Patheos/On Faith: Faltering and Leading: The Conservative Movement

Faltering and Leading: The Conservative Movement

By Tim Muldoon

In the aftermath of Jesus' death, a frightened Peter and a group of dispirited disciples scattered, lost and unsure of what to do. Their first response was to hide, and only after Jesus' resurrection and ascension did they re-gather during the celebration of the feast of Pentecost and receive the conviction to spread the news with confidence and great joy. Luke the Evangelist describes this new fervor as a gift of the Holy Spirit, which enabled Jesus' followers to speak fearlessly to people of every nation and language, regardless of their immediate success

The history of Christianity is rife with similar examples of followers being alternatively fearful and bold, faltering and leading, in the face of the challenges of the culture in which they lived. Some disciples remained hidden, others became martyrs. Some caved into external pressures, such as the early 4th-century traditores who handed over sacred texts to Rome during the persecutions of Diocletian. Others, like the 2nd-century convert-apologist Justin Martyr, proclaimed the gospel, even in the face of grave threats and eventual death. Followers of Jesus, in short, have always had to navigate the difficult questions of how to live with faith in cultures that do not understand what that faith really entails.

David French points to the most recent and most evident example (at least for Americans) of this ancient pattern. He suggests that Catholics and Mormons are leading in efforts to protect unborn human life and marriage, while Evangelicals are faltering in these efforts. He writes very positively, admiring the willingness of Catholics and Mormons to work out the public implications of faith even in the face of the scorn of the cultural elite.

I appreciate French's thought-provoking analysis, but wish to suggest a slight re-drawing of the lines of cooperation. Yesterday the primary lines in the Western world were between different religious congregations. Today, though, the lines are epistemic, by which I mean rooted in different ideas about how to come to a certainty about truth claims.
More practically, this thesis means that the old lines were between (say) Catholics and Protestants, or between Mormons and Evangelicals, or between Mainline Protestants and Evangelical Protestants, and so on. The new lines are between those who want to take their cues from secular society and those who want to take their cues from faith.

To put it baldly: some believe abortion and marriage are issues to be decided by popular opinion (regardless of faith), and some believe abortion and marriage are issues to be rooted in faith (regardless of popular opinion).

French is critical of what he sees as a failure among Evangelicals to take strong countercultural stands, to root themselves in the truth revealed by God through Jesus. I cannot speak for Mormons, but I can observe, in light of many studies of the attitudes of Catholics in recent decades, that the same critique applies to Catholics. Those who have the courage to speak up against abortion are a distinct minority. The reason, I think, is that abortion is the gravest and most divisive issue that forces discerning Christians to overtly declare their opposition to prevailing cultural norms, even when the philosophical, theological, ecclesial, and ethical grounds for that opposition are virtually unquestionable. French is certainly correct to point to the way that a critique of the culture of death is written into Catholic DNA. But he is overly optimistic, failing to assess how many Catholics manage to acknowledge that DNA without ever rising to the level of courageously making it mean anything in the public sphere. As with the earliest disciples of Jesus, sometimes fear trumps prophecy.

If there is a hopeful note in this ancient and new story of the relationship between faith and culture, it is this: no longer is the story limited to a single narrative. There are three strands (Catholic, Evangelical, and Mormon) that French points to in his article, but there are surely others. Many contemporary Jews and Muslims, for example, are equally concerned that American laissez-faire attitudes toward sex, and therefore toward abortion, marriage, and many other social issues are toxic to a society. Further, the convergence of these narratives around social issues offers fruitful directions for interfaith conversation, when once upon a time those conversations foundered on the rocks of doctrinal disagreement.

Out of those conversations, one might hope that there might be widely beneficial reflections on the nature of faith itself and its implications for culture. No doubt Evangelicals wrestle, sometimes poorly, with questions of how to engage with culture. But so do Catholics, Mormons, Jews, Muslims, and even Mennonites and Amish. The question of how to live one's faith with conviction and purpose is a perennial question for all who take God seriously. What this emerging interfaith conversation is doing is broadening our awareness of how to live with faith in a world that is often naively hostile to any faith at all. In the face of this larger cultural challenge we would be foolish not to see each other as allies.

