Contraception, right or wrong????

[pax]

I was just curious what the view of contraception is from the non-catholic, non-orthodox point of view.  This thread is not really intended for debate, I'm just wondering what your opinion was on this issue.

[Reformationist]

I don't think your going to have much success relating "taking the pill" to something that "brings about an abortion" even if you believe they are scientifically the same thing.  With that in mind I will refrain from voting or offering futher opinion.

God bless.

[Susan]

wrong, absolutely wrong and sinful.

[fieldmouse3]

I think it's okay. Abortion is a big no-no, but there are many reasons why couples need to wait to have children. Finances, living situation, ect.

[Andrew]

If God leads you, absolutely OK.

[Fr. Rob]

I know you said that you didn't open this thread for a debate, but I simply have to say the following rant:

The ONLY circumstance that I can see any form of contraception as being OK in is an instance where the contraceptive is not being used as a contraceptive. For instance, the Pill is often perscribed to women with Endometriosis. I would prefer that doctors embrace other means of caring for women in this situation, and if they do not seek other means, but simply perscribe the Pill out of personal convienece, I would find another doctor.

The principal, biblical reason for marriage is the begetting of Children. Of course, in our day, those couples who are unable to concieve can (and should!) adopt.

While sex is a good thing, and is a act in which a husband and wife are to be joyful in. . . sex divorced from it's principal God-given intent is sinful and wrong.

I can understand the reasons that couples decide to use contraception, I mean, I'm broke too! However, the simple fact of the matter is that Chemical Birth Control methods are abortifacent in the way that they function, and that is absolutely immoral and sinful. To take a pill that works to either a) form a mucus plug over the cervix to prevent the sperm from entering the fallopian tubes or, if that fails to b) thin out the lining of the uterus so that implantation of the fertalised egg cannot occur is an abolutely horrendus thing. God will not lead you to take a pill or get an implant with this kind of effect.

I had a long conversation with my fiancee's physician about the issue. . . she was trying to convince my F that Chemical Birth Control was OK, and said there was no harmful side effects. She explained how the pill blocked the cervix, but neglected to explain about the uteral lining. . . I called her on it. She began to protest, so I pulled out the types and specifications report that I have access to since I work in a hospital. I slammed it down on the desk in front of her, showed it to her, and asked her how many people she had lied to. She finally said, "better for the baby to die when it's just at a hundred cells than to die when it actually looks like a baby."

My fiancee will NOT be going back to this doctor.

Moral? Learn the truth from MANY sources, and then confront your doctor about the real inner workings of birth control. It's an abortifacent, and if you know that is a possibility and you take it willfully, any abortion that occurs - intended or not - will be on your conscience.

/me steps down off his soapbox

[suzie]

When you speak about the pill bringing about abortion, I would suppose you mean the "morning after" pill?

[ZiSunka]

I think Christians owe it to their families and to the community NOT to have more children than they can reasonably care for. Thus, I think family planning is perfectly acceptable and even desirable.

However, any birth control measure that causes the death of a life once it is conceived is wrong. The time to choose is BEFORE conception, not after.

We plan to use natural family planning, because it seems like the healthiest method, and the best for bonding the family. The divorce rate among families that use NPF nationally is less than 10%, compared to 40-60% of non-NPF families.. Plus, neither the husband or the wife have to ingest chemicals that might make them sick or affect any unborn child accidentally conceived.

I know families that have used NPF for more than twenty years, no accidents!

[VOW]

To Suzie:

When you speak about the pill bringing about abortion, I would suppose you mean the "morning after" pill?

No. When the "Birth Control Pill" was first introduced, it contained high levels of female hormones, and it actually STOPPED the woman from ovulating. However, the high levels of hormones caused all kinds of dangerous side effects, so the drug companies kept reducing the levels. As the birth control pill exists today, the hormone levels are such that ovulation still generally occurs, but the uterine lining is not receptive to implantation.


Peace,
~VOW

[Fr. Rob]

Originally posted by suzie
When you speak about the pill bringing about abortion, I would suppose you mean the "morning after" pill?

No! The Morning After Pill essentially releases all kinds of hormones and chemicals into your body that serve to, frankly, fry the new life inside.

As VOW pointed out, the Birth Control Pill is believed by most women who are on it to stop ovulation. It does not always succeed. After all the side effects that VOW mentioned were discovered, they "engineered" the pill to stimulate the formation of a psudeo-natural cervical mucus buildup, which is supposed to prevent any sperm from passing the cervix and entering the uterus and the fallopian tubes.

The thing is, it's not always successful. When it's not, the sperm continues unabated to the fallopian tubes for conception. Some studies have linked the high number of tubal ligations to the Pill, and while I am not a doctor, I can tell you that most women I am called to minister to in that situation here at our hospital are users of some form of chemical BC.

If conception occurs, however, the BC Pill has yet another built-in weapon. The chemicals stimulate a high degree of resistance (chemical and other) in the uterine lining that make it difficult for a fertalized egg to implant, resulting in the abortion of the fetus.

Chemical Birth Control is a very disasterous part of the culture of death, and I pray that men and women of faith will reconsider their use of it.

Natural Family Planning is more effective, safer, has no side effects (except, perhaps a rather rampant sexual desire after abstaining for a week or so), and cannot have the first potential to abort a fetus. If a Christian cannot abstain, pray, and fast for a week (as Paul says is permitted) to plan their family size, then I would have to question the real motive behind having sex. . . love or lust.

