Contraception

[Benedicta00]

I do not believe that BC is immoral. NO I do not. For many reasons. I am not one that believes in BC pills. But for surgery or other methods I do not believe that it is immoral and not good. If a woman can take BC pills and they do not effect them then Praise God for these. Some take these for other reasons other than BC.

But the pill, the shots, the implant, the ring and all the chemical based contraceptives will abort a fertilized egg if it was not successful at preventing ovulation... a IUD never prevents ovulation and only aborts fertilized eggs. After the first 2 years of NoraPlant implants, the implants works only as an abortfinat and will not prevent ovulation but will only abort fertilized eggs.

do you think that is moral, good and of God and something that is to be praised?

You know what? we can throw out all the other reasons why the Church disbelieves contraceptives. lets just look at this right here.... isn't this reason enough to call this junk evil in of itself?

 

[MezzaMorta]

Because a woman or man's fertility is not a illness or disease that need treatment.

You can't pick and choose. You can not use the argument that birth control is wrong because God made women fertile so we should not change that unless you are willing to accept every thing else that naturally occurs with in us as part of God's plan as well. Including deadly diseases.

 

[Benedicta00]

You can't pick and choose. You can not use the argument that birth control is wrong because God made women fertile so we should not change that unless you are willing to accept every thing else that naturally occurs with in us as part of God's plan as well. Including deadly diseases.

fertility is not a disease and it does not need treatment and ABC is not medicine.

 

[ParsonJefferson]

We put kneelers in Church becuase we believe it is quite biblical to kneel down before God.

But I guess what you are saying is this is something you give your self permission to do? How do you know you are not mistaken?

There is a huge difference in putting in a kneeler in Church to make the knees comfortable and destroying or stifling fertility.

Think for a second about what it would mean if you were wrong? if we were wrong about kneelers in Church I don't see that is having the same effect on the cosmos.

Is it right or wrong to pray to Mary? That certainly is not something found in the Bible! And what happens if you're wrong to pray to Mary and the saints, and it is indeed - as many believe - idolatry?

But you're obviously missing the point!

So the Catholic Church has taught you that it's wrong and sinful to use Birth Control. Big deal! It wasn't very long ago that the same church was teaching that it was wrong to use even NFP! And this is the same Catholic Church that teaches all manner of other things that simply are NOT in the Bible.

Can you see where I'm coming from? Or are you so steeped in Catholic Dogma that you're not able to allow yourself to even consider the possibility that you could be wrong?

 

[MezzaMorta]

fertility is not a disease and it does not need treatment and ABC is not medicine.

stop pretending to be stupid. If God made us a certain way, which we should not change (as you said) you can not just apply that to the "good" parts. We must also apply that to the "bad" things. If God made us with a diease or a condition or what ever.... according to you that is the way God made us and we should not change it.

 

[ParsonJefferson]

And for those who would say that Onan was struck dead by God for simply violating jewish law to fulfill a duty to a dead brother, a close reading presented in this Month's Homiletic and Pastoral Review notes that this is not the likely explanation.

1) '"he spilled his seed on the ground" fails to do full justice to the Hebrew expression. The Hebrew verb shichet never means to spill or waste, rather it means to act perversely. The text also makes clear that his perverse action was related toward the ground, not against his brother' ...

2) In the context of the entire chapter, Genesis 38, it is clear that Onan is only one of three persons who violated the law. Judah and Shelah were also guilty of this, why was only Onan struck dead?

3) The law spells out the consequences of Onan's failure to perform his duty as the brother of a dead man - in Deut 25:5-10 (an embarassing rebuke but not death - in contrast to other sexual sins such as adultery and rape in which death is prescribed in the same book) - so why was Onan struck dead?

The age-old Catholic teaching that Onan's Sin was masturbation is completely and totally wrong. It had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with masturbation.

Onan was selfish, and took the woman to have sex with her, but refused to provide his brother an heir. Why? Partly because Onan wanted his brother's inheritance! Onan COULD HAVE allowed the next closest kinsman-redeemer to marry the woman and bear a child with her, but he didn't. He wanted to have sex with her, but did not want to provide his brother an heir. In addition, he directly violated a law of God at that time.


This is a completely, totally and entirely different matter than my wife and me, in our mid 40s and with two grown children and one almost grown, deciding to not have any more children. To compare the two is asinine.

