the Christian truth about the evil of birth control

[CatholicXian]

Those who were born "sterile" (or really, "infertile") have not deliberately done anything to prevent the conception on a child. God is a worker of miracles... remember Sarah? Homosexual actions leave no possibility for conception, miracle or not.

That is not the point. The point is that semen is knowingly being wasted in each case.

It is not being "wasted" in the case of unintended sterility. Abraham was not wasting his seed with Sarah while she was barren.

The Pill is an abortifacient and thus akin to an abortion

Is that so? Just what is abortion?

Yes. Abortion is the murder of an unborn child (or partially born, in some cases).

Barrier/other methods of contraception turn the marital embrace into an event of lust--using the other person as an object of pleasure, rather than a spouse (a mother, or a father).

So now a spouse is only one who is a mother or a father, or a potential mother or father? And on what basis does contraception turn sex into lust? Are you even married?

Potential mother or father, I stand corrected.

Contraception turns sex into lust because it views the other person as an object of personal pleasure--self-gratification. Our fertility (or potential fertility) is part of who we are--it's how God created us. Contraception sidesteps our God given gift of fertility (or potential fertility). It says there's a problem with how God made us, and we need to use something to fix it.

But sex is the only means of procreation.

It is also the most intimate act between a man and wife--"the two shall be one". I think I see the main problem with the Catholic view of sex--it is utilitarian. It is seen as only useful if the chance of procreation is involved. This utilitarian view ignores the other aspects of sex. That's too bad.

I never said that sex was only about procreation. It is not. I have stated already that sex has two INSEPARABLE ends. Procreation, and the unity of the spouses. The Catholic view of sex is not remotely utilitarian. Contraception is utilitarian--it's using one's spouse for pleasure--"I only want sex to feel good with you, I don't want to have to worry about a baby"

Contraception is a perfect example of utilitarianism.

Sex is not always pleasurable the first time for the wife. In fact, the first time it usually hurts (sometimes a lot) for the wife. Why does she do it? To grow in union with her husband and to consummate her marriage, and to produce offspring, to start a family, to receive the great blessing that children are.

Wow, that sure is a distortion of the point being made. I cannot speak for Vic but I am quite certain that he is not talking about the first time. The point is, if sex wasn't pleasurable, we likely wouldn't be having this discussion.

Yes, we would. Even if sex wasn't pleasurable (which, lets face it, it sometimes isn't--step outside your masculine perspective for a moment and hear it from a woman (and countless other women, I'm sure) that sex is not always pleasurable, despite what the media portrays), it would still unite the spouses and it would still produce children. Am I saying that sex is always unpleasurable? No. For the most part, sex is a great pleasure. But not always, and not immediately.

Labor is painful. Giving birth is one of the most painful experiences of life (trust me). But we still go through with it. Saying we wouldn't have sex if it was not pleasurable is like saying we wouldn't give birth unless it was pleasurable. Which, since we do give birth even though it's the most unpleasant of physical experiences on this earth, your point about the pleasurableness of sex is lost to me (and I suspect many other women reading this).

I can't help but notice that there still has not been a sound biblical basis given for contraception being a sin.

One has to see with eyes of faith, not lenses of doubt.

The story of Onan is not the only passage of Scripture the Church uses to inform her teaching on contraception, but bringing up other Scriptural instances will just bring further excuses to those unwilling to see that children are blessings and fertility is not a disease we ought to prevent, but rather something God designed in our very natures as persons. Our sexuality and fertility is part of who we are. When we deny our fertility, we deny part of ourselves.

"Be fruitful and multiply"

 

[Free]

I can only repeat what Pope Paul VI said, when he said that "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" is intrinsically evil.

Based on what?

In "Humanae Vitae" the Pope was quite prophetic. In the late 60's, he forsaw the rise in divorce, the disrespect of women (such as in pornography) and decaying morals in areas of sex being a result of easy to get contracepetion. And he was right. Forty years later, look around.

People would do well, whether they are Catholic or not, to read the things the popes write.

Many people have written in the past about things which are happening today.

Abortion is the murder of an unborn child (or partially born, in some cases).

You also stated this: "The Pill is an abortifacient and thus akin to an abortion".

Just what is it that the Pill is aborting?

Potential mother or father, I stand corrected.

So those who cannot conceive are not to be considered spouses?

