Contraception

[msaenz]

Why is it that before the 1930 Lambeth Conference all Christian denominations considered artificial contraceptives NOT to be morally permissable? Why did things change?

 

[419gam]

Before the civil rights movement of the sixties African Americans were not entitled to equal rights under the law why did things change?....Progress.

 

[progressivegal]

common sense? Some people shouldn't have kids, some people don't want kids, and some people just plain can't afford it.

 

[Hydra009]

Here it is:

Religious and cultural attitudes toward birth control

Protestant Christianity

Christianity in general has had mixed opinions towards contraception and its role in society over the years. Prior to the 1930s, contraception was generally condemned by all the major branches of Christianity, including by major reformers like Luther and Calvin. This condemnation was relaxed by the Episcopalian Church at the 1930 Lambeth Conference, and most Protestant groups followed suit over the course of the 20th century, though some individual Protestants adhere to the traditional view that contraception is wrong.

Among Protestant Christianity, the sizeable ELCA, which includes a large number of US Lutheran and Episcopalian churches, makes the following statement:

"When [having children] is not their intention, the responsible use of safe, effective contraceptives is expected of the male and the female. Respect and sensitivity should also be shown toward couples who do not feel called to conceive and/or rear children, or who are unable to do so."

 

[NothingButTheBlood]

The contraception debate always makes me think of the Monty Python skit.

 

[progressivegal]

The contraception debate always makes me think of the Monty Python skit.

Every sperm is sacred

 

[Aaiden]

I don't see why it ever was a moral issue. If ya don't want kids then whats the problem?

 

[Lokisdottir]

*hugs this thread*

 

[Cheli]

I don't see why it ever was a moral issue. If ya don't want kids then whats the problem?

I guess some Christians' response would be to not have sex unless trying to conceive. Therefore contraception would be irrelevent.

 

[Chrysalis Kat]

I guess some Christians' response would be to not have sex unless trying to conceive. Therefore contraception would be irrelevent.

Humm...wouldn't not having sex in order to avoid pregnancy also be considered practicing birth control (albeit it's not contraception)?

Anyway, I don't think this ever was a truly moral/religious issue. That was the just the ruse. It just added fuel to the political social subjection of woman that was prevalent prior to the Suffrage movement. It's easiest to keep and maintain power if women are kept barefoot and pregnant and in the kitchen than if they show up at the voting booths.

 

[Cheli]

Humm...wouldn't not having sex in order to avoid pregnancy also be considered practicing birth control (albeit it's not contraception)?

Good point. I think it was Martin Luther (could be wrong) who said that if a woman doesn't have as many children as she is capable of then she is guilty of that many murders. And if a woman dies of bearing and caring for her [excessive number of] kids then so be it for that is what she is there for. Nice dude.

 

[Ave Maria]

Because as time went on, society became more liberal and so did most churches. Praise God that the Catholic Church has always stuck to God's morals!

 

[Cheli]

Praise God that the Catholic Church has always stuck to God's morals!

Whilst I am not in favour of much of the Catholic church's opinions, I have to admit that it's much better being consistent than being wishy-washy like the other denominations.

 

[Hydra009]

Whilst I am not in favour of much of the Catholic church's opinions, I have to admit that it's much better being consistent than being wishy-washy like the other denominations.

Ehhh...I don't know about that. Consider being consistant about stoning from the OT to the present. Yikes. There is something to be said for those who wisely change the traditional ways if they no longer work.

 

[Finella]

I think it makes sense that the church would adapt to current social situations -- especially given the population growth around the world, I would certainly think it is a moral issue if a couple continues to procreate and yet not have the means to care for the children, causing further strain on society's and the planet's resources. Being wise about procreation is just good stewardship.

Also, I like the way the 1930 Lambeth conference put it: parenthood is a calling, not just an assumption of living life. I think, as Christians, we are meant to look at every choice we make as meaningful, and parenthood is certainly one of them. We should go about making that choice prayerfully.

 

[Cheli]

Ehhh...I don't know about that. Consider being consistant about stoning from the OT to the present. Yikes. There is something to be said for those who wisely change the traditional ways if they no longer work.

Don't get me wrong, I think that the Catholic church's stance and traditionalism is wrong, but it is really the only one that tries to remain true to the roots of Christianty. I mean, they haven't changed so much just to suit themselves as the others have.