Bookmark and Share
My Photo

FROM the EDITORS:

  • IMPORTANT INFORMATION:
    Opinions expressed on the Insight Scoop weblog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Ignatius Press. Links on this weblog to articles do not necessarily imply agreement by the author or by Ignatius Press with the contents of the articles. Links are provided to foster discussion of important issues. Readers should make their own evaluations of the contents of such articles.

NEW & UPCOMING, available from IGNATIUS PRESS







































































« Reverberations from Regensburg | Main | Benedict reflects... »

Tuesday, December 05, 2006

Comments

Deacon John M. Bresnahan

Of course , some people ignore the fact that Europe is condomizing and aborting itself into oblivion--leaving the continent to those who want no part of the West's Culture of Sterility---Moslems.

Billy Billingsley

Just throw condoms at the problem. That'll solve everything.

Boinkie

Yup. and when I went to Medical school in the 1960's, our psychiatric teachers said all mental illness was due to sexual frustration and that sexual liberation was the cure...didn't work very well, did it?

Brian John Schuettler

This ["condomism"] is the belief that all problems surrounding sexual activity could be solved with enough contraception...
The dogma of Condomism is a conundrum in that sexual activity, if left to itself, tends toward reproduction which, in turn, guarantees survival of the species. Condomism is therefore an inherent rejection of Darwinian theory in that survival, being dependent upon reproduction, is thwarted.
Question: Can a believing, dogmatic Darwinist endorse contraception and abortion?
If he does then is it fair to say that he has abandoned the first principle of his Belief System of Darwinism?
If he does not then shouldn't all dogmatic Darwinists support a pro-life position in the culture wars?

MenTaLguY

Brian, I'm not sure that follows.

Evolution generally refers to the notion that, given reproduction, random variations accumulate and are winnowed by environmental factors to arrive at forms which are maximally effective at reproduction (survival being important only to the extent that it contributes to reproduction).

Doctrinaire evolutionism's core principle is simply that that such processes (whether we're speaking of genes, "memes", or budding universes) are the immediate and only cause of everything in the cosmos. Given such a worldview, whether life, survival, or reproduction are actually desirable must be assessed using a separate metric.

Usually that metric ends up being personal convenience. If it turns out that the only "evolutionarily viable" strategies are personally inconvenient, oh well. Don't feel like caring for children? Contraception. Don't feel like taking care of Baby-who-was-conceived-anyway? Abortion. Don't feel like taking care of Grampa? Euthanasia. Extinction of the human race? Eh. Why not?

From there it's not too difficult for a slide from selfishness into self-righteousness like that which marks the voluntary human extinction movement [warning: site makes me physically sick].

Yes, it's stupid, evil, and Satanic, but there you go.

MenTaLguY

On a different note, re: Boinkie's post, I wonder how many people today toe the "liberation" line, but fail to realize that contraceptives are -- by definition -- agents of sexual frustration.

Brian John Schuettler

"Doctrinaire evolutionism's core principle is simply that that such processes (whether we're speaking of genes, "memes", or budding universes) are the immediate and only cause of everything in the cosmos. Given such a worldview, whether life, survival, or reproduction are actually desirable must be assessed using a separate metric."

Yes,MenTaLguY, I follow. If only my exercise were indeed as simple as I made it to sound! What I was attempting to do was to satirize the increasingly occurring "religious" tone of the dogmatic atheists who are currently led by Richard Dawkins (Mr. Meme himself). Just look, as you stated, at their attempt to assign "cause" without accepting a metaphysical reality of meaning. It's ludicrous! Their religion does not have a framework or "intellectual justification", if you will. It amused me to think that perhaps the neo-darwinian materialists should adopt a central core of doctrine beginning with commitment to survival. Anyway,the whole comment was really done "tongue in cheek". Thanks for your astute input.

Fr. Stephanos, O.S.B.

The Church doesn't expect condom-users to sell catechisms.

Condom-users should not expect the Church to sell condoms.

gotprayer

Condomism that a good one like everything under issue today it always black or white with either side. I just once wish you, as well your foes would look at the spectra physical or to say it another way, in the same text, would look at the whole tree and not just a live branch and a dead one. Or prehaps your whole point is to get me to wish I was never given my exsitence after all I did not ask for my existence at least to my knowledge. If this was your objective... well done! For 4 years I have gone with out a spouse. Trying to grasp Christ Jesus and now understanding what I have come to see as the false and empty promises of the self proclaimed moral elitist. Last week I purchase condoms under considerable guilt. For two reasons (1) I am not under oath or orders, holy or other wise. and (2) if I get lucky enough to be held, caressed and warmed even if the happy ever after, is not so ever after. I say to your emptiness whooee (meaning poop) Love is better than your so call Morality. Time is fleeting better to love if even finite, as it where and lacking then to neither be loved or to love. Your morality molding is fine for juveniles and young adults and the married but it has no place for men in mid life crisis in fact it show little compassion to say the least. And just to keep it spectra physical and keep our foes at bay. I do not think this ever so missed act should be multi-plistic either "there can be only one".
A couple nights ago I kiss a women long and gentle the longivity of our relationship ended within those moments. However dispite your view that moment is mine it is not ugly nor is it or was it a hellaious sin nor a forever after, loss. I wish it had gone to sex. (what ever the hell that is) That kiss was very cool. It was centristic like my Catholic faith. Maybe not yours but yes mine. Again if my whole demeanor is wrong and I am will not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven I wish I was never given existence. What hope is there if the Lord enters into Judgement with his servant.

David

Never give up hope! The Lord's mercy, like His Love is infinite. Full well does He understand our weaknesses and passions. His forgiveness is ever ready so long as we are willing to repent and attempt to obey His law.

A fundamental aspect, I think, of Christian service is to attempt to discern God's will and live by it. This means that if He, through His Church, says that something is wrong, like contracepting, then such an act must be wrong. Obedience to God's law demands that we conform our behaviour to this. But this shouldn't be seen as mere moralism. Rather, it is the foundation for what we are called to do: that is, to love.

Philip

I think the four points should be seen more as the bill of goods, or snake oil, being sold by to the public by utterly degenerate criminals. This fits with Kerouac's theory, as Morse brings up at NRO, that promiscuity reduces the ability of people to form emotional bonds, and it also fits with the rampant promiscuity of rampantly violent cultures and people. It also fits with what we know about the denials that contraception would lead to abortion and family breakdown (that being the purpose), and the lies we know were told by NARAL from its beginning and admitted by Bernard Nathanson.

The free sex lobby does not have a sexual ideology, but a series of evolving rationalizations. It is not about sex, but the complete liberation from all moral strictures (as gotprayer points out), the surrender to any and every temptation. It's like a training. As far as I can tell, Catholics and relativists are in increasing agreement, but on different sides, or you might call it the same side of a different coin.

Philip

That's Keroac.

Brian John Schuettler

Pretty safe bet it wasn't Jack Kerouac...:)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Ignatius Insight

Twitter


Ignatius Press


Catholic World Report


WORTHY OF ATTENTION:




















Blogs & Sites We Like

August 2017

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    
Blog powered by Typepad