Piss Poor Papacy Policy

[Alex Bragi]

There are now six billion of us living on this planet. Every day there are approximately 220,000 more. If this trend continues, overpopulation and environmental destruction will eventually destroy us.

There is a solution.

Yet, despite the fact that the environmental and social consequences of overpopulation are well documented, the Vatican is still vehemently opposed to all forms of artificial contraceptives. Why? Put quite simply--it's power. For the Vatican to confront the issue birth control, it would mean putting an end to the myth of papal infallibility and relinquishing absolute power over the lives of a billion plus people.

At the UN conference on population and development, it was stated that "the Vatican supports the advancement of women's education and health care" and also admitted that "the Holy See does not support procreation at all costs". Yet, surley, their condemnation of birth control totally contradicts this!

While the Vatican claims to be "pro family" and "pro life", that doesn't seem to stop them supporting often brutal and dictatorial regimes. The Pope supports human rights only when the perpetrator is perceived as atheistic, therefore endangering the status of the church. He won't speak out against human rights abuses when the perpetrator is a right-wing regime, sympathetic to the Vatican's ultra-conservative beliefs. Consider how the Pope condemned UN agencies for providing Kosovo rape victims with "morning after pills", yet seemingly had no concern what so ever for the rape, torture and ethnic cleansing. It's plain and simple hypocrisy.

Pope Benedict addressing crowds in St Peter's Square, a day after Rome staged one of the Live 8 concerts, said he hoped the G8 summit would bring genuine and lasting relief to Africa. Again, pure hypocracy!

Millions of children are suffering from malnutrition, lack of basic health care and lack of education. Many are forced into prostitution and child labour. It's so very wrong that this should be happening in the modern times we live in. This kind of suffering should not be happening; this kind of thing would not be happening if people were educated about birth control and had unrestricted access to it.

Rather than preaching the wrongs of contraceptives and abortion, maybe, just maybe, more people might have a little more respect the Pope if he could just convince us all why it's so damned important to keep women in traditional subservient rolls? Rolls that condemn millions of women to lives of appalling injustices because of cultural and religious beliefs, and creating a vicious cycle of perpetual child bearing, poor health, poverty and misery.


Footnote: In the last ten years attendances at Catholic churches across Australia have dropped by 13%.

[Sir_G]

Alex the other reason they wont support birth control is because that would put an end to their best recruiting method. The more children catholics have the more catholics there will be in the world.

And since they aren't taught to question the church they blindly follow whatever they are fed. Best I not get started or I'll be on the soap box forever.

Greg

[_ID_]

This is one of the resons I do not support organized religion. Every single one I have encountered has some sort of hypocritcal teaching or pollicy. If the baisic beliefs are sound, then I find the members are hypocritcal and haughty. I can't associate myself with a group of individuals that do either one.

V/R
ID

[Warbaby1943]

Alex, you really come up with some great thought provoking posts. I happen to be Catholic but I do not blindly follow a lot the Church teaches, I know hypocritical but!!! Because of some of my beliefs they no longer ask me to be on the Church council, which truly is fine with me.

I think the Church should stay out of the bedroom and I have other opinions that are contrary to its teachings but I'll stop here. Great thread, thanks.

[cariad]

I think the Church should stay out of the bedroom and I have other opinions that are contrary to its teachings but I'll stop here. Great thread, thanks.

Just don't try keeping God out of it though - He has a habbit of getting everywhere, even where we don't want Him!

cariad

[Warbaby1943]

Just don't try keeping God out of it though - He has a habbit of getting everywhere, even where we don't want Him!

cariad

I'd never even think of trying that. I believe we need him especially in today's world but that isn't the gist of this thread, as I read it.

[cheeseburger]

I think, 'the point' is that the catholic church is against the idea of having sex for any other reason than to have kids, or start a family.

I'm a little confused as to how you quickly drew the conclusion that this is about 'power'.

Put quite simply--it's power

[Warbaby1943]

I think, 'the point' is that the catholic church is against the idea of having sex for any other reason than to have kids, or start a family.

I'm a little confused as to how you quickly drew the conclusion that this is about 'power'.

I kind of agree with Alex. The Church (Rome) does like to control many aspects of our daily life, not just how or for what reason we indulge in sex. Since most people do indulge in sex one way or another it has always been a hot topic with the Church for as long as I can remember. Telling us what birth control methods are OK and what sexual activities are taboo, to me, is a form of control which is just another way of saying the Church is exercising power over us.

[JackBNimble]

Ok...I'll take up the other side of the argument on this one too, just for the sake of balance.

