BIRTH CONTROL OF ANY SORT TAKES LIFE

[Meowzltov]

Don't you mean Can cause?

The whole purpose of the progesterone in estrogen/progesterone hormone based contraceptives (such as the the regular Pill, the CombiPatch, or various shots) is a "back up plan" of keeping the developing human life from implanting should contraception fail (aka abortion). In the case of the Mini Pill and the Progesterone only Shot (such as Depo-Provera) no Estrogen is used, so there is no attempt at preventing conception, only aborting it.

Now you know exactly what I mean.

 

[Hank77]

The whole purpose of the progesterone in hormone based contraceptives such as the pill is a "back up plan" of keeping the embryo from implanting should contraception fail. In the case of the Mini Pill, the Progesterone only Shot, and the IUD (which uses Progestin in addition to agitation.)

Yup, they Can cause this to happen or not. I personally know two women who have gotten pregnant on the pill, one of them twice. So it doesn't always cause the embryo not to be able to implant.

 

[Meowzltov]

Please tell me you're not saying that a person will go to hell unless they repent of using contraception?

Everyone says that about something they enjoy that someone else thinks is a sin. For example, fornication is rampant, including among Christians. So you have people saying, "How can you say that someone who makes love outside of marriage is going to hell?"

 

[Meowzltov]

Yup, they Can cause this to happen or not. I personally know two women who have gotten pregnant on the pill, one of them twice. So it doesn't always cause the embryo not to be able to implant.

Yes, even if used as intended, the Pill has a 1% method failure rate. And its real problem is that a woman will forget to take a days dose, rendering it ineffective. I also had a friend get pregnant on the pill. It makes you wonder what the memory failure rate is.

 

[Meowzltov]

That's something for the two years, though not very reliable, but combined with abstinence, it worked for you. I'm glad it did, but it doesn't work for everyone, such as my mom and a few Catholics I know that have gotten pregnant anyway.

You don't understand. We didn't use abstinence for the two years we used lactational amenorrhea. We did use periodic abstinence for the rest of our marriage. (My son couldn't nurse because of medication I was on, so he was bottle fed.) I'm very much an "earth mother" sort of person -- I like to be natural. I'm very much in tune with my body.

 

[Meowzltov]

If you're saying that sometimes fertilisation DOES occur but the embryo is actually prevented from developing into a foetus; I wasn't aware that this was the case.

You are not alone. MOST people are not aware of this. That's why we try to spread the word, because it impacts a lot of decisions.

 

[Meowzltov]

My view is still the same; that preventing a life from beginning is not the same as deliberately terminating one that has already begun.

Absolutely.

 

[Strong in Him]

You are not alone. MOST people are not aware of this. That's why we try to spread the word, because it impacts a lot of decisions.

It might do with some people, or at least make them re-think their method of birth control. But even if I'd known this 25 years ago; we weren't ready for children, so I went on the pill. Had I become pregnant anyway, I might, in view of my illness, have considered adoption - which would have upset a lot of people. But I can understand how someone might terminate a foetus which is "only" two months old, rather than go through the agony of childbirth and then parting with a baby.

Note, I can understand it; I do NOT agree with it and hope I would never have had an abortion.

 

[Hank77]

Yes, even if used as intended, the Pill has a 1% method failure rate. And its real problem is that a woman will forget to take a days dose, rendering it ineffective. I also had a friend get pregnant on the pill. It makes you wonder what the memory failure rate is.

This is true in some cases but we cannot and doctors do not attribute it to improper usage in all cases.

 

[Strong in Him]

Everyone says that about something they enjoy that someone else thinks is a sin. For example, fornication is rampant, including among Christians. So you have people saying, "How can you say that someone who makes love outside of marriage is going to hell?"

Well they might say that, but the only way such a person will go to hell is if they reject God, continue to reject God, refuse to confess and admit that their action may have hurt God/broken his law - and continue in this attitude for the rest of their lives.
This does not give someone a license to sin and then say "oh, I'll repent later". But a person could commit adultery/fraud/murder/theft etc etc, or dabble in the occult, confess, repent, turn to the Lord and be saved. We are spared hell because of what the Lord Jesus did for us; not because we refrained from certain sins.

In this case, It has not yet been proved that using contraception is a sin. If, as I believe, it isn't; how can someone repent of it? Failing to trust in the Lord Jesus and accept what he has done, is THE action that will send someone to hell - nothing else.

 

[Meowzltov]

In this case, It has not yet been proved that using contraception is a sin.

There is a commandment, "Be fruitful and multiply, filling up the earth." To violate that commandment is sin.

That said, there are some significant differences between than and now.

Back then, human beings were scarce. Children were blessings and the more children you had, the more blessed you were. Because there was no medical science, children often didn't make it to adulthood, so it was necessary to have a great many children just to have surviving offspring. Only in this way could mankind "fill up the earth."

