No. It wouldn’t.
What is the use to ask opinions from the equally ignorant people? In such a case just toss a coin. The concept of “let the blind lead the unsighted” is not helpful to anyone.
You are much too “kind”, if you think that the “live and let live” was invented be me. Ethical systems are dime a dozen and they are all subjective. The “live and let live” offers the greatest level of freedom. And if everyone (and I mean “everyone”) subscribed to this system, then there would be peace and goodwill in the world.
I showed an example of this attitude when answering to @Elf01. I respect his opinion about birth control (or lack of it). Why can’t you (in general!) reciprocate this respect? Live and let live…
Many apologists say that NFP is acceptable because it does not interfere with the natural process, even though it is directed / aimed toward avoiding conception.
That may be. But it isn’t what the Church actually teaches about contraception.
What the Church teaches is that each act of intercourse must be per se ordered to both unity and procreation.
It can be abused so people can commit atrocious crimes without reproach, so on its own it can easily create a world full of problems. If everyone followed the Catholic Church’s ethical system then everyone would be happier than that one.
Yes, because that responds to my criticism, which still stands.
Which part of that response do you mean?
Badger to me.
“We don’t need to come to consensus about ethical systems if everyone just adopts the same ethical system.”
Unfortunately it is impossible to separate what the apologists say and what the church “teaches”. The church is an institution, which cannot say or teach anything. Only the members of church are able to “teach”.
It is hilarious that you wish to evaluate a method by analyzing what could happen, if the method is NOT followed. If you think that the church’s teaching cannot be abused, you have another think coming. How can you know that following the catholic ethical system would lead a happier life? Go and read the posts in the “moral theology” forum, and see the incredible misery the poor teenagers feel when their normal and natural hormones lead to “sin” and fear of hell.
Your method is followed and it does result in what I mentioned. Most likely you forgot that your preconceived notions of standard morality is not included in the live and let live philosophy.
If they did follow it than they would not have those concerns. It is also usually a mental illness that causes them to react that way.
Where and in which countries is the concept of “live and let live” followed by EVERYONE? The standard of morality IS principle of the Golden Rule - which is just another way to express the “live and let live”.
Mental illness??? What nonsense.
Ever heard of OCD? And the other point still stands.
No it isn’t. Live and let live means tolerating what you don’t agree with and expect it in return. The Golden Rule is completely different and masochists can get away with some stuff even with its restrictions.
Nowhere because there are laws that ban things and with good reason.
OCD has nothing to do with the hormones of teenagers.
The Golden Rule has two formats. The negative version is the better one: “Don’t do unto others that you would not want others do unto you” - which is the perfect realization of the “live and let live” principle. The positive one is: “Do unto others what you would wish them do unto you.” Which can easily be thwarted.
What masochists do with their own body is none of your business.
There is no reason to ban the Golden Rule - see above. And since it never happened, you cannot make a declaration about its effectiveness.
They still aren’t the same thing.
But it does have something to do with how they react with the guilt.
But they can hurt others since it is something they want done to them.
I’m talking about the live and let live principle not the Golden rule.
Sure they are.
The reaction is not the result of the act, it is the result of upbringing they received. And it is still not “OCD”.
What consenting people do with each other is STLL none of your business.
It is going to take more than an Ipse Dixit fallacy to make me believe that.
It can be and in those scenarios the fault is on the upbringing not the teachings.
I don’t care what you believe. Read the definitions.
Golden rule - negative version: “Don’t do unto other that you would not want them do unto you”.
This just a different wording for “Live and let live”.
The problem is the acceptance of the teachings. That is what causes the feelings of guilt, the fear of hell and other psychological disorders. When someone is convinced that the natural response to their raging hormones is “sinful” it directly leads psychological disorders.