In order to be fair, I'll state that I'm not religous in any way and am not Catholic.

Let's begin.

The first part of your argument seems to be that due to the growth in population people are living in poverty and the environment is being damaged and therefore the church needs to change its fundamental beliefs to support the use of some form(s) of birth control in order to help reduce poverty induced suffering and damage to the environment.

That seems reasonable on the surface, but the first problem is that the largest growth in population isn't in the Catholic world. It isn't even in the "Christian" world (Catholic being considered a subset of Christian). According a United Nations study, the population growth rate in people identified as Islamic is 6.4%, compared to just 1.46% for people identified as "Christian". The U.S. Center for World Mission estimates are much lower and closer, with 2.9% groth for Islamic people and 2.3% growth for Christian people.

Setting those facts aside, lets look at the statement that population growth is the reason for people living in poverty.

University of California, Berkeley & Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy
1. There is no relationship between the prevalence of hunger in a given country and its population. For every densely populated and hungry nation like Bangladesh or Haiti, there is a sparsely populated and hungry nation like Brazil and Indonesia. The world today produces more food per inhabitant than ever before. Enough food is available to provide 4.3 pounds for every person everyday: 2.5 pounds of grain, beans and nuts, about a pound of meat, milk and eggs and another of fruits and vegetables. The real causes of hunger are poverty, inequality and lack of access to food and land. Too many people are too poor to buy the food that is available (but often poorly distributed) or lack the land and resources to grow it themselves (Lappe, Collins & Rosset, 1998).

Food distribution is unfortunately not something the Catholic Church or any other NGO can do much about. This was a lesson the U.S. government learned the hard way in Somalia in the last decade. Even the United States military couldn't provide enough security without a full scale invasion to provide safe and adequate food distribution. At the end of the day, corrupt governments sometimes find it useful to their own purposes to control the availability of food, much less educational opportunities. You are correct that the failing of these governments does lead to prostitution and many other social problems. Unfortunately, until such time as Humanity finds the willingness to deal with these governments problems such as you described will continue.

Now let's address some of the ecological damage:
University of California, Berkeley & Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy

Much of the needed food can be produced by small farmers located throughout the world using agroecological technologies (Uphoff & Altieri, l999). In fact, new rural development approaches and low-input technologies spearheaded by farmers and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) around the world are already making a significant contribution to food security at the household, national, and regional levels in Africa, Asia and Latin America (Pretty, l995). Yield increases are being achieved by using technological approaches, based on agroecological principles that emphasize diversity, synergy, recycling and integration; and social processes that emphasize community participation and empowerment (Rosset, l999). When such features are optimized, yield enhancement and stability of production are achieved, as well as a series of ecological services such conservation of biodiversity, soil and water restoration and conservation, improved natural pest regulation mechanisms, and so on (Altieri et al., 1998). These results are a breakthrough for achieving food security and environmental preservation in the developing world, but their potential and further spread depends on investments, policies, institutional support, and attitude changes on the part of policy makers and the scientific community

So really it seems that population growth has little to do with poverty or ecological damage.

Your argument seems to fragment at this point. I'm not sure how you can say the Catholic Church's position is hypocritcal.

The Church forbids sex outside marriage, so its teachings about birth control should be understood in the context of husband and wife. The church does support the use of natural family planning methods.

The Roman Catholic Church believes that using contraception is "intrinsically evil" in itself, regardless of the consequences. Catholics are only permitted to use natural methods of birth control.

But the Church does not condemn things like the pill or condoms in themselves. What is morally wrong is using such things with the intention of preventing conception. Using them for other purposes is fine - for example, using the pill to regulate the periods of a woman who is not in a sexual relationship is not wrong.

The Church teaches that using artificial contraception is wrong because:

it is against "natural law"
it breaks the natural connection between the procreative and the unitive purposes of sex
it turns sex into a non-marital act
it gives human beings the power to decide when a new life should begin - that power belongs to God
it leads to widespread immorality
it damages the institution of marriage
it reduces male respect for women
it gives human beings the idea that they can have complete power over the body
it allows the implementation of eugenic programmes

The Church teaches that the physical expression of love between husband and wife in sexual intercourse can't be separated from the reproductive implications of both the act and marriage.

Sex is seen as intimately involved in God's design for the universe, and as something profoundly important that involves a person's mind and spirit as well as their body.

The modern attitude of the Catholic Church to contraception was laid down in the 1930s when Pope Pius XI issued "Casti Connubii" (which translates as "Of Chaste Marriage").

