BIRTH CONTROL OF ANY SORT TAKES LIFE

[Founder]

This is not to say whether taking that life is good or bad, or contrary to God's Will. It is just to state a simple fact that Any sort of premeditated interference with a child being born is taking a child's life.

This is true Biblically, Scientifically, Legally, and in the Common Sense Business environment. This is not to say anything else.

Of Course, "Whom God set free is free indeed" so people have the right to be wrong, but they must pay the price whether worldly, or other worldly.

The idea is to get people to face facts first, and then make whatever judgment they want about those facts. Everyone has the right to their own opinion, but no one has a right to their own facts.

The answer for Believers is to face the facts and repent appropriately their wrongdoing, and all is well with God. That is what I do. "FounderChurch"

 

[Philip_B]

I am not completely certain what the argument is here. It seems to be suggesting that abstinence, using prophylactics, taking a contraceptive pill, or using a number of other preconception devices, is implicitly the same as post-conception therapies such as the morning-after pill or indeed a medical pregnancy termination.

Logically I am not sure I can equate all these options in the sense I think the OP is suggesting.

 

[Incredible Transformation]

I don't think that is true. Abortion takes like, other forms of birth control stop life from happening. There is a big difference. There would be a lot of unwanted children and more abject poverty if we didn't have some form of birth control.

 

[Greg J.]

This is not to say whether taking that life is good or bad, or contrary to God's Will. It is just to state a simple fact that Any sort of premeditated interference with a child being born is taking a child's life.

This is true Biblically, Scientifically, Legally, and in the Common Sense Business environment. This is not to say anything else.

Pregnancy, the normal way, includes a lot of sperm racing for the female's egg. Do you know which one God wants to win the race? Or do you know God's will after you see what has happened? If the latter, then how would you know that God has ordained any of them to reach the egg at all, because LOTS of times none of them do?

Human beings are in partnership with God. They have certain responsibilities and God has other responsibilities. God did not make every individual sperm to find an egg, which means MANY sperm die according to the biology that God gave us. If a sperm can die without moral fault, then cells can die without moral fault. Our responsibility changes when the cells transform into a human, in part due to the fact that a human can survive and grow. But an individual sperm or egg cannot.

What constitutes a fact, like everything else, is open to interpretation. Labeling your interpretation as the correct one means nothing (John 5:31). God does not subscribe to any human's beliefs—we are stuck with only communicating what we believe, even if God gave you a revelation of the truth.

(I've addressed only the biology, and have not addressed the situation of sex with the intention of not producing a child. We can sin all kinds of ways with our intentions even without doing anything at all.)

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

Are you saying a condom is bad? I do know some that believe that. Which makes little sense. Because even if you don't use one, alot of times the wife doesn't get pregnant which means the little swimmers died anyways. Which one could argue you shouldn't even have sex then since your taking millions of little lives.

Though I do know some, like quiverfulls believe using even condom is a sin because it stops you from being blessed (having a child). Which I do not believe at all. I mean yes you are stopping pregnancy but God doesn't say you must have kids and if not its a sin and your going to hell. Especially in todays world where people can barely afford living as a couple let alone adding just one baby.

Now theres the argument that "Well if you REALLY believe in God then you would know He will provide!". Well no one doubts that. But it Hes not a magic genie that will give you everything you want. If you choose to have 14 kids (one after another) it doesn't mean money will fall out of the sky. Sometimes we pretend are freewill choices are what He would want.

Most people I know who have 8+ kids either have a spouse who makes a 6 digit figure or they live in essentially poverty and are always at "Free" events getting clothes, food...etc. One could argue that is Him providing. That very well could be. But we don't know for sure. I've also seen the argument that He will never give you more then you can handle. That also may be but its still your choice to have 14 kids. When all along maybe your blessing was just the first two.

People tend to leave free will out of the equation. If I stand in front of a train and have 100% true faith God will stop the train.... 99% chance I will be wrong.

 

[Founder]

All of the responses so far, are of the self-serving variety. I stated a very simply idea. That any sort of INTENTIONAL, PREMEDITATED preventing of pregnancy is taking life. I said nothing more as to whether it was good or bad, or God approved or not or anything else. So, don't read stuff into my statement that is not in there. Intentions rule here. I said, IF IF IF you do this Birth Control for the purpose of preventing a child, you have at that moment taken a life whether or not there would have been a child, no on knows. Common sense should tell you that if you interfere you are likely not to have a child, and if you don't interfere it is likely that you will have a child. So putting up the barrier however is the same as taking the life of the child because that was your motive when you did the barrier whatever it was. Is everyone not able to understand this simple idea???? I think you don't WANT to understand it.

 

[Philip_B]

Common sense should tell you that if you interfere you are likely not to have a child, and if you don't interfere it is likely that you will have a child. So putting up the barrier however is the same as taking the life of the child because that was your motive when you did the barrier whatever it was.

