(August 10, 2015 at 2:34 pm)Clueless Morgan Wrote:

Quote:It only matters because we believe sacred things need to be treated with reverence and kept in a particular context, and to not do so is immoral in our opinion.

What if IVF were treated "reverentially?"

What inherent value does the "particular context" of the conception have if it has no effect on the child conceived?

Like I said, I believe it is God that determines the sacredness of something. I don't believe He has deemed IVF to be sacred.

(August 10, 2015 at 6:22 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(August 10, 2015 at 2:34 pm)Clueless Morgan Wrote: If a thing like human life is sacred despite the morality of the method of conception, then what purpose does distinguishing between the morality of the methods of conception have?  Why make the distinction?  Why does it matter whether a child is conceived through a loving sex act, or a violent one, or through medical intervention if the end result is still a "sacred" child?

Like I said, we think it's immoral to take something holy outside the purity of its context. And to us, that's what IVF does.

So then you're just committing the naturalistic fallacy.

Excellent points as always Clueless.

(August 10, 2015 at 6:26 pm)Clueless Morgan Wrote:

(August 10, 2015 at 6:22 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Like I said, we think it's immoral to take something holy outside the purity of its context. And to us, that's what IVF does.

So then you're just committing the naturalistic fallacy.

Can you explain what that is?

(August 10, 2015 at 5:13 pm)Exian Wrote: Having heated discussions is actually fairly new to me, and something I learned to be ok with since joining AF. It was a shock to me, but I quickly learned the benefit of it. Often times, tip-toeing to avoid tension will also cause you to avoid the meat of a conversation.

Ugh.

I'm a gentle soul, I don't like it when people are aggressive and rude lol. You can blame my mother for that.

Not sure if that's what you meant by "heated discussions" though, so I may be off base.

(August 10, 2015 at 6:19 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(August 10, 2015 at 6:15 pm)abaris Wrote: I said, going by your post record as the only source. And there's a difference between asking oneself why, reflecting on a matter, and taking an explanation at face value. There's a very big difference.

I just don't understand how you can deduce, from the 2 months I've been here, that I have never in my life asked myself why and reflected on these matters. Not sure what you mean by taking an explanation at face value, though.

I agree with abaris, and I would like to add an observation of my own to explain. I think the impression abaris relates here is created by the fact that once challenged to discuss your justification for certain views, you would often state a stance of the church as a reason and then refuse to discuss their validity any further. This has happened on several occasions and creates the impression that you feel compelled to accept the teachings of the church, and that your own reflections on them, while you might entertain them, can never have the power to sway your opinion away from church doctrine. Why else would it ever suffice you to state church opinion as the main justification for many of your views?

(August 10, 2015 at 6:32 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(August 10, 2015 at 5:13 pm)Exian Wrote: Having heated discussions is actually fairly new to me, and something I learned to be ok with since joining AF. It was a shock to me, but I quickly learned the benefit of it. Often times, tip-toeing to avoid tension will also cause you to avoid the meat of a conversation.

Ugh.

I'm a gentle soul, I don't like it when people are aggressive and rude lol. You can blame my mother for that.

Not sure if that's what you meant by "heated discussions" though, so I may be off base.

Same. Lol

Shit can get pretty haywire here (and I don't mean the friendly disagreement type) and I go through real chemical changes haha Real big pussy.

I had a few JWs come to my door a few weeks back, and I thought "Cool. I'm gonna quiz them and see what they know." The guy mentioned a few things and I played dumb just to see if he knew his stuff, but then the guy was so visibly shaken and stuttering about that I was suddenly thrust into his shoes. I realized that this was just some stranger who believes he needs to walk up to other stranger's houses and talk about God. So I went easy on him, like a big puss.

Either that, or he was so excited that somebody was engaging with him that he got a surge of adrenaline. Haha

(August 10, 2015 at 6:44 pm)Alex K Wrote:

(August 10, 2015 at 6:19 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I just don't understand how you can deduce, from the 2 months I've been here, that I have never in my life asked myself why and reflected on these matters. Not sure what you mean by taking an explanation at face value, though.

I agree with abaris, and I would like to add an observation of my own to explain. I think the impression abaris relates here is created by the fact that once challenged to discuss your justification for certain viws you would often state a stance of the church as a reason for your views and then refuse to discuss them further. This creates the impression that you feel compelled to accept the teachings of the church, and that your own reflections on them, while you might entertain them, can never have the power to sway your opinion away from church doctrine.

 

There have been very few times that I have refused to explain things any further. Those times all happen because people were starting to get very rude, and I'm sorry, but there's only so much that I think is healthy for me to subject to. The thing that I think you both fail to understand is that when I state a stance of the Church, it's because it's also my stance. And since people here love to say I cherry pick from Christianity when I state my views, it's become habit to always clarify that it's in line with my faith, and not stuff I'm cherry picking.

I still think it's very rash to tell someone you've known for 2 months on a forum that they have never, in their life, asked themselves why or reflected on matters. I'm not sure how anyone can presume to know that and make that accusation.

(August 10, 2015 at 6:19 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Not sure what you mean by taking an explanation at face value, though.

Sorry, you always keep saying the church says this and the church says that. At the same time you keep relativising the dogma by saying you understand and you don't judge. Gays, IVF and all the other matters we discussed. Because you're good at heart and you really don't want to judge. And that's why I said, there seems to be some inner conflict.

(August 10, 2015 at 6:46 pm)Exian Wrote:

(August 10, 2015 at 6:32 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Ugh.

I'm a gentle soul, I don't like it when people are aggressive and rude lol. You can blame my mother for that.

Not sure if that's what you meant by "heated discussions" though, so I may be off base.

Same. Lol

Shit can get pretty haywire here (and I don't mean the friendly disagreement type) and I go through real chemical changes haha Real big pussy.

I had a few JWs come to my door a few weeks back, and I thought "Cool. I'm gonna quiz them and see what they know." The guy mentioned a few things and I played dumb just to see if he knew his stuff, but then the guy was so visibly shaken and stuttering about that I was suddenly thrust into his shoes. I realized that this was just some stranger who believes he needs to walk up to other stranger's houses and talk about God. So I went easy on him, like a big puss.

Either that, or he was so excited that somebody was engaging with him that he got a surge of adrenaline. Haha

Yeah, I'm always nice to people of other religions who come to my door. Even the political people who came and tried to tell me why I should vote for Obama lol.

It must be hard knocking on some stranger's door to tell them your views, so I understand getting really nervous and uncomfortable, so I always try to be as nice as possible.