I never said that sex was only about procreation. It is not. I have stated already that sex has two INSEPARABLE ends. Procreation, and the unity of the spouses. The Catholic view of sex is not remotely utilitarian. Contraception is utilitarian--it's using one's spouse for pleasure--"I only want sex to feel good with you, I don't want to have to worry about a baby"

You state that sex is for procreation and the unity of spouses. Yet, for some unknown reason, you argue that if you remove the ability to procreate, then there is no unity. On what grounds?

Yes, we would. Even if sex wasn't pleasurable (which, lets face it, it sometimes isn't--step outside your masculine perspective for a moment and hear it from a woman (and countless other women, I'm sure) that sex is not always pleasurable, despite what the media portrays), it would still unite the spouses and it would still produce children. Am I saying that sex is always unpleasurable? No. For the most part, sex is a great pleasure. But not always, and not immediately.

No, I am quite certain we wouldn't. Sex sells, end of story. If sex wasn't pleasurable we would not be having a discussion about birth control, especially since you are arguing that "it would still produce children". I am also quite certain that the unifying factor in sex is the pleasure.

The story of Onan is not the only passage of Scripture the Church uses to inform her teaching on contraception

And I'm sure it is not the only passage used in the Church which is given a different meaning in order to prove something that has no biblical basis.

but bringing up other Scriptural instances will just bring further excuses to those unwilling to see that children are blessings and fertility is not a disease we ought to prevent, but rather something God designed in our very natures as persons.

I've already addressed this argument so I advise that you not use it.

but rather something God designed in our very natures as persons. Our sexuality and fertility is part of who we are.

It is also a part of the majority of animals.

"Be fruitful and multiply"

And?

 

[CatholicXian]

I can only repeat what Pope Paul VI said, when he said that "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" is intrinsically evil.

Based on what?

In "Humanae Vitae" the Pope was quite prophetic. In the late 60's, he forsaw the rise in divorce, the disrespect of women (such as in pornography) and decaying morals in areas of sex being a result of easy to get contracepetion. And he was right. Forty years later, look around.

People would do well, whether they are Catholic or not, to read the things the popes write.

Many people have written in the past about things which are happening today.

I cannot speak for CatholicCrusader who originally posted the above, not me. But I think you should take an honest look at the encyclical. It would definitely help the discussion.

Abortion is the murder of an unborn child (or partially born, in some cases).

You also stated this: "The Pill is an abortifacient and thus akin to an abortion".

Just what is it that the Pill is aborting?

Life begins at conception, not birth. The Pill is aborting a human person... since, human persons are the only fruit of sexual intercourse between spouses. I can't think of any time a woman gave birth to something other than a human baby?

Potential mother or father, I stand corrected.

So those who cannot conceive are not to be considered spouses?

Did I say that? Have I not continued to hold up Abraham and Sarah as a great example of God's power?

People who have deliberately sterilized themselves in order not to conceive, are still spouses, but they have done a grave injustice to their marriage, and thus to themselves and their spouse.

I never said that sex was only about procreation. It is not. I have stated already that sex has two INSEPARABLE ends. Procreation, and the unity of the spouses. The Catholic view of sex is not remotely utilitarian. Contraception is utilitarian--it's using one's spouse for pleasure--"I only want sex to feel good with you, I don't want to have to worry about a baby"

You state that sex is for procreation and the unity of spouses. Yet, for some unknown reason, you argue that if you remove the ability to procreate, then there is no unity. On what grounds?

There can be no true unity when one does not accept the spouse as they are, for who they are. Contraception "says" there's something 'wrong' with one's spouse that needs to be 'fixed'. The wife isn't good enough as she is, she needs to be pumped full of abortifacient chemicals. The husband isn't good enough as he is, he has to cover up his sexual organ with latex and keep his bodily fluids to himself, etc.

Yes, we would. Even if sex wasn't pleasurable (which, lets face it, it sometimes isn't--step outside your masculine perspective for a moment and hear it from a woman (and countless other women, I'm sure) that sex is not always pleasurable, despite what the media portrays), it would still unite the spouses and it would still produce children. Am I saying that sex is always unpleasurable? No. For the most part, sex is a great pleasure. But not always, and not immediately.

No, I am quite certain we wouldn't. Sex sells, end of story. If sex wasn't pleasurable we would not be having a discussion about birth control, especially since you are arguing that "it would still produce children". I am also quite certain that the unifying factor in sex is the pleasure.

So sex is a mere physical experience, having nothing to do with the spiritual (since the "unifying factor is the pleasure")? Two becoming one flesh is merely a graphic image of sexual intercourse? People are animals, just having sex because "it feels good"?

