Contraception

[gengwall]

Come on people! Are there really no anti-contraception folks out there who can bring reasonable objections and arguments against the biblical positions I have posted? Do you really conceed that the bible is silent on contraception and subsequently acknowledge that it is not inherently sinful? I'm listening.

Christalee4 - you are a linking maniac my friend. Do you like track all of these links on a spreadsheet or something? Seriously though, I appreciate it. The links are certainly food for thought, although I still do not sense the threat you do. But I'll keep my eye open.

I still do not subscribe to the notion that this is an agenda item for the main religious organizations in the country. To me, it is very much a radical, fringe movement with virtually no large scale support within the Christian community, and any evidence to the contrary is quite unconvincing.

 

[JulySheMustFly]

Gengwall - keep in mind that many hardcore anti contraception folks are also very much against the felowship between believers and non-believers even for the purpose of intellectual discussion. As a result may not frequent the OPEN forums on CF.

BTW - I have found the position of those without a christian faith icon very interesting.

 

[gengwall]

Gengwall - keep in mind that many hardcore anti contraception folks are also very much against the felowship between believers and non-believers even for the purpose of intellectual discussion. As a result may not frequent the OPEN forums on CF.

BTW - I have found the position of those without a christian faith icon very interesting.

That is the one flaw that I have found here at CF is that debate is banned in many of the forums where issues like this are most appropriately addressed. So we go here and hope. I suppose what you are saying is that they are afraid of being brow beat by non-Christians. But I had hoped to aswage those fears in my instructions for the thread. Any "book of faith" case presented should be respected and left alone by those who hold no value in said book. In other words, a scriptural battle would be between only those who hold value in the scriptures. Others can chime in, of course. But discussion about the validity of our source of truth are irrelevant to any internal disucssion of that source of truth for us. Does that make sense?

So, I was hoping that some would come on and make a biblical case against contraception. Or at least, shoot holes in my biblical case that it is not forbidden. Some, to be sure, have tried to make a "denominational" case against contraception. But catecisms and conferences and and policy statements are not our shared source of truth. So, I continue to wait...

 

[elsbeth]

There's a thread running now in the Christians section on birth control. There are people very adamant that bc is wrong, but the only arguments are that the Bible tends to see children as a blessing, and the part in the Bible about Onan.
Feelings run high on this issue, but it comes down to that there just isn't any clear Biblical condemnation for bc.

 

[gengwall]

There's a thread running now in the Christians section on birth control. There are people very adamant that bc is wrong, but the only arguments are that the Bible tends to see children as a blessing, and the part in the Bible about Onan.
Feelings run high on this issue, but it comes down to that there just isn't any clear Biblical condemnation for bc.

And, true to my word, I have dealt with those arguments scripturally earlier in this thread.

...on "Be fruitful and multiply..."
...on Onan...
...on Onan (cont.)...
...on "The purpose of marriage is procreation"...
...on "The purpose of sex is procreation"...

 

[Diane_Windsor]

Question To Those Who Think Contraception Is Sinful:

If you take contraception for purely health-related reasons, but birth control is a side effect, is it immoral?

~Krysia

For the Roman Catholic Church I believe that this has been answered in JPII's Theology of the Body. I think it is under the theory of double ??? (the name escapes my mind). The theory also may be applied to AIDS and condom use, voting for politicians who are pro-choice, etc. Perhaps a RC will happen upon this thread and can fully explain the RCC's position.

 

[gengwall]

For the Roman Catholic Church I believe that this has been answered in JPII's Theology of the Body. I think it is under the theory of double ??? (the name escapes my mind). The theory also may be applied to AIDS and condom use, voting for politicians who are pro-choice, etc. Perhaps a RC will happen upon this thread and can fully explain the RCC's position.

Hopefully. I think PeaceLover02 tried that in this entry, but the quotes presenting the RC position contained no scripture and didn't even hint at a scriptural backing. The only conclusion I constantly come to is that the lack of scriptural support for the RC position simply means there is none. One thing I know, I am not about spend my time reading through volumes of RC position papers, decrees, and arguments. If there is strong scriptural support for the condemnation of contraception, it should be able to be summarized fairly economically for us here.

 

[rosesandravens]

I agree.

Ignorance is one thing, but choosing to remain ignorant? Plain stupidity. This is why I enjoy socialising with Christians in a Christian setting - the worst that can happen is I learn something new and build on my experiences of the world and other people.

 

[MrsJoy]

Hmm well I am childfree and got called a swine and was basically told that sex with my husband was not loving and only for self pleasure.

These people really need to get a life and stop focusing on other peoples sex lives.

esp since God's Word does not back this idea up.
men's perversion does.
3 words: song of solomon.

 

[MrsJoy]

Yes, but do they not still base their "judgements" on scirpture? I was under the assumption that they still hold the Onan incident as a scriptural condemnation of contraception. I might be wrong though.

the main problem with that train of thought being that God's Word clearly gives the reason for his being killed " He was evil in God's eyes, and so He killed him."
it does not say "he wasted his seed and so God killed him."

it also shows very clearly the WHY of onan's intentions "b/c he knew that the child would not be his but his brothers."