Why is Contraception Considered Morally Acceptable?

patricius79 · Jun 4, 2015

jayem said:
OK. And neither does the Bible say that taking medication is prohibited.[

So why would "natural" family planning be acceptable, but medically-assisted family planning be morally questionable? Don't they both have the same intent--to prevent pregnancy?

if fertility were a disease, then taking medication for it could be perfectly moral.

NFP is an acceptable means to avoid pregnancy for serious reason, because there is nothing intrinsically wrong with not having sex during the fertile period, or with having sex during the infertile period

in order to act morally, one must have a right intention, and choose a morally acceptable means to achieve one's goal.

jayem · Jun 4, 2015

patricius79 said:
if fertility were a disease, then taking medication for it could be perfectly moral.

NFP is an acceptable means to avoid pregnancy for serious reason, because there is nothing intrinsically wrong with not having sex during the fertile period, or with having sex during the infertile period

in order to act morally, one must have a right intention, and choose a morally acceptable means to achieve one's goal.

The intention is that the couple is not ready to assume the responsibilities of parenthood. What is intrinsically wrong with using a condom, or diaphragm, or Depo Provera, or Ortho Novum to achieve the same result?

rrguy · Jun 4, 2015

Every Christian church condemned contraception until 1930. Of course times change but not always what's morally wrong,? What bothers me is a Christian Dr. Wouldn't suggest a non abortive birth control? Knowing that if miracle of conception some how occurs the birth control will abort the embryo. This saddens me.

onlyTruth · Jun 5, 2015

BayouAngel said:
To say I have nothing to lose by practicing NFP is a lie. This is the part of your comment that would potentially be offensive, but I don't take offense because you don't know me, and you don't know how birth control pills have improved my quality of life. Unless you mean I have nothing to lose by learning more about NFP, in which case I agree.

It isn't offensive to suggest doctors don't always know what they're talking about (but as a coder for a hospital, I suggest it isn't necessarily a lack of knowledge so much as it's all about the money and not necessarily your health). But I don't have enough information on the subject at the moment to say if NFP would be more or as effective as my doctor's solution. It's not just about not getting pregnant after all.

If you are open to learning more about NFP than I suggest reading Naprotechnology Revolution. Naprotechnology has a lot to do with NFP but it is not NFP. NFP is just a subset of Naprotechnology. NFP is bascially different methods of planning for a family. Naprotechnology deals with a lot of female conditions and what is really causing them. It helps the women understand what is really going on with their body and addressing them so that they can be treated in a moral way. Most Ob/Gyn's these days will listen to you and your symptoms and throw the pill at you as a treatment. I know, they did this to my wife. She wasn't willing to accept that the pill was just a cure-all treatment. We now see a Ob/Gyn that is educated in Naprotechnology. She was successfully treated without the pill. This success story is not rare with Naprotechnology. If you read the book, it will make a lot of since. Most Ob/Gyn's (and when Isay most I mean like 98%) will not even take a look at this stuff. And it makes sense why they don't - there is no money it. They all just follow the money. Money is in the pill.

onlyTruth · Jun 5, 2015

madschipperke said:
It's not a human. It's a zygote.

A zygote (or embryo) is a human. The debate on whether or not an embryo is a human or not is probably better suited for another thread. The important thing in my post was to indicate why IVF is evil. There seemed to be several on this thread that were surprised by that notion. By explaining what happens during IVF and understanding most Christians belief that an embryo is human, I hope has explained the Christian perspective as to why IVF is evil. Not to mention the other reasons I stated in a previous post about the evils of IVF.

There are a lot of Christian beliefs that may be hard to understand until you have "bought" in to more fundamental beliefs. Just like any belief, whether is is religious or not.

Aimee30 · Jun 5, 2015

patricius79 said:
Do you believe that contraception is morally acceptable? If so, why? If not, why not?

I want to know more about what others think about this topic, and to discuss this.

Peace of Christ,

Patrick

I believe it is if we think of the best interest of our neighbors. More and more children means more potential homeless or people who may cause others to be homeless. The less children a poorer person has, the less drain on programs like WIC. Don't get me wrong, I am not for eliminating programs that help people. I just think that it's either this or abstinence even in marriage. I also prefer people to be married when they use it, but we can't change some people into magically accepting abstinence. Better to be responsible and not cause more financial burden.

