Butker calls it out.
-
@Jolly said in Butker calls it out.:
Yet ... Mr. Butker is an asshole, a person who should fuck off.
If you read what I actually wrote, I was talking about one specific thing he said regarding two things I almost certainly have more experience of than he does. And I didn't say he was an asshole. You said I was. Not that it matters much. It's assholes all the way down, after all.
I noticed nobody responded to my point about caesarian sections interfering with God's plan for who gets to live and who gets to die. An inconvenient truth? Who gets to decide which parts of modern medicine are in line with what God wanted after all? The guy who never marries and doesn't have children, apparently.
It's another debate, but being a devote Catholic doesn't mean you can't say some dumb things. It's always struck me that the prohibition against contraception is ridiculous. I understand the views on abortion, and can sympathise with it if I don't agree with it. But not allowing birth control - seriously? Of course there are plenty of 'devout' Catholics who completely ignore the church's teachings on that, and they aren't described as phony or degenerate. At least not by anybody reasonable.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Butker calls it out.:
Of course there are plenty of 'devout' Catholics who completely ignore the church's teachings on that, and they aren't described as phony or degenerate. At least not by anybody reasonable.
Here I go, being unreasonable again.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Butker calls it out.:
Of course there are plenty of 'devout' Catholics who completely ignore the church's teachings on that, and they aren't described as phony or degenerate. At least not by anybody reasonable.
Here I go, being unreasonable again.
@George-K said in Butker calls it out.:
Here I go, being unreasonable again.
Coincidentally, I was listening to a history podcast on the drive home tonight on the Papal Dark Ages, also known as the Saeculum Obscurum, or even more entertainingly as the Pornocracy. It's fair to say that the behaviour of the various Bishops of Rome would have put even Mr. Biden's behaviour to shame.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saeculum_obscurum
Ah, the good old days before modern liberalism ruined everything.
I was only joking
-
-
@George-K said in Butker calls it out.:
Here I go, being unreasonable again.
Coincidentally, I was listening to a history podcast on the drive home tonight on the Papal Dark Ages, also known as the Saeculum Obscurum, or even more entertainingly as the Pornocracy. It's fair to say that the behaviour of the various Bishops of Rome would have put even Mr. Biden's behaviour to shame.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saeculum_obscurum
Ah, the good old days before modern liberalism ruined everything.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Butker calls it out.:
@George-K said in Butker calls it out.:
Here I go, being unreasonable again.
Coincidentally, I was listening to a history podcast on the drive home tonight on the Papal Dark Ages, also known as the Saeculum Obscurum, or even more entertainingly as the Pornocracy. It's fair to say that the behaviour of the various Bishops of Rome would have put even Mr. Biden's behaviour to shame.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saeculum_obscurum
Ah, the good old days before modern liberalism ruined everything.
I'm protestant, not Catholic. Throughout time, there have been some pretty sinful things done by people who were supposedly Christian.
But...The good far outweighs the bad
-
-
@George-K said in Butker calls it out.:
@LuFins-Dad said in Butker calls it out.:
Deja Vu!
Sigh...
That’s okay, yours looked better…
-
-
It’s my understanding that life begins when you retire, the kids move out, and the dogs die.
-
@Jolly said in Butker calls it out.:
Yet ... Mr. Butker is an asshole, a person who should fuck off.
If you read what I actually wrote, I was talking about one specific thing he said regarding two things I almost certainly have more experience of than he does. And I didn't say he was an asshole. You said I was. Not that it matters much. It's assholes all the way down, after all.
I noticed nobody responded to my point about caesarian sections interfering with God's plan for who gets to live and who gets to die. An inconvenient truth? Who gets to decide which parts of modern medicine are in line with what God wanted after all? The guy who never marries and doesn't have children, apparently.
It's another debate, but being a devote Catholic doesn't mean you can't say some dumb things. It's always struck me that the prohibition against contraception is ridiculous. I understand the views on abortion, and can sympathise with it if I don't agree with it. But not allowing birth control - seriously? Of course there are plenty of 'devout' Catholics who completely ignore the church's teachings on that, and they aren't described as phony or degenerate. At least not by anybody reasonable.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Butker calls it out.:
I noticed nobody responded to my point about caesarian sections interfering with God's plan for who gets to live and who gets to die. An inconvenient truth?
Because your argument is specious. Since Christianity considers life as created by God, it is important to conserve and nurture it with the tools he gives us. C-sections preserve lives - those of the mother and those of the baby.
Would you argue that Catholics are not interested and do not spend large amounts of money on healthcare? That they let people die from conditions where surgical intervention leads to positive outcomes?
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Butker calls it out.:
I noticed nobody responded to my point about caesarian sections interfering with God's plan for who gets to live and who gets to die. An inconvenient truth?
Because your argument is specious. Since Christianity considers life as created by God, it is important to conserve and nurture it with the tools he gives us. C-sections preserve lives - those of the mother and those of the baby.
Would you argue that Catholics are not interested and do not spend large amounts of money on healthcare? That they let people die from conditions where surgical intervention leads to positive outcomes?
@Jolly said in Butker calls it out.:
@Doctor-Phibes said in Butker calls it out.:
I noticed nobody responded to my point about caesarian sections interfering with God's plan for who gets to live and who gets to die. An inconvenient truth?