This document said that artificial birth control was a violation of the "law of God and nature" and that those who used it committed "a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious."

1951
In 1951 Pope Pius XII said that it was acceptable to use the rhythm method if a couple had a good reason to limit the size of their family.

1958
In 1958 Pius XII stated that it was legitimate for women to take the birth control pill for medical reasons other than contraception. He said that the contraceptive side effect would not be wrong because of the "doctrine of double effect".

1968
In 1968 Pope Paul VI issued "Humanae Vitae," which banned all artificial methods of birth control. His uncompromising position on birth control led to protests around the Catholic world and Roman Catholic hierarchies in some countries openly modified the policy.

The document surprised many Catholics, who had hoped for a relaxation of the traditional attitude after Vatican II, and it rejected the views of the commission appointed to consider birth control, which had recommended that the ban on contraception be ended.

Pope John Paul II
Pope John Paul II thought birth control was profoundly important; while still Cardinal Wojtyla he wrote that the issue of contraception was a "struggle for the value and meaning of humanity itself" (1978).

When he became Pope he confirmed the Church's position, "the natural regulation of fertility is morally correct; contraception is not morally correct."


Natural Family Planning

What is Natural Family Planning?
Natural family planning involves using self-control to regulate sexual activities in harmony with nature. The natural methods of family planning are:

abstention: not having sex
this method is 100% reliable
rhythm method: having sex at times of the woman's menstrual cycle when she is unable to conceive.
this method is calendar based.
its reliability is around 85%
body function methods: these use other functions of the woman's body, such as mucous patterns and temperature patterns to determine when the chance of conception is low. The couple only have sexual intercourse during the period of low fertility.
these methods are up to 98% reliable
Natural family planning methods are quite hard work. The couple must measure and chart certain physical symptoms with accuracy, and then interpret the charts properly, keeping in mind other events that may interfere with the woman's normal bodily rhythm. They also need the self-discipline to regulate their sex life accordingly.

Why is Natural Family Planning OK?
Natural family planning is not unethical or disobedient to God because:

it uses a mechanism God designed
it is natural because it is based on the natural human property of self-control
self-mastery is a power which God gave only to human beings
they should use self-mastery rather than methods which work against nature
it does not completely prevent conception - the sexual act remains "open" to the creation of a new life


Lastly, I’ll tackle your comment regarding Pope’s condemnation of providing “morning after pills to rape victims and then finally the address the comments after the Live 8 concert.

The condemnation of the morning after pills is consistent with the core values of the Church’s belief that all Life is sacred, in that the morning-after pill" —are hormones that act both to prevent ovulation or fertilization, or perhaps the subsequent implantation of a fertilized egg (zygote) depending on when in a woman’s cycle they are taken. If the pills prevent implantation they are in effect terminating the life of the otherwise fertilized egg. As such, it would be working as an abortifacient and terminating an otherwise created life.

Finally, I’m again not sure how you can claim Pope Benedict was being hypocritical when he said he hoped the G8 summit would bring genuine and lasting relief to the people of Africa.
As discussed previously, if any one group could possibly provide some hope to deal with the poverty, education and economic problems that plague Africa it would be the G8. Unfortunately, the scope of changes required to solve the problems intimidates even those with the best of intentions. Outright war with the goal of displacing many of the corrupt governments in place, massive population displacement due to such activities, further poverty and death would most likely be necessary. Simply providing even billions of dollars in “aid” would do very little, as in many cases this would simply go into the hands and pockets of corrupt government officials and could even exacerbate problems by providing funds to support ethnic warfare such as the “cleansing” that has taken place in Darfur by the Sudanese government.

[JackBNimble]

Ok...I'll take up the other side of the argument on this one too, just for the sake of balance.

In order to be fair, I'll state that I'm not religous in any way and am not Catholic.

Let's begin.

The first part of your argument seems to be that due to the growth in population people are living in poverty and the environment is being damaged and therefore the church needs to change its fundamental beliefs to support the use of some form(s) of birth control in order to help reduce poverty induced suffering and damage to the environment.

That seems reasonable on the surface, but the first problem is that the largest growth in population isn't in the Catholic world. It isn't even in the "Christian" world (Catholic being considered a subset of Christian). According a United Nations study, the population growth rate in people identified as Islamic is 6.4%, compared to just 1.46% for people identified as "Christian". The U.S. Center for World Mission estimates are much lower and closer, with 2.9% groth for Islamic people and 2.3% growth for Christian people.

Setting those facts aside, lets look at the statement that population growth is the reason for people living in poverty.

