forced sterilization

[Exhausted]

The teaching of God cannot change. The whims of particular generations of people cannot change the Truth.

'Fraid they alredy have. *cough-every-other-religion-cough*

 

[knightlight72]

I wasn't sure if you are serious. But do you feel God isn't the creator of all life?

Do you feel God doesn't know what he's doing?

I don't think God has any physical input into the world today, even if he kicked off evolution. If however he does, and he sends babies to folk who aren't capable of parenting them, then the old guy certainly doesn't know what he is doing and should hand over to someone who is a bit more clued up!

I understand where you are coming from now tangnefedd.

I am coming from the perspective of what it means to trust in a living God, one who is real, and omnipotent, one of love, and one of full of promises. One who has felt so desirous of us, that He gave his only Son in sacrifice so that we would have a chance to be with God.

Therefore, I trust God, and I understand that while I may not understand what or why he does something, I know God knows more than I do, including the end result of this.

This is a loving God I am refering to.

 

[Tangnefedd]

Therefore, I trust God, and I understand that while I may not understand what or why he does something, I know God knows more than I do, including the end result of this.

This is a loving God I am refering to.

I respect your right to believe that. But if a thing is wrong, it is wrong, whether or not one believes God is responsible!

 

[knightlight72]

I respect your right to believe that. But if a thing is wrong, it is wrong, whether or not one believes God is responsible!

I think I disagree with that. We know very little of what happens around us, and the world at large. God knows everything, to the point of knowing every hair on your head.

If we disagree with God, then it is always us who is wrong.

 

[Tangnefedd]

I would disagree wth God if I thought God was wrong, no problem. But our perception of what God thinks is only our perception, we have absolutely no way of knowing for certain what God thinks!

 

[Lycaenidae]

The teaching of God cannot change. The whims of particular generations of people cannot change the Truth.

Fine. Continue crapping out babies while we scientists scramble to produce enough food. In places that don't have modern agriculture, as much as 70% of crop yields can be lost to pests. Here in the U.S. we've managed to cut losses to about 10-30%. What happens when pests start to evolve resistance faster than we can introduce new genes into crops or faster than we can produce new chemicals? All those babies you insisted God wanted you to crap out are going to starve.

 

[Ledifni]

All Christians are somehow connected to the Catholic Church, each in various degrees of communion. All Christians should understand that sterilization is wrong. I will refer to the Catholic Church as the Church if I wish.

The teaching of God cannot change. The whims of particular generations of people cannot change the Truth.

Wait, Monica. The two statements above, taken in combination, can be interpreted in one of three ways that I can see:

1) You believe that the Christians who are "connected to the Church" but have heretical beliefs ought to be burned at the stake for the sake of their souls.

2) You believe that Truth does change, and that's it's changed from what it was during the Dark Ages. This contradicts your second statement, so if this is the case, then you should rephrase to say, "the teaching of God about sterilization cannot change."

3) Or, you believe that the whims of generations can't change Truth, yet Truth just happens to be exactly the same as the whim of the current generation of the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church -- that is, that of all the various forms that Roman Catholic teaching has taken over the centuries, the modern form is exactly correct, while forms of the past were incomplete or mistaken, and forms of the future will be corrupt and leavened.

Because, you see, the Roman Catholic Church has changed, and changed in extremely drastic ways, since its creation. Either Truth changes, or Truth is what it was during the Dark Ages, or modern ideas just happen to be exactly Truth -- we were all lucky enough to be born in the generation in which the Roman Catholic Church found Truth. None of those three possibilities look reasonable to me.

The only reasonable possibility (but one I'm sure you'd emphatically disagree with) is that the Roman Catholic Church is searching for truth just like everybody else, and sometimes they get things right and sometimes they get things wrong.

 

[Monica02]

Fine. Continue crapping out babies while we scientists scramble to produce enough food. In places that don't have modern agriculture, as much as 70% of crop yields can be lost to pests. Here in the U.S. we've managed to cut losses to about 10-30%. What happens when pests start to evolve resistance faster than we can introduce new genes into crops or faster than we can produce new chemicals? All those babies you insisted God wanted you to crap out are going to starve.