Tim Muldoon is a Catholic theologian, author, speaker, and retreat leader specializing in the ways that Church traditions speak to contemporary life. He has written extensively on the themes of young adult spirituality, Ignatian spirituality, theology in postmodernity, sexuality and marriage, and adoption issues. He is a columnist at Patheos.

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.

TO ALL, EVERY & ANY "HUUMATE in CONTiNUUM" via "ETERNITY AVOiDING LONLiNESS." WHEREFORE:
-
Ameennnnnn..

Ommmmmmm..

Aummmmmm..

Vahhhhhhhhh... AND now Sing

EKLAHhhhht-iON..
.
............................. ._.
........................ ._.|._.|._.
.................... , .|._.| .. |._.|._
.................... | .|. . |. . |. . |._.|
.................... | .|. . |. . |. . |. . |
.................... | .|. . |. . |. . |. . |
................ ._.| .|. . |. . |. . |. . |
........... | .| .) .\ . . ..^ ..^ ..^ . .|
........... | .| . . | . . . . . . . . . ..|
........... | .| . .| . . . . . . . . . .. |
........... |. | . .| . . . . . . . . . .. |
........... \ .\ . . . . . . . . . . . . .|
............ \ .\ . . . . . . . . . . . ../
............. ). \ . . . . . . . . . . .(
............ /. .. \ . . . . . . . . . . .\
.......... / . . . . \ . . . . . . . . . .. \
.......... . . . . . . \ . . . . . . . . . . .\
.......... . . . . . . . \ .. . . . . . . . . ..\
.

1) Inhale 'E' (sounds like hE/shE slightly)

2) Exhale 'KLAH' (use 't' for stop-gap in 'time') pause in a Mini Second, THEN

3) Inhale 'i' (sounds like hiii).

Try "IT".
__

PEACE, PAZ, SHALOM, SALAAM, MIR, ZHINGYU, AHIMSA, SHANTi, ONKAR
__

Credit: "JJ" http://onwapo.wordpress.com

Posted by: wiki-truth | February 21, 2011 10:17 PM

Using Guttmacher Inst-itute data on birth control method failure rates, one is able to calculate the number of unplanned pregnancies resulting from the current use of male condoms. It is an horrific number of 1.2 million/yr. Even perfect use of would result in 138,000 unplanned pregnancies.

(And what is the abortion rate in the USA? ~1,000,000/yr CDC data.)

Conclusion: currently, a perfect, birth control barrier system does not exist. Time to develop one. In the meantime, mono-masturbation or mutual masturbation for heterosexuals are highly recommended for those at risk. Abstinence is the another best-solution but obviously the sex drive typically vitiates this option although being biological would it not be able to develop a drug to temporarily eliminate said drive?

Posted by: YEAL9 | February 21, 2011 5:49 PM

I am not particularly interested in Jesus, what he may have done or thought regarding the choice controversy, since he is irrelevant.

If we are to seek out a Biblical figure, that figure would surely be Moses, who introduced Justice to the West, through another figure, HaShem ("God").

There is an important point, and it concerns the self-asserted rights of men to co-opt women's bodies nazi-style to suit their own moral agenda. And make no mistake, the nazis had well developed ethical and moral systems.

We are a nation that (on paper) guarantees equal protection. If a fertilized egg is to be given equal protection with a living human being, and if a host (a pregnant woman) is to be forced to guarantee it, then similar hosts must be appointed among men for similar conditions, identical conditions being technologically impossible, at present. We must also acknowledge that with choice denied an embryo would receive greater protection than the born, that such an imbalance would have to have remedy.

How would American men be subject to the same or similar laws as pregnant American women, or women facing the prospect of pregnancy without recourse to abortion? How could the living receive equal protection to that of an embryo in a post-choice world?

