Resisting the urge to tie this back into the sex conversation.

Simply impossible to avoid that connection in this discussion.

Even today, the church's work to discourage birth control in an overpopulated world is one of the most destructive and immoral influences on the planet.

This isn't my belief, but in defense of the Catholic Church, I think their belief is based on the idea that all life is precious. I can't see how that could be immoral.

The Catholic church disapproves of birth control in circumstances where no life has been created yet. No life is harmed in any way by wearing a condom.

This isn't my belief, but in defense of the Catholic Church, I think their belief is based on the idea that all life is precious. I can't see how that could be immoral.

When children are starving because their parents can't feed them and the church urges them to have more--that's immoral in my book.

I've been away for a while, and must say that this is the best conversation to come back to: sex and religion! Although, my thoughts have pretty much already been said by Hec, Gud, Anne, and a few others.

So, in completely other news, the reason I am home and able to post at all is that a water main broke in my library, flooding it, and we can't even work on rescuing books and computers because of the asbestos! Water was up to four inches deep in the library, with sodden ceiling tiles down in the Z section. It went through to the floor below, where we have our catalog server, web server, backup for our network, and storage for older microfilm (mostly old New York Times) and supplies.

I love you guys, and it's great to catch up, but I would SO rather be putting paper toweling between pages of books, setting up fans, and checking my computer to see if it is completely fried (is that the right term if the problem is water?), or if I can rescue anything from it.

slight x-post with Natter, but I seriously had to whine, because this so sucks.

The Catholic church disapproves of birth control in circumstances where no life has been created yet. No life is harmed in any way by wearing a condom.

I know that but doesn't their anti-birth control stance an extrapolation of their general stance on life? (Really, I should not be the one trying to make this point because I don't know enough.)

Resisting the urge to tie this back into the sex conversation.

Ahh, there we go. The "gotta make a chock full of nuts joke" tension is released. Thanks.

I could kind of be the board freak on this one. I don't have the chocolate drug effect (the absence of which is more common in men, I thought?), so I often turn down down chocolate when it is offered around the office. It isn't that I dislike it, I'm just kinda neutral on it, and I know there are people around the place who really really really like it.

My view on having chocolate sucked off my nuts ... oh wait, I don't have to comment on that one anymore. I guess the manner of the application would be kind of key. For example, no cats allowed.

I know that but doesn't their anti-birth control stance an extrapolation of their general stance on life?

Nope. The encyclical banning birth control explained that sex was wrong unless it was open to the chance of procreation. So, for instance, oral sex to ejaculation is just as bad as using a condom.

So, in completely other news, the reason I am home and able to post at all is that a water main broke in my library, flooding it, and we can't even work on rescuing books and computers because of the asbestos!

Oh no!! Good luck rescuing the books!

So, sex is only appropriate when there is a possibility of creating life?

ETA: Okay, I see the difference. This is what I wrote before:

I think their belief is based on the idea that all life is precious. I can't see how that could be immoral.

What I should have said is that their anti-birth control beliefs are based on their view that sex should always lead to the possibility of life. Not my view, but it's hardly immoral.