Today, the earth is full. Indeed, it is overflowing. Because of Medicine, the children we have are in all likelihood going to survive to have children of their own. Even the Pope says that we don't need to breed like rabbits.

But that doesn't mean children aren't still blessings or that there isn't still a commandment to keep. The question is, HOW DO WE BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY WITHOUT DESTROYING THE EARTH FROM OVERPOPULATION? The answer is, childspacing/limiting children.

So...... The marital relationship MUST include an openness to children, no different now than thousands of years ago.

Artificial Birth Control violates that openness to children, as it allows for sex acts that are divorced from the possibility of conception.

Natural Family Planning has no such violation, and yet allows for child spacing and limitation.

 

[Strong in Him]

There is a commandment, "Be fruitful and multiply, filling up the earth." To violate that commandment is sin.

That's one interpretation.
Personally, I do not believe that to be a command for us. if it was, then surely God would make sure that all of us had the potential to keep that command. Yet men and women are, or have been, infertile. Many also don't marry; either by choice or because they can't find anyone. But Christian, single, women, such as nuns, for example, do not generally go around having children out of wedlock so as to keep a command from God.

I've never believed I was being commanded to have children.

That said, there are some significant differences between than and now.

Back then, human beings were scarce. Children were blessings and the more children you had, the more blessed you were. Because there was no medical science, children often didn't make it to adulthood, so it was necessary to have a great many children just to have surviving offspring. Only in this way could mankind "fill up the earth."

Today, the earth is full. Indeed, it is overflowing. Because of Medicine, the children we have are in all likelihood going to survive to have children of their own. Even the Pope says that we don't need to breed like rabbits.

Exactly.

But that doesn't mean children aren't still blessings

Children are great blessings, for some.

The question is, HOW DO WE BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY WITHOUT DESTROYING THE EARTH FROM OVERPOPULATION? The answer is, childspacing/limiting children.

Again, that's one interpretation.
That's a question I have never concerned myself with. Many do indeed limit the number of children they have, by using birth control.

Artificial Birth Control violates that openness to children, as it allows for sex acts that are divorced from the possibility of conception.

Sex is not only for having children; it is not wrong to practice it just for the enjoyment of it.
And artificial birth control doesn't always work.

 

[Paidiske]

The whole purpose of the progesterone in estrogen/progesterone hormone based contraceptives (such as the the regular Pill, the CombiPatch, or various shots) is a "back up plan" of keeping the developing human life from implanting should contraception fail (aka abortion). In the case of the Mini Pill and the Progesterone only Shot (such as Depo-Provera) no Estrogen is used, so there is no attempt at preventing conception, only aborting it.

Now you know exactly what I mean.

Not strictly true. Progesterone-only contraceptives may function in this way (quote from Wikipedia follows):

"Mechanism of action
The mechanism of action of progestogen-only contraceptives depends on the progestogen activity and dose.[7]

• Very-low-dose progestogen-only contraceptives, such as traditional progestogen-only pills (and subdermal implants Norplant and Jadelle and intrauterine systems Progestasert and Mirena), inconsistently inhibit ovulation in ~50% of cycles and rely mainly on their progestogenic effect of thickening the cervical mucus, thereby reducing sperm viability and penetration.
• Intermediate-dose progestogen-only contraceptives, such as the progestogen-only pill Cerazette (or the subdermal implant Nexplanon), allow some follicular development (part of the steps of ovulation) but much more consistently inhibit ovulation in 97–99% of cycles.[8] The same cervical mucus changes occur as with very-low-dose progestogens.
• High-dose progestogen-only contraceptives, such as the injectables Depo-Provera and Noristerat, completely inhibit follicular development and ovulation. The same cervical mucus changes occur as with very-low-dose and intermediate-dose progestogens.

In anovulatory cycles using progestogen-only contraceptives, the endometrium is thin and atrophic. If the endometrium were also thin and atrophic during an ovulatory cycle, this could, in theory, interfere with implantation of a blastocyst (embryo)."

What that all adds up to is that the dosage of progesterone affects the likelihood that it is functioning as an ovulation suppressant or a preventer of implantation. It also shows that the effect is not the same in all women. Women using this form of contraception, who are concerned about it functioning by preventing implantation, would need to monitor the effects on their own body and judge whether or not ovulation is being prevented.

 

[Armoured]

There is a commandment, "Be fruitful and multiply, filling up the earth." To violate that commandment is sin.

I don't recall that being a general commandment, or anywhere that violation of it is "sinful".

 

[Meowzltov]

That's one interpretation.
Personally, I do not believe that to be a command for us. if it was, then surely God would make sure that all of us had the potential to keep that command. Yet men and women are, or have been, infertile. Many also don't marry; either by choice or because they can't find anyone. But Christian, single, women, such as nuns, for example, do not generally go around having children out of wedlock so as to keep a command from God.

