The Chruch Contraceptive

[wynn]

That's a complete strawman argument, and not what I am suggesting at all. I think that declared Christians who choose to overbreed and can't afford it/have a greater ecological footprint than is sustainable should get subsidies from the Church instead of handouts from the government. It's really not the same thing at all. I pay taxes which pay the police, therefore, they should protect me regardless of their faith or my lack thereof. Your argument is a complete strawman.

Do you really believe that humans will take you seriously when you talk to them or about them like that?

 

[spidergoat]

That is what they do. I lived down the street from a Christian family that had a litter of 10.

 

[wynn]

Yeah, totally, contempt is proven to be the number one motivating force for desired and lasting change!

 

[spidergoat]

It's a start.

 

[Liebling]

Do you really believe that humans will take you seriously when you talk to them or about them like that?

No. I don't expect them to listen to reason at all. I mean, why start now?

Over-breeding is an issue. I'm not going to sugar coat it for the faint of heart.

What would you prefer? "Christians who have too many children despite the insustainability of our planet at it's current growth rate and the rapid decline of our ecosystem due to human overpopulation?"

Overbreeding is exactly what they are doing.

 

[HectorDecimal]

I wonder how many people realize that some aspects of their particular faction don't apply common sense.

 

[Balerion]

Yes, poverty is a correlating factor, I didn't bring it up for a reason. Religion in the poorest communities, often takes the place of education in third world countries.

It can, and in places it does. But more often than not, ignorance is what takes the place of education. I'm not being flippant here, either: often, poor and uneducated people don't even have a proper understanding of their own religion, so what you're left with is parochial superstition. I remember being in my early teens having all sorts of wrong ideas about sex, such as the belief that drinking Mountain Dew would lower my "count" enough that I was temporarily infertile, or that pulling out was 100% effective. And I live in a first-world country! Imagine what kind of nonsense is dreamed up in the third world.

And you are right, education and family planning would help remedy it, all of which certain religions completely reject for religious reasons. And a flock follows it's leaders.

This I don't necessarily agree with. I mean, yes, on face value, that statement is true. But as the recent contraceptive issue here in the US told us, something like 98% of Catholic women have used or currently use contraceptives. This would include devout women, dumb women, poor women, as well as those who are educated enough to know better than to believe everything the Church says.

I know friends who didn't want to have children but after sitting down with their pastor at their Baptist church, decided to do so because it was the right thing to do as a follower of God. When their third child arrived, she and the baby nearly died in childbirth due to heart problems and it took her a year and a half to recover, and the baby was both premature and stuggling with developmental delays. When she recovered, her very religious husband convinced her to have another baby because God took care of them once, they would do it again. She was buried in October, six months pregnant with their fourth child of heart failure. The best the husband could get from the Church was a few casseroles after her passing. He struggles and had to accept public aid this January when he lost his job because he has small children and he's the only provider. Did the Church help him? No. Some community.

That is a horrible story, and you have my condolences. However, I think you're looking at an extreme case, not one representative of the whole. And I don't just mean because she died. I mean the church having that much influence on an individual. These are splinters of splinters. Most churches would never advocate such a thing.

Now this is just one story, but it's interesting to have the heads of a church dictate that family planning is against God's will but not support those people when they do so. It takes advantage of a state run system to forward their faith. That's what I object to. If they want to advocate having more than 2 children per couple, they should subsidize families when they can't afford it.

I share your frustration.

And why does third world over-population effect me? Other than the obvious and willful destruction of ecosystems that overflow the earth's carrying capacity and destroy things for the rest of us responsible people, we have a positive birth rate almost exclusively due to immigration in the U.S. and the more crowded things get, the more crime will rise, the more pollution will rise and all of the other issues with overcrowding will occur.

That's a tremendous non-sequitur. People aren't coming to the US because of overcrowding in their respective homelands. They're coming here for opportunities which don't exist elsewhere.

 

[spidergoat]

No. I don't expect them to listen to reason at all. I mean, why start now?

Over-breeding is an issue. I'm not going to sugar coat it for the faint of heart.

What would you prefer? "Christians who have too many children despite the insustainability of our planet at it's current growth rate and the rapid decline of our ecosystem due to human overpopulation?"

Overbreeding is exactly what they are doing.

They believe the Earth was put here for human beings, not that we are a part of the Earth. even moderate Christians believe this, which is why it's such a danger.

 

[lightgigantic]

That's a complete strawman argument, and not what I am suggesting at all. I think that declared Christians who choose to overbreed and can't afford it/have a greater ecological footprint than is sustainable should get subsidies from the Church instead of handouts from the government. It's really not the same thing at all. I pay taxes which pay the police, therefore, they should protect me regardless of their faith or my lack thereof. Your argument is a complete strawman.

