual sex can be the same hetero sexual sex
seems to be orders of magnitude to this same different thing
on 1 end every single sex act is different then another even between the same people
on the other end all sexily stimulating acts between 2 people can be groped together
in this case the important detail for you is reproduction
going with that hetero sexual sex with an infertile person is the same as homosexual sex and different from hetero sexual sex where children might be produced
Do you acknowledge that the physical act performed is the same one in either case?
They are not the same physical act. There is no natural penis entering a natural vagina when people participate in anal or oral sex, no matter the sexes of the people involved. These sexual acts are for pleasure and bonding, not procreation. They have nothing to do with the sexual act of putting a penis in the vagina and are in no way impeding that sexual act or procreation, no more than not having any sex at all does.
In fact, what you are doing, remaining celibate, not having sex at all, impedes procreation to the same extent or more as participating in oral or anal sexual activity since those activities cause bonding between people, which could lead to them wanting to raise children together, either by adopting or by using other methods to have a child, to cause procreation in a "non-traditional" way.
Please try to keep up with the discussion. We were talking about sex between infertile persons, not heterosexual sodomy.
Do you acknowledge that the physical act performed is the same one in either case?
They are not the same physical act. There is no natural penis entering a natural vagina when people participate in anal or oral sex, no matter the sexes of the people involved. These sexual acts are for pleasure and bonding, not procreation. They have nothing to do with the sexual act of putting a penis in the vagina and are in no way impeding that sexual act or procreation, no more than not having any sex at all does.
In fact, what you are doing, remaining celibate, not having sex at all, impedes procreation to the same extent or more as participating in oral or anal sexual activity since those activities cause bonding between people, which could lead to them wanting to raise children together, either by adopting or by using other methods to have a child, to cause procreation in a "non-traditional" way.
Please try to keep up with the discussion. We were talking about sex between infertile persons, not heterosexual sodomy.
that's a good point purposely obtaining from reproduction is a problem if you believe that your naughty bits have a duty to perform
9th Amendment and 14th Amendment.