Fr. Rob

[suzie]

The pill also supresses ovulation, thickens the cervical mucus making sperm migration difficult, and makes the uterine wall hostile to implantation or conception. Fertilization is the union of sperm and egg, Conception is the implantation of the fertilized ovum onto the uterine wall, and pregnancy is from conception until the end product (baby). I am not advocating the pill but attempting to give complete info.

[Fr. Rob]

Originally posted by suzie
The pill also supresses ovulation, thickens the cervical mucus making sperm migration difficult, and makes the uterine wall hostile to implantation or conception.

We agree thus far. These are the facts.

Fertilization is the union of sperm and egg, Conception is the implantation of the fertilized ovum onto the uterine wall, and pregnancy is from conception until the end product (baby). I am not advocating the pill but attempting to give complete info.

Fertilization is Conception. A child is cocieved when the egg and sperm meet. Implantation is Implantation, which takes from two to nine days after conception/fertilization.

Fertilization is also conception in the Biblical sense. We are formed in the womb at the moment we are concieved. . . at that moment the breath of life is breathed in. . . "before I formed you in the womb, I knew you."

Fr. Rob

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Fr. Rob
Fertilization is Conception. A child is cocieved when the egg and sperm meet.

Taking into account that you acknowledge that the initial "first line" defense against pregnancy that some pills offer is to form a barrier that prevents fertilization it would seem that your argument against the pill is not in reference to the fertilized egg, but rather the inefficiency of the pill to block the cervix.  This begs the question, if a pill were developed that prevented fertilization by safely stopping ovulation, or efficiently blocking fertilization, would that be an acceptable means of contraception for you?  Would this satisfy your church's position on the topic of chemical contraception?  How do you guys feel about contraception that prevents the process of fertilization like a diaphram, or sponge, or prophylactic?

Not trying to hijack the thread pax.  I'm just confused as to your church's position on contraceptive that prevents fertilization.

God bless.

[VOW]

To Reformationist:

The original BCP DID block ovulation, yet the Catholic Church was against it, adamantly so. Pope Paul VI issued a decree, "On Human Life." It's an incredible piece of reading! Once I understood the Church's position, then I could see how artificial contraception is against the will of God.

Even if fertilization is prevented, either by suppression of ovulation or blocking the path of the sperm, you are interfering in a process created by God. The sexual act has TWO purposes: procreation and recreation. When those two purposes are deliberately separated, by the actions of people, you are opening the door to abuse. Infidelity, Immorality, Pornography, and even battering can result. Now, mind you, I'm not saying that happens to EVERYONE. But once the sex act becomes simple entertainment, people will be pushing for more and more "variety," often at the expense of the relationship.

NFP takes TWO people to participate. Birth Control isn't seen as only the responsibility of the woman, and the couple is required to work together. This entails appreciation of the very power of the sexual union: more than anything else, it can CREATE LIFE.


Peace be with you,
~VOW

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by VOW
The original BCP DID block ovulation, yet the Catholic Church was against it, adamantly so.

So the stance of the Catholic church is not opposed to the pill because it an abortificant but because it is "interfering in a process created by God?"

The sexual act has TWO purposes: procreation and recreation. When those two purposes are deliberately separated, by the actions of people, you are opening the door to abuse. Infidelity, Immorality, Pornography, and even battering can result.

That's a bit presumptuous, don't you think?  This ranks right up there with smoking leads to use of illegal drugs.  I don't see how removing the possibility of pregnancy destroys the moral foundation that holds families accountable to God's Word.

Now, mind you, I'm not saying that happens to EVERYONE.

I would venture to say that birth control is not the catalyst for these forms of disobedience for ANYONE.  Our ability to be disobedient to God's righteous standard, or sin as it were, needs no excuse.  It is spawned from a heart that desires to please our old nature more than pleasing God.  Believe me, the "door is open" regardless of the use of birth control or not.

But once the sex act becomes simple entertainment, people will be pushing for more and more "variety," often at the expense of the relationship.

Again I think this is presumptuous.  What about people who are barren?  Should they not have sex because they can't procreate?  Sex between a husband and wife is an expression of love, or should be.  If there is an inability to conceive a child it doesn't mean that people will seek "variety." 

God bless.

[DaveKerwin]

I don't know where I stand with birth control pills, condoms, etc. I will have to think and pray on that when I get married.

I believe it is possible for some christians to use contraceptives and have God honored in that, and for other christians not to use them, and still have God honored.

[VOW]

To Reformationist:

That's a bit presumptuous, don't you think? This ranks right up there with smoking leads to use of illegal drugs. I don't see how removing the possibility of pregnancy destroys the moral foundation that holds families accountable to God's Word.

Well, frankly, Christianity can be quite presumptuous. A pastor can tell his flock, "You shouldn't frequent strip clubs, because of temptation." Isn't it presumptuous that a man who goes to strip clubs is presenting himself with the occasion to sin? Hey, not all men who go to strip clubs are going to fool around with the dancers after the show! Maybe some of them are art students, and wish to appreciate the human body.

I'd say, look at the big picture. Artificial contraception made its big break into the marketplace during the Sixties. Since then, the divorce rate has risen, the incidence of people living together without marriage has increased, and pornography has been elevated to "art." Sheesh, even the "men's magazines" are showing more and more graphic nudity.