Simple. All men from the age of nine to sixty-five (nine being the earliest age of reported case of pregnancy, sixty-five the latest)will be required to donate kidneys, submit to bone marrow transplants, blood transfusions, etc., for those requiring them.

Beneficiaries would range in age from infants and very young children to the elderly.

Equal protection. Equal justice. The living, who, with choice denied, would not have rights equal to those of a fertilized egg, would be granted such rights via male hosts, donors, etc.

Surprised the anti-choicers haven't made the foregoing proposal.

Awaiting all Catholic men to volunteer, including priests, who are anti-choice and fit within the stated age demographic.

Not going to volunteer? Okay.

Then shut up.

Posted by: Farnaz2Mansouri21 | February 20, 2011 6:55 PM

It is obvious that intercourse and other sexual activities are out of control with over one million abortions and 19 million cases of STDs per year in the USA alone.

More evidence:

"Yes, oral sex is sex, and it can boost cancer risk-

Here's a crucial message for teens: Oral sex carries many of the same risks as vaginal sex, including human papilloma virus, or HPV. And HPV may now be overtaking tobacco as the leading cause of oral cancers in America in people under age 50.

"Adolescents don’t think oral sex is something to worry about," said Bonnie Halpern-Felsher professor of pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco. "They view it as a way to have intimacy without having 'sex.'"

Posted by: YEAL9 | February 20, 2011 4:21 PM

Amazing; NO GRACE!

FOR: Audaciously Attempting to MODERNIZE Ye & Yo PRE-APOCALYPTIC Old-Time (man-Made) Religion Story's, as if suddenly [Compatible with] APOCALYPTARiANITY.

Mr. MULDOON et al;

Ye said, "The question of how to live one's faith with conviction and purpose is a perennial question for all who take God seriously."

Note:

1) Suddenly The Trend/Tendencies for The most Pre-Apocalyptic thinking "CHURCH"(s) hath boldly Turned a Seculars BIOLOGICAL "MEME"concept (inheriting CULTture & or SECTtions of ENVIRO) into some Biblical 'iNTELLIGENT DESiGN' concept,i.e. JEWISH DNA, ISLAMIC DNA, CATHOLIC DNA, PAGAN DNA.... And

2) Suddenly The "CHURCH"(s) turned a Secular Science & Physics Story, i.e., ASTRONOMY (instead of trying to Eliminate ASTROLOGY use among Adherents or public) into a "[WE NOW] Agree that the BIG-BANG is REAL [Similar; said by POPE & COmpetitors.] and accept that the Universe is +/- 13.754,144 Billion Years old. And

3) Suddenly The Biblical 'Water' Story's can be explained by the Secular 'H2O' real Story. i.e., Walking On 'Water'... And like (un)wise hath now proclaimed that somehow (via WORD MERCHANDISING) their Biblical 'Light' Story's [Of BIBLE/GEETA/QURANs...] which hath become the "PHOTON" story now explained. i.e., Beam Me [i] UP & or Down (HEAVEN/MIDDLE/HELL) places/World(s) story's or the wingy thingy storys art explainable now.

Sir's, Mam's; The "CHURCH(s) [OSIRISians, ZEUZ(s), JUDEO(s), ISLAMIC(s), HINDU(s) et al] have to face the reality that now

The "RELIGION OF EVERYTHING before, The SCIENCE of Everything" /a/k/a The "HOlyi COsmic FEeler's FAith'rs" (HO-CO-FE-FA) SYSTEM, like a belief, but better than current man-Made & old-time JEALOUS RELIGION (Competing for a Name for GODs instead of "IT"") systemS.

Hint: OUT-LAWING THE EUCHARIST should be the 1st Step into becoming APOCALYPTARIAN(s) instead of PRE-APOCALYPTARIAN(s).

i.e., There is a Night & Day Difference between a "PRE-APOCALYPTIC SCIENTIST" (Teacher, Jurist etc..) and that of a "APOCALYPTIC SCIENTIST" (Jurist, Teacher, Politician...).