Perhaps modern society acts that way. But that's not the way God intended sex to be. I'm not saying that sex is not (or can't be) "fun" and pleasurable, but birth control does not make sex fun, nor pleasurable. Sex is just as fun and pleasurable without contraception. In fact, it's probably more so because it's open, honest, and free.

The story of Onan is not the only passage of Scripture the Church uses to inform her teaching on contraception

And I'm sure it is not the only passage used in the Church which is given a different meaning in order to prove something that has no biblical basis.

In your opinion.

but bringing up other Scriptural instances will just bring further excuses to those unwilling to see that children are blessings and fertility is not a disease we ought to prevent, but rather something God designed in our very natures as persons.

I've already addressed this argument so I advise that you not use it.

I must've missed it then, I'll go back and re-read your posts.

but rather something God designed in our very natures as persons. Our sexuality and fertility is part of who we are.

It is also a part of the majority of animals.

I'm sure you will agree there is a world of difference between human persons and animals. Animals have no awareness of their sexuality, but for argumentative purposes, yes, God designed animals in such a way that they too can produce offspring. Animals beget animals. Spouses beget children--human persons with spiritual souls in need of Christ's salvation.

 

[CatholicXian]

Free,

I found it,

We wanted to remain in absolute control and avoid more children. Both of those reasons are the main reasons for contraception and both are the antithesis of principles God has given us in His Word about families. Fertility and children are not a disease you should go to the doctor to prevent.

No, they're not, and no one is saying that they are. You cannot win an argument by changing what is being said by the other side.

It's not intended to be a direct quote from "the other side". It's a perceived mentality.

What else does birth control (especially the Pill) signify? Why are we going to the doctor to "fix" our fertility if we're not viewing it as a "disease" or something "wrong" with our bodies? You take vitamins/medicine to make your body work better, but not to prevent functions it's already supposed to perform.

I can't think of anything else people go to the doctor for to stop the body from doing something it's supposed to do... can you?

 

[Imagican]

There is a good point that has been offered here.

Wouldn't contraception NEGATE the PURPOSE of sex being ACCEPTABLE in marriage? For the purpose of sex to BEGIN with is without a doubt; PROCREATION.

Now, if one uses birth control simply to be able to HAVE SEX for the sake of LUSTS, then wouldn't this BE nothing other than LUST?

Children being concieved is through the POWER of God. WE are UNABLE to 'create life'. That is God's domain. So, in essence, aren't WE attempting to USURP this authority when we have UNNATURAL sex, (use of birth control)? For we have then taken it's TRUE PURPOSE out of the equation and simply inserted our PLEASURE above the PURPOSE.

Is sex pleasurable? Did God allow this act to BE pleasurable? ABSOLUTELY. But not for us to ABUSE it simply for the SAKE of pleasure WITHOUT the consideration of it's PURPOSE.

MEC

 

[Vic C.]

Contraception "says" there's something 'wrong' with one's spouse that needs to be 'fixed'.

:o

So if one's spouse contracts HIV some time ago through a blood transfusion and it just now rears it's ugly virus head, how do you "fix" that? :-?

Wow, can we even concede that there are circumstances where condoms are needed? Do we have to be so rigid in our beliefs?

 

[CatholicXian]

Contraception "says" there's something 'wrong' with one's spouse that needs to be 'fixed'.

:o

So if one's spouse contracts HIV some time ago through a blood transfusion and it just now rears it's ugly virus head, how do you "fix" that? :-?

Wow, can we even concede that there are circumstances where condoms are needed? Do we have to be so rigid in our beliefs?

If it's worth believing in...



Are condoms 100% effective in protecting against HIV? Even if we supposed that they were 99.9% effective, would you be willing to risk that .1% chance that you could infect your spouse with a deadly disease? Is sex is more important than the health of your spouse?

(edit: spelling)

 

[Vic C.]

... Are condoms 100% effective in protecting against HIV? Even if we supposed that they were 99.9% effective, would you be willing to risk that .1% chance that you could infect your spouse with a deadly disease? Is sex is more important than the health of your spouse?

(edit: spelling)

You got it backwards; in my scenario, she has it and I'm using to protect myself! You automatically assumed selfishness on my part.

:smt018

:

BTW, your spelling was spot on. This Firefox browser lets me know when there's errors! 8-)

Life begins at conception, not birth. The Pill is aborting a human person.

I agree with life at conception. But oral contraception does not abort; it prevent or suppress ovulation. You may be thinking of the RU 486 pill, which is so controversial, Walmart pharmacies refused to sell it.

I'm sure you will agree there is a world of difference between human persons and animals. Animals have no awareness of their sexuality.