I think you have a naive interpretation of obeying the commandments. In every case, you obey them

1. when you can
2. when it is not overruled by a more important commandment

For example, if there is no temple, you cannot offer sacrifices, so you are not breaking the commandment to offer sacrifices. If you are a doctor working in a hospital saving lives on the Sabbath, you are not breaking the Sabbath because saving a life is more important than not working on the Sabbath.

The commandment to be fruitful and multiply is for those bound in marriage, not those who are single or infertile. And I don't see how you can get around it being a commandment as it is grammatically written in the imperative. Whenever God states something in the imperative, it is a commandment.

 

[Meowzltov]

Not strictly true. Progesterone-only contraceptives may function in this way (quote from Wikipedia follows):

"Mechanism of action
The mechanism of action of progestogen-only contraceptives depends on the progestogen activity and dose.[7]

• Very-low-dose progestogen-only contraceptives, such as traditional progestogen-only pills (and subdermal implants Norplant and Jadelle and intrauterine systems Progestasert and Mirena), inconsistently inhibit ovulation in ~50% of cycles and rely mainly on their progestogenic effect of thickening the cervical mucus, thereby reducing sperm viability and penetration.
• Intermediate-dose progestogen-only contraceptives, such as the progestogen-only pill Cerazette (or the subdermal implant Nexplanon), allow some follicular development (part of the steps of ovulation) but much more consistently inhibit ovulation in 97–99% of cycles.[8] The same cervical mucus changes occur as with very-low-dose progestogens.
• High-dose progestogen-only contraceptives, such as the injectables Depo-Provera and Noristerat, completely inhibit follicular development and ovulation. The same cervical mucus changes occur as with very-low-dose and intermediate-dose progestogens.

In anovulatory cycles using progestogen-only contraceptives, the endometrium is thin and atrophic. If the endometrium were also thin and atrophic during an ovulatory cycle, this could, in theory, interfere with implantation of a blastocyst (embryo)."

What that all adds up to is that the dosage of progesterone affects the likelihood that it is functioning as an ovulation suppressant or a preventer of implantation. It also shows that the effect is not the same in all women. Women using this form of contraception, who are concerned about it functioning by preventing implantation, would need to monitor the effects on their own body and judge whether or not ovulation is being prevented.

Thank you for the information on the different levels of progestin. I didn't know that before and it is very helpful.

It says that in the traditional mini-pills, it only prevents conception 50% of the time. That would mean Wikipedia is downplaying the effectiveness of the mini-pill's action as an abortifacient, preventing developing human life from implanting in the uterus. Mini-pills are 87-99% effective, so that tells you how many conceptions are averted via abortion.

 

[Meowzltov]

I don't recall that being a general commandment, or anywhere that violation of it is "sinful".

Any time God says something in the imperative, it is a commandment. This, specifically, has been considered a commandment by both the Jews and the traditional Church (Catholic and Orthodox) for 2000 years. Protestants were also opposed to Artificial Birth Control until the mid 20th century.

 

[Paidiske]

Any time God says something in the imperative, it is a commandment.

Well, yes. But not every commandment is given to everyone.

My sense of this is that a commandment given to the first human couple doesn't apply to everyone once we have seven billion people in the world. We have successfully filled the earth.

 

[Strong in Him]

The commandment to be fruitful and multiply is for those bound in marriage, not those who are single or infertile. And I don't see how you can get around it being a commandment as it is grammatically written in the imperative. Whenever God states something in the imperative, it is a commandment.

If you believe that God commanded you to "go forth and multiply"; that's what you should do.
I don't believe God commanded that for our marriage; i.e that we were obliged to have children. If we had been, we would have had them. If God had commanded that every married couple have children, he would make it possible for them to obey that command. Especially if the couple were Christian and were seeking his will.

And if every command WAS given to everyone, we'd have to convert to Judaism to be accepted as God's people.

 

[ToBeLoved]

I think you have a naive interpretation of obeying the commandments. In every case, you obey them

1. when you can
2. when it is not overruled by a more important commandment

For example, if there is no temple, you cannot offer sacrifices, so you are not breaking the commandment to offer sacrifices. If you are a doctor working in a hospital saving lives on the Sabbath, you are not breaking the Sabbath because saving a life is more important than not working on the Sabbath.

The commandment to be fruitful and multiply is for those bound in marriage, not those who are single or infertile. And I don't see how you can get around it being a commandment as it is grammatically written in the imperative. Whenever God states something in the imperative, it is a commandment.

What is the difference between the 10 Commandments and a commandment otherwise as you state them?

That is then putting it all on one equal platform the way you use 'commandments' as being anything.