Am I saying that artificial birth control is directly responsible? No, I'm not. I AM saying that the MINDSET which CONDONES artificial birth control has greased the skids for this sewage.

You don't have to agree. That is the teaching of the Catholic Church, and I, for one, understand the reasoning behind it.



Peace,
~VOW

[Fr. Rob]

VOW-

Kudos! While we may not agree on a lot between the Roman Catholic and Primitive Episcopal Church, we both agree that Paul VI's "Humanae Viate" was an excellent piece of work, and very prophetic too!

As to my objections, I object to having human sexuality hijacked solely for the physical pleasure of the two involved. When human sexuality is understood outside of it's normal mode by society at large, it's a disasterous result. . . as VOW has demonstrated.

REF- Even if the Pill was finally perfected, I'd have a problem with it. . . on the grounds outlined above. You are using artificial means to allow you to do something natural without the natural result taking place. If you don't want to get Pregnant, you abstain from sexual activity during fertile periods. An unwillingness to do so demonstrates, to me, a desire to put the physical pleasure of sex above the natural order of sex.

Sex is pleasurable so that we will have children. God created us that way.

I find your analogy to smoking/drugs to be along the line of apples and watermelons. We are talking about the created order. He created the miracle of sex to bring new life into the world. He did not create illegal drugs for the purpose of abusing them.

My thoughts, anyway. Yours, of course, may vary.

Fr. Rob

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by VOW
Well, frankly, Christianity can be quite presumptuous. A pastor can tell his flock, "You shouldn't frequent strip clubs, because of temptation." Isn't it presumptuous that a man who goes to strip clubs is presenting himself with the occasion to sin? Hey, not all men who go to strip clubs are going to fool around with the dancers after the show! Maybe some of them are art students, and wish to appreciate the human body.

Come on VOW.  It's not fooling around with the dancers that makes going to a strip club sinful.  It's exposing yourself to a lewd environment that inspires lustful desires, regardless if you do anything with the dancers.

I'd say, look at the big picture. Artificial contraception made its big break into the marketplace during the Sixties. Since then, the divorce rate has risen, the incidence of people living together without marriage has increased, and pornography has been elevated to "art." Sheesh, even the "men's magazines" are showing more and more graphic nudity.

Yeah.  All that has a direct correlation to birth control.  Riiiight.  Say, when did they take prayer out of school?  Don't you think that has had a bit more influence on the downward spiral of society then the introduction of artificial birth control. 

Am I saying that artificial birth control is directly responsible? No, I'm not. I AM saying that the MINDSET which CONDONES artificial birth control has greased the skids for this sewage.

So anyone with the MINDSET that CONDONES artificial birth control, Christian or not,  harbors the very same mindset that "greased the skids" for Infidelity, Immorality, Pornography?

You don't have to agree. That is the teaching of the Catholic Church, and I, for one, understand the reasoning behind it.

That's fine.  But, as the question was posed to obtain the Protestant viewpoint it really rather irrelevent what the teaching of the Catholic church is on the subject.  Additionally, are you saying that the "teaching of the Catholic church" is that "the MINDSET which CONDONES artificial birth control has greased the skids for this sewage?"

VOW and Fr. Rob, I would still appreciate an answer to the following questions (pax, if you'd like me to start a new thread for this just let me know):

"So the stance of the Catholic church is not opposed to the pill because it an abortificant but because it is interfering in a process created by God?"

"What about people who are barren?  Should they not have sex because they can't procreate?  Sex between a husband and wife is an expression of love, or should be.  Is your position that when there is an inability to conceive a child that it means that people will seek variety."

Thank you for your responses.

God bless.

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Fr. Rob
An unwillingness to do so demonstrates, to me, a desire to put the physical pleasure of sex above the natural order of sex.

So if a husband and wife desire to have sex for purely pleasurable reasons without the desire to procreate it goes outside the "natural order of sex?" 

Sex is pleasurable so that we will have children. God created us that way.

Sex is pleasureable regardless of wanting to have children.  I highly doubt God's sole intent on making sex pleasureable is so that we will have children.  One reason, yes.  THE reason, no.  Besides, this flies in the face of the method of natural birth control as well.  Otherwise, the only time we'd have sex is when we wanted a child. 

I find your analogy to smoking/drugs to be along the line of apples and watermelons.

You think I'm comparing apples and oranges?  VOW definitively linked the mindset that endorses artificial birth control with infedelity, immorality, and pornography.  I know you're both Catholic but come on!  I think you're paying to much attention to the response to an "apples and oranges" statement.

God bless.

[VOW]

To Reformationist:

People who are barren are not deliberately thwarting the will of God.

And I find your reasoning that removing prayer from schools is the source of the immorality of today pretty far-fetched as well.

You are free to disagree with the teaching of the Catholic Church. I for one, though, can understand the WHY that Pope Paul VI was trying to convey. When people try to dissect something that God has put together, everything changes.

For your mental perusal, the Catholic Church is against artificial CONCEPTION for the same reason. You are messing with something that belongs to God. Look at the horrific debates going on now about stem cell research and discarded embryos! In-vitro fertilization causes more morally-related dilemmas than the original infertility created!

You can look to the BIBLE for similar problems! Abraham's wife was infertile, so Abraham took Hagar to his bed. Here we are, thousands of years later, watching people kill each other in Palestine, a direct result of that situation.

YMMV.