Starvation is largely due to political issues rather than inability to produce food. We need to address the real issues behind starvation and not just tell poor people that they do not have a right to exist. Eugenics is not in God's plan, He is the author of life, not you and not me.

 

[Monica02]

Wait, Monica. The two statements above, taken in combination, can be interpreted in one of three ways that I can see:

1) You believe that the Christians who are "connected to the Church" but have heretical beliefs ought to be burned at the stake for the sake of their souls.

2) You believe that Truth does change, and that's it's changed from what it was during the Dark Ages. This contradicts your second statement, so if this is the case, then you should rephrase to say, "the teaching of God about sterilization cannot change."

3) Or, you believe that the whims of generations can't change Truth, yet Truth just happens to be exactly the same as the whim of the current generation of the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church -- that is, that of all the various forms that Roman Catholic teaching has taken over the centuries, the modern form is exactly correct, while forms of the past were incomplete or mistaken, and forms of the future will be corrupt and leavened.

Because, you see, the Roman Catholic Church has changed, and changed in extremely drastic ways, since its creation. Either Truth changes, or Truth is what it was during the Dark Ages, or modern ideas just happen to be exactly Truth -- we were all lucky enough to be born in the generation in which the Roman Catholic Church found Truth. None of those three possibilities look reasonable to me.

The only reasonable possibility (but one I'm sure you'd emphatically disagree with) is that the Roman Catholic Church is searching for truth just like everybody else, and sometimes they get things right and sometimes they get things wrong.

The Truth of the Church has not changed. Various other aspects of the Church have of course changed, but Truth is Truth. Burning people at the stake has never been Church dogma.

 

[Ledifni]

The Truth of the Church has not changed. Various other aspects of the Church have of course changed, but Truth is Truth. Burning people at the stake has never been Church dogma.

Oh yes it has. Oh, Monica, you really need to study the history of your Church. Burning people at the stake has been explicitly endorsed by more than one Pope. The teachings of the Church have changed greatly over the centuries.

Perhaps the basic holy texts haven't changed, but neither have they changed for any of the non-RCC denominations that you're so positive are wrong. The only things that have changed for any Christians, RCC or not, have been the teachings of the leaders -- and your leaders have changed their teachings just like the leaders of every other church.

 

[Monica02]

Oh yes it has. Oh, Monica, you really need to study the history of your Church. Burning people at the stake has been explicitly endorsed by more than one Pope. The teachings of the Church have changed greatly over the centuries.

Perhaps the basic holy texts haven't changed, but neither have they changed for any of the non-RCC denominations that you're so positive are wrong. The only things that have changed for any Christians, RCC or not, have been the teachings of the leaders -- and your leaders have changed their teachings just like the leaders of every other church.

A pope endorsing something does not make it dogma.

 

[Lycaenidae]

Starvation is largely due to political issues rather than inability to produce food. We need to address the real issues behind starvation and not just tell poor people that they do not have a right to exist. Eugenics is not in God's plan, He is the author of life, not you and not me.

Look, I'm an entomologist. I work in agriculture. I know what I'm talking about. I wish people would start listening to scientists rather than assuming that they just know everything already. I'm not suggesting eugenics, and I'm not suggesting poor people don't have a right to exist. I don't think anybody here has suggested either of those things. I'm suggesting that we should take a little more responsibility for our future.

 

[Monica02]

Look, I'm an entomologist. I work in agriculture. I know what I'm talking about. I wish people would start listening to scientists rather than assuming that they just know everything already. I'm not suggesting eugenics, and I'm not suggesting poor people don't have a right to exist. I don't think anybody here has suggested either of those things. I'm suggesting that we should take a little more responsibility for our future.

