Using condoms if you're married?

[stray bullet]

and having kids is not one of them. That is socially instilled.

Aslo do have links to support this, that if don't want kids you are psychologically abnormal. I have heard it all now.

The desire to have and raise children is an extremely instinctual and vital part of life.

To suggest otherwise would be throwing out all application of reason to biology, nature and evolution.

You think a bird has babies for social reasons, or because it is an instinctual desire? Do mother animals just make nests, then happen to get pregnant? You think salmon swim upstream for some other reason? No, it has been hardwired into life to have (and usually raise) children.

What are we, the one species of mammals that don't have a desire to have and raise children?

Reproduction is the most important part of biology. To suggest that humans, unlike virtually all complex life, have no instinctual desires to have children is simply absurd.

 

[Chajara]

Wow- even the supposedly Christian community thinks condom use is ok.

I think the rapture will be coming any minute now.

People have been saying "The world's coming to an end" for centuries. Surely we can do better than that. Care to explain why condom use is so terrible for Christians?

 

[stray bullet]

People have been saying "The world's coming to an end" for centuries. Surely we can do better than that. Care to explain why condom use is so terrible for Christians?

I suppose the good part is the cultural of death is ultimately self-destructive.

 

[Annabel Lee]

Stray, I have an instinctual desire to have children. That's why I had three of them.
But I also spaced them so I could do a good job of raising them. I absolutely refused to be one of those stressed out, overwhelmed mothers.

I used the reason God gave me to be a good mother.

 

[Chrono Traveler]

Suppose the parents themselves used condoms for years, until they decided they were ready to have children. Just because the parents have reproduced doesn't mean they never used birth control.


Uh... gee, thanks. I must really be screwed up, because I have no maternal instinct. Never have. When other little girls were playing with baby dolls, I was out in the yard, playing with toy trucks, gettin' down with my bad tomboy self.

Even if that is a psychological issue, why on earth would I want to get help or counseling for it? Kids are expensive, stressful, and they tend to kill the romantic life of the people who have them. I don't want any, and I'm glad I don't have any of those sneaky little hormones to convince me otherwise.

I myself am passive about this. kids are good, but a long romance is also nice.

Stray, I think its wrong to say that everyone needs to have kids. Not everybody really has a inborn drive to have kids(many do, a few don't). We need sun to live, we NEED to eat to live. We don't not need to have kids for ourselves to live. As long as most people want kids and keep the human race alive, I really see no problem with people who just simply want romance..

 

[stray bullet]

Stray, I have an instinctual desire to have children. That's why I had three of them.
But I also spaced them so I could do a good job of raising them. I absolutely refused to be one of those stressed out, overwhelmed mothers.

I used the reason God gave me to be a good mother.

My posts were in reference to those who want no children, ever

Wanting a certain amount of children is a whole different issue and isn't related to my recent posts.

Hope that made it clear... sorry.

 

[stray bullet]

Stray Bullet is incorrect. Not everyone really has a inborn drive to have kids(many do, a few don't). We need sun to live, we NEED to eat to live. We don't not need to have kids for ourselves to live. As long as most people want kids and keep the human race alive, I really see no problem with people who just simply want romance..

No, humans and all other mammals have a desire to have (and raise) children. That's why all mammals have breasts, because they are intended to naturally care for their young.

No lifeform could have made it this far unless they had an biological desire to have children.

It is not a social thing, it is a biological thing.

Not wanting any children is teaching of radical feminism in gross rebellion to nature.

 

[Lokisdottir]

The desire to have and raise children is an extremely instinctual and vital part of life.

To suggest otherwise would be throwing out all application of reason to biology, nature and evolution.

Yes, but does every person on earth need to do it in order for the species to survive? Does it really hurt you in any way if a few people decide they don't want kids?

You think a bird has babies for social reasons, or because it is an instinctual desire? Do mother animals just make nests, then happen to get pregnant? You think salmon swim upstream for some other reason? No, it has been hardwired into life to have (and usually raise) children.

What about the instinctual desire of male lions to kill the offspring of other males, in order to eliminate the competition and leave the lionesses free to mate again?

What about the instinctual desire of bonobos to have homosexual sex as a way of strengthening inter-troop relations? (In essence, it's their way of keeping the peace, and it works quite well--bonobos very rarely fight or kill each other.)

What about the instinctual desire of many different species to defend their territory and kill off all competition?

These behaviors may not be essential to the species' survival, but--like the desire to procreate--they are hardwired.

What are we, the one species of mammals that don't have a desire to have and raise children?