Peace,
~VOW

[Fr. Rob]

REF-

Briefly, because I have a Chapel service to start in a few minutes, concerning barren families:

One of the chief reasons for getting married is to raise children in the faith and fear of God. If a couple knows that they are barren, and they have no intention to adopt, etc... to have a child, then I wouldn't officiate at their wedding. The issue is the openness to life.

While the side effects (abortifacent tendencies, etc...) of CBC bother me, the fundamental issue remains the openess to life. If you are going to plan your family, do it naturally by abstaining.

On a side note, about the Catholic thing, VOW is a Roman Catholic, and I am a member of the Primitive Episcopal Church. I do consider myself Catholic, as does my Church, but I am not speaking from a Roman Catholic position on the matter. While I highly respect Paul VI writing, the position I take is my own.

Fr. Rob

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by VOW
People who are barren are not deliberately thwarting the will of God.

Thwarting the Will of God???  You honestly think that if it was God's Will that someone have a child that a pill would stop that?  You think the Will of God is so tentative a thing as to be so easily countered? 

And I find your reasoning that removing prayer from schools is the source of the immorality of today pretty far-fetched as well.

You think it's far-fetched to contribute the level of today's immorality to the removal of prayer from school but you espouse the belief that birth control is a major contributor in the perpetuation of immorality, infidelity, and pornography?  Got it.

You can look to the BIBLE for similar problems! Abraham's wife was infertile, so Abraham took Hagar to his bed. Here we are, thousands of years later, watching people kill each other in Palestine, a direct result of that situation.

The conflicts in the Middle East that you speak of had NOTHING TO DO WITH Sarah's infertility other than to be used as an excuse.  It is the result of Abraham's disobedience.  And for that matter, what does that scenario have to do with artificial birth control?  As you said, Sarah was barren.  They didn't use birth control.

YMMV.

What does this mean? :confused:

God bless.

[VOW]

To Reformationist:

The example of Abraham and Sarah was in reference to artificial CONCEPTION.

YMMV: Your Mileage May Vary.


Peace,
~VOW

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by VOW
The example of Abraham and Sarah was in reference to artificial CONCEPTION.

Whose conception, Sarah or Hagar?  Sarah's was divine and Hagar's, while sinful was definitely done the natural way. 

YMMV: Your Mileage May Vary.

Which means?

God bless.

[psycmajor]

Contraception is a GOOD thing! I don't see why God would disagree with it; how would it be sinning, at least from a New Testament point of view?

 
By the way, how could contraception bring about an abortion, unless you're talking about the "morning-after" pill??


Thank GOD for contraception! :D :D :D :D :D

[VOW]

To Reformationist:

Abraham was not MARRIED to Hagar. Therefore, while Ishmael was conceived "naturally," he shouldn't have been in her bed to begin with. That's artificial conception, in my book. Surrogate parenthood: massive potential for problems!

"Your Mileage May Vary" means you probably have a completely different interpretation, and you are entitled to it.

Basically, Ref, I've given you a nutshell synopsis of Pope Paul VI's Encyclical. Your debate is not with ME, but with HIM. You might do a websearch and find the original Encyclical. Information is always best first hand. Arguing with ME isn't going to solve anything. However, just reading for yourselfwhat Pope Paul had to say about the entire mess of artificial birth control might provide you with some food for thought.



Peace,
~VOW

[Thunderchild]

Contraception is approved even by Rome (though only if you do it by playing Russian Roulette.)

I can't see any wrong in contraception - though I don't endorse those varieties of the pill which do not prevent conception, but prevent a fertilised egg from implanting. That is abortion - just very early in foetal development.

[PrinceJeff]

While sex is a good thing, and is a act in which a husband and wife are to be joyful in. . . sex divorced from it's principal God-given intent is sinful and wrong.

Where in the Bible does it say so, Friar Robbie?

[PrinceJeff]

Within marriage of course.

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by VOW
Abraham was not MARRIED to Hagar. Therefore, while Ishmael was conceived "naturally," he shouldn't have been in her bed to begin with.

True.  I have not contradicted this.  In fact, I was the one to attribute the present day problems to Abraham's sinfulness, not Sarah's infertility.

That's artificial conception, in my book.

Okay VOW.  Call it that if you like but Abraham's act of infidelity wasn't sinful because a child was conceived.

Surrogate parenthood: massive potential for problems!

I agree.  However, there's was not a case of what we consider surrogate parenthood.  It's not like Sarah was interested in claiming Hagar's child as her own. 

Arguing with ME isn't going to solve anything. However, just reading for yourselfwhat Pope Paul had to say about the entire mess of artificial birth control might provide you with some food for thought.

Not arguing with you VOW.  Pax asked for the Protestant opinion on artificial birth control and Fr. Rob contributed the position of his Catholic church, to which you expounded on by giving the stance or your Catholic church.  And, while I have not read what Pope Paul VI wrote about it, I don't give the man authority on these issues.  Not to mention, it's going to be written from the Catholic standpoint which will probably take into account other things that I don't give authority to.

God bless.

[Thunderchild]

While sex is a good thing, and is a act in which a husband and wife are to be joyful in. . . sex divorced from it's principal God-given intent is sinful and wrong.

Quite correct. In humans the primary purpose of sex is to enable the two to become one (not produce another) flesh. So tis written, anyway.

[PrinceJeff]

Fr. Rob said pretty much that it's ONLY for procreation. That is what is not true.

[Stormy]

I wonder do you want to know if I personally think birth control is wrong? :scratch:

Probably not.

