Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeathGuardElite)
    peruvian or columbian?
    That's really tough.

    I want this to be a messy experience. So neither. 'British' cocaine at 10% purity will do.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by william walker)
    No. The Church was dissolved and re-established in 1660. Changing from the reformed Catholic Church in England, to the Protestant Church of England. So the currently established and preeminent Church of England has nothing to do with Henry VIII.
    good for king henry. but the policy of no contraceptives is a new thing no matter the church.

    (Original post by JD1lla)
    That's really tough.

    I want this to be a messy experience. So neither. 'British' cocaine at 10% purity will do.
    yeah you don't want to waste the expensive stuff
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeathGuardElite)
    good for king henry. but the policy of no contraceptives is a new thing no matter the church.



    yeah you don't want to waste the expensive stuff
    Because they haven't been around very long or in wide use.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by william walker)
    Because they haven't been around very long or in wide use.
    you're wrong on both accounts but okay.
    look there isn't anything wrong with condoms
    also abstanance only has been proven not to work

    because penn and teller investigated it
    Warning has a nipple or two female shown in the show
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbV0Kzd-VgU
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeathGuardElite)
    you're wrong on both accounts but okay.
    look there isn't anything wrong with condoms
    also abstanance only has been proven not to work

    because penn and teller investigated it
    Warning has a nipple or two female shown in the show
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbV0Kzd-VgU
    It doesn't work if people aren't moral.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by william walker)
    It doesn't work if people aren't moral.
    however your morality is based on the denial of what humans are. the rejection of being human.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeathGuardElite)
    however your morality is based on the denial of what humans are. the rejection of being human.
    No the morality is there to constrain peoples actions so they improve their lives. We know human at nature itself unconstrained is sinful and immoral.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    This is a very weird thread. Where is the love of Jesus shinning?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by william walker)
    No the morality is there to constrain peoples actions so they improve their lives. We know human at nature itself unconstrained is sinful and immoral.
    no the morality is there to prevent humans being human the idea of sin and immortality is nothing more then a tool to control others its got nothing to do with what god wants because god would love anyone and forgive anyone for their sins no matter what they did.

    (Original post by Racoon)
    This is a very weird thread. Where is the love of Jesus shinning?
    its not here its been blacked out.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeathGuardElite)
    no the morality is there to prevent humans being human the idea of sin and immortality is nothing more then a tool to control others its got nothing to do with what god wants because god would love anyone and forgive anyone for their sins no matter what they did.



    its not its been blacked out.
    No conscience is there to prevent human from being human. Morality is there to constrain there actions.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by william walker)
    No conscience is there to prevent human from being human. Morality is there to constrain there actions.
    partially wrong.
    your conscience is very dependant on the person.

    morality as demanded by you is there to effect the conscience.
    people like me don't have a conscience like you do.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Of course it was you who started this.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrKmas508)
    Of course it was you who started this.
    would it have been anyone else?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by william walker)
    No conscience is there to prevent human from being human. Morality is there to constrain there actions.
    Do you agree with evolution and the big bang theory? If you do I don't see how that is any more incompatible with Anglican theology than using a condom. Both are scientifically proven that go against what the church teaches.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AngryRedhead)
    Do you agree with evolution and the big bang theory? If you do I don't see how that is any more incompatible with Anglican theology than using a condom. Both are scientifically proven that go against what the church teaches.
    Scientifically it is clear that evolution has taken place and that the big bang theory is the most likely explanation for the universe. So I agree with them scientifically. However theologically what the Church says makes sense and is correct. So I believe it. I don't really understand the overlap between science and religion, they are separate things coming from difference places. So I believe both.

    Also don't try and equate actions with thoughts. Me thinking about science and thinking it is vitally important and correct. Isn't the same thing as undertaking an immoral action. Like have intercourse with a condom.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by william walker)
    Scientifically it is clear that evolution has taken place and that the big bang theory is the most likely explanation for the universe. So I agree with them scientifically. However theologically what the Church says makes sense and is correct. So I believe it. I don't really understand the overlap between science and religion, they are separate things coming from difference places. So I believe both.

    Also don't try and equate actions with thoughts. Me thinking about science and thinking it is vitally important and correct. Isn't the same thing as undertaking an immoral action. Like have intercourse with a condom.
    Hasn't the church historically taught special creationism? That doesn't gel with modern science at all. Theologians who believe in God directing evolution maybe but old earth creationists are contradicting both science and what it says in the bible by taking that view. They are totally mutually exclusive.

