Get us, we are the more devout
You know…if you’re going to use massive power over the minds of people, you ought to do so carefully and thoughtfully. You ought not to use that power to wreck people’s lives for the sake of your power and celebrity. Wouldn’t you agree?
You would, but the Catholic church wouldn’t.
Papal comments on birth control began in the early 20th century, spurred partly by the emergence of new methods and also by the decision of the Anglican Church to allow exceptions to its no-contraception rule and the subsequent acceptance of contraception by other Protestant denominations.
Apparently the Catholic church wanted to show off by making a display of being more abjectly obedient to an imaginary god and its imaginary rules than other churches. It did so by forbidding people to prevent conception – it did so by interfering in people’s lives in the most basic way possible, for no sensible reason of any kind. A trivial reason and an enormous set of consequences. The Catholic church is morally frivolous to a shocking degree.
No surprise here–religious organizations often function just like any other business. They fill a niche that they see open. In this case, it was the troglodyte niche.
None of this would bug me much if the pope or bishop or whatever would just say “the church thinks you shouldn’t use condoms” or “I think it’s wrong to do X”. But of course these political, self-serving decisions are always phrased as “God wants you to avoid condoms”. As if that wasn’t stupid enough on the surface, when they finally have to retract and disavow earlier positions, are they really going to say that God changed its mind?
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Skeptic South Africa, Ophelia Benson. Ophelia Benson said: Get us, we are the more devout http://dlvr.it/96hbh […]
No, its never God that’s wrong.
Its our (their) interpretation that’s flawed.
Its always the old interpretation that’s flawed. Its always certain that the new interpretation is what he meant all along. This new, improved interpretation will always be correct.
They never explain why God’s personal messenger on earth, who speaks to God directly, can have a flawed interpretation. Why God can’t explain himself clearly is also neatly sidestepped.
But God’s inability to communicate clearly is one thing that he does pass on to the church…
I hate to say this, but are you sure it’s not a fiendish plot to make sure that Catholics shall outbreed the rest of us? You might say that this is a typical case of the womb being mightier than the sword. Have a look at the article below
http://www.bigquestionsonline.com/columns/phillip-longman/survival-of-the-godliest
which is mainly about how the fundamentalists of all persuasions look like outbreeding the people who don’t believe in large families. Some of them – no names no pack drill – even take on multiple wives in a bid to make absolutely sure.
I always wonder about the numbers in Muslim societies.
There are about the same number of men and women everywhere, so polygamy surely means that fewer men reproduce, or that they need to “borrow” women from later generations to, er, satisfy their urges.
Stephen,
This growing population of low-status men without prospects for finding wives is already a problem in Asian and Middle Eastern countries. Polygamy is one source but the low value placed on women means they suffer higher rates of abortion, withholding care and even infanticide (some Chinese communities have 1.3 boys born for every girl) so even if there was strict monagamy there would still be far more men than women. One quirky but sad result is the boom in sex dolls, a depressing and sad result is a boom in violence as young men seek to find alternative ways of “proving” themselves.
The NEJM wrote:
One might think that the scarcity of women might make them more “valuable”, giving them an advantage in the future however a study in PNAS showed that this value accrues to the men who are “still masters or custodians of women”, and not the women themselves. http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1114&Itemid=34
It’s a terrible situation and with such deeply ingrained cultural (ahem) values it won’t have and easy or fast solution. At the very least, we in the west can take a leaf from OB’s book and stop treating these backwards, violent, oppressive behaviours with respect.
Well, yes; but the religions don’t have any morality. Either it’s politics:
Or it’s thought control:
They do this all the time. They’ve always done it – as, of course, you know. After all, wrecking people’s lives is definitely power.
The moral people are quite ordinary. They’re the ones who really make the effort to do as they are told, and even – quite often – to try to work things out (only quietly, in case the Inquisition gets to hear about it). The clergy – the powers that be – just make sure of doctrinal orthodoxy (whatever policy dictates at the time) so that they can go on being the powers. Do they care about the real consequences of their nasty decrees? Of course not. Sin and repentance and all that. Humility and obedience. Hope, chastity, patience… Aren’t these the “virtues” of the oppressed?
The Abrahamic religion is the perfect instrument for thought control. It’s the best that has ever been devised. It can function pretty well even now, even without an active Inquisition. 1984? Forget it; the Church was there more than fifteen hundred years ago. But now at last it’s on the defensive, and its decrees look ever more idiotic, irresponsible and self-serving.
I know. But since they have the reputation of being about morality and compassion, it’s worth repeating that they’re not.