The fact that "pro life" is the term for, "against abortion," but can also literally be interpreted to mean, "supports social programs for people who are alive" is childish word games. This isn't a real argument. It doesn't advance any point. It doesn't even logically make sense. It's just playing on the inherent ambiguity of natural language in service of a cheap non sequitur.

I am not sure how the logic I laid out would lead people to support sex education or easily obtainable birth control.

It is mostly a personal responsibility thing, as I understand it. You are responsible for creating the baby so you must give up some of your rights like bodily autonomy.

Birth control and sex education are not really related to that at all as far as I can tell.

>It is mostly a personal responsibility thing, as I understand it. You are responsible for creating the baby so you must give up some of your rights like bodily autonomy.

If that's what you believe, then don't terminate your pregnancy. As far as anyone else is concerned, it's none of your concern.

> If that's what you believe, then don't terminate your pregnancy. As far as anyone else is concerned, it's none of your concern.

I mean, I personally agree with you.

However, there are very few true libertarians in our society and almost everyone has views that they wish to impose on other people. The pro lifers are not different than anyone else in this regard.

>almost everyone has views that they wish to impose on other people.

And more's the pity.

This may be the case for some but the Catholic worldview is both pro-life and extremely sex-positive, in the appropriate context.

If you're talking about not just "women who have sex" but "~women~ people who have sex without regard for the children whom they may conceive", then yeah I'm against that kind of sex.

The Catholic Church opposes the use of condoms[1]. Even in areas of the world where AIDS is rampant. They are not sex-positive, they are procreation-positive.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_HIV/AIDS

Edit: I suppose the Catholic Church is sex-positive when it comes to their clergy and underage parishioners. Disclaimer: I went to Catholic school for 11 years.

> Catholics oppose the use of condoms

Not really. Catholic doctrine might, American Catholics, especially, do not:

https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2016/09/28/poll-finds-...

> Even in areas of the world where AIDS is rampant.

https://www.cnn.com/2016/02/18/health/zika-pope-francis-cont...

(Benedict XVI made somewhat similar comments in 2010 regarding AIDS in Africa.)

> Catholic doctrine might, American Catholics, especially, do not

This is unfortunately true (but unsurprisingly so, especially these days). That doesn't mean that they're somehow right; they don't speak for the Church.

> The Catholic Church opposes the use of condoms[1]. Even in areas of the world where AIDS is rampant.

Correct.

> They are not sex-positive, they are procreation-positive.

They are both. "Sex-positive" doesn't mean "anything goes".

> I suppose the Catholic Church is sex-positive when it comes to their clergy and underage parishioners.

No, the Church is harshly critical of this kind of thing. The fact that individual offenders have been shuffled around for decades is to our shame and to the shame of their bishops, but nonetheless the Church is not "for" this kind of thing in any way.

> I went to Catholic school for 11 years.

At least in America, I'd say the majority of Catholic schools are only nominally Catholic.

> No, the Church is harshly critical of this kind of thing. The fact that individual offenders have been shuffled around for decades is to our shame and to the shame of their bishops, but nonetheless the Church is not "for" this kind of thing in any way.

I prefer to judge the church on its actions, not on its words. The bishops/cardinals in question got lofty appointments as their "punishment"[1].

[1] https://theconversation.com/the-catholic-churchs-grim-histor...

> Cardinal Law was neither indicted nor arrested. Instead, Pope John Paul II transferred Law to run one of the Vatican’s most cherished properties, the Basilica of Saint Mary, essentially rewarding Law for his deft cover-up of the abuses in Boston.

The Church is not a democracy. The opposition to condoms at the top is has serious consequences the world over, regardless of what Americans feel. If their stated policy is causing needless deaths, what is the value of the policy, and what is the value of the institution promoting such a policy?

> If you're talking about not just "women who have sex" but "~women~ people who have sex without regard for the children whom they may conceive", then yeah I'm against that kind of sex.

The best way to ensure that children are treated with appropriate regard is to ensure that fewer unwanted children are born.