›
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Abstinence is a Sin

lackofcheeselackofcheese
edited February 2009 in Flamewars
I was posting about this in the abortion thread, but that isn't the best place for it, so I'm making a new thread.

I had the idea that, if the Catholics consider it a sin to "spill one's seed," you could make some great satire by arguing that a woman allowing an ovum to go unfertilised must also be a sin.

As I said in the other thread, it would probably be best in the faux-religious style, the type that people often can't distinguish from real religious people writing. Here are examples of the sort of thing I've thought of and would put in:
We all know that it's wrong for us to decide when a new life to begin, and this is one of the most immoral aspects of contraception. However, it is always said that "Abstinence is the only 100% effective method of contraception." Surely as long as there is a chance of the contraception failing, then the decision is still truly in God's hands? Abstinence, on the other hand, leaves nothing to chance.
The story of Onan is an important one; he was punished by God for spilling his seed upon the ground. However, we live in different times now, and we must understand that while God's teachings are infallible, we have to use the knowledge we have obtained as well to help us get closer to Him. Our God-given mental faculties have allowed us to discover so many new aspects of His Design. In particular, we know a lot more now about the human reproductive system than we did in Onan's day. In the same way that allowing semen to be lost is a sin, isn't it also wrong to allow an ovum to be lost without allowing for God's will?
Ultimately, though, I'm pretty lazy, and I doubt I'd bother making a decent-length post and getting a blog to put it on. Besides, I think others could execute this better than me. Perhaps even a communal satire blog would work well.

Comments

  • WalkerWalker
    edited February 2009
    Obviously the solution is to marry off every girl at puberty and force her to get sexed up by her husband every month. Everyone will be happy right up until they die in filth and squalor because we'll have too many God damn babies running crawling around.

    image
    Post edited by Walker on
  • SailSail
    edited February 2009
    Obviously the solution is to marry off every girl at puberty and force her to get sexed up by her husband every month.
    Of course, women make up 51% of the population, so some noble men will have to take it upon themselves to get two wives.

    Dibs.
    Post edited by Sail on
  • lackofcheeselackofcheese
    edited February 2009
    Sail should be sainted for his willingness to altruistically do God's work.
    On the other hand, I expect Scott Rubin, the selfish bastard that he is, won't even be willing to take a single wife. God has a special place in hell for the likes of him.
    Post edited by lackofcheese on
  • LokappaallaaLokappaallaa
    Baby overpopulation could be solved by one modest proposal.
  • ChurbaChurba
    On the other hand, I expect Scott Rubin, the selfish bastard that he is, won't even be willing to take a single wife.
    Can I take his wife? Please?
  • MrRobotoMrRoboto
    Baby overpopulation could be solved by one modest proposal.
    A giant baby cannon?
  • lackofcheeselackofcheese
    edited February 2009
    A Modest Proposal. Refer to Wikipedia for more information.
    However, a giant baby cannon would be rather effective also.
    Post edited by lackofcheese on
  • ErynEryn
    edited February 2009
    A cannon certainly could be one good way to spank a giant baby, at least. I mean, how else could you do it? With a really big ladder? I dunno, maybe?
    Post edited by Eryn on
  • WalkerWalker
    A cannon certainly could be one good way to spank a giant baby, at least. I mean,how else could you do it?With a really big ladder? I dunno, maybe?
    Which makes me wonder if we could combine all the overpopulation babies into one giant superbaby. Then we just stick it in a military installation with very high walls, vats of baby formula, and a giant spanking machine of some sort. Like... a really fast ferris wheel.
  • misakyramisakyra
    edited February 2009
    Which makes me wonder if we could combine all the overpopulation babies into one giant superbaby. Then we just stick it in a military installation with very high walls, vats of baby formula, and a giant spanking machine of some sort. Like... a really fast ferris wheel.
    Would the superbaby look something like this?
    Post edited by misakyra on
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    On the other hand, I expect Scott Rubin, the selfish bastard that he is, won't even be willing to take a single wife.
    Can I take his wife? Please?
    That's rather clever. Jolly good job.
  • CremlianCremlian
    On the other hand, I expect Scott Rubin, the selfish bastard that he is, won't even be willing to take a single wife.
    Can I take his wife? Please?
    That's rather clever. Jolly good job.
    You know, the more I think about it, the more Scott is living the life of someone who would be in one of those "Old grumpy single man" meets "young energetic female" in a "heartwarming romantic comedy" where the grumpy single man finally learns how to love and live life again :-p