Hint: WE [i] Proud APOCALYPTARIAN(s) belief in,

IN IT WE TRUST"

'Something To Live For!' (NEW-AGE)

NOt

"IN GOD WE TRU$T"

'Something To DIE For!' (OLD-AGE)

ELSE "WORLD WAR 3-THREE" or WW-IV is Com'th! And APATHY will get the better of Humanity as WE [i] Know them. WHEREFORE

GOD, G-d, G_d, ALLAH, gd, ISHVARA.. & many Names Must FOLLOW US "Apocalyptarians" instead of Pre-Apocalyptarians Following GOD, G-d, G_d, ALLAH, gd, ISHVARA.. & many Names!!

Soo, in this Holyi "BIRTH IS A MIRACLE" (Not, No Born in someones elses PreApocalyptic SIN or CURSE et al Story's) and soo,

ALLAH/GODs.., follows US now! Nay/NO longer US follow GOD, G-d, G_d, ALLAH, gd, ISHVARA.. & many Names!

SERIOUSLY!

Posted by: ITs-TIME | February 20, 2011 3:15 PM

It is obvious that intercourse and other sexual activities are out of control with over one million abortions and 19 million cases of S-TDs per year in the USA alone.

from the CDC-2006

"Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. While substantial progress has been made in preventing, diagnosing, and treating certain S-TDs in recent years, CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year, almost half of them among young people ages 15 to 24.1 In addition to the physical and psychological consequences of STDs, these diseases also exact a tremendous economic toll. Direct medical costs as-sociated with STDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars."

How in the world do we get this situation under control? A pill to temporarily eliminate the sex drive would be a good start. (Andy Rooney of 60 Minutes, 4/18/2010 described them as anti-desire pills). And teenagers and young adults must be constantly reminded of the dangers of se-xual activity and that oral s-ex, birth control pills, condoms and chast-ity belts are no protection against STDs. Might a list of those having a STD posted on the Internet help?-Said names would remain until the STD has been eliminated with verification by a doctor. Lists of s-exual predators are on-line. Is there a difference between these individuals and those having a STD having s-exual relations while infected???

And then there is this:

Hmmm, so a growing baby is considered by some to be nothing more than an infection? Talk about having no respect for human life!!!!!

And Nature or Nature's God is the #1 taker of everyone's life. That gives some rationale for killing the unborn or those suffering from dementia, mental disease or Alzheimer's or anyone who might inconvenience your life???

We constantly battle the forces of nature. We do not succumb to these forces by eliminating defenseless children!!!!!
-

Posted by: YEAL9 | February 20, 2011 12:44 AM

Yeal,

What is amazing about you is that bloggers from both sides of the spectrum agree that you a troll that we all detest.

How can one individual be the focal point of disgust universally?

Quite an accomplishment.

Posted by: Counterww | February 19, 2011 7:24 PM

I can respect the internal logic of the Catholic doctrine that Muldoon describe while disagreeing with it. (My own stance on abortion is that it should remain legal, since trying to ban it will not work and will only cause harm to women and to medical professionals.) Muldoon's reference to "Evangelicals" seems to be really about fundamentalists, whose position on abortion I do NOT respect. That's because fundamentalists generally use the abortion issue as a proxy for defending Christian privilege and male privilege, such as the ongoing conflict in South Dakota. Muldoon should know better than to buy into the fundamentalist myth that American society and American culture are persecuting Christianity. In particular, he should avoid the thinking behind the term "cultural elite," which is typically a euphemism for certain anti-Semitic myths.

Posted by: Carstonio | February 18, 2011 3:53 PM

-
TRUTH + FREEDOM = Our-Religion NO PELEG-/YKTAN!