Heh, I missed this the first time around. : You may want to do some actual research on this. For instance, dolphins mate for life and have been know to engage in intercourse purly for pleasure.

Chimps are extremely promiscuous and even indulge in self pleasure.

But I have digressed into sexual education mode. 8-) 8-)

 

[CatholicXian]

... Are condoms 100% effective in protecting against HIV? Even if we supposed that they were 99.9% effective, would you be willing to risk that .1% chance that you could infect your spouse with a deadly disease? Is sex is more important than the health of your spouse?

(edit: spelling)

You got it backwards; in my scenario, she has it and I'm using to protect myself! You automatically assumed selfishness on my part.

:smt018

:

Okay... so then you're willing to risk your own life for sex?

Life begins at conception, not birth. The Pill is aborting a human person.

I agree with life at conception. But oral contraception does not abort; it prevent or suppress ovulation. You may be thinking of the RU 486 pill, which is so controversial, Walmart pharmacies refused to sell it.

Birth Control Pills for women are also abortifacients. They work in 2 ways. The first is to suppress ovulation, but if that doesn't work (which, it doesn't always--"Breakthrough Ovulation"), the Pill works to thin the lining of the uterine wall so the embryo is unable to implant... The Pill cannot prevent fertilization, it prevents the survival of the embryo.

How's WebMD for a non-biased source? http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/ ... ntrol-pill

[Hormonal Contraception] (the pill, the patch, and the vaginal ring) all contain a small amount of synthetic estrogen and progestin hormones. These hormones work to inhibit the body's natural cyclical hormones to prevent pregnancy. Pregnancy is prevented by a combination of factors. The HC usually stops the body from releasing an egg from the ovary. HC also changes the cervical mucus to make it difficult for the sperm to find an egg. HC can also prevent pregnancy by making the lining of the womb inhospitable for implantation.

aka, the Pill is an abortifacient. It causes the woman's body to spontaneously abort any fertilized embryo that may exist.

I'm sure you will agree there is a world of difference between human persons and animals. Animals have no awareness of their sexuality.

Heh, I missed this the first time around. : You may want to do some actual research on this. For instance, dolphins mate for life and have been know to engage in intercourse purly for pleasure.

Chimps are extremely promiscuous and even indulge in self pleasure.

But I have digressed into sexual education mode.

Animals do not reason the way human persons do. I still protest that animals have no awareness of their sexuality outside of instinct. Yes, some animals do mate for life but this is not because they love each other. I am a great animal lover. But animals are not persons.

 

[CatholicXian]

If I could pray that one thing change after this discussion, it would be that Christians would reject the Pill completely. To fully get out the message that life begins at conception, we have to reject the Pill as an abortifacient. Not many woman know exactly how the Pill works, but they NEED to.

Oral contraceptives (i.e., the Pill, under all its fancy names/brands) are just as evil as RU-486. Just as deadly. Do the research.

 

[ebleau]

Since the Pill began to be sold in 1960, divorces have tripled, out-of-wedlock births jumped from 224,000 to 1.2 million, abortions doubled, and cohabitation soared 10-fold from 430,000 to 4.2 million.

!960 also gave us the invention of the Halogen Lamp Light! So maybe The Halogen Lamp Light was to blame for the effects you gave...

Sorry, but it's a STRETCH to say the pill caused that.

 

[CatholicXian]

Since the Pill began to be sold in 1960, divorces have tripled, out-of-wedlock births jumped from 224,000 to 1.2 million, abortions doubled, and cohabitation soared 10-fold from 430,000 to 4.2 million.

!960 also gave us the invention of the Halogen Lamp Light! So maybe The Halogen Lamp Light was to blame for the effects you gave...

Sorry, but it's a STRETCH to say the pill caused that.

It's not a stretch. The Pill directly relates to, and has an effect on sex. The halogen lamp light does not. Big difference.

 

[ebleau]

!960 also gave us the invention of the Halogen Lamp Light! So maybe The Halogen Lamp Light was to blame for the effects you gave...

Sorry, but it's a STRETCH to say the pill caused that.

It's not a stretch. The Pill directly relates to, and has an effect on sex. The halogen lamp light does not. Big difference.

No, it is NOT different... unless you can be HARD proof of the relationship of the pill to this decline on society. It is a proposed correlation. Effect 1 happened at sometime as event 2, they MUST be related!! NO! Could they be? well yes.. But you CAN NOT claim that as the REAL reason without hard real proof.

Halogen Lights can effect sex.... Do you make love to your spouse with a light on or off? Halogen Lights can make it brighter in the room and maybe you can see more imperfections on your spouse.. then you no long are aroused. So yes... Halogen Lights can effect sex.