I am not totally convinced of the argument, because I think to sustain it, you need to support a theory of the unique human life having begun before conception, and whilst there may be some discussion as to at which point you understand life to begin, (conception, quickening, birth, etc) I am not aware of any school of thought that would understand human life beginning at any point before conception. The only people I know who would make such an argument would be the supporters of reincarnation which is a thought outside the normal mainline Christian understanding of human life.

 

[Open Heart]

I would not equate artificial birth control with abortion. However, it still is wrong because it violates the three necessary pillars of God's plan for sex: marital bonding, pleasure, and openness to procreation.

There is always the option of periodic abstinence if you wish to space your children apart. My husband and I used this way and we have our two children spaced 3 years apart as planned. This is known as Natural Family Planning, or more specifically the Billings Ovulation Method. It has a method failure rate of about 2%. It only works if you do it -- cheat and it doesn't work.

Billings LIFE: Official Site of The Billings Ovulation Method™ - Leaders in Fertility Education

 

[SkyWriting]

Everyone has the right to their own opinion, but no one has a right to their own facts.

You've not heard of Trump yet?

But seriously, we all the right to our own set of facts.

True story - a guy impregnates a crippled girl and she gets an abortion
becasue while she is able to get pregnant, her body is not really fit
for carrying or helping to raise a child. Her hips are frozen with
arthritis and she has been unable to walk for 15 years.

True story - her roommate was run over by a truck as a child
and has been paralyzed ever since from the waist down. But
she is a happy mother of three.

True story - a ten year old shows up at middle school with
a baby to show, from her step-dad (now in prison.) Mom must
now raise the baby because she didn't believe in abortion.

Another fact: The female body aborts about 50% of all pregnancies
for a variety of reasons. Even stress.

 

[Open Heart]

But seriously, we all the right to our own set of facts.

This must be sarcasm.

 

[SkyWriting]

This must be sarcasm.

We really have no option other than our own facts.
We are under no obligation to listen to others facts.

 

[Open Heart]

We really have no option other than our own facts.
We are under no obligation to listen to others facts.

Facts exist independent of what we think. What we think should be verified by accepted means. For example something stated by an internet junk site cannot be accepted as a fact (even though it may turn out to be true). Something verified by three independent valid scientific studies can be considered to be a fact. A quote backed up by the original source document (such as a quote from the Pope backed up by a copy of the Pope's whole speech to verify accuracy and context) can be considered to be a fact.

I realize that even these means are not 100% accurate, but what I'm saying is that we CAN choose the best ways of determining facts over irreputable means.

Reasonable people should be able to agree on facts--except where they dispute the reliability of sources. For example, a conservative may doubt what a liberal media source such as CNN says, while a liberal may doubt what a conservative media source such as Fox News says. (In reality, all media news sources are second hand or third hand or worse by the time they reach us, and subject to error and bias.) Inevitably, however, fact seeking organizations will out a bad story or "fake news," which is what happened when both CNN and Fox News screwed up a report on the Supreme court ruling on Obama Care in 2012.

 

[Strong in Him]

This is not to say whether taking that life is good or bad, or contrary to God's Will. It is just to state a simple fact that Any sort of premeditated interference with a child being born is taking a child's life.

Maybe it's just me, but how can someone take a life that doesn't exist?

 

[Open Heart]

Any sort of premeditated interference with a child being born is taking a child's life.

Do you include abstinence in your idea?

 

[SkyWriting]

Facts exist independent of what we think. What we think should be verified by accepted means. For example something stated by an internet junk site cannot be accepted as a fact (even though it may turn out to be true). Something verified by three independent valid scientific studies can be considered to be a fact.

I don't mean to be contrary, but salt has been "proven"
to raise blood pressure, and to lower it over the last
20 years.

And your rule of 3 good sources, is not the rule other
people may choose.

Meta-Studies include 10 to 200 studies. And not always
coming to final results.

Why Perform a Meta-Analysis

 

[SkyWriting]

Maybe it's just me, but how can someone take a life that doesn't exist?

People who consider life is at conception.

 

[Hank77]

All of the responses so far, are of the self-serving variety. I stated a very simply idea. That any sort of INTENTIONAL, PREMEDITATED preventing of pregnancy is taking life.

And provided no scripture at all that supports your view.

 

[Hank77]

People who consider life is at conception.

But below is what you said.....

This is not to say whether taking that life is good or bad, or contrary to God's Will. It is just to state a simple fact that Any sort of premeditated interference with a child being born is taking a child's life.

This is before conception. Therefore, no life has begun.

 

[SkyWriting]

But below is what you said.....

This is before conception. Therefore, no life has begun.

That's a valid point for scientists who define
life beginning at conception. This would
allow for some forms of birth control and
not for others.

People do have differing opinions on when
life begins, and more opinions on when
we can interfere with natural conception
events, and when we cannot.

Some insist on no unnatural interference
and some even consider the "rhythm
method" to be interfering with God plans.

Few agree on all these points.

 

[Hank77]

There is always the option of periodic abstinence if you wish to space your children apart. My husband and I used this way and we have our two children spaced 3 years apart as planned.

And then what, abstinence?