It seems wise to plan your family so that you can properly care for the children that you have.

Many women need to work; and being a daycare provider I know how expensive care can be.

Children are not all fun. They bring joy but also a lot of work.

Women and men could become overburden both physically and financially with too many children!

That is my opinion.

But I am not the one who should be important to you.

I wonder if you want to know if I think God says birth control is wrong? :scratch:

Probably Yes. I cannot find anything within the Bible that advises differently.

The answer therefore, must lie in the perspective of who you wish to please. :)

[VOW]

To Thunderchild:

In humans the primary purpose of sex is to enable the two to become one (not produce another) flesh.

I gotta disagree. The primary purpose of MARRIAGE is to make two become one flesh. Sex is designed for procreation. The pleasurable aspect of that is secondary. All living things live to reproduce.

The teaching of the Catholic church is that procreation and recreation are to be considered one. Neither aspect is of a higher order than the other. Once you elevate one above the other, you cause problems.


Peace,
~VOW

[PrinceJeff]

I do believe children are a heritage of the Lord, as scripture says. But nowhere in the Bible does it say, "thou art to only have sexual relations with your spouse for thine purposes of bearing children."

[VOW]

To Jeff:

Sexual immorality is condemned all throughout the Bible. And marriage is praised, divorce is condemned by Jesus. Since the Biblical times did not have a means of artificial birth control, it would follow that marriage was roughly the equivalent of procreation. Women didn't have a lifespan much beyond the childbearing years.

The "recreational" aspect of sex was secondary.

And it is because of the reproductive aspect that marriage was such a serious matter, because it provides the stable family unit for the rearing of children.

It's only in relatively RECENT times that human beings have been able to think of sex as recreational (unless you want to discuss the double standard of men vs women, and then we can get into the disgusting discussion of concubines, prostitution, and adultery....so let's not go there, LOL).


Peace,
~VOW

[Stormy]

The "recreational" aspect of sex was secondary.


Sure. :rolleyes: I believe that! LOL :D

[Susan]

ThE OnLy AcCePtAbLe FoRm oF bIrTh CoNTrOL In GOD's sIgHt Is  . . .
ABSTINENCE!

[Andrew]

"ThE OnLy AcCePtAbLe FoRm oF bIrTh CoNTrOL In GOD's sIgHt Is Ê. . .
ABSTINENCE!"

IOW have sex with your wife or husband only when both want another child? Marriages will break down becos of this! Sex is for procreation and recreation!

[Thunderchild]

1 Sexual immorality is condemned all throughout the Bible. 2 And marriage is praised, 3 divorce is condemned by Jesus. 4 Since the Biblical times did not have a means of artificial birth control, 5 it would follow that marriage was roughly the equivalent of procreation. 6 Women didn't have a lifespan much beyond the childbearing years.

1:true 2:true 3:true 4:false - by means of drugs not only contraception but also abortion. Barrier contraception was also known, and spermicide (the last not being well recommended - being a matter of smearing the opening to the uterus with a mixture of olive oil and powdered lead.)  5: Even if point 4 were accurate, point 5 is not a natural corollary 6: false - the chances of reaching child-bearing age were markedly reduced by comparison with today's expectations. the chances of surviving to age 40 were markedly reduced by comparison with today's expectations. Those who reached age 40 had no significantly reduced chances of survival compared with today's standards. Even if history did not show the fact, the Bible does, not by direct statement, but by implication.

[Thunderchild]

Even when a man lays with a prostitute, the two have been made one flesh: Paul.

[Divinus]

Personally, I don't think there is anything wrong with contraception. Nor do I think there is anything wrong with married couples having non-procreative sex. Indeed, non-procreative sexual imagery is used in relation to God and Israel, and God and the Church.

[PrinceJeff]

And no we are not going to Hell or Purgatory for using it.

[Fr. Rob]

Jeff-

Birth Control is not the unforgivable sin. However, if one uses chemical birth control and causes the abortion of a little life, I do believe that one must repent of that.

While it concerns me that sex is becoming more for pleasure and less for procreation in our society, the largest concern I have is the problem with chemical birth control.

If people take it, having been told that this is possible, then all I can do is pray that God will either enlighten them, or bring them to repentence.

In the end, it is up to God to make the decision on their eternal destiny, which he -of course- has already done.

Fr. Rob

[Miss Shelby]

LilyLamb--(who I have come to absolutely adore)--posted this article in the Catholic forum a few months ago. I think this article is excellent. It was written by a Baptist minister.

http://www.pricelesswoman.com/Other_Pages/Is_Your_Birth_Control_Biblical.html

Michelle

[Thunderchild]

Genesis 38: 8 - 10 KJV - [quote] And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother. And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also. [quote]

The lengths some people will go to in their attempts to place people under bondage to laws which don't exist.

Does contraception by definiton prevent people from demonstrating love for each other? And by contraception, I do mean - that which prevents conception.

Or will there be some declaring the Pope to be wrong in declaring that contraception is acceptable?

The Bible declares

[Jenna]

I, personally, believe that contraception is acceptable. Granted, there are forms of birth control that I don't agree with, but I am not opposed to all. I think that there are people with legitimate reasons for wanting to refrain from pregnancy, and I think that it is wrong for anyone to make a blanketed statement saying that a Christian is doing something awfully sinful in preventing pregnancy.

