Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 11/20/2010 12:59:49 PM PST by Pyro7480
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Siobhan; Canticle_of_Deborah; NYer; Salvation; american colleen; Desdemona; StAthanasiustheGreat; ..

Catholic ping!


2 posted on 11/20/2010 1:01:11 PM PST by Pyro7480 ("If you know how not to pray, take Joseph as your master, and you will not go astray." - St. Teresa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OldDeckHand; Houghton M.; Gamecock

Ping!


4 posted on 11/20/2010 1:05:38 PM PST by Pyro7480 ("If you know how not to pray, take Joseph as your master, and you will not go astray." - St. Teresa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: netmilsmom; thefrankbaum; markomalley; Tax-chick; GregB; saradippity; Berlin_Freeper; Litany; ...

Catholic ping!


5 posted on 11/20/2010 1:08:36 PM PST by NYer ("Be kind to every person you meet. For every person is fighting a great battle." St. Ephraim)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pyro7480

It is immoral for a male prostitute to give anal sex to a man.

It is no more immoral for that same male prostitute to also wear a condom, and it might help with some diseases.

There is no attempt to or affect of avoiding pregnancy because the man receiving can’t get pregnant, and the seed will be spilled/wasted regardless of whether a condom is used.

It is not a new development to say that such a homosexual male protitute may wear a condom, but it is new for a pope to discuss the topic and to suggest that male homosexual condom use may make their immoral act less immoral (less selfish).


8 posted on 11/20/2010 1:20:03 PM PST by Notwithstanding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pyro7480

If someone is familiar with Thomistic ethics, this is not a surprise. If the reason that you use a condom is to prevent disease, and not for prevention of conception, it is permissible. Thomistic ethics does not consider secondary factors or secondary consequences. For instance, it does not consider the issue of homosexuality in this decision, but only the prevention of disease. It is a clever way of dealing with moral issues, but it is also the reason that Thomistic ethics is strongly criticized.


9 posted on 11/20/2010 1:34:27 PM PST by Nosterrex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pyro7480; PadreL; Morpheus2009; saveliberty; fabrizio; Civitas2010; Radagast the Fool; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

11 posted on 11/20/2010 1:51:10 PM PST by narses ( 'Prefer nothing to the love of Christ.')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pyro7480

Sadly, FoxNews is about to get this story wrong.


13 posted on 11/20/2010 2:18:00 PM PST by vladimir998 (Part of the Vast Catholic Conspiracy (hat tip to Kells))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pyro7480

‘“But it is not the proper way to deal with the horror of HIV infection.”’

Well, well, so different when one hears the entire story.


38 posted on 11/20/2010 6:47:09 PM PST by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson