Posted on 06/24/2015 10:58:41 PM PDT by Morgana
From pro-choice Methodist Minister John M Swomley:
“There is also covert violence in the idea that women should not have sexual intercourse if they don’t want children. An act of sexual intercourse is not an implied contract to have children. While this may be the belief of those who accept the doctrine that every sexual act must be open to procreation, it would be violent for any government to decide that such a sectarian doctrine should be enforced against anyone, Catholic or non-Catholic, who does not accept that teaching.”
John M Swomley Compulsory Pregnancy: The War against American Women (Amherst, New York: Humanist Press, 1999) 58
Suggesting a woman shouldn’t have sex is violence, but abortion is not? Look at the picture of an aborted baby (first trimester) below and ask yourself if a suggestion of abstinence is more violent than abortion.
PICTURE ON LINK: WARNING GRAPHIC
(Excerpt) Read more at clinicquotes.com ...
People, in general, shouldn’t have sex unless they are married and they are having it with the person whom they married. I speak about traditional marriage. It keeps society strong and prevents the spread of STD/STIs. It keeps children safer and gives them a more stable environment as a whole.
Saying idiotic things like this minister is violence to intelligence.
What are we guys to do???
If we have consensual sex with a woman it is rape. If we DON’T have sex it is a form of violence!
Does this mean I am committing violence on all the women I am not having sex with???
The abortion industry has a very skewed view of violence. In order to distract from the horrific violence it commits upon innocent children every day, abortion promoters snatch at dust and moonbeams to claim that a whole slew of non-violent actions are actually violent.
Black is white, up is down, wet is dry.
Yet another MAN who thinks that women need to be more like men. After all, MEN, the ideal, never become pregnant or give birth, no matter how much sex they have or with what.
It also encourages people to grow up and be responsible. That’s why liberals oppose sexual morality.
What’s violence is imposing laws contrary to reason and nature.
True. But sadly, liberals aren’t the only ones who oppose sexual morality, growing up, and behaving responsibly.
Sexual immorality is one of the defining characteristics of liberalism.
That may be. But surely you’ve been around long enough to see it’s not limited to liberals.
I always thought that men would have a different perspective about sex if they either had to have the children or nobody was sure who was going to get pregnant when a couple had sex.
If men had to have babies, they’d find a better way to do it in ten years, or the human race would die out.
I don’t think they’d make it through the first year of menstruation.
People who are opposed to Christian moral standards aren’t conservative. They may be right of center moderates but you can’t maintain a conservative society with liberal morals. That’s why the Communists were so eager to push the sexual freedom on America.
I didn’t think I would either.
I just believe that to a conservative you have to adhere to all the legs of the conservative stool. Limited government, strong defense, and be socially conservative.
No reason to enforce this with law,
just stop using the law to incentivize having bastards
by paying women to have children out of wedlock,
and the whole problem instantly declines.
I’m in complete agreement with you there. But in seeing the connection between morality and freedom, I fear we’re among the minority.
I doubt that this minister knows the history of many saints who voluntarily chose abstinence in their marriage as a sacrifice to honor God.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.