Christians Being Persecuted/discriminated Against In The Usa

[BG45]

Do you know these are the same folks who were behind the Satan statue in Oklahoma?

I live in Oklahoma, they want to put in a Satan statue.

I come to boston they want to have a black mass.

Coincidence???????? or am I the chosen one.

 

Haha.  Well played, and actually far more preferable to "Satan has better PR people than we do".
 

[CrossCuT]

I would say that NFP takes advantage of the natural period of infertility while contraception artificially creates it.

 

Ah yes, that is a good point however technology gives us the ability to "unnaturally" manipulate our bodies in many other areas. 

 

I assume youre not against modern medicine and the technology involved to improve it.

[Lilllabettt]

Since you  have earlier dismissed a religious connection to your argument, I dont see how swapping what I did in your quote is any different. With NFP, the same thing is happening. Sex is occuring with the deliberate reason to reach into the set of possible outcomes to control the result. You are reaching into the other persons future. 

 

 

That seems like a pretty big assumption. You have no idea whats really going on in peoples minds. You can make a guess, but that is not the same thing as knowing. Besides, like I have mentioned previously, a couple who is married, devoted, love eachother etc who use contraception to delay prenancie due to financial reasons are not thinking that way. They WANT to have a child with their spouse, just not at the given time which is identical to NFP. However I fail to see how NFP in your context is not objectification since the same manipulation of outcomes is happening. 

 

Could you explain how the manipulation of contraception is different from the manipulation of NFP?

 

Honestly ... didn't we just go over this?

People can have all kinds of intentions for their future. The universal principle here is that objectification of people is wrong.  This principle applies to your present actions even if sometime in the future you intend to live in a shoe with so many children you don't know what to do.

 

 I will now mangle the english language in an attempt to make this as clear as a freaky-deaky bell:

 

The thought that sometime in the future you will be open to the possibility of your partner becoming a parent of your child does not change the objectification inherent in you not being open to the possibility of your partner becoming a parent in the present. Your future intercourse may be non-objectifying. The intercourse where you are not open to that possibility is an objectifying act.

 

I could go into the differences between NFP and contraception, but I am not going to. BECAUSE IT IS BORING. If you are actually interested you can run a google search on the phorum. Believe it or not the "NFP and contraception is the same" idea has been covered a million times from a bazillion different angles.

[CrossCuT]

Its a pretty simple question.

By your definition of objectification which is the purposful manipulation of outcomes, is or isnt nfp objectification?

[Lilllabettt]

And if you honestly believe all that you just said about people simply being weak and not evil, then you should watch the ish that spews from your mouth on these topics. You practice the judgment virtue to an extent that makes you come off as a gigantic beesh.

 

 

chick who calls other woman the b word wants to argue about what is and what is not misogyny. lololololololololollololololololololololololololololololol. somehow I can't imagine a scenario where you call a man with whom you disagree that name. you remind me of this chick who got into it with me on abortion. hassan knows what I'm talking about.  She suggested my thought patterns were because I a. hated women and b. needed to get laid.

It was hilarious.

 

Its a pretty simple question.

By your definition of objectification which is the purposful manipulation of outcomes, is or isnt nfp objectification?

 

Not in the mood to deal with the NFP = contraception trolls. Not poking that beehive today. the answer is no. But I am not dealing with NFP is contraception trolls. So thats it. that's all you're getting from me. Ask somebody else about why NfP does not objectify if you don't want to let it go. And If anyone here wants to talk to me about how NFP is contraception or how it can be used with a contraceptive mentality, kindly go wash your hair.

 

[CrossCuT]

I think you should go back and try reading a little more closely. Im not asking you to explain to me the differences of NFP and contraception, Im asking YOU to explain to me how YOUR definition of objectification appears to not include NFP.

 

By your definition of objectification which is the purposeful manipulation of outcomes, is or isnt nfp objectification?

 

I am NOT asking if nfp = contraception.

Im asking since contraception = objectification by your definition, does nfp = objectification by the same?