University of California, Berkeley & Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy
1. There is no relationship between the prevalence of hunger in a given country and its population. For every densely populated and hungry nation like Bangladesh or Haiti, there is a sparsely populated and hungry nation like Brazil and Indonesia. The world today produces more food per inhabitant than ever before. Enough food is available to provide 4.3 pounds for every person everyday: 2.5 pounds of grain, beans and nuts, about a pound of meat, milk and eggs and another of fruits and vegetables. The real causes of hunger are poverty, inequality and lack of access to food and land. Too many people are too poor to buy the food that is available (but often poorly distributed) or lack the land and resources to grow it themselves (Lappe, Collins & Rosset, 1998).

Food distribution is unfortunately not something the Catholic Church or any other NGO can do much about. This was a lesson the U.S. government learned the hard way in Somalia in the last decade. Even the United States military couldn't provide enough security without a full scale invasion to provide safe and adequate food distribution. At the end of the day, corrupt governments sometimes find it useful to their own purposes to control the availability of food, much less educational opportunities. You are correct that the failing of these governments does lead to prostitution and many other social problems. Unfortunately, until such time as Humanity finds the willingness to deal with these governments problems such as you described will continue.

Now let's address some of the ecological damage:
University of California, Berkeley & Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy

Much of the needed food can be produced by small farmers located throughout the world using agroecological technologies (Uphoff & Altieri, l999). In fact, new rural development approaches and low-input technologies spearheaded by farmers and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) around the world are already making a significant contribution to food security at the household, national, and regional levels in Africa, Asia and Latin America (Pretty, l995). Yield increases are being achieved by using technological approaches, based on agroecological principles that emphasize diversity, synergy, recycling and integration; and social processes that emphasize community participation and empowerment (Rosset, l999). When such features are optimized, yield enhancement and stability of production are achieved, as well as a series of ecological services such conservation of biodiversity, soil and water restoration and conservation, improved natural pest regulation mechanisms, and so on (Altieri et al., 1998). These results are a breakthrough for achieving food security and environmental preservation in the developing world, but their potential and further spread depends on investments, policies, institutional support, and attitude changes on the part of policy makers and the scientific community

So really it seems that population growth has little to do with poverty or ecological damage.

Your argument seems to fragment at this point. I'm not sure how you can say the Catholic Church's position is hypocritcal.

The Church forbids sex outside marriage, so its teachings about birth control should be understood in the context of husband and wife. The church does support the use of natural family planning methods.

The Roman Catholic Church believes that using contraception is "intrinsically evil" in itself, regardless of the consequences. Catholics are only permitted to use natural methods of birth control.

But the Church does not condemn things like the pill or condoms in themselves. What is morally wrong is using such things with the intention of preventing conception. Using them for other purposes is fine - for example, using the pill to regulate the periods of a woman who is not in a sexual relationship is not wrong.

The Church teaches that using artificial contraception is wrong because:

it is against "natural law"
it breaks the natural connection between the procreative and the unitive purposes of sex
it turns sex into a non-marital act
it gives human beings the power to decide when a new life should begin - that power belongs to God
it leads to widespread immorality
it damages the institution of marriage
it reduces male respect for women
it gives human beings the idea that they can have complete power over the body
it allows the implementation of eugenic programmes

The Church teaches that the physical expression of love between husband and wife in sexual intercourse can't be separated from the reproductive implications of both the act and marriage.

Sex is seen as intimately involved in God's design for the universe, and as something profoundly important that involves a person's mind and spirit as well as their body.

The modern attitude of the Catholic Church to contraception was laid down in the 1930s when Pope Pius XI issued "Casti Connubii" (which translates as "Of Chaste Marriage").

This document said that artificial birth control was a violation of the "law of God and nature" and that those who used it committed "a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious."

1951
In 1951 Pope Pius XII said that it was acceptable to use the rhythm method if a couple had a good reason to limit the size of their family.

1958
In 1958 Pius XII stated that it was legitimate for women to take the birth control pill for medical reasons other than contraception. He said that the contraceptive side effect would not be wrong because of the "doctrine of double effect".

1968
In 1968 Pope Paul VI issued "Humanae Vitae," which banned all artificial methods of birth control. His uncompromising position on birth control led to protests around the Catholic world and Roman Catholic hierarchies in some countries openly modified the policy.

The document surprised many Catholics, who had hoped for a relaxation of the traditional attitude after Vatican II, and it rejected the views of the commission appointed to consider birth control, which had recommended that the ban on contraception be ended.