 

[TheDivaAngel]

The age-old Catholic teaching that Onan's Sin was masturbation is completely and totally wrong. It had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with masturbation.

Onan was selfish, and took the woman to have sex with her, but refused to provide his brother an heir. Why? Partly because Onan wanted his brother's inheritance! Onan COULD HAVE allowed the next closest kinsman-redeemer to marry the woman and bear a child with her, but he didn't. He wanted to have sex with her, but did not want to provide his brother an heir. In addition, he directly violated a law of God at that time.


This is a completely, totally and entirely different matter than my wife and me, in our mid 40s and with two grown children and one almost grown, deciding to not have any more children. To compare the two is asinine.

AMEN!!!!!!!!!!! The "Church" teaches alot of silly nonsense...This was So well said.

 

[Lotar]

Perverts

 

[TheDivaAngel]

Perverts

HEy....who calling that?

 

[IamAdopted]

Perverts

You started it.

 

[NHB_MMA]

Got too wrapped up to reply to this for a couple days, but there have been some good points made.

 

[b4uris]

it is clear your teaching comes from a source outside the bible, hence outside of God

No no. Hence indicates a connection between two phrases. Naughty, naughty.

 

[b4uris]

Contraception... utterly necesary for the continuation of life on this planet.

Having fewer children is necessary for the continuation of life on this planet. Is it safe to assume you wouldn't be as supportive of anaphrodisiacs being promoted alongside contraceptives to achieve this? If so, I smell double standard.

 

[b4uris]

Is it right or wrong to pray to Mary? That certainly is not something found in the Bible! And what happens if you're wrong to pray to Mary and the saints, and it is indeed - as many believe - idolatry?

On the same token, what if contraception is a sin. Why don't you err on the side of caution when it comes to this?
Peace in Christ

 

[b4uris]

Lotar, calling other people perverts is quite uncharitable.

 

[NHB_MMA]

There are also arguments from Tobit, Wisdom, the Psalms, 2 Kings, ect. Still, if you understand anything about Orthodoxy, you know that Scripture is only part of Tradition, and that the morality of contraception has been a subject discussed since the very beginnings of the Church.

In the time that the Old Testament was written the human race was far from being in danger of dying out.

Maybe there was no danger of dying out, but the population was a drop in the bucket compared to today.

Lotar, something I read gave me the impression that in Orthodoxy sources of doctrine for the faith are ranked in an order of significance. In other words, the Bible is the absolute pinnacle of doctrine, then tradition follows as being highly important, but not quite on the same infallible level as Scripture. Is that correct? It's the impression from something I got from the OCA web site.

 

[Ave Maria]

I have to disagree. There is nothing wrong with using non-abortifacient contraception.

 

[NHB_MMA]

I have to disagree. There is nothing wrong with using non-abortifacient contraception.

That would be my point too and I'd like to get back to some of the good points by Lotar and Benedict when (or if) I get a chance, but I am thankful that I explored the argument sometime ago. Before that, I had no idea that any pill could discharge an implanted egg.

 

[Lotar]

Maybe there was no danger of dying out, but the population was a drop in the bucket compared to today.

Yes, but that hardly validifies the interpretation that the commandment was simply for the survival of the species. It seems to me that it is a bit presumptuous to assume that we have fullfilled this commandment.

Lotar, something I read gave me the impression that in Orthodoxy sources of doctrine for the faith are ranked in an order of significance. In other words, the Bible is the absolute pinnacle of doctrine, then tradition follows as being highly important, but not quite on the same infallible level as Scripture. Is that correct? It's the impression from something I got from the OCA web site.

They are ranked in order of honor. Even within Scripture this is true. This is why Orthodox all stand while the Gospel is being read in the church (rather like how the Jews stood while the Law was read).

Holy Tradition is by definition infallible.

 

[Lotar]

Having fewer children is necessary for the continuation of life on this planet. Is it safe to assume you wouldn't be as supportive of anaphrodisiacs being promoted alongside contraceptives to achieve this? If so, I smell double standard.

Considering that less than 20% of the world's population consumes more than 80% of its resources, I would say that the problem is not with over population, but rather with over consumption. Dropping birth rates have been accompanied with heightened consumerism, increasing consumption, and a shift from consuming renewable marterials (such as food and water) to non-renewables.

The sad fact is that people would rather have more stuff than more people.