How do you view birthcontrol?

[R3quiem]

Edit: Due to a poster having taken offense to this post, I hereby clarify that any statements I make in this post are questions or objections raised against the Catholic church and those who believe in this particular belief about birth control, and not necessarily to the poster who presented these initial comments.

They believe it hurts God, because birth control goes against his design of fertility and his command to be fruitful and multiply.

Also, someone once posted here on CF (in the christian ethics forum) that birth control was worse than murder because preventing life is the saddest thing in the world, non-existence is horrible.

God can have his feelings hurt? That's why it's immoral?

(But preventing life through abstinence apparently is not sinful. Nuns and priests are not sinning by not procreating, despite the command to be fruitful.)

And you don't see the inconsistency with that position? It's sinful to use condoms because they prevent babies, but not having sex at all (which is even better at preventing babies) is not sinful.

Every month, an egg in a woman is killed. Should see try to have sex every month and try to ensure that as many of her eggs as possible are turned into children? Afterall, each egg that goes unfertilized, in your opinion, should be sinful because non-existence is horrible.

If a family has two children, are they sinful for not having ten children instead? That's 8 people that they have refused to give life to.

 

[R3quiem]

And I disagree that nonexistence is horrible. A nonexistent being has no sense of being nonexistence, and therefore can feel nothing.

If we are to worry about how horrible nonexistence is, we should be continually bothered by the infinite number of people who were never born, because no matter how many more humans we give birth to, there are still an infinite number of people who are still nonexistent.

 

[Cognitive]

And I disagree that nonexistence is horrible. A nonexistent being has no sense of being nonexistence, and therefore can feel nothing.

If we are to worry about how horrible nonexistence is, we should be continually bothered by the infinite number of people who were never born, because no matter how many more humans we give birth to, there are still an infinite number of people who are still nonexistent.

Good point, not to mention we're all doomed to fall into nonexistence again anyway.

Procreation is a great thing if you wish to do so, but if you don't want have children the sex is still great. I'm not one who believes in all this sin business and I will have tons of meaningless and non-meaningless sex by the time of my life is over. I refuse to stop after my quota I've decided for children has been fulfilled.

 

[Jade Margery]

God can have his feelings hurt? That's why it's immoral?


And you don't see the inconsistency with that position? It's sinful to use condoms because they prevent babies, but not having sex at all (which is even better at preventing babies) is not sinful.

Every month, an egg in a woman is killed. Should see try to have sex every month and try to ensure that as many of her eggs as possible are turned into children? Afterall, each egg that goes unfertilized, in your opinion, should be sinful because non-existence is horrible.

If a family has two children, are they sinful for not having ten children instead? That's 8 people that they have refused to give life to.

Hey now, be nice to Rebekka; she's describing the beliefs of the RCC, not her own opinions. No need to address her personally.

 

[R3quiem]

Hey now, be nice to Rebekka; she's describing the beliefs of the RCC, not her own opinions. No need to address her personally.

I do not see how critiquing or questioning her statements is not being nice. I did not intend anything in that post to be any sort of personal attack- I merely pointed out the inconstancy that I see it in what she presented and asked if it is true that she does not see that inconsistency.

As she has a Catholic icon, although she is presenting the information as not being of her personal opinion, I assumed she was a representative of the Catholic Church and supports a number of the beliefs of that institution. If she does not, my argument against her statements still holds, and another Catholic could vary well decide to critique them.

 

[flicka]

I don't know any Catholics IRL who oppose BC of any kind. I think it's one of those things that people conveniently 'forget about' when it interferes with their life or secretly just think the church is wrong about or isn't important to their faith. I don't know what other explaination there is. My in laws are VERY Catholic, but they never said anything about it one way or another.

 

[R3quiem]

I was raised mostly by Catholics and I agree with your observation that although many of them can be quite devout, a lot of them do not seem to agree that birth control is sinful.

 

[gwenmead]

I'm of the mind that an ounce of prevention is worth a ton of cure.

Thus I'm a HUGE fan of birth control. I'd love to see it available at a low cost to everyone, with plenty of accurate educational info to go along with it. I'd also love to see more male methods invented so that us ladies don't need to bear most of the birth control burden.

 

[ebia]

For those who believe that birth control or masturbation are immoral or evil, how do you arrive at that conclusion?

Who does it hurt?

In the case of the RCCs official teachings on birth control a cynic might suggest that it's because said official teachings are decided by a bunch of elderly, life-long celebate men who don't want other people having fun and who have never had to bring up children.