1 Space-Ship Earth, 1 LiFE, 1 G-D?, 1 i + Holyi-TiME
-
............................ _.-(_)._
........................... '______'
.......................... {______} . . . If iSLAM is A Peaceful
.......................... /./.♥.\/.♥.\.\ . . Ummah, Then WHY Art
.......................... |.\__/\__/.|.. . YE Acquiring A 'WMD'
.......................... \.....--....../ . . against 'KAFIR' Ummah?
......................... /'...."""....'\ .
....................... \/_.............._\
....................... (__/....'|....\__)
.......................... |___.|___|
........................... '---------'. By GARY, STAN & Family
-

Posted by: ITs-TIME | February 18, 2011 2:45 PM

No, JJ, your picture is not me - I don't look like a farking Barbie doll.

You're right, sex is not love. I've had sex with people I didn't love, and loved people I never had sex with. But ain't it grand when you get the chance to have sex with the person you love? And it matters not what your ratio of indoor to outdoor plumbing is.

Posted by: lepidopteryx | February 18, 2011 2:28 PM

L E P I D O P T E R Y X Is That You?
.
.
_____ vvvv+vvVV
____ ?Sexy?Sexy
___ y?Sexy?Sexy?
___ ?Sexy?Sexy♥S
___ ?Sexy?Sexy?S
__ ?Sexy?Sexy?Se
_ ?Sexy?Sexy?Se
_ ?Sexy?Sexy?Se
_?Sexy?Sexy?Sexy?
?Sexy?Sexy?Sexy?Sexy
?Sexy?Sexy?Sexy?Sexy?Se
?Sexy?Sexy?Sexy?Sexy?Sex
__?Sexy?__?Sex?Sexy?Sex
___ ?Sex____?Sexy?Sexy?
___ ?Sex_____?Sexy?Sexy
___ ?Sex_____?Sexy?Sexy
____ ?Sex____?Sexy?Sexyb
_____ ?Se____?Sexy?Sex
______ ?Se__?Sexy?Sexy
_______ ?Sexy?Sexy?Sex
________ ?Sexy?Sexy?sex
_______ ?Sexy?Sexy?Sexy?Se
_______ ?Sexy?Sexy?Sexy?Sexy?
_______ ?Sexy?y?Sexy?Sexy?Sexy
_______ ?Sexy?Sexy?Sexy?Sexy?Sexy?S
________ ?Sexy?Sexy____?Sexy?Sexy?se
_________ ?Sexy?Se_______?Sexy?Sexy?
_________ ?Sexy?Se_____?Sexy?Sexy?
_________ ?Sexy?S____?Sexy?Sexy
_________ ?Sexy?S_?Sexy?Sexy
________ >b?Sexy?Sexy?Sexy
________ ?Sexy?Sexy?S
________ ?Sexy?Sexy
_______ ?Sexy?Se
_______ ?Sexy?
______ ?Sexy?
______ ?Sexy?
______ ?Sexy?
______ ?Sexy
______ ?Sexy
_______ ?Sex
_______ ?Sex
_______ ?Sex
______ ?Sexy
______ ?Sexy
_______ Sexy
_______ Sexy?
________ SexY
=======================
---M-A-D-E---IN---U. S. A.---/
======================
.
_____

Caution: Ye Might Get Sexually Molested By a Blogger. i.e., YEAL9 Might Mistake You For a Reporter or something like that.
.
.
PS: SEX is NOt LOVE, LiFE-IS!

Posted by: ITs-TIME | February 18, 2011 12:24 PM

Yeal,

Why do you care who's on top and who's on bottom. My husband and I have been known to go at it with him on top, me on top, and both of us on our sides, sometimes all in the same love-making session. Does it man that I'm "playing the guy" if I'm on top?

If you had ever shopped for toys, you would know that vendors do, in fact, carry cleaning solutions for them. Anything that goes into any bodily orifice needs to be cleaned after use, whether it's a sex toy or an oral thermometer.

You are free to refuse to particpate in any bedroom activities that you or your deity of choice consider icky. You are not free to deny the right to marry to people who enjoy these activities based solely on the fact that you and/or your deity of choice find them icky.

Posted by: lepidopteryx | February 18, 2011 10:51 AM

Salute to the "LIBERATED" One!

