So, are you saying that if a majority of people believed that birth control was wrong, then it would be alright for it to be illegal?
Yes. That is the the way lawmaking in a free society is more or less supposed to work.
Not really. There are lots of things that the vast majority of people believe are immoral, unhealthy, or not good for society, but they aren’t illegal. Adultery, for example. Laws usually require more than just a majority believing something is wrong. The “something” has to be other people’s business too. It has to be something that imposes direct harm to someone who is unable to or at a disadvantage to defend themselves against it. That is the standard that universal banning of birth control frequently doesn’t rise to. Now there are some issues regarding birth control that I think do rise to that. For example, the relentless marketing of birth control to minor children in public schools, using untruths and half truths, and to the exclusion of reasonable education about how women’s bodies actually work, based on the interest of population control. This is an issue that I think could stand some legal correction. IN addition, the approval of methods that have been proven unsafe and are banned in nearly every other developed country, could use some regulation.
If the members of society care enough about the immorality of something to make a law against it, then they can make their voices heard and a law can be made against it. Adultery isn’t illegal in most places because most people don’t care much about it. They see it as a personal issue between husband and wife. Who would prosecute all those cases? For those found guilty, what would the penalty be and who is going to pay to house and feed those who are repeat offenders? Who is going to enforce the law? Obviously, having a law against it in a free society doesn’t make sense, so there isn’t a big push for it.
I believe ABC would fall into the same category, even if the majority of society thought ABC to be immoral. However, only a fraction of free societies believes it to be immoral to begin with, so during my life time I don’t think this is going to be a legal issue.
There’s a significant difference between people not caring about it, and people not thinking it’s any of their business. I think most people would say that they think adultery is wrong and even harmful to society. If it was illegal, it would be prosecuted by the same people that prosecute other crimes. The penalty would most likely be a fine, restitution, community service, for etc, for a first offense, similar to other non-violent crimes. I don’t see how having a law against it makes less sense than having a law against smoking cigarettes in restaurants, or distributing plastic bags.
I think more people commit adultery than risk a fine by smoking in a non-smoking restaurant, unfortunately. I am against making unenforceable laws.
I don’t see how something is unenforceable because it is prevalent. Speeding is pretty prevalent, and no one seems to thing speed laws are unenforceable. Or do you think that?
I would say that for every speeder get gets caught there are probably a thousand that don’t. But society has decided it doesn’t want to drive on a road with somebody who’s going to endanger their life. So it is a law that is enforced by making examples out of those who speed. I would not be agreeable to having a law in place that made examples out of people who commit adultery. That’s just my moral compass, though.
Why not? Finding out that your spouse has given you a STD, endangered your home, broken your trust, betrayed you and your children, can certainly cause lasting harm. I think requiring restitution for paying medical bills, therapy bills, moving fees, etc seems reasonable.
Well you can collect, civilly, if your spouse cheats on you. This is done during divorce proceedings. I am fine with that.
Truthfully, adultery is the same as breaking a contract (civilly). We don’t usually have a law against breaking a contract. We are set up to deal with these things in civil court, and I have no objection to that at all.
Not in every state. What about the person who cheated with your spouse? If it can be proven that they were aware the spouse was married, shouldn’t they be a co-defendant?
Not in my opinion. As I said in my previous post, this is not different than breaking any other contract, civilly. If you are wronged by a cheating spouse, sue the spouse for breaking the contract.
The person who cheated with your spouse has no obligation to you, so no, they should not be included in any complaint.
The person who broke into my car has no more obligation to me, but they still harmed me and they can be prosecuted. Or, if it makes more sense, a person can be prosecuted for knowingly buying stolen property, even if they weren’t the one who stole it.
You and I aren’t going to agree on this, or convince each other of our respective views. If you don’t see the difference between larceny and physical destruction of property vs. a spouse cheating on another, then I am going to bow out here.
If we lived in a perfect world it would be.
The cheating spouse has done irreparable and far more damage, and yet they are the one that should not be prosecuted?
I’m not sure having a heated discussion on this topic makes sense since birth control in the USA will never be made illegal.
I assume you realise that Catholics comprise only 22% of the US population and also all polls taken on this topic indicate even a majority of Catholics use some form of birth control.
Yes, I agree with the Church teaching that ABC is gravely sinful but this is a fight in the country that cannot be won.
Well, look at it this way. Jesus didn’t go to Cesar and attempt to legislate morality. Why bother if you can change the hearts and minds of people? Then you won’t need laws.
Also, if we make ABC illegal for religious reasons, then what’s to stop other religions from enforcing their mores legally? It’s a slippery slope and is one of the reasons for separation of Church and state. Do we really want pork made illegal in exchange for ABC to be made illegal? I don’t think we really want to go there…
Also some laws on sexual sins exist (6th cmd.), with variations, in different jurisdictions.
That reinforces my point. Adultery isn’t just a sin against God, it’s also a betrayal of the cheated-on spouse’s trust and a sure way to psychologically hurt any children in the household.