I too feel that we should take resposibility for the future, however we cannot do it by advocating sinful behavior. There is nothing wrong with improving crop yield, but we must also strive to reduce political problems which contribute greatly to starvation. Expecting poor people to not reproduce by using artificial birth control or being sterilized because they are poor is a eugenic attitude. You say that you are not a eugenicist but many people are.

 

[Monica02]

Look, I'm an entomologist. I work in agriculture. I know what I'm talking about. I wish people would start listening to scientists rather than assuming that they just know everything already. .

People will and should listen to you for entomology related information. I am sure you are familiar with alot of data. I hope you are doing your part with the gifts God gave you to end starvation and may God bless you for that. Please remember to always work for the glory of God and to work within his plan, not in place of it.

 

[Ledifni]

A pope endorsing something does not make it dogma.

Perhaps not, Monica, but then what does? There is only one difference between you and all the people who, according to you, are heretical. That difference is the difference between what your Pope says and what their pastor says. So, if the Pope's teachings don't have anything to do with what is Truth, then they must have Truth just like you do.

 

[Ledifni]

I too feel that we should take resposibility for the future, however we cannot do it by advocating sinful behavior. There is nothing wrong with improving crop yield, but we must also strive to reduce political problems which contribute greatly to starvation. Expecting poor people to not reproduce by using artificial birth control or being sterilized because they are poor is a eugenic attitude. You say that you are not a eugenicist but many people are.

Excuse me, who said anything about "poor people?" We're talking about people who are completely unable or unwilling to properly care for their children. Those people, rich or poor, shouldn't subject children to that kind of life. Now granted, there may be more poor people who are unable to care for their children than rich people (though I would argue that rich people are more likely to be unwilling to care for their children than poor people), but Monica, we have to be realistic here. If you can't care for your children, you shouldn't have them; that is not because you don't deserve children, but because your children don't deserve to grow up without being cared for.

Of course, you're right that we should also look for solutions to these problems so that everyone can care for their children. But in the meantime, is it right to subject children to illness, injury, and even death so their parents won't be deprived of the chance to pass on their genes? I don't think so.

 

[Monica02]

Excuse me, who said anything about "poor people?" We're talking about people who are completely unable or unwilling to properly care for their children. Those people, rich or poor, shouldn't subject children to that kind of life. Now granted, there may be more poor people who are unable to care for their children than rich people (though I would argue that rich people are more likely to be unwilling to care for their children than poor people), but Monica, we have to be realistic here. If you can't care for your children, you shouldn't have them; that is not because you don't deserve children, but because your children don't deserve to grow up without being cared for.

Of course, you're right that we should also look for solutions to these problems so that everyone can care for their children. But in the meantime, is it right to subject children to illness, injury, and even death so their parents won't be deprived of the chance to pass on their genes? I don't think so.

The original thread is about people who might not care for their future children properly, however the topic of starvation was brought up and that is when poor people became part of the thread.

Of course children are entitled to proper care, but God is still the author of life. All children, all people, are subject to illnes, injury and death. Who are we to predetermine that some of these people do not have a right to exist?

 

[Monica02]

Perhaps not, Monica, but then what does? There is only one difference between you and all the people who, according to you, are heretical. That difference is the difference between what your Pope says and what their pastor says. So, if the Pope's teachings don't have anything to do with what is Truth, then they must have Truth just like you do.

The teachings are from God, not the pope. The pope is God's servant.

 

[knightlight72]

I would disagree wth God if I thought God was wrong, no problem. But our perception of what God thinks is only our perception, we have absolutely no way of knowing for certain what God thinks!

Why would you disagree ith God? God knows more than you.

 

[Lycaenidae]

I too feel that we should take resposibility for the future, however we cannot do it by advocating sinful behavior. There is nothing wrong with improving crop yield, but we must also strive to reduce political problems which contribute greatly to starvation. Expecting poor people to not reproduce by using artificial birth control or being sterilized because they are poor is a eugenic attitude. You say that you are not a eugenicist but many people are.

Everybody should be having fewer children, not just poor people.