Comments for Contraception and the Laws at http://www.thecatholicthing.org , comment 1 to 4 out of 4 comments http://www.thecatholicthing.org Thu, 20 Jun 2013 07:58:46 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/contraception-and-the-laws.html#comment-10154 Manfred: I agree with you that the gulf between good and evil is indeed widening. However, I fear that the differences are only more stark and obvious to a small sub-set of people who have not completely marinaded their consciences in popular culture. - Kerv Tue, 28 Feb 2012 17:28:37 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/contraception-and-the-laws.html#comment-10149 Thank you for a very frank and timely column, Dr. Arkes. Seeing the condom jar in the middle of the column brings up Drew University in Madison, N.J. where unnamed students were looting the jar and not sharing with others. My office is just down the street and I am reminded of the medieval practice where villagers would "marry" the village idiot with a female, retarded or not, and then surround the house on the "wedding night" and peer in. Bishops ended the practice but it seems that with the introduction of webcams, the practice is being reintroduced. The good news is the gulf between good and evil is widening and the differences are more stark and obvious. - Manfred Tue, 28 Feb 2012 11:33:03 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/contraception-and-the-laws.html#comment-10148 But isn't part of the problem that the previous framing of the issue of contraceptives vis a vis Obamacare as one of "conscience" and "religious freedom" was a decision by the bishops and most others to avoid the issue of birth control per se. They felt they could win on the issue of "conscience" but not on the rightness of the Church's teaching per se. - jsmitty Tue, 28 Feb 2012 11:02:47 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/contraception-and-the-laws.html#comment-10142 When George Stephanopoulos specifically mentioned Griswald v. Connecticut in the ABC debate, wasn't he cueing the debators to take a position on the "right to privacy" which played the major role in the Supreme Court decision, and paved the way for Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton? Or can we attribute such perceptiveness to TV anchors? - Howard Kainz Tue, 28 Feb 2012 05:50:59 +0100