Birth Control

[DiscipleOfIAm]

I saw the poll thread right before posting this. I had intended to post this before I saw that.

We have beaten this dog to death before. But, this thread should be a little different. Rather than debate BC, I am more looking for the forms of BC other Baptists are using and why.

My wife is pregnant and due Nov 30. We are trying to decide how we will monitor future pregnancies. From what I have read, IUD's, the pill, the shot are contributors of "silent abortion" and this is not what we want to use. We unknowingly used an IUD in the past as well as the pill. I did not find out the effects until later and we have felt terrible about possibly ending a life.

Are there other mehtods that are effective? What, why, and how?

God Bless!

 

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

You can use condoms or "The Ovulation Method". The book my wife has is called The Ovulation Method Of Birth Regulation by Mercedes Wilson.

I saw the poll thread right before posting this. I had intended to post this before I saw that.

We have beaten this dog to death before. But, this thread should be a little different. Rather than debate BC, I am more looking for the forms of BC other Baptists are using and why.

My wife is pregnant and due Nov 30. We are trying to decide how we will monitor future pregnancies. From what I have read, IUD's, the pill, the shot are contributors of "silent abortion" and this is not what we want to use. We unknowingly used an IUD in the past as well as the pill. I did not find out the effects until later and we have felt terrible about possibly ending a life.

Are there other mehtods that are effective? What, why, and how?

God Bless!

 

[oliveplants]

>>not a Baptist, but maybe helpful

I have a Christian book on contraception that says the NuvaRing doesn't allow for the mini-abortions; it stops all conception. DH forbids me using hormonal BC of any kind because of effects on my emotions and possible side effects to physical health. We use a combination NFP/calendar and condoms during fertile times. But only til I feel my body is ready for another, because we really do want lots more children and only space the pregnancies a little to allow me better health to have more later.

(Bet that was more info than you were looking for. sorry.)

 

[TwinCrier]

I have used the pill in the past, but wouldn't have if I had been properly informed of the risks and abortive effect. After going with natural methods, I now can tell exactly when I start ovulatining because I know what it feels like. I was ignorant of what that small numbing pinch inside my hip was before. Even though dh has had a vascetomy, I still think around that time, "I'm fertile." Most people see what is involved with Fertility Awareness and get turned off, but it gets much easier as you become aware of your own body.
http://www.americanpregnancy.org/preventingpregnancy/fertilityawarenessNFP.html

 

[cubanito]

Condoms, withdrawal and after deciding to stop after 4, I had a vasectomy. Worked for us.

As we would have welcomed any "accidental" child with the same enthusiams, the pressure for a "perfect" birth control was never there.

Twincrier is quite right about being able to feel ovulation for most women if they "tune in" to their bodie's sensations.

JR

 

[Laserman]

Wow,

All You folks call Yourselves followers of Christ and yet practice Sex for self Pleasure and approve of murdering life by contreception. That's protestants for You. I'm saddened by reading these replies at the state of Christianity. Sex is for procreation and NOT for pleasure only ,even if You are married and already have children. If I were some of You I'd re-study this issue and spend some time in prayer about this. You know before the 1920s ALL protestant denominations were against contraception, but one by they all fell for the temptation. Sad, really. It doesn't square with true Christianity.

Laserman

 

[DiscipleOfIAm]

Wow,

All You folks call Yourselves followers of Christ and yet practice Sex for self Pleasure and approve of murdering life by contreception. That's protestants for You. I'm saddened by reading these replies at the state of Christianity. Sex is for procreation and NOT for pleasure only ,even if You are married and already have children. If I were some of You I'd re-study this issue and spend some time in prayer about this. You know before the 1920s ALL protestant denominations were against contraception, but one by they all fell for the temptation. Sad, really. It doesn't square with true Christianity.

Laserman

So, you're saying the Bible tells us to have sex ONLY for procreation?