You miss the point - if you start treating a demograph as an exclusive breakaway from society essentially you have a second society.

IOW there are very good reasons why there are a complete absence of laws in secular society that dictate one sort of laws/economic treatment for one race/creed/ethic over another.

I mean there are very good reasons why you don't complain of receiving civic benefits that arise from the tax contributions of extremely wealthy christians, no?

("sorry sir, this is a christian public swimming pool funded, supported and patronized by christians ... I"m afraid you will have to go to the other side of town to the atheist one if you want to take a dip")

 

[spidergoat]

Don't worry, Liebling, they are punished by their own sins. Imagine having to raise a dozen children, or being pregnant all the time. And they need a big house to go with that, so they have to pay higher property taxes.

 

[HectorDecimal]

A pox on you sir! May you marry and have children

 

[spidergoat]

Hey, what did I ever do to you?

 

[wynn]

No. I don't expect them to listen to reason at all.

Then what are you doing talking about this? Venting to a third party?

I mean, why start now?
Over-breeding is an issue. I'm not going to sugar coat it for the faint of heart.

What would you prefer? "Christians who have too many children despite the insustainability of our planet at it's current growth rate and the rapid decline of our ecosystem due to human overpopulation?"

Overbreeding is exactly what they are doing.

Talking to them with contempt is why they don't listen to you and people like you.

Tragicomically, the way you address the problem is precisely one of the factors that exacerbates it.


:shrug:

 

[Balerion]

Then what are you doing talking about this? Venting to a third party?





Talking to them with contempt is why they don't listen to you and people like you.

Tragicomically, the way you address the problem is precisely one of the factors that exacerbates it.


:shrug:

Complete nonsense, as usual.

 

[Aqueous Id]

I like your way of thinking. You should have read my whole sheet of calculations on how accidental pregnancies could be shared equally by both parties who made said mistake. I'll have to dredge it up for you.

You did a breeder spreadsheet? You could have a neighborhood committee, that rounds people up and forces them to sit through your Power Point slides, unless they agree to immediate sterilization.

Responsibility for ones actions. Ownership of choices. This is what the world is missing these days, and ultimately it will be our destruction.

I know. Ashes to ashes. Crack that whip. People are going to learn to mind.

 

[Liebling]

You did a breeder spreadsheet? You could have a neighborhood committee, that rounds people up and forces them to sit through your Power Point slides, unless they agree to immediate sterilization.


I know. Ashes to ashes. Crack that whip. People are going to learn to mind.

Oh yes, because humans in general are so adept at looking at things logically and with a modicum of common sense.

I'm not advocating a limit on breeding or anything like that, just suggesting outcomes that wouldn't put the burden on people who shouldn't shoulder the burden for other peoples choices. I also believe that smokers and people who are obese with no medical condition causing it should pay more for health coverage. I think there should also be a higher tax on liquor, cigarettes and fast food/convenience foods. A higher tax on cars that have inefficient fuel usage and on industries that pollute heavily.

People make destructive choices because they never have to bear the responsiblity for them. I think people would think twice and churches also might change their stances on family planning if they were responsible for the burden of those choices.

 

[wynn]

Why do you think people have children?

Because of failed contraceptives?

 

[Liebling]

I think people have children out of hubris, actually. Out of pride for themselves and their ability to breed, and out of duty (to Church, parents, spouse). Women have children because of a biologically driven nature to nurture. Men have children to prove they are men. Some people have children to offset the number of cretins who are breeding, and cretins have children because they don't know any better.

There are a lot of reasons people have children. I don't think failed contraceptives are one of those reasons, and I am not sure where you got that from. Most people who have too many children do so on purpose, it is no accident. They are just dogmatic, ignorant, and don't care about anything but themselves and their path to the hereafter whether that be through their religion or through being remembered for having litters instead of families.

Intelligent, aware, non-ignorant people who give a damn about their society and the world we live in and want to create a better, more sustainable world ecologically, economically and in a socially conscious manner only have one or two.

 

[wynn]

Most people who have too many children do so on purpose, it is no accident.

In that case, whether their religion forbids the use of contraceptives or not, is irrelevant.



That said, I have never met any Christian woman who would not use contraceptives. They all do.
In films and tv shows, and in popular media, I have heard of Christian women who supposedly do not use contraceptives. But not it reality.

 

[Arioch]

@wynn --

That said, I have never met any Christian woman who would not use contraceptives.

You obviously haven't met very many christian women because I know many who refuse to on religious grounds(regardless of the harm they may do to themselves and others).