Catholic church on birth control; cause for abandoning it?

[Salus Maior]

Yeah, Die-hard-toeing-the-line Republicans aren't exactly what I'd call a prime example of Christian virtue and devotion.

Unfortunately; perception is often guided by the loudest. It’s the problem of humility.

Tbh, I don't think sincere Christianity can really thrive in this country in a truly influential way.

[Las Islas de Metanoia]

Religious morality not needed to maintain civilization? Really?

So what do you think of the Reign of Terror produced by the Atheist driven French Revolution? And the Gulags produced by the Atheist Soviet Union? Where they better alternatives than religious civilization? What about the Social Darwinist and Spiritual denying Materialist ideologies of Nazism and Communism which caused the most bloodshed in the history of mankind?

Are they better alternatives to Religious morality?

Moral systems can have and have existed without Religion.

Reign of Terror? You think only atheists were involved? Ok. How about the Crusades. All the religious based torture and punishment that existed when they had more control(speaking of Europe).

Saudi Arabia is very religious. Should we introduce beheading, whipping and stoning? Did you know they actually post schedules in the foreign sections so people can avoid these events?

A religious moral system is fine if you want to live it. Where you go wrong is trying to force it on others.

Think about. Who has more faith? Somebody who chose that life style or those who were “Mentored” into it?

I chose religion, my mother was a Carmelite Order member and my dad was an avowed Atheist, I know both sides.

BTW. Religion is encoded into our DNA.

The God gene hypothesis is based on a combination of behavioral genetic, neurobiological and psychological studies.[2] The major arguments of the hypothesis are: (1) spirituality can be quantified by psychometric measurements; (2) the underlying tendency to spirituality is partially heritable; (3) part of this heritability can be attributed to the gene VMAT2; (4) this gene acts by altering monoamine levels; and (5) spirituality provides an evolutionary advantage by providing individuals with an innate sense of optimism.

Have fun constructing a society that goes against our genetic structure.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

You just accused the physical sciences of misleading the public. That's nothing to sneeze at. On what grounds do you accuse them of this?



If it were just to buy us time as we transition to renewables, you might have a point. Instead we've been putting off such a transition.



Firstly, other human beings are impacted by this, such as people living near the ocean. They didn't choose to be impacted by this.

Secondly, what right have we to alter the planet for our own self-interest? Wouldn't it be more honourable to keep our numbers to the minimum, in the name of the "take only pictures, leave only footprints" mantra?



Define "nature-related deaths."

If you mean weather-related, bear in mind that weather forecasts have improved in accuracy over the years, buying people more time to take steps that allow them to survive. But that still means they have to say goodbye to their homes when they get destroyed by these kinds of storms. And in some cases (eg. Katrina) the technologies people rely upon for survival break down.

We tried to tax carbon to reimburse the victims of climate change. There are millions of voters who wouldn't bite. They can't all be climate change denialists.

1. On the grounds that they are largely funded by the government, which stands to prosper immensely at people panicking and believing that socialism, which is what every climate politician inevitably suggests, is the only way to save themselves. Besides, the climate consensus isn't nearly as broad as it is thought to be. There are plenty of intellectually savvy dissidents.

2. "Transition to renewables" is simply not possible at our current technology levels. The market will decide when "transition to renewables" is economically viable, and when it does, I promise you, I will not hold on to fossil fuels.

3. It's a lot less expensive to do what the Netherlands did and reclaim land from the sea than to stop using fossil fuels. The damage costs caused by burning fossil fuels per ton, even if you assume that that actually is what is causing the earth to warm, is less than a cent, as opposed to the hundreds of dollars that each ton can add to the economy.

4. And none of these technologies would have been possible without cheap energy from fossil fuel.

5. If you are hurt by climate change, and you can prove that someone or a group of someones actually caused that, I'd have no problem with you suing. But since such a lawsuit would likely be laughed out of a courtroom, I see no reason why the law should do what civil courts won't.

1. "Socialism" isn't really objectively definable, but honestly, if you don't put it past the average scientist to accept bribery from fearmongers, why put it past

2. The cat's out of the bag on "market" solutions, since the fossil fuel industry has already accepted millions of dollars in subsidies. It's too late to know what a true "market" solution would have looked like. Not that the "market" has any real mechanism to deter pollution.

3. If Americans were as competent as the Dutch, you might have a point. In the USA, levees fail and thousands die. Also, we could still theoretically go the levee route if we had a clearer plan to prevent levee failure, as long as the people responsible for climate change have to foot the bill for making it necessary in the first place.