 

[TwinCrier]

You only get the procreation part if God sees fit to bless you with that life. If you can't have children, you still have to keep trying.

 

[sawitch]

Maybe I was 'blessed' as getting pregnant was far too easy for us. All attempts at BC failed until I had my tubes removed.
Having an even larger family would have been too great a strain on our emotional, financial and practical resources.
Please would the opponents of BC use some common sense. I'm sure God doesn't intend us all to be brooding mares!!

 

[TwinCrier]

God always provides!
Psalm 37:25 I have been young, and now am old; yet have I not seen the righteous forsaken, nor his seed begging bread.

 

[sawitch]

God always provides!
Psalm 37:25 I have been young, and now am old; yet have I not seen the righteous forsaken, nor his seed begging bread.

Strange that. I didn't see anybody handing out free shoes to my kids when times were tough!!!
(Maybe shoes aren't as important as bread, but most people seem to have them.)

I believe that God expects us to be good stewards, and that having a huge tribe of children would not have been good stewardship of our resources. He wants us to use our God-given brains. BC is a benefit of our modern culture and should be used as such.

 

[cubanito]

No sex for pleasure, only for procreation, means no sex after menopause.

As to the stand of protestant denominations before the 1920's, I am fairly certain this was not as monolithic as is claimed.

JR

 

[Assisi]

So, you're saying the Bible tells us to have sex ONLY for procreation?

That's not what was said. Just that sex is not for pleasure only. Sex should be both unitive and procreative. Of course not every sexual act will result in pregnancy, God did not design it that way.

No sex for pleasure, only for procreation, means no sex after menopause.

As to the stand of protestant denominations before the 1920's, I am fairly certain this was not as monolithic as is claimed.

JR

Source??

To the OP there are plenty of methods which are not abortifacients. I'm a Catholic and so I believe that only natural methods are moral. But that aside, I know people who don't share my view on that morally but still opt for natural methods. There are a lot of advantages. My husband and I use the Billings Ovulation Method, which we really like (and it has a great efficacy) and I also know couples who use the Sympto-Thermal Method. Other than my moral and theological reasons for choosing a natural method, the thing I like best about our method is that both my husband and I are involved. I don't like the trend in society that contraception and children are women's problems and responsibility falls to them alone.
Most natural methods have a higher efficacy than both condoms and withdrawal when it comes to avoiding pregnancy. (According to the World Health Organisation)
They give all sorts of advantages to the wife in terms of knowledge of her body. I have always had very irregular cycles and when I started to chart (when I was engaged) was the first time I could know with any accuracy when my period would come. That was a great advantage! Now I can tell almost to the hour.
They provide a time of abstainance as described in 1 Cor 7. We find the period of time when we abstain to be such a gift in terms of our interior life(our relationship with God) and our relationship with each other.

I could go on and on. I hope that you find the right method for you!

 

[TwinCrier]

Strange that. I didn't see anybody handing out free shoes to my kids when times were tough!!!
(Maybe shoes aren't as important as bread, but most people seem to have them.)

I believe that God expects us to be good stewards, and that having a huge tribe of children would not have been good stewardship of our resources. He wants us to use our God-given brains. BC is a benefit of our modern culture and should be used as such.

Are you saying that God wasn't sufficient for your needs? Are you saying that if you don't use birth control you'll have 100 kids? I don't believe either of these statements to be true.

 

[cubanito]

The "quote" button dosen't seem to be working for me. As I've been having problems w the internet in general, I think it's on my end.

If I quote you right, Assisi, sex can occur for purposes other than procreation. You cite "unitive" as one such. I would agree. Now, what exactly is the problem if I have pleasurable sex with my wife that is also "unitive" but offers very little chance of fertilization?

I would agree with the concerns raised at the outset of this thread regarding methods that do not prevent fertilization, but only implantation. However, clearly physical barriers work ONLY by preventing fertilization.

Given "unitive" sex within marriage, what is wrong with, say, vasectomy?