Because your argument is specious. Since Christianity considers life as created by God, it is important to conserve and nurture it with the tools he gives us. C-sections preserve lives - those of the mother and those of the baby.
Would you argue that Catholics are not interested and do not spend large amounts of money on healthcare? That they let people die from conditions where surgical intervention leads to positive outcomes?
I think you may have missed my point.
If life is created by God, then the baby that is born using IVF or surrogacy is also created by God. Who are we to tell people they can't do this? If you say because it's not natural, then neither is caesarian section. Obviously, the second case is bollocks, both of my children were born by c-section. So why deny people life created using other technological means? "Loss of dignity" - seriously? There was no loss of dignity in the case I knew of, and now there's a teenage boy who wouldn't be here if it wasn't for surrogacy. Any 'chaos' created by his existence is roughly equivalent to that created by any other teenage boy.
Yes, I get the fact that he's a devout Roman Catholic, but religious doctrine isn't a better reason for telling people what to do than any other doctrine if what you're telling them doesn't make sense.
-
@taiwan_girl said in Butker calls it out.:
@Jolly said in Butker calls it out.:
How about this one:
At its core, feminism is the belief that women deserve equal social, economic, and political rights and freedoms.
I agree with that. But he was the one who said it. But if she did say, I still think its weird.
What if one of your kids said, "Before I got married. No wait, even though i was married but didnt have kids, my life was nothing."
"So, the time you spent growing up with loving parents, the wisdom they gave you, the nurturing, etc. means nothing to you?"
"Correct. My life did not begin until I was married and had kids"
Again, you are missing the word vocation.
Vocation:
-
aparticular occupation, business, or profession; calling.
Synonyms: pursuit, employment -
a strong impulse or inclination to follow a particular activity or career.
a divine call to God's service or to the Christian life. -
a function or station in life to which one is called by God:
the religious vocation; the vocation of marriage.
@LuFins-Dad said in Butker calls it out.:
@taiwan_girl said in Butker calls it out.:
@Jolly said in Butker calls it out.:
How about this one:
At its core, feminism is the belief that women deserve equal social, economic, and political rights and freedoms.
I agree with that. But he was the one who said it. But if she did say, I still think its weird.
What if one of your kids said, "Before I got married. No wait, even though i was married but didnt have kids, my life was nothing."
"So, the time you spent growing up with loving parents, the wisdom they gave you, the nurturing, etc. means nothing to you?"
"Correct. My life did not begin until I was married and had kids"
Again, you are missing the word vocation.
Vocation:
-
aparticular occupation, business, or profession; calling.
Synonyms: pursuit, employment -
a strong impulse or inclination to follow a particular activity or career.
a divine call to God's service or to the Christian life. -
a function or station in life to which one is called by God:
the religious vocation; the vocation of marriage.
I honestly dont see what I am missing in my analysis.
He says:
I can tell you that my beautiful wife Isabelle would be the first to say that her life truly started when she began living her vocation as a wife and as a mother.
What does that say about her life before? Maybe there is some "subtle" english language meaning I am missing.
-
-
No, there's nothing to miss. She values her role as wife and mother. It doesn't have to mean anything about her life up until then, just that she has found what is for her real meaning in her life.
-
No, there's nothing to miss. She values her role as wife and mother. It doesn't have to mean anything about her life up until then, just that she has found what is for her real meaning in her life.
@Mik It seems there is some subtle in the language. If your analysis is correct, I would have said some thing like
"My wife would be the first to say that her life became more fulfilling when she began............"
To say "that her life truly started when..............." seems to diminish what happened before.
(Again, sounds like a bit of subtle in the English language that I am missing)
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Butker calls it out.:
@taiwan_girl said in Butker calls it out.:
@Jolly said in Butker calls it out.:
How about this one:
At its core, feminism is the belief that women deserve equal social, economic, and political rights and freedoms.
I agree with that. But he was the one who said it. But if she did say, I still think its weird.
What if one of your kids said, "Before I got married. No wait, even though i was married but didnt have kids, my life was nothing."
"So, the time you spent growing up with loving parents, the wisdom they gave you, the nurturing, etc. means nothing to you?"
"Correct. My life did not begin until I was married and had kids"
Again, you are missing the word vocation.
Vocation:
-
aparticular occupation, business, or profession; calling.
Synonyms: pursuit, employment -
a strong impulse or inclination to follow a particular activity or career.
a divine call to God's service or to the Christian life. -
a function or station in life to which one is called by God:
the religious vocation; the vocation of marriage.
I honestly dont see what I am missing in my analysis.
He says:
I can tell you that my beautiful wife Isabelle would be the first to say that her life truly started when she began living her vocation as a wife and as a mother.
What does that say about her life before? Maybe there is some "subtle" english language meaning I am missing.
I don’t think you’re missing any underlying linguistic peculiarity. The statement has the desired emotional and spiritual effect the athlete is wishing to convey to the audience. People with familiarity with Roman Catholicism, Greek Orthodoxy, Church of England and those other Christian ecclesial communities would pick up on it immediately.
By itself I wouldn’t needlessly dwell on it.
-
-
I don’t think you’re missing any underlying linguistic peculiarity. The statement has the desired emotional and spiritual effect the athlete is wishing to convey to the audience. People with familiarity with Roman Catholicism, Greek Orthodoxy, Church of England and those other Christian ecclesial communities would pick up on it immediately.
By itself I wouldn’t needlessly dwell on it.