For example, I am perfectly fertile,  but I cannot carry babies full term. I have my own malfunction that has lead to the death of one precious child and left us in grave fear for another. My husband and I are happy to use a barrier form of contraception, as it enables us to have a healthy relationship in our marriage, while putting off pregnancy until we are better equipped to  handle it. I would have to be on bedrest for the entirety of my pregnancy, and if we were not using bc, then I would no doubt have become pregnant again and would have been unable to care for my daughter through her infancy. Aside from that, there is also the very real possibility that I could die during child birth and that I would then leave my husband to carry  on by himself. So, for as much as I would love to give my husband a little boy, we will bide our time on birth control, at least until our daughter is old enough to help me during pregnancy.

The long and short of it is though, that for anyone to make the use of birth control into a black and white matter of right vs. wrong is not the proper way to handle it. At least not in my opinion.

[VOW]

It is interesting to note that up until the middle of the last century, ALL MAJOR non-Catholic Christian faiths taught against contraception.

I used to believe whole-heartedly in contraception. I thought all intelligent women should take control of their own bodies, and be responsible. I bought the party line of ZPG, that our planet cannot sustain a constantly-increasing population. Even after I became a Catholic, I still felt that it was a personal decision.

Later, I read about and UNDERSTOOD the point that Pope Paul VI made in his encyclical, "On Human Life."

There's no need for anyone to agree with me. All I know is what the Holy Spirit finally led me to believe. But I DO feel that people need to be aware that the general acceptance and approval of artificial birth control is an end-product of SOCIETY'S teachings. And it is my observation that the endorsement by non-Catholic Christian churches of artificial birth control is a result of pressure by SOCIETY.

Something to think about.


Peace be with you,
~VOW

[Smilin]

It is worthy to note as well:
Early Christians strictly FORBID
the cutting into of the body,
claiming it to be sacred.
Modern medicine has significantly
improved the quality of life.
Very few christians now oppose
the intevention of surgery and
modern medications for the treatment
of diseases, mental disorders, etc.
(which AT ONE TIME..were falsely thought
to be demonic possesions rather than
an illness)

In effect, the lack of knowledge
on human anatomy, viruses,
illnesses and the like led to
horrible results.

How then can christians deny
birthcontrol for the purpose
of family planning and to avoid
an unwanted pregnancy when
the means are within our grasps?

Would a christian deny a child
stricken with a brain tumor
the option of chemotherapy?

Should we deny couples who
aren't able to conceive, the
option of science intervention
by artificial insemination techniques
to bear children?

Some things to think about.....

[VOW]

To Smilin:

Modern science has made fantastic progress in allowing married couples an accurate way to determine ovulation, through the Billings Method. "Natural" family planning is available to anyone who wishes to determine when to have children. It's also a means which involves BOTH partners.

Surgery and chemotherapy are treatments to preserve a life which is already in existence. Artificial contraception is interfering with the BEGINNING of life. A difference, to be sure.


Peace be with you,
~VOW

[Smilin]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by VOW
[B]It is interesting to note that up until the middle of the last century, ALL MAJOR non-Catholic Christian faiths taught against contraception.

Something else to think about Vow...

Why do you seperate Christ's church?

Who are you referring to in All Major non-Catholic christian faiths..

What are you insenuating when you say non-Catholic?

Consider this for thought....

Christ did not name his church,,,man did...

The bible teaches us:

Ephesians 4:5
one Lord, one faith, one baptism;


Are not all who profess to be Christians brothers and

sisters in Christ?  I welcome your response

[Smilin]

Vow,

How can it be wrong for a loving couple

to practice available methods of birth control?

Surgical methods are also available to ensure

unwanted pregnancies.  I respect your

views on the sanctity of life.  Life is one of

God's wonderful gifts.  Yet, consider all

the tragedies that face our generation today:

the number of children in foster homes, child abuse,

child abandonment, to name a few.

Also as Julie pointed out, medical reasons for

modern birth control...i.e. the health of the mother.

For christians to refuse PREVENTION, as earlier christians

refused healing techniques, horrible tragedies are

the result.  That is to say, ignorance and the refusal

of medicine and surgery led to the needless sufferings

of many physically and mentally ill patients as the

refusal of some christians to accept birth control has led

to the HORRID development of the destruction of life,

abortion.  Another topic,,for another thread.

 

your brother in Christ,

Smilin

[VOW]

To Smilin:

Funny, isn't it, how the number of unwanted children, abused children, and abandoned children is higher than it has ever been.....yet birth control is freely available to anyone who wants it, without charge. Birth control isn't the solution, obviously.


Peace be with you,
~VOW

[Smilin]

Originally posted by Susan
ThE OnLy AcCePtAbLe FoRm oF bIrTh CoNTrOL In GOD's sIgHt Is  . . .
ABSTINENCE!

 

What passage of scripture do you base this statement on Susan?

[Smilin]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by VOW
[B]To Smilin:

Funny, isn't it, how the number of unwanted children, abused children, and abandoned children is higher than it has ever been.....yet birth control is freely available to anyone who wants it, without charge. Birth control isn't the solution, obviously. 


Agreed, obviously it isn't the solution to our societies problems,

The love and power of Jesus Christ is. 

[VOW]

To Smilin:

The separation you see is not of my making. We have people here in the forum who are Christians, not Catholic, yet do not appreciate being lumped together in the category of "Protestant."

I am not responsible for the divisions in the Body of Christ, and I grieve over them.