4. Yeah, and I'm posting from land stolen from indigenous Canadians. Matters of chance are not immune from criticism. The question is where we go from here.

5. We're ALL harmed by climate change and letting only the most litigious amongst us claim compensation would be ridiculous. It'd be more efficient to seek compensation from the fossil fuel industry toward ALL of climate change's victims.

[The Black Forrest]

Moral systems can have and have existed without Religion.

Reign of Terror? You think only atheists were involved? Ok. How about the Crusades. All the religious based torture and punishment that existed when they had more control(speaking of Europe).

Saudi Arabia is very religious. Should we introduce beheading, whipping and stoning? Did you know they actually post schedules in the foreign sections so people can avoid these events?

A religious moral system is fine if you want to live it. Where you go wrong is trying to force it on others.

Think about. Who has more faith? Somebody who chose that life style or those who were “Mentored” into it?

Okay, you have named societies where religion has led to evil. I don't dispute that, and I doubt he does either. But you have failed to dispute the claim that religion is required for a free society, I claim I agree with.

Are you saying you can’t have a free society without religion?

I would say a free society allows religion to grow.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

Unfortunately; perception is often guided by the loudest. It’s the problem of humility.

Tbh, I don't think sincere Christianity can really thrive in this country in a truly influential way.

Define "sincere Christianity."

[Genivaria]

You can't stop something which is deeply ingrained into your DNA. The instinct to procreate is the very essence of what makes us a living being. If you don't want people to procreate, then either prevent their semen from fertilizing an egg within a woman's uterus by using birth control, or find a way to manipulate the human genome to remove the urge to procreate. But of course, the Catholic Church will do none of this, because its much easier for them to stick to long debunked pseudoscientific dogma rather than admit that their policy is wrong.

Then there's no choice in sex?

Then why is rape as bad as it is?

Sex being an inherent human desire doesn't mean that humans have no control.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Then there's no choice in sex?

Then why is rape as bad as it is?

Sex being an inherent human desire doesn't mean that humans have no control.

Then they can just not have sex.

[The New California Republic]

The worse we would do is pray for you.

X for doubt

Given that religious figures through history have killed people for heresy and apostasy, that button is getting hammered.

[Antityranicals]

Unfortunately; perception is often guided by the loudest. It’s the problem of humility.

Tbh, I don't think sincere Christianity can really thrive in this country in a truly influential way.

If you're talking about America, I disagree. America is probably the only place in the first world where there is any hope of true Christianity thriving.

[Salus Maior]

The worse we would do is pray for you.

X for doubt. The one that partly motivated the Holocaust was Martin Luther's virulent ramblings On the Jews and their Lies after all.

That wasn't the prime motivation at all. You could say that antisemitism historically all had an influence in the Holocaust, but the "stab in the back" myth and racial pseudoscience (which was popular everywhere among progressives at the time) were the primary motivators.

Of course, far be it from me to say anything good about Martin Luther.

[The Black Forrest]

Moral systems can have and have existed without Religion.

Reign of Terror? You think only atheists were involved? Ok. How about the Crusades. All the religious based torture and punishment that existed when they had more control(speaking of Europe).

Saudi Arabia is very religious. Should we introduce beheading, whipping and stoning? Did you know they actually post schedules in the foreign sections so people can avoid these events?

A religious moral system is fine if you want to live it. Where you go wrong is trying to force it on others.

Think about. Who has more faith? Somebody who chose that life style or those who were “Mentored” into it?

I chose religion, my mother was Carmelite Order member and my dad was an avowed Atheist, I know both sides.

BTW. Religion is encoded into our DNA.

The God gene hypothesis is based on a combination of behavioral genetic, neurobiological and psychological studies.[2] The major arguments of the hypothesis are: (1) spirituality can be quantified by psychometric measurements; (2) the underlying tendency to spirituality is partially heritable; (3) part of this heritability can be attributed to the gene VMAT2; (4) this gene acts by altering monoamine levels; and (5) spirituality provides an evolutionary advantage by providing individuals with an innate sense of optimism.

Have fun constructing a society that goes against our genetic structure.

Ok you need to source those claims. I don’t buy it. My background is primatolgy.

[Godular]

Moral systems can have and have existed without Religion.

Reign of Terror? You think only atheists were involved? Ok. How about the Crusades. All the religious based torture and punishment that existed when they had more control(speaking of Europe).