Both are willful manipulations of an outcome. I am not including any other reasons since you yourself have dismissed them in an earlier post. 

[Lilllabettt]

Im sorry I can't. maybe someone else on the thread will help you. I think if you read into why nfp is not considered contraception it would be fairly clear. why nfp is not a refusal to accept the possible futures that are a part of a sexual partner's personal identity. blah see I am already getting roped in. but i said I am not going there and so I'm not going to. hopefully someone else will jump in.  happy to talk about anything else. not touching the nfp/contraception thing with a 10 ft pole.

[Lilllabettt]

btw when I say :NFP = contraception trolls" I am not referring to yourself crosscut

Edited May 8, 2014 by Lilllabettt

[4588686]

Im sorry I can't. maybe someone else on the thread will help you. I think if you read into why nfp is not considered contraception it would be fairly clear. why nfp is not a refusal to accept the possible futures that are a part of a sexual partner's personal identity. blah see I am already getting roped in. but i said I am not going there and so I'm not going to. hopefully someone else will jump in. happy to talk about anything else. not touching the nfp/contraception thing with a 10 ft pole.

Again, she's not asking why NFO is not contraception. She's asking why NFP is not objectifying. That seems like a perfectly fair question. I strongly suspect that you refuse to answer it because it pretty obviously should be an act of objectification given your kind of weird definition, for lack of a better word, of what objectification is.

[4588686]

What exactly is 'objectification' in your view, Lilllabett? What does it mean to reduce somebody to an object?

[Lilllabettt]

treating a person as an object.

[CrossCuT]

I believe she semi explaiend earlier in the post below. This is where she set the context of the conversation (at least the context I have been arguing from) where she eliminates the consideration of someones reasons, religion, and morality. And simply bases her reasons off of her definition of objectivity.  Which is kind of vague imo and can easily be applied to NFP.

 

And again, not saying NFP=contraception, jsut that her definition of objectification appears to be applicible to both. 

I don't really have any interest in people's explanations for their use of contraception. I am not interested in deciding whether their reasons are "good" enough.

 

My view of contraception as inherently objectifying does not have anything to do with religion or Christian morality. Whenever sex becomes a meeting of things, we are objectifying people. A person is the individual composed of their unique memories, present experiences, and future possibilities.  (Please note that I am deliberately refusing to use a metaphysical definition of person. Because I am not making a metaphysical, theological or religious argument.) Contraception is an effort to have sex with someone while foreclosing one dimension of that person's future possibilities (the possibility that they might conceive a child with you.) Contraceptive sex is by its very nature an act of objectification. 

 

 

[4588686]

treating a person as an object.

 

 

Defining 'objectification' as 'treating a person as an object' is not an analytically useful or clear definition in this case.  

[Maggyie]

OK NFP 101. NFP can be used with a contraceptive mindset but when it is used properly the participants are OPEN TO LIFE. namely, NFP-sex does not preclude the possibility of conceiving a child, right here, right now. It accepts that potential future arising from the specific sex act.

This is the whole point of why NFP is approved and the pill etc is not. The openness to life part. If you're doing NFP and you're not open to life and thereby objectifying your partner, you are doing it wrong.

Please note I have never used NFP in my life and its use is not required in marriage. I am not a huge fan. OT but wanted to mention that.

[4588686]

So ... you mean the sliding doors scenario.

It seems obvious to me that there are important differences between a deliberate decision to try to limit another person's future possibilities and the incidental limiting that is a consequence of the passing of matter through time and space.

 

 

I would agree with this but I don't see what this has to do with your claim that contraception is objectifying.  This argument only holds if the individual in question is being coerced into using contraception.  

 

That second sentence is said taking for granted that there is a link between limiting someone's future possibilities and objectifying them.  While I agree there is something immoral about limiting somebody's future possibilities against their will (one reason why opposition to gay marriage is odious, by the way) I don't see how that is 'objectifying.'  

Edited May 9, 2014 by Hasan