And since I have given my thoughts on contraception, I will now bow out of this thread.



Peace be with you,
~VOW

[Smilin]

We grieve together.....

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by VOW
To Smilin:

Funny, isn't it, how the number of unwanted children, abused children, and abandoned children is higher than it has ever been.....yet birth control is freely available to anyone who wants it, without charge. Birth control isn't the solution, obviously.


Peace be with you,
~VOW

No more so than is it the source for everything that you've attributed to it:

When those two purposes are deliberately separated, by the actions of people, you are opening the door to abuse. Infidelity, Immorality, Pornography, and even battering can result.

Artificial contraception made its big break into the marketplace during the Sixties. Since then, the divorce rate has risen, the incidence of people living together without marriage has increased, and pornography has been elevated to "art."
<DIV>I AM saying that the MINDSET which CONDONES artificial birth control has greased the skids for this sewage.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>When people try to dissect something that God has put together, everything changes.</DIV>

<DIV>Funny, isn't it, how the number of unwanted children, abused children, and abandoned children is higher than it has ever been.....yet birth control is freely available to anyone who wants it, without charge.</DIV>

<DIV>Hmmm...maybe these things are due more to the disobedience of fallen man than whether "artificial contraception" is to blame.</DIV>

<DIV>God bless.</DIV>

[eldermike]

It's intresting to look at the ways we choose to view what is and is not sin.
Not that there is anything wrong with trying to be as close to right with God as one can be. I am all for that. But, I am mostly gald we are forgiven.

Blessings

[Miss Shelby]

Originally posted by Thunderchild
Genesis 38: 8 - 10 KJV - [quote] And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother. And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also. [quote]

The lengths some people will go to in their attempts to place people under bondage to laws which don't exist.

Does contraception by definiton prevent people from demonstrating love for each other? And by contraception, I do mean - that which prevents conception.

Or will there be some declaring the Pope to be wrong in declaring that contraception is acceptable?

The Bible declares

Thunderchild, did you read past the first part of the study?&nbsp; It dealt with much more Scripture than just the one which you posted.

Michelle

[Caedmon]

While I am not a Catholic, I support the Church's position in full. Artificial birth control is a disruption of the natural order and purpose of sex.

I've heard all the arguments:

1. Sex is not just for procreation
- Exactly... both aspects, procreation and recreation are equivalent in status, and should be treated as such.

2. We should be good "stewards" of children.
- With business propositions perhaps... Children are not objects. Do you not believe that God will meet your needs? Oh ye of little faith...

3. If God wants someone to have a child, birth control's not going to stop it.
- And if God really wants to let me steal a piece of jewelry, He'll let it happen, won't He? But it doesn't mean it's righteous that I steal, does it?

4. The ancient Hebrews needed to constantly reproduce to secure their race's numbers.
- The "overpopulation" argument is ridiculous. Consider this: If people didn't have premarital sex, we wouldn't have a reason to draw up an "overpopulation" excuse.

5. Modern medicine is to be used for the betterment of society.
Are children a "disease", to be prevented or eliminated? That's an interestingly ironic statement, because there are such "innoculations" that prevent these "diseases"!!!

There's many more, but I'll stop here. Basically, I view sex as having a dual purpose instilled by God: procreation and recreation. And for the love of all things amazing... I am not saying it is only for procreation!!! Both are equivalent in significance, and are natural a part of one another, designed and instituted together, in the same activity, by God. If you divorce the two purposes, you produce "bulemic" sexuality.

[Didaskomenos]

The purpose of sex? Where does the Bible tell us the purpose of sex? I mean, I happen to believe that one purpose is certainly the original, practical purpose. But God has made it something much more. As someone already pointed out, the "becoming one flesh" phenomenon is based on sex. It's not based on having a child become the one flesh. Jesus said that if someone has sex with a prostitute, they are one flesh (regardless of whether they conceive).

What about this in 1 Cor 7:1-6:
"Now for the matters you wrote me about: It is good for a man not to marry. But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. I say this as a concession, not as a command."

I don't know of anyone who claims these verses aren't referring to sex, and the use of marriage in keeping people from sexual immorality. They are encouraged to not deprive one another, and to "come together," not for the purposes of procreation, but to keep the sexual impulse in the environment it was created to be in (marriage). It's marriage that was created for sex, not sex for childbearing. "Wherefore for this reason shall a man leave his father and mother . . . and the two shall become one flesh."

I don't like contraceptives that kill. But other forms of birth control do not seem to contradict any principle of Holy Scripture. I know Catholics who use the "rhythm method." Abstinence itself is a form of birth control. In any of these ways, to different extents, you are exercising human will in determining if and when a human life is conceived. That responsibility is a gift of God meant for marriage. But it's not the point of marriage.

[niwde]

sex is for love
not for other thing
couples can enjoy sex
if they just feel like doing it anytime with a condom ,without forming a new life is wrong.
y?
they just cannot control themselves
a husband sees his wife in a tight fitting dress
lust will come into his mind,hence there won't be any love
whereas if he can wait for the suitable time,he might need to pray and ask for strength,natural family palnning also
foster better relationships between couples either sexually,or they loves lifes

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by niwde
sex is for love
not for other thing
couples can enjoy sex
if they just feel like doing it anytime with a condom ,without forming a new life is wrong.
y?
they just cannot control themselves
a husband sees his wife in a tight fitting dress
lust will come into his mind,hence there won't be any love
whereas if he can wait for the suitable time,he might need to pray and ask for strength,natural family palnning also
foster better relationships between couples either sexually,or they loves lifes

Okay, maybe I'm confused on this but, in what way can a husband lust after his wife?&nbsp; A husband is supposed to have a sexual desire for his wife.&nbsp; That's not lust. :confused: :scratch:

God bless.