 

[Cognitive]

In the case of the RCCs official teachings on birth
control a cynic might suggest that it's because said official teachings are decided by a bunch of elderly, life-long celebate men who don't want other people having fun and who have never had to bring up children.

They just want make everyone miserable too. Even playing field, they cant have sex you cant enjoy it and get little mammal by products.

 

[ebia]

They just want make everyone miserable too. Even playing field, they cant have sex you cant enjoy it and get little mammal by products.

Let's just say that one wonders whether that teaching will be the same when they eventually get a few married Cardinals, let alone a female Pope.

 

[Verv]

The question is in the title though I would also add what do you think (those who have any issue with birth control) of someone who is on birth control for medical reasons and not for contraception per say. Is she still "sinful"?

Birth control can have some damaging side effects if we are talking about pills...

However, the general idea of people being responsible about when they have their kids is a good idea -- some homes are not ready for many children, and thus it is wise to use contraceptives.

That is my view. Thanks for posing this question to the forums.

 

[CreedIsChrist]

Thanks for explaining, but I know that heavy periods are not the only medical reason to use the pill.
I am wondering what medical reasons (approved by the church) there could be for direct sterilization (tubal ligation or vasectomy), situations where not being sterilized would directly bring someone in life danger. (Possible death from pregnancy doesn't count, for the church that is, as abstinence prevents pregnancy too.)

If a woman uses the pill for medical reasons only and she's not sexually active then it's not technically a contraceptive, it functions as medicine. (According to the church it's not a sin to use condoms either, only to use them as contraceptive. It's not a sin to wear them outside a sexual situation.)

yes this is a good answer. BC for medical reasons is ok because it acts as a medicine. However using BC for the sole intent of having sex is a mortal sin. Vasectomy is also a mortal sin and I don't see any medical conditions that would require a vascectomy.

 

[rosenherman]

In the case of the RCCs official teachings on birth control a cynic might suggest that it's because said official teachings are decided by a bunch of elderly, life-long celebate men who don't want other people having fun and who have never had to bring up children.

Some cynics might be of the opinion that the sole reason for the ban on birth control is to make sure there is an ever increasing number of catholics.

 

[rosenherman]

yes this is a good answer. BC for medical reasons is ok because it acts as a medicine. However using BC for the sole intent of having sex is a mortal sin. Vasectomy is also a mortal sin and I don't see any medical conditions that would require a vascectomy.

Is a mortal sin one that will kill you? Like a mortal illness is one that can/will kill you?

 

[b&wpac4]

Some cynics might be of the opinion that the sole reason for the ban on birth control is to make sure there is an ever increasing number of catholics.

One could even be more cynical and say that because the decision was made before medical science understood how reproduction worked and people believed that the sperm from a man contained the entire new person and the woman was just where the new person grew, and that because Catholics believe that the Church cannot be wrong on moral teachings, they cannot go back on this decision without hurting the idea that the Church cannot be wrong on moral teachings. If one wanted to be more cynical, that is.

Personally, I don't much care what Catholics believe and practice. They are free to do as they please. I'm not a Catholic, so the rulings of the Catholic church do not effect me.

 

[Silent Bob]

In the case of the RCCs official teachings on birth control a cynic might suggest that it's because said official teachings are decided by a bunch of elderly, life-long celebate men who don't want other people having fun and who have never had to bring up children.

Or you can be a really twisted cynic and point out that when those elderly men have sex they pick their mate so that birth control is not needed...

I know its an aweful joke so I am sorry but just had to be said.

 

[rosenherman]

I've got to respond to SiderealExalt's tag line or whatever you call it.

"Even if truth was relative, you'd still be wrong conservatives."

Wrong conservatives? Was it supposed to mean conservatives would be wrong or is the point that conservatives on this board are wrong? What makes a wrong conservative? Aren't most conservatives right?

 

[keith99]

I'm wondering though, I'm not familiar with the church's opinion of masturbation. Unless you're making condoms out of balloons then masturbation would be the only other use for them, correct?

No! Condoms are excellent as part of a timing device for bombs. (Acid that eats through them). Because of the quality control condoms can be used to make a pretty accurate timer, unlike other things that can be used like balloons.

 

[keith99]

In the case of the RCCs official teachings on birth control a cynic might suggest that it's because said official teachings are decided by a bunch of elderly, life-long celebate men who don't want other people having fun and who have never had to bring up children.

Nah, us cynics have a much better reason. Got to have plenty Catholics in the next generation to pay for the retirement of old priests. And it does not hurt the church if they are kept poor enough by having too many kids that they are more apt to put their hope in some reward in heaven instead of material comfort on earth.