Posted by: ITs-TIME | February 18, 2011 10:25 AM

" If you believe that a woman, upon conceiving a child, ceases to be a real human being and becomes the property of her fetus, if you believe that a woman's ownership of her body ends upon loss of virginity, that's your choice."
_________________________________________

Now that you've assumed what I believe, let me do the same. I'm guessing your actions would equate to the following...

"You believe that a man and a woman's accountability and responsibility for the consequences of their own actions ends when a child is conceived. That the "inconvenience" of conception far outweighs the desire to act in a responsible manner."

Posted by: globalone | February 18, 2011 8:56 AM

o All "Abrahamics" believe that their god created all of us and of course that includes the gay members of the human race. Also, those who have studied homosexuality have determined that there is no choice involved therefore gays are gay because god made them that way.

To wit:

o The Royal College of Psy-chiatrists stated in 2007:

“ Despite almost a century of psy-choanalytic and psy-chological speculation, there is no substantive evidence to support the suggestion that the nature of parenting or early childhood experiences play any role in the formation of a person’s fundamental heteros-exual or hom-ose-xual orientation. It would appear that s-exual orientation is biological in nature, determined by a complex interplay of ge-netic factors and the early ut-erine environment. Se-xual orientation is therefore not a choice.[60] "

"Garcia-Falgueras and Swaab state in the abstract of their 2010 study, "The fe-tal brain develops during the intraut-erine period in the male direction through a direct action of tes-tosterone on the developing nerve cells, or in the female direction through the absence of this hor-mone surge. In this way, our gender identi-ty (the conviction of belonging to the male or female gender) and s-exual orientation are programmed or organized into our brain structures when we are still in the womb. There is no indication that social environment after birth has an effect on gender ident–ity or s-exual orientation."[8

Of course, those gays who belong to Abrahamic religions abide by the rules of no adultery or fornication allowed.

Posted by: YEAL9 | February 17, 2011 6:33 PM

oh God, the hateful, verbose, gay-bashing Yeal aka CCNL1 is back.

Posted by: areyousaying | February 17, 2011 5:46 PM

"..Catholics and Mormons are leading in efforts to protect unborn human life and marriage..."

...and would have some credibility in these matters if they also cared about hiding pervert priests and gay-bashing, respectively.

Posted by: areyousaying | February 17, 2011 5:44 PM

Hmmm lets see, in gay sexual activity, who plays the guy and who plays the gal? Who is on top and who is on the bottom? A coin flip? To say the least, an unusual situation. Then there are those "made in China" toys/strap-ons. Lets hope the FDA has checked them for lead and other toxic components. And do said "toys" come with sanitizers and/or sterilization instructions.

Lots and lots of "gays" doing their hot and heavy things on Internet tube sites but nothing about coin flipping, who is on first, and sanitizer sites?? There must be some "Gaying It For Dummies" books out there somewhere. Hmmm, I wonder if said books/sites have to have FDA and CDC approval??

Is said activity wrong and worthy of a trip to hell? Of course not but to the general heterosexual population it is yucky, unusual and not normal to them. With that mind set, approval by the majority is not always sanctioned in law.

Posted by: YEAL9 | February 17, 2011 3:57 PM

Civil unions? Yes! Marriage? Physically impossible!!
Posted by: YEAL9

Only if you define marriage as the practice of procreative sex.
You could say that sex between me and my husband is nothing more than mutual masturbation, since we cannot make babies together - the day we met, he was shooting blanks and I was in the early stages of menopause. If we had been fertile as a couple, we would have been taking measures to ensure that our love-making did not cross the line into baby-makig.
When we got married, he was still sterile, and I was fully menopausal. No babies for us, ever. Sex for us is about nothing more and nothing less than giving each other extreme physical pleasure.
Our marriage license is not nullified by the fact that we can't have babies, and would not have babies even if we could.

By the way, you do realize that the organ-orifce combinations used by same-sex couples that you find so icky are also enjoyed by many hetero couples, don't you?