Also, have you considered the inherent duplicity in claiming a "rhythm method" is "natural"? Nothing involving calendars, thermometers or even an intimate knowledge of human physiology is "natural". It is just as misnamed as calling some "health supplement" that comes in a pill "natural". Natural for a human is to be a host to millions of parasites, typically die in childhood from any of a 20odd childhood diseases, and to be as fertile as possible should one survive to adulthood. Little about the humans posting here is "natural". Why would I want to relabel a decidedly artificial method "natural" and then condemn other methods?

Interestingly the "natural man" is a synonym for EVIL in the Scriptures. So if condoms are artificial and Billings is "natural", gimme artificial. Better life through chemicals.


The INTENT of the rhythm method is the same as that of any barrier method (condoms,vasectomy): to prevent fertilization

It is the intent of the heart, and not the legalistic MAN MADE traditions and laws of those who love long robes and the fine greetings that God is interested in

Birth control is birth control. So long as we do not intentionally kill a new life, which we know starts at conception from every Bio textbook, it is all either permitted or not.


As to my sources, too busy, I'll withdraw the point at this time.

JR

 

[Assisi]

Sex is unitive and procreative. I believe that everytime I have sex with my husband I should be open to life by not doing anything that would prevent or lessen the change of conception. Sex is never purely for pleasure.

I call the methods natural because that is their technical name. They are natural because nothing is changed in my body, my husbands body, or the sexual act by the methods.

It is not accurate to call the methods Rythym Methods, because Rythym is one (not very reliable) of the methods in the group usually referred to as natural. I do not know anyone who uses a rythym method.

Your arguement about the word natural is a bit silly. By the same reasoning no one should have a natural birth, there should be caeserian sections only. Anyway, it is not because natural methods are natural that they are moral. The name is not really significant.

If the INTENT of the user of a natural method is indeed the same as someone who has a vasectamy then that is considered a sin.

Besides, the OP has asked that this not turn into a debate. I was merely providing info and I thought it would be best to qualify my writing with my background as I am aware that the OP may not agree with my moral stance.

 

[cubanito]

Actually, very few people have natural births. A natural birth is a female going off in the field by herself and eating the placenta afterwards. We humans tend to be very un-natural (artificial). At my wife's last birth, some 30 people were around drinking expresso in an adjoining room, while I and the OB man decided to dance to Cuban music to entertain the crowd. Were it not for my little sister interrupting with "I think I see the head" my oldest daughter would have hit the floor. Most people are not quite as animated, usually having only a video camera along with a troup of specialists, some at the bedside, and others in the pharmacy or laboratory. Then we turn the placenta into a hair rejuvenation treatment rather than eating it. All manne of air conditioned buildings, chemicals, specialists, tests and whatnot is natural? Oh please child, even in remote villages, all manner of strange rites involving spirits and so on get involved.

We humans are markedly artificial, as God asked us to be, and increasingly subdue nature to our will. God did not command us to worship nature, and very much warns us not to revere it. Nor should we wantomly and thoughtlessly destroy it either. Rathe, as we were made SUPERIOR to nature (while yet in part of it) we are to subdue it and cultivate it as a garden.

I am much irritated that so many Christians forget this, and like modern pagans, revere the "natural" from their air-conditioned, daily-bathed, clothed and pampered lives. NO birth control method is natural, just like very little we plan out in our highly artificial lives is natural.

You claim the Billings Ovulation method changes nothing in your body. So what exactly does a condom change in somebody elses body? Or withdrawal, a method which while supposedly very unreliable, my wife and I practiced for 22 years without a single failure? And just why should changing something in your body be of any consequence? Do you not give vaccines to your children, forever altering their immune system? How about some tea, coffee, or chocolate, all full of mind altering caffeine (and chocolate also hitting the marijuana receptors).

It is rather the entire pagan-influenced culture that is silly about the word natural! We humans were never told to BE natural, like the animals. We decidedly alter nature to benefit ourselves, and to honor God. This worship of Gea that is creeping into Christianity is very evil, and very stupid.