    Wouldn't it be much more immoral to not use a condom, potentially spread STD's and bring a life into the world that you didn't want and subject your partner to something she didn't want. I don't recall Jesus or anything in either the OT or the NT prohibiting condoms, do you?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AngryRedhead)
    Hasn't the church historically taught special creationism? That doesn't gel with modern science at all. Theologians who believe in God directing evolution maybe but old earth creationists are contradicting both science and what it says in the bible by taking that view. They are totally mutually exclusive.

    Wouldn't it be much more immoral to not use a condom, potentially spread STD's and bring a life into the world that you didn't want and subject your partner to something she didn't want. I don't recall Jesus or anything in either the OT or the NT prohibiting condoms, do you?
    And? Science doesn't gel with the theological view. Does that make science nonsense? No it just means they come at the question from difference places. One from a theological view and the other a scientific.

    As I said you shouldn't have sex in that case. Also condoms don't always stop STD's and other things don't always stop women from getting pregnant. If people are at greater risk of getting an STD or pregnant from intercourse they will be less likely to undertake such actions. Also the rate of STD's and unwanted babies has massive increased since these things like the pill, sex ed and condoms became widely available. As without the enforced morality people have more sex, so increase the chances of it happening.

    Jesus didn't say anything about a lot of things. What of it? The bible doesn't say a lot of things also. What of it? I don't hold to the bible alone, but also the institution of the Church of England.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by william walker)
    And? Science doesn't gel with the theological view. Does that make science nonsense? No it just means they come at the question from difference places. One from a theological view and the other a scientific.

    As I said you shouldn't have sex in that case. Also condoms don't always stop STD's and other things don't always stop women from getting pregnant. If people are at greater risk of getting an STD or pregnant from intercourse they will be less likely to undertake such actions. Also the rate of STD's and unwanted babies has massive increased since these things like the pill, sex ed and condoms became widely available. As without the enforced morality people have more sex, so increase the chances of it happening.

    Jesus didn't say anything about a lot of things. What of it? The bible doesn't say a lot of things also. What of it? I don't hold to the bible alone, but also the institution of the Church of England.
    I'm not calling science or religion nonsense here, although if pushed I would certainly be more inclined to say that religion is nonsense before science is. Also, science invalidates religion; we have seen this countless times. Which one is therefore superior? Science or religion? It is science of course. Religion is not truth, it is all just fairytales and mythology. Science is empirical and can be reproduced. That is why people trust science over mythology.

    Condoms are something like 99% effective. I can't speak for other forms of female contraception but even if you restrict sex to within marriage whats the harm in using contraception there? I understand the church will not likely approve as it encourages its followers to reproduce to keep up the dwindling membership numbers but considering the state of the earths resources I see no religious reason why condoms should not be allowed. It is merely good stewardship of the earth God gave us.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AngryRedhead)
    I'm not calling science or religion nonsense here, although if pushed I would certainly be more inclined to say that religion is nonsense before science is. Also, science invalidates religion; we have seen this countless times. Which one is therefore superior? Science or religion? It is science of course. Religion is not truth, it is all just fairytales and mythology. Science is empirical and can be reproduced. That is why people trust science over mythology.

    Condoms are something like 99% effective. I can't speak for other forms of female contraception but even if you restrict sex to within marriage whats the harm in using contraception there? I understand the church will not likely approve as it encourages its followers to reproduce to keep up the dwindling membership numbers but considering the state of the earths resources I see no religious reason why condoms should not be allowed. It is merely good stewardship of the earth God gave us.
    Sure theology has isn't failings as does science. Like science allows for the abortion of 185,000 unborn persons. Allows for better weapons for people to kill each other. So then science means mass murder and should be done away with? In some area's science is right in other area's theology is. Mainly in human to human interaction and understanding ones self theology is superior to science. In terms of understanding the universe and how things work science is better. As I said they come at the questions from different places.

    Yeah and guess what is 100% effective people not having sex unless they want to conceive another human life. Maybe if people did that then the world wouldn't have the populations problems you talk about or environmental problems. Morality doesn't just get tossed out the window when you get married. Otherwise what would be the point?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! By his great mercy he has given us a new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, and into an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, who are being protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: October 21, 2015
Poll
Are you going to a festival?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.