In the last two posts there has appeared the words "misogynous" and "control over women's lives".
It seems to me that such language is the result of people having taken a position against the RC Church in early life, for personal reasons I assume, and have used these expressions, which are unexamined assertions, to such an extent and presumably without challenge that they have come to believe they are facts.
But they are not. Their use prejudges the argument in their own favour by the pejorative tone of such expressions and thus they are circular and disingenuous.
The other side believes that ABC is misogynous and seeks control over women.
If the expression "control over women's lives" is changed to "control over women's lives in women's interests" the real argument is engaged. If it is not in women's interests to have themselves mechanically and chemically spayed for the convenience of men who seek cheap and easy sexual intercourse without responsibility then it is perfectly obvious who are the misogyists and who is seeking control over women.
Control over people's lives in their interest is the whole point of democratically agreed laws. Control of people for no reason but the exercise of control is another matter.
What is happening is that a devious use of these pejoratives without reference to the interests of the people controlled is being deployed presumably on the assumption that the intended audience is stupid.
So there is a necessity of people promoting ABC to prove that it is in the interests of women, and men. It is certainly in the interests of the businesses involved in the manufacture, distribution, retailing and advice concerning their use, to promote ABC. It is certainly in the interest of low intensity eugenicists as I have explained.
Is it in the interests of women? That's the question. That the subject has become an issue in the race for the White House suggests that people qualified to be President, and their teams, are of the view that ABC is not in the interests of women and that those promoting it are misogynists.
You might as well say that the Pope is full of **** and leave it at that. Because that is what you are really saying with your sneaky pejorative assertions designed to delude the unwary. And at least a billion people disagree with you.
If Joe and Thomas will get on with doing that we might be able to have a grown up, intelligent discussion on the matter.
Sex is not on the agenda with ABC. You are discussing encouragement to not have sex whether you like it or not. Sex is an evolved response to the procreation and continuation of the species. How can the deliberate circumvention of that be classed as sex when it is merely recreation and setting out to defeat the evolved urge on which the recreation is based?
A2Kers will decide for themselves whether my posts are "tedious". They do not need your guidance on such matters Joe. Once again, like most things you say, it is circular. I'm full of **** as well as the Pope and the billion odd Catholics and all to prove you are right. You ego is out of control.
If you read my tedious posts, which you obviously don't, you would know that it is of no relevance how many Catholic women use ABC to the official position of the Church. Just as it is of no relevance to the Government's position on speeding or drug taking how many people break the speed limit or take drugs. That some female parishioners express "near complete contempt" of the Church's teaching in this regard is another meaningless, asserted circularity based on your desire for them to have such contempt which I do not believe they have whether they have recourse to ABC or not.
Your reference to whale meat demonstrates your lack of understanding of the issues involved.
The Roman Catholic Church will do what it has always done and seek to protect women from the carnal depredations of men such as yourself and your eager followers. You are the misogynists and seekers of control over women's lives and assertions to the contrary are pointless and stupid unless you explain why doing nothing about the natural woman to change her nature is guilty of the specious and self-serving allegations you make against that position. Why do you need me to tell you what the Church should do. It's position is clear and out in the open and I agree with it.
I'm not sure that the position of the business interests in ABC is out in the open. I think those interests have dangled a temptation before your eyes and you have succumbed to it.