 

[CatholicXian]

The Pill changes the act of sexual intercourse--it changes what it means. It's also an abortifacient. Thus, it DIRECTLY relates to the number of abortions because it is itself the CAUSE of countless unknown abortions.

 

[ebleau]

One the issue of Sex in marriage being for procreation only...

Everyone read Song of Solomon.. it is a VERY descriptive account of a very passionate love between a man and wife, but mentions NOTHING about procreation. Were they in sin because they lusted each other in love and marriage? NO. The Marriage bed CAN NOT be defiled! If you don't lust your mate in some way how can sex happen? It can't.

Hebrew 13:4

"Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge."

 

[ebleau]

The Pill changes the act of sexual intercourse--it changes what it means. It's also an abortifacient. Thus, it DIRECTLY relates to the number of abortions because it is itself the CAUSE of countless unknown abortions.

National statistics DO NOT count people on the pill as abortions. Can you count it? no. Unless you can me EVERY time that the pill stopped conception. Good Luck on that one.

My wife takes the pill, not for contraception but because her hormones are off balanced and she has longer than normal periods and BAD headaches among other things. The pill helps her be productive and function in day to day life as a teacher. sp.. is SHE in sin? and or WE in sin when we make love to each other and enjoy and celebrate the love we have for each other even though we may not be able to conceive? I think not. Read my above post.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

The Pill changes the act of sexual intercourse--it changes what it means. It's also an abortifacient. Thus, it DIRECTLY relates to the number of abortions because it is itself the CAUSE of countless unknown abortions.

National statistics DO NOT count people on the pill as abortions. Can you count it? no. Unless you can me EVERY time that the pill stopped conception. Good Luck on that one.

My wife takes the pill, not for contraception but because her hormones are off balanced and she has longer than normal periods and BAD headaches among other things. The pill helps her be productive and function in day to day life as a teacher. sp.. is SHE in sin? and or WE in sin when we make love to each other and enjoy and celebrate the love we have for each other even though we may not be able to conceive? I think not. Read my above post.

There are instances regarding medical issues where the pill COULD be acceptable: I would have to research the specifics. But normally speaking, artificial contraception is intrinsically evil.

 

[CatholicXian]

The Pill is an abortifacient. Read my previous posts... the information is out there and available for all who are willing to hear.

I am not in a position to judge specifics, but for those who "need" the Pill for medical reasons--there are other options out there--diet, lifestyle changes that make a world of difference. For someone in a marital relationship--the Pill should not be used unless both spouses are willing to abstain until the Pill is no longer necessary. Abortion is not worth it. Life is life.

http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/ ... ntrol-pill

[Hormonal Contraception] (the pill, the patch, and the vaginal ring) all contain a small amount of synthetic estrogen and progestin hormones. These hormones work to inhibit the body's natural cyclical hormones to prevent pregnancy. Pregnancy is prevented by a combination of factors. The HC usually stops the body from releasing an egg from the ovary. HC also changes the cervical mucus to make it difficult for the sperm to find an egg. HC can also prevent pregnancy by making the lining of the womb inhospitable for implantation.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/drug-i ... n/DR602119

In addition, oral contraceptives change the uterus lining just enough so that an egg will not stop in the uterus to develop.

The Pill doesn't prevent a woman's body from getting pregnant, it makes the woman's body hostile to the fertilized egg.

Does it happen often? I pray not. But once is one time too many.

 

[ebleau]

I am not in a position to judge specifics, but for those who "need" the Pill for medical reasons--there are other options out there--diet, lifestyle changes that make a world of difference. For someone in a marital relationship--the Pill should not be used unless both spouses are willing to abstain until the Pill is no longer necessary. Abortion is not worth it. Life is life.

While there is other options out there, none of those options are an option for my wife. So what you are saying that my wife and I should NOT be intimate with each other... EVER? LOL that's a good one.
Let me ask you. Are you married? If so, Do you enjoy being intimate with your spouse or is it "Just for procreation and not recreation"?

So let's take this farther... Is someone who DOESN'T want to marry in sin for it, because he/she is not producing babies in our almost overpopulated world? Using your reasoning, it would be, because they are going against the "natural" flow of things.

 

[biblecatholic]

Is someone who DOESN'T want to marry in sin for it, because he/she is not producing babies in our almost overpopulated world?

this is a inaccurate bit of information primarily put out by pro-abortionist. You can fit every human on earth in the state of Texas there is no "overpopulation"