[PrinceJeff]

I agree. People really need to use their heads a little better.

[ZooMom]

I once heard Contraception vs. NFP described something like this...

Contraception is like sending God a note saying that there could be a party at your house at any given moment, but that He is not invited and if He shows up anyway the door will be locked.

NFP is like sending God a note saying that there will likely be a party on such and such and such days and you would be honored if He came, but on such and such and such days you will not be at home but the door is still open if He wants to drop by anyway.

Which note do you think would offend God the most?


God, and children, are always welcome in our home, and received with joy. Once the shock wears off. :) Peace be with you.

[PrinceJeff]

Sandy that's the best and most loving way I have seen your side explained. :)

[pax]

Sorry...I've been on vacation for the past few days. I know I didn't intend this thread for debate, but I think it's been more of a healthy exchange of information than anything else (as long as we don't get to the point of name-calling and hurling insults at each other I'm okay). This is an issue for all of Christianity, not just Catholicism. The following quotation is an exerpt from Jason Evert's "Pure Love." It was a pamphlet written for teens that basically gives them the Church's teaching on sexuality in an easy to understand format. Most of it is about premarital sex, but other issues are covered. It really is well done. The following is an exerpt about contraception:

"What about safe sex?"

There is no such thing. No form of contraception can prevent a heart from being broken, and a soul from being lost.

God has created sexuality for a far greater purpose than regretful one-night stands. To express to us how tremendous the act of lovemaking is, God uses it to bring an eternal soul into the world. One marital embrace and a child can be created! The act cries out for true permanence. By its very existence, that child is saying, "I'm permanent, so you two should be as well!"

Often, the couple knows they are not ready for the total giving and commitment their act embodies, so they do everything in their power to deny the natural process of life-giving love. Couples begin to treat pregnancy as a disease against which they must be protected, instead of a gift to receive with joy. One woman said, "It's like saying, 'I want to make love to you, but I've got to get my barrier in place.' Sounds a bit like making war, not love." Contraception degrades women especially; it gives men a license to use women by enjoying the pleasures of sex without permanent commitment. Whoever supports contraception for the sake of women's rights destroys with one hand what they are trying to build up with the other.

What about the body? Can it be spared from the consequences of premarital sex? Not at all. You should not be motivated by fear to work for true love, but if that would help, here are some of the statistics you seldom hear:


At least one in four sexually active adults has herpes, which is incurable and easily transmitted. If a woman contracts it, two-thirds of her newborn children who contract it from her will die at birth.9 Is it worth it?


Eight out of ten people who have a sexually transmitted disease are not aware of it yet.10


If you have sex with a person, you are effectively having sex with everyone they have had sex with in the past ten years, not to mention the others their partners have had sex with.11 This is especially frightening due to the fact that when a person gets the HIV virus, it normally does not show itself as AIDS for ten years.


If a woman gets chlamydia, one of the most common sexually transmitted diseases, and is not treated in time, she will become permanently infertile. Eighty percent of women do not show symptoms of chlamydia when they have contracted it. Thus, it is called the "silent sterilizer."12


Other sexually transmitted diseases that can be carried into marriage undetected include gonorrhea, syphilis, herpes, human papilloma virus, hepatitis B, HIV, and a few dozen others.13 These are not ideal wedding gifts.


Women whose sexual activity began at an early age (teens) and women who have had multiple sexual partners have a much higher chance of developing cervical cancer. Part of the cause of this may be from a virus transmitted through men, who can give the virus to their wives once they marry.14


Research has shown that condoms have an average failure rate of 31% in protecting against HIV. AIDS is incurable and always fatal.15 Think: Would you jump out of a plane with a parachute that had only a 69% chance of working?


Among countless other side effects, birth control pills increase a woman's chance of having breast cancer, tumors, heart attacks, infertility, and contracting HIV.16


Abortion could result in hemorrhage, a perforated uterus, shock, cardiac arrest, permanent infertility, convulsions, kidney failure, prolonged bleeding, massive infection, and death.17


After an abortion, a woman's chance of having a miscarriage increases by 50%. Having a child with retardation is 40% more likely. A woman who has had an abortion is 200% more likely to have an ectopic pregnancy in the future, and her chance of having breast cancer doubles with each abortion!18


It is not God's plan for you to use contraceptives or to have multiple sexual partners. In fact, those who are virgins when they marry have a divorce rate 71% lower than those who are not, and couples who use Natural Family Planning have a divorce rate of less than two percent.19 What future are you working toward?


http://www.catholic.com/chastity/pure_love.asp . I realize not everything was relevant to this conversation, but I think it helps shed light on why the Church teaches this.

[Divinus]

Erm, you wouldn't get STIs if you used a condom. Thats one of the reasons people do use them.

[ZooMom]

From a Christian perspective, contraception should really only be an issue within the bounds of marriage. Christians, whether they agree on the morality/immorality of contraception, are pretty much unanimous in agreeing that sexual relations outside of marriage are sinful. So single Christians who use contraception are only compounding their sin, because they shouldn't be having sex in the first place.