Catherineanne · Jun 5, 2015

patricius79 said:
Thanks for your response Cute Tink. I think everyone agrees with you that sex is wonderful.

It might be an idea not to assume this.

Catherineanne · Jun 5, 2015

patricius79 said:
As far as why I think contraception is wrong... I think it is wrong because it seems that the specific purpose of sex--not the only purpose, but the specific one--is procreation. It is the only interpersonal, bodily act which results in children. So if we are not respecting that fact, we seem to be going against the Creator's plan.

If this is the case, I assume you think all couples should stop having sex when the woman reaches menopause and the specific purpose can no longer be possible?

Dave-W · Jun 5, 2015

patricius79 said:
NFP is an acceptable means to avoid pregnancy for serious reason, because there is nothing intrinsically wrong with not having sex during the fertile period, or with having sex during the infertile period

Actually there is. Acts 15 says that Gentile believers are to avoid inappropriate contentia - usually rendered fornication or sexual impurity. But as I understand the word's use in the Jewish diaspora community which made up the leaders of the gentile churches, it meant ANYTHING that violated the Law's sexual prohibitions including sex during menses (the infertile period).

It also violates Paul's directions in 1 Cor 7 which says to avoid sex ONLY by mutual consent, for prayer, and for a short time period.

Catherineanne · Jun 5, 2015

patricius79 said:
Thanks, Cute Tink. I'm glad that we agree that some people are just seeking "meaningless sex". Do you know of any sociological data one way or another as to the effects of contraceptives on marriages?

I am not sure there is such a thing as meaningless sex; if it were really meaningless nobody would bother. Even the most shallow kind must surely have its own purpose even if it is only to achieve shallow sex.

Perhaps it is the equivalent of consuming candy floss (cotton candy) knowing full well that it has absolutely no nutritional value whatever. Not everything has to be deep and meaningful; sometimes trivial and shallow is what someone needs or wants at a particular time. To continue the metaphor I am not sure that sex always has to be haute cuisine. Sometimes it is just a packet of crisps; over in a moment and forgotten.

hiphopopotomus · Jun 5, 2015

Catherineanne said:
If this is the case, I assume you think all couples should stop having sex when the woman reaches menopause and the specific purpose can no longer be possible?

Of course they should.That is why boot scooting classes are so popular amongst that age group of women.
Well at least that is the only reason I can see to justify it!

Eudaimonist · Jun 5, 2015

patricius79 said:
Do you believe that contraception is morally acceptable? If so, why?

I'd have to know why it might not be morally acceptable in order to give a specific answer. I think that contraception is morally acceptable because I have no reason to think that it is morally unacceptable.

eudaimonia,

Mark

BayouAngel · Jun 5, 2015

onlyTruth said:
If you are open to learning more about NFP than I suggest reading Naprotechnology Revolution. Naprotechnology has a lot to do with NFP but it is not NFP. NFP is just a subset of Naprotechnology. NFP is bascially different methods of planning for a family. Naprotechnology deals with a lot of female conditions and what is really causing them. It helps the women understand what is really going on with their body and addressing them so that they can be treated in a moral way. Most Ob/Gyn's these days will listen to you and your symptoms and throw the pill at you as a treatment. I know, they did this to my wife. She wasn't willing to accept that the pill was just a cure-all treatment. We now see a Ob/Gyn that is educated in Naprotechnology. She was successfully treated without the pill. This success story is not rare with Naprotechnology. If you read the book, it will make a lot of since. Most Ob/Gyn's (and when Isay most I mean like 98%) will not even take a look at this stuff. And it makes sense why they don't - there is no money it. They all just follow the money. Money is in the pill.

They'll have to get napro more widespread before it's a possibility for a lot of people. No doctors in my area. I'll stick with physically possible solutions at the moment. They're working anyway.

BukiRob · Jun 5, 2015

Wryetui said:
I am 17 years old, sorry if I'm not married yet, lol...

Then a wise man listens and doesn't speak about things he knows absolutely nothing about. Strive to be a wise man

BukiRob · Jun 5, 2015

Wryetui said:
According to 1 Corinthians 7:2, “yes” is the clear answer: “But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband.” In this verse, Paul states that marriage is the “cure” for sexual immorality. First Corinthians 7:2 is essentially saying that, because people cannot control themselves and so many are having immoral sex outside of marriage, people should get married. Then they can fulfill their passions in a moral way.