Pope John Paul II
Pope John Paul II thought birth control was profoundly important; while still Cardinal Wojtyla he wrote that the issue of contraception was a "struggle for the value and meaning of humanity itself" (1978).

When he became Pope he confirmed the Church's position, "the natural regulation of fertility is morally correct; contraception is not morally correct."


Natural Family Planning

What is Natural Family Planning?
Natural family planning involves using self-control to regulate sexual activities in harmony with nature. The natural methods of family planning are:

abstention: not having sex
this method is 100% reliable
rhythm method: having sex at times of the woman's menstrual cycle when she is unable to conceive.
this method is calendar based.
its reliability is around 85%
body function methods: these use other functions of the woman's body, such as mucous patterns and temperature patterns to determine when the chance of conception is low. The couple only have sexual intercourse during the period of low fertility.
these methods are up to 98% reliable
Natural family planning methods are quite hard work. The couple must measure and chart certain physical symptoms with accuracy, and then interpret the charts properly, keeping in mind other events that may interfere with the woman's normal bodily rhythm. They also need the self-discipline to regulate their sex life accordingly.

Why is Natural Family Planning OK?
Natural family planning is not unethical or disobedient to God because:

it uses a mechanism God designed
it is natural because it is based on the natural human property of self-control
self-mastery is a power which God gave only to human beings
they should use self-mastery rather than methods which work against nature
it does not completely prevent conception - the sexual act remains "open" to the creation of a new life


Lastly, I’ll tackle your comment regarding Pope’s condemnation of providing “morning after pills to rape victims and then finally the address the comments after the Live 8 concert.

The condemnation of the morning after pills is consistent with the core values of the Church’s belief that all Life is sacred, in that the morning-after pill" —are hormones that act both to prevent ovulation or fertilization, or perhaps the subsequent implantation of a fertilized egg (zygote) depending on when in a woman’s cycle they are taken. If the pills prevent implantation they are in effect terminating the life of the otherwise fertilized egg. As such, it would be working as an abortifacient and terminating an otherwise created life.

Finally, I’m again not sure how you can claim Pope Benedict was being hypocritical when he said he hoped the G8 summit would bring genuine and lasting relief to the people of Africa.
As discussed previously, if any one group could possibly provide some hope to deal with the poverty, education and economic problems that plague Africa it would be the G8. Unfortunately, the scope of changes required to solve the problems intimidates even those with the best of intentions. Outright war with the goal of displacing many of the corrupt governments in place, massive population displacement due to such activities, further poverty and death would most likely be necessary. Simply providing even billions of dollars in “aid” would do very little, as in many cases this would simply go into the hands and pockets of corrupt government officials and could even exacerbate problems by providing funds to support ethnic warfare such as the “cleansing” that took place in Darfur by the Sudanese government.

[Alex Bragi]

Alex the other reason they wont support birth control is because that would put an end to their best recruiting method. The more children catholics have the more catholics there will be in the world.

A good point.

Alex, you really come up with some great thought provoking posts. I happen to be Catholic but I do not blindly follow a lot the Church teaches, I know hypocritical but!!! Because of some of my beliefs they no longer ask me to be on the Church council, which truly is fine with me.

Thank you, and thank you for not taking offense, as this is certainly not aimed at Catholics per se. Some of my best friends are Catholics, and like you, they choose not to rigidly follow Vatican authority that seems, quite frankly, to be out of touch with many of it's followers.

I think the Church should stay out of the bedroom and I have other opinions that are contrary to its teachings but I'll stop here. Great thread, thanks.

Congratulations, Warbaby1943, you've just become responsible for my next thread. I hope you will enjoy that one too.

I think, 'the point' is that the catholic church is against the idea of having sex for any other reason than to have kids, or start a family.

Yes, that's true, but then why does the Vatican condone the "Rhythm" method?

Jack—This the longest and most comprehensive response I've even had to a thread I've started. Thank you for taking the time and trouble to post it.

You've quoted statistics regarding the rate of growth for Christians verses Moslems. You may disagree, but I feel it's just too easy to fudge the numbers. I mean are we including crypo-christian and professing Christians? Affiliated Christans? Marginal Christians? To be honest I don’t know much about Moslems, but I do know that Christians seem to splinter off in to numerous groups and levels of devotion, so I'm not really sure what would be accurate figures simply because there are too many variables.

The information supplied by University of California, Berkeley & Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy is certainly interesting reading, and I'm certainly not about to argue with the facts, however, I feel it's simply ridiculous to condone creating more of the same when there's a solution.

I've read the remainder of your response and found it well researched and interesting. Again thank you for posting it.