    But yea, Abstinence is a Sin!
  • misakyramisakyra
    You know, the more I think about it, the more Scott is living the life of someone who would be in one of those "Old grumpy single man" meets "young energetic female" in a "heartwarming romantic comedy" where the grumpy single man finally learns how to love and live life again :-p
    Ah, so he's in need of a manic-pixie-dream-girl, then?
  • Kate MonsterKate Monster
    Obviously the solution is to marry off every girl at puberty and force her to get sexed up by her husband every month. Everyone will be happy right up until they die in filth and squalor because we'll have too many God damn babiesrunningcrawling around.
    Everyone would be happy except for the men that never wanted to marry or have children, the young girls and women forced into marriage and effectively rape from the age of 10, and the homosexuals that are forced to live a heterosexual lifestyle.
    I know this a joke thread, so I won't get uppity, but the casual discussion of forcing women into slavery and enforced breeding terrifies me on a very basic level.
  • lackofcheeselackofcheese
    edited February 2009
    So have you read A Modest Proposal? Does it make you feel the same way?
    Post edited by lackofcheese on
  • Kate MonsterKate Monster
    edited February 2009
    So have you readA Modest Proposal?
    Am I of Irish decent and literate? Yes, of course I have.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • lackofcheeselackofcheese
    edited February 2009
    Am I of Irish descent and literate?
    While the former seems likely, you give me reason to doubt the latter.

    In all seriousness though, I'm sorry. I wasn't paying enough attention to who I was responding to. It's clear the implication that you might not have read it was offensive, but please understand that I am much less well-read than yourself and so I did not see the potential for offense as I was posting it. My intention, however, was to hear your opinions on Swift's essay.

    I guess the answer is obvious though - for Swift this was a very serious matter. On the other hand, this thread (though I would say most rather than all of it) is far more focused on humor than it is on making a real statement, which is the source of your problem. Satire in general can easily be offensive, but the combination of modern-day society and the Internet can make it much worse - today's Internet can leach any seriousness from a discussion with ruthless efficiency.
    Post edited by lackofcheese on
  • VigaViga
    Baby overpopulation could be solved by one modest proposal.
    Baby back ribs.

    image
  • Kate MonsterKate Monster
    Am I of Irish descent and literate?
    While the former seems likely, you give me reason to doubt the latter.

    In all seriousness though, I'm sorry. I wasn't paying enough attention to who I was responding to. It's clear the implication that you might not have read it was offensive, but please understand that I am much less well-read than yourself and so I did not see the potential for offense as I was posting it. My intention, however, was to hear your opinions on Swift's essay.

    I guess the answer is obvious though - for Swift this was a very serious matter. On the other hand, this thread (though I would say most rather than all of it) is far more focused on humor than it is on making a real statement, which is the source of your problem. Satire in general can easily be offensive, but the combination of modern-day society and the Internet can make it much worse - today's Internet can leach any seriousness from a discussion with ruthless efficiency.
    Oh, I wasn't offended. I was giving a silly/snotty answer. I meant it to be silly. No inflection on the interwebs can be a problem.
  • SailSail
    Way to kill the joke, guys.
  • lackofcheeselackofcheese
    A joke is not so easily killed.
  • WalkerWalker
    Obviously the solution is to marry off every girl at puberty and force her to get sexed up by her husband every month. Everyone will be happy right up until they die in filth and squalor because we'll have too many God damn babiesrunningcrawling around.
    Everyone would be happy except for the men that never wanted to marry or have children, the young girls and women forced into marriage and effectively rape from the age of 10, and the homosexuals that are forced to live a heterosexual lifestyle.
    I know this a joke thread, so I won't get uppity, but the casual discussion of forcing women into slavery and enforced breeding terrifies me on a very basic level.
    My apologies. I too find the idea utterly disgusting, but I have a habit of approaching utterly disgusting things with a gigantic grin on my face. Maybe it's because I saw too much George Carlin too early in life, or because I'm afraid of really confronting those sort of subjects, but I'll leave that question to the philosophers psychologists.
  • Kate MonsterKate Monster
    edited February 2009
    My apologies. I too find the idea utterly disgusting, but I have a habit of approaching utterly disgusting things with a gigantic grin on my face. Maybe it's because I saw too much George Carlin too early in life, or because I'm afraid of really confronting those sort of subjects, but I'll leave that question to thephilosopherspsychologists.
    I hear you, I grew up in a Carlin loving home! ^_^
    However, I have noticed that one way society starts to accept the unacceptable is through repeated humor about the subject (racist/gay jokes and the like). I think we should be able to poke fun and be silly as much as we want to be, but I am just as aware that some people couch their horrible ideas and desires in the form of humor. It is hard for me not to have a queasy feeling when approaching this line, even if I see the humor in it.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
Sign In or Register to comment.