Utter rubbish. No where, absolutely NO WHERE does scripture even hint that sex between a husband and wife is exclusively for procreation.

In fact if you know anything about jewish culture they NEVER held the view you suggest. Paul is saying that the husband is RESPONSIBLE for making his wife happy with regards to meeting her sexual needs and the wife likewise is responsible for meeting her husbands needs. That in marriage you DON'T have the right to say "not tonight, I have a headache"

Secondly, understand and know the context that Paul is writing in... who is he speaking to and what was their situation? In Corinth at the time, there was some very substantial persecution going on. He is saying that because of this persecution it is better to remain single. It is a gross error to suggest that Paul is teaching, that in general remain celibate

rrguy · Jun 5, 2015

jayem said:
The intention is that the couple is not ready to assume the responsibilities of parenthood. What is intrinsically wrong with using a condom, or diaphragm, or Depo Provera, or Ortho Novum to achieve the same result?

hiphopopotomus said:
Yes I agree.Having lots of children is a selfish act.
Here in Australia it costs our governments an average of $15000 a year to educate each child.So if you have 4 children that is $60,000 per year.For 12 years of schooling that comes to $720,000.And that is just for their education.There are many other costs such as healthcare and other public infrastructure on top of that.Clearly such a family is a massive drain on tax revenue and it means other people have to go without things for their family to support somebody elses children because the parents are never going to cover these costs through their tax payments during their working life [unless they are very high income earners].

Really? I don't think so. That statement is not even biblical. Most people having kids know they will have to work harder & give up some personal time etc... Second most people having kids want what's good for them & for them to be a better part of society. If the government can't find a successful way to educate 4 kids it won't be better at 1! These kids grow up& hopefully become a contributing member of society. Do a little research, It has been known forever that a growing population is good even economically.

BukiRob · Jun 5, 2015

DaveW-Ohev said:
Actually there is. Acts 15 says that Gentile believers are to avoid inappropriate contentia - usually rendered fornication or sexual impurity. But as I understand the word's use in the Jewish diaspora community which made up the leaders of the gentile churches, it meant ANYTHING that violated the Law's sexual prohibitions including sex during menses (the infertile period).

It also violates Paul's directions in 1 Cor 7 which says to avoid sex ONLY by mutual consent, for prayer, and for a short time period.

The problem with your argument is that women are infertile during the month when they are not menstruating.

KCfromNC · Jun 5, 2015

Wryetui said:
I know what is sin and I am totally allowed to speak against sin as a christian, don't you think? If you want to have intercourses with who you want ditching the "charge" of having a baby to take care of just to please your lustful feelings it's your problem, but in christian families sould not exist contraception, every new life is a gift from God and using contraceptive methods is standing against God's intention. The Church has always taught this, so I prefer to stand with the Church of Christ instead of society and it's lost wanderers.

http://www.pibburns.com/augustin.htm :

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation

Dave-W · Jun 5, 2015

BukiRob said:
The problem with your argument is that women are infertile during the month when they are not menstruating.

Percentages.

Sperm can live for several days, and the ovum can be available for a few days following ovulation. That covers almost all of the rest of the month. But the percentage of successful fertization and implantation goes from low to high (2-3 days surrounding ovulation) and then goes back down to zero shortly before menses starts.

How long the sperm lasts and how long the ovum is viable varies greatly from couple to couple based on a variety of factors in both partners.

BukiRob · Jun 5, 2015

DaveW-Ohev said:
Percentages.

Sperm can live for several days, and the ovum can be available for a few days following ovulation. That covers almost all of the rest of the month. But the percentage of successful fertization and implantation goes from low to high (2-3 days surrounding ovulation) and then goes back down to zero shortly before menses starts.

How long the sperm lasts and how long the ovum is viable varies greatly from couple to couple based on a variety of factors in both partners.

Sperm can live UP TO 5 days. The period of infertility of a woman before here menstruation is 11 days. There are without question periods of time when a woman has 0% chance of becoming pregnant

Why is Contraception Considered Morally Acceptable?

Called to Jesus Through Mary

Naturalist

Regular Member

Newbie

Newbie

That's Me in the Corner

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!

Well-Known Member

Newbie

I believe in life before death!

<3

Newbie

Newbie

Regular Member

Newbie

Regular Member

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!

Newbie

Similar threads