I am not opposed to teaching about sex: I just want it done in a morally traditional way. All education inherently has a moral framework, whether it is acknowledged or not. It\u2019s either gonna be secularism or some sort of moral traditionalism (usually Christianity, Judaism, Islam). Nor is the Catholic against all family planning, which is why we believe in Natural Family Planning, which is
not<\/strong><\/em> contraception when understood and applied properly.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
So this is not doing
nothing<\/em>. It\u2019s simply an approach that you can\u2019t handle or accept because it\u2019s traditional and religious-based: though it is also based on the data of social science, as to long-term happiness, stable marriages and families, etc.<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
Secular social science backs up the notion that Christian observance leads to better marriages, stable families, and even (irony of ironies!) better sex in marriage. But let\u2019s not confuse anyone with the facts of science . . .<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n*<\/div>\n
you hold (I believe) that the preborn child is not a person or not a human being.<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n
\n
*<\/div>\n
Honestly this is a tough issue for me, I won\u2019t lie. You haven\u2019t heard me say the pre-born is not a person and not a human being, that is not my view.<\/span><\/div>\n*<\/div>\n
When you talk about whether someone is a nice guy though it\u2019s very important to step into their shoes. Take on their assumptions. So I suppose<\/span> [\u201cnew\u201d pro-lifers] would answer and say that yes, he regards the fetus as a person, but<\/span> [they] can understand how a reasonable person might think differently and he can see that from their perspective they are not murderers.<\/span>
\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
I suppose you know I am vegan, right? Honestly when I think about it too much it kills me what we do to pigs and cows and fish. And even chickens. People are deluding themselves and acting like it\u2019s no big deal, like they don\u2019t have feelings, like their pain doesn\u2019t matter, like their emotions don\u2019t matter. But people eat meat, I get that, I used to do the same. And so I don\u2019t just say everyone that eats meat is terrible. And so I hate the meat industry, but I don\u2019t hate the people who don\u2019t know better. And that\u2019s how it is with abortion. People are coming from a different place from you, you have to recognize that and therefore recognize that the moral implications for them supporting abortion vs you are different.<\/span>
\n*\n\n
I see, so you place human preborn babies on the level of
\u201cpigs and cows and fish. And even chickens\u201d<\/span>. It \u201ckills\u201d<\/span> you: what we do to them. And you say, \u201cPeople are deluding themselves and acting like it\u2019s no big deal, like they don\u2019t have feelings, like their pain doesn\u2019t matter, like their emotions don\u2019t matter.\u201d<\/span><\/div>\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
Precisely! Note how you wax eloquently about the treatment of animals, yet won\u2019t make the same statement about what happens in abortion to human beings, even though you say,
\u201cYou haven\u2019t heard me say the pre-born is not a person and not a human being, that is not my view.\u201d<\/span> You\u2019re all over the ballpark, logically and morally. I wish this gave us hope that you could actually modify your positions to humane<\/em> and morally progressive<\/em> ones, but sadly, the evolution of your views over the last 10-15 years gives no one such hope.<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
You make a direct analogy between eating meat and murdering children in abortion, as if there is any such analogy. It\u2019s outrageous and preposterous: but completely par for the course for immoral and evil and unjust secularist views.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
I am against all the death, all the suffering. How is that all over the ball park?<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
*<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
I explained how you were, but you never get it. It\u2019s like this every time we try to dialogue. The most charitable take is that you simply don\u2019t understand the rules of classical logic. I\u2019m not trying to be insulting. Logic is a field of knowledge that people have to learn, just as with anything else.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
*<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
You try to make out that you are so compassionate about life. I commend you for your stand on veganism (while not holding it to be morally imperative for all). If you care so much about the abortion issue, too, however, you would simply continue to say you were pro-life and let it go at that. But you don\u2019t. You refuse to say that a preborn human being has an inherent right to life, and on humanitarian grounds: just as you argue with regard to the animals.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
*<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
I\u2019m interested in reducing animal death. I\u2019m interested in reducing human death, including abortion.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
*<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
I don\u2019t deny that. But the way to do it is to OPPOSE ABORTION itself. You want to reduce abortions (thus implying that you think they are wrong to some degree, anyway). Yet you won\u2019t oppose the thing itself. You wouldn\u2019t want to reduce it if you didn\u2019t (down deep or whatever) regard it as wrong in the first place. You\u2019re not trying to reduce people going to ball games or eating ice cream or riding a Ferris wheel. <\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
*<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
It\u2019s like saying, \u201cI oppose rape, but I don\u2019t favor any laws against it\u201d or \u201cI oppose sexual harassment of women, but the harassers ought to have the right to choose. Who am I<\/em> to oppose their natural inclinations? So I want to reduce the incidence of these outrages, but not make them illegal or punishable by law.\u201d<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
*<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
Any number of other analogies could be brought to bear. They show by analogy the logical absurdity and moral insanity of your position. So-called \u201cpro-choice\u201d has always been a morally outrageous, logically incoherent position, and will continue to be for all eternity.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
*<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
This is why I support sex ed and access to contraceptives. I\u2019m not for \u201ctraditional\u201d sex ed because it doesn\u2019t work, it doesn\u2019t save lives. This is why I\u2019m against Republicans who oppose Medicare for All and paid maternity leave. These are policies that make the choice of life easier on women. Republicans are less pro-life than I am.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
*<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
I replied to this argument above and have written probably 20 articles about this business of how to make abortion less prevalent. It has to be based on moral principle, truth, and facts. <\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
*<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2021\/03\/SlaughterhouseBeef.jpg\")
<\/p>\n