Saudi Arabia is very religious. Should we introduce beheading, whipping and stoning? Did you know they actually post schedules in the foreign sections so people can avoid these events?

A religious moral system is fine if you want to live it. Where you go wrong is trying to force it on others.

Think about. Who has more faith? Somebody who chose that life style or those who were “Mentored” into it?

Okay, you have named societies where religion has led to evil. I don't dispute that, and I doubt he does either. But you have failed to dispute the claim that religion is required for a free society, I claim I agree with.

Douchebaggery will exist regardless of religion or the lack thereof. Religion is not required for that, what makes you think it must be true in the other way?

[Genivaria]

Okay, you have named societies where religion has led to evil. I don't dispute that, and I doubt he does either. But you have failed to dispute the claim that religion is required for a free society, I claim I agree with.

Are you saying you can’t have a free society without religion?

I would say a free society allows religion to grow.

It's one of the interesting things about religion in the US vs Europe, why does religion seem to be thriving in a secular country where freedom of religion is a constitutional right but religion is shrinking in many European nations that have state churches.

One would think it should be the other way around doesn't it?

[The Black Forrest]

Sex being an inherent human desire doesn't mean that humans have no control.

Then they can just not have sex.

Why? If you chose that; great.

How are you hurt by other people having sex?

[United Muscovite Nations]

Then they can just not have sex.

Why? If you chose that; great.

How are you hurt by other people having sex?

So that they don't catch venereal diseases.

[Salus Maior]

Then there's no choice in sex?

Then why is rape as bad as it is?

Sex being an inherent human desire doesn't mean that humans have no control.

Then if they have control, then abstinence should be a valid option.

[Nakena]

Are you saying you can’t have a free society without religion?

I would say a free society allows religion to grow.

It's one of the interesting things about religion in the US vs Europe, why does religion seem to be thriving in a secular country where freedom of religion is a constitutional right but religion is shrinking in many European nations that have state churches.

One would think it should be the other way around doesn't it?

Different cultural and normative developments. Also it shows IMO that it doesnt necessarily has to mean much if something is official rubber stamped state religion or not.

[Genivaria]

Sex being an inherent human desire doesn't mean that humans have no control.

Then they can just not have sex.

Why do you feel the need to make that choice for others?

[The Black Forrest]

Sex being an inherent human desire doesn't mean that humans have no control.

Then if they have control, then abstinence should be a valid option.

I don’t think anybody says it shouldn’t. I think most of the fighting is against views of Abstinence only.

[The New California Republic]

BTW. Religion is encoded into our DNA.

The God gene hypothesis is based on a combination of behavioral genetic, neurobiological and psychological studies.[2] The major arguments of the hypothesis are: (1) spirituality can be quantified by psychometric measurements; (2) the underlying tendency to spirituality is partially heritable; (3) part of this heritability can be attributed to the gene VMAT2; (4) this gene acts by altering monoamine levels; and (5) spirituality provides an evolutionary advantage by providing individuals with an innate sense of optimism.

Have fun constructing a society that goes against our genetic structure.

A tendency, that it is partially heritable, based on a hypothesis. None of that says that society is incapable of functioning without religious morality.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Then they can just not have sex.

Why do you feel the need to make that choice for others?

Because, contrary to what other people say, it does affect me, indirectly perhaps, but it does.

[Salus Maior]

Then they can just not have sex.

Why? If you chose that; great.

How are you hurt by other people having sex?

Spread of STDs, children born to parents unprepared for them, abortions, emotional damage, etc.etc.etc...

There's plenty of valid reasons to criticize casual sex and advocate for monogamy.

[Genivaria]

Sex being an inherent human desire doesn't mean that humans have no control.

Then if they have control, then abstinence should be a valid option.

It is indeed a personal option, it's just not a sound policy for anything.

[Las Islas de Metanoia]

X for doubt

Given that religious figures through history have killed people for heresy and apostasy, that button is getting hammered.

What about Atheist people like Pol Pot of Cambodia or The Cult of Reason during the Reign of Terror?

The Cult of Reason (French: Culte de la Raison)[note 1] was France's first established state-sponsored atheistic religion, intended as a replacement for Catholicism during the French Revolution. After holding sway for barely a year, in 1794 it was officially replaced by the rival Cult of the Supreme Being, promoted by Robespierre.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Why? If you chose that; great.

How are you hurt by other people having sex?

Spread of STDs, children born to parents unprepared for them, abortions, emotional damage, etc.etc.etc...

There's plenty of valid reasons to criticize casual sex and advocate for monogamy.

^