So you don't want to debate. Fine, but your initial post contained all the hostility of a frontal attack from my perswpective. Typical, typical, "throw the stone and hide the hand" while crying "peace, peace"...

You are so right, let's not debate.

Let's just both admit you are wrong and be done with it.

JR

 

[cubanito]

I believe that everytime I have sex with my husband I should be open to life by not doing anything that would prevent or lessen the change of conception. Sex is never purely for pleasure.
.

So having sex only when not likely to be fertile is not lessening the chance of conception?

As to sex not intended to be purely for pleasure, I agree. Sex should be only within the marital union, and such a union (it hurts to have to point out the obvious) is only between one man and one woman. However, such sex is intended to be divisive as well as unitive, given that it is to divide a man from his parents. There is a tme for every purpose under Heaven, and there are times that it is Good to be divisive.

Sex with one's spouse should not be for self gratification only, but for mutual pleasure. Such mutual pleasure is automatically tied to strengthening the marital bond.

JR

 

[Assisi]

You claim the Billings Ovulation method changes nothing in your body. So what exactly does a condom change in somebody elses body? Or withdrawal, a method which while supposedly very unreliable, my wife and I practiced for 22 years without a single failure? And just why should changing something in your body be of any consequence?

In my opinion a condom or withdrawal changes the sexual act. Altering fertility alters what sex is theologically.

Once again, it is not because they are natural that we consider them morally acceptable. I am not opposed to technology. Natural is simply a name.

It is rather the entire pagan-influenced culture that is silly about the word natural! We humans were never told to BE natural, like the animals. We decidedly alter nature to benefit ourselves, and to honor God. This worship of Gea that is creeping into Christianity is very evil, and very stupid.

So you're calling me a pagan? I agree with some of what you say, but some of it is very, very distorted. Of course we do not have an animal nature, we have a human nature and that is different. God has a different nature from us as well. We are called to more than our nature through the grace that Christ gives us through His work on the Cross. If we do not accept this call, if we do not accept the grace which gives us more than our nature, we will not be able to live with God in heaven.

So you don't want to debate. Fine, but your initial post contained all the hostility of a frontal attack from my perswpective. Typical, typical, "throw the stone and hide the hand" while crying "peace, peace"...

You are so right, let's not debate.

Let's just both admit you are wrong and be done with it.

JR

That's a bit rude... I reread my post and it doesn't hostile to me. I just wanted to know where you got that info about contraception in Protestant churches before the 20's. I'd be interested to read it.
I am not trying to foist my opinions on you, only to explain the reasoning behind my choice in the hope that I may of some help to the OP. I don't appreciate being judged for honestly doing what I feel God has called me to do with respect to family planing.

So having sex only when not likely to be fertile is not lessening the chance of conception?

JR

If I'm am not fertile, and I have sex with my husband, I have done nothing to lessen the chance of conception at that point in time. That's exactly my point. Every time I have sex with my husband I am open to life. I believe God allows us to cooperate with His creative work, and that we have a duty to be responsible when bringing new life into the world. We should not deliberately have more children than we can afford. Lessening the chance of conception is not the issue, because there are times when God calls us to do that. The issue is what means we use to do that. In my opinion, contraception means we are not giving all of our self to our spouse in sex. We are holding something back, and that belies the act. These are some of my reasons for choosing the method of family planing that I have chosen, (though there are others) and I am aware that not many people on this forum will agree with me on them, that's why I didn't fully explain them at first.

 

[DiscipleOfIAm]

WAIT! The OP was not meant to end up a debate. Please, if you want to debate, feel free, but do it on another thread. Perhaps start a Birth Control Debate thread?

I think I got all of the responses I need. Thanks everyone! I was just asking for suggestions of non-abortive birth control. If you don't believe in any form of birth control, that's okay, too.

God Bless!