Posted by: lepidopteryx | February 17, 2011 10:30 AM

From below, on top, backwards, forwards, from this side of the Moon and from the other side too, gay sexual activity/unions are still mutual masturbation caused by one or more complex sexual defects. Some defects are visually obvious in for example the complex maleness of DeGeneres, Billy Jean King and Rosie O'Donnell. Of course not all having these abnormal tendencies, show it outwardly. Civil unions? Yes! Marriage? Physically impossible!!

Posted by: YEAL9 | February 17, 2011 8:21 AM

Once again, I'll ask the question that no christian has had the courage to answer in this forum:

In this country we have the right to marry the person of our choice. This is a civil union, done with licenses and civil authority regardless of the venue in which the ceremony takes place. So, should the government select a portion of our population, and remove that right from them? Should the constitution be amended to dictate that all americans are not equal?

Posted by: itsthedax | February 16, 2011 6:40 PM

Was Pentecost a historical event or simply more myth concocted by Luke to gain members to the newest cult in town??

e.g. Luke, the only gospel writer to note the Pentecost, started this tale in Luke 24:49 i.e. a single attestation and therefore historically unreliable.

http://wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php?title=479_The_Promised_Spirit

Posted by: YEAL9 | February 16, 2011 4:11 PM

o Bottom Line #1: The failures of the widely used birth "control" methods i.e. the pill and male condom have led to the large rate of abortions ( one million/yr) and S-TDs (19 million/yr) in the USA. Men and women must either recognize their responsibilities by using the pill or condoms properly and/or use other methods in order to reduce the epidemics of abortion and STDs.

Bottom line #2-

Currently, a perfect barrier system does not exist. Time to develop one! In the meantime, mono-masturbation or mutual masturbation are highly recommended for heterosexuals who need a contraceptive.

Abstinence is another best-solution but obviously the sex drive typically vitiates this option although being biological would it not be able to develop a drug to temporarily eliminate said drive?

Posted by: YEAL9 | February 16, 2011 4:02 PM

And there is a major difference between living by your faith, even preaching it verbally or through example, and using the civil law to force your religious dogma on others.

If you don't believe gay marriages are real or valid, that's your choice. If you believe that a woman, upon conceiving a child, ceases to be a real human being and becomes the property of her fetus, if you believe that a woman's ownership of her body ends upon loss of virginity, that's your choice. But you have no more right to force that opinion on all of us via the civil law than my Orthodox Jewish friend has to make it illegal to buy or consume pork because he believes that it's an abomination.

Posted by: Catken1 | February 16, 2011 2:57 PM

Stop claiming that you're "protecting unborn life" by co-opting other people's bodies against their will. When you do the work, put in the effort, and use YOUR body parts and resources to save lives, you are protecting life. Forcing other people to do so, while you sit back and feel smug about your moral virtue, is merely enslaving those human lives you deem less human and less important to the service of those you deem more valuable. When you, as a Catholic, demand that half the population serve as nothing more than brood mares, to breed and breed and breed until we die of it, with no room for any other activity, any real life beyond service as an incubating machine, you are serving a culture of emotional and spiritual death for women. When you favor policies regarding birth control and abortion that lead to overpopulation, dire poverty, and starvation for many families and children, you are serving a culture of death.

And stop claiming that you're "protecting marriage" by attacking gay people's marriages. You haven't done THING ONE for my marriage, or for anyone else's. Hurting my LGBT friends and their families DOES NOT HELP ME OR MINE IN ANY WAY. All you've done is to damage some people's lives and families, and cause them a lot of unnecessary pain, in order to maintain your own smug sense of government-privileged superiority as a heterosexual. Not a good or a virtuous trade. Plenty of gay people, through their willingness to cherish and fight for marriage, have done more to promote healthy and loving marriages and to advertise the value of the institution of marriage, than you have.

Posted by: Catken1 | February 16, 2011 2:52 PM

Posts By Category

Posts By Date

Faltering and Leading: The Conservative Movement

Comments

Post a Comment