Whoa, hold up. Since when do the desires of a few scattered people reflect on the desire of the entire species? Did you somehow get the idea that because I don't want kids, I don't want anybody to have kids?

Reproduction is the most important part of biology. To suggest that humans, unlike virtually all complex life, have no instinctual desires to have children is simply absurd.

Exaggerate much?? When did anybody ever say that humans have no instinctive desire to have kids? Just because a few of us don't, doesn't mean none of us do.

 

[praying]

. That's why all mammals have breasts, because they are intended to naturally care for their young.

Then why can't all women breast feed, see how incongruent that is.

Not wanting any children is teaching of radical feminism in gross rebellion to nature.

And if you know that you would be an abusive parent?

Not everyone is cutout to be a parent, and because we are not animals and do have a psychological nature you can not compare the two in that sense. All animals have a biological need to mate, not all human animals are right for parenting. In the animal world all offspring are treated the same by each species, meaning there are no purposefully abusive animal parents. Also animals only mate when the biological urge to reproduce is present, I don't know of any animals besides humans that have sex for pleasure, a big big difference.

 

[Lokisdottir]

Not wanting any children is teaching of radical feminism in gross rebellion to nature.

First of all, the reason I don't want kids is not because of any "teaching." It's the way I've always been.

Secondly--radical feminist? Me? Man, you have no idea how hilarious that is...

Finally, allow me to use your logic against you, if you please:

Every mammalian species that has been studied has been found to have a small subset of homosexual members. For a fixed percentage of the population, this behavior is natural. The idea that homosexuality is wrong is a teaching of radical fundamentalism, in gross rebellion to nature.

 

[Ouch]

My posts were in reference to those who want no children, ever

Wanting a certain amount of children is a whole different issue and isn't related to my recent posts.

Hope that made it clear... sorry.

So, you would say that it is wrong for a Christian to not want to have kids, but Paul would say in 1 Corinthians 7:8 "Not to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am." And also in 7:34 "An unmarried woman or virgin is concerend about the Lord's affiars: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit." So according to Paul, is it necessary to have kids to follow God's will? No. Is it an unnatural, psychological problem for someone to not want kids? No. If you doubt that, look in the DSM-IV. It can tell you that there is no psychological diagnosis involving a lack of desire for children.

There is nothing wrong with birth control, be it pills or condoms. Remember, the point of this thread is dealing with married couples, so it doesn't really matter what kind of sex condoms promote, because sex is okay within the marital relationship.

Here's something else I thought of. If you (or anyone else...I forgot who said that)are going to compare human sex to salmon swimming up a stream, you're missing something. Every time that salmon spawn, they have kids. When animals mate, the female gets pregnant. When humans have sex, there is no guarantee that there will be a pregnancy. God meant for it to be enjoyable. There is nothing in the Bible that says otherwise.

Not wanting any children is teaching of radical feminism in gross rebellion to nature.

I just noticed this. All I can say is I'm disturbed. You're simply giving your own opinion, not to mention making sweeping generalizations that really don't get at the heart of the issue. Go read 1 Corinthians chapter 7 please.

 

[praying]

You think a bird has babies for social reasons, or because it is an instinctual desire? Do mother animals just make nests, then happen to get pregnant? You think salmon swim upstream for some other reason? No, it has been hardwired into life to have (and usually raise) children.

We, to put it simply, are not birds or fish.

That was just a song, birds do it bees do it, even you and I can do it. Sorry could not resist.

What are we, the one species of mammals that don't have a desire to have and raise children?

No I think for the most part people do want to have children but is more social construct than survival of the species. A long long time ago it was a survival issue, no longer.

Reproduction is the most important part of biology. To suggest that humans, unlike virtually all complex life, have no instinctual desires to have children is simply absurd.

Well I have friends who do not want children and are quite normal and for the record I do think for most there is some level of "instinct" involved but I think social construction plays a much greater factor in it then anything else.

 

[stray bullet]

Yes, but does every person on earth need to do it in order for the species to survive? Does it really hurt you in any way if a few people decide they don't want kids?

It doesn't matter what has happened in the last two hundred years or if having kids is vital to the existence of the species today.

What about the instinctual desire of male lions to kill the offspring of other males, in order to eliminate the competition and leave the lionesses free to mate again?

What about the instinctual desire of bonobos to have homosexual sex as a way of strengthening inter-troop relations? (In essence, it's their way of keeping the peace, and it works quite well--bonobos very rarely fight or kill each other.)

What about the instinctual desire of many different species to defend their territory and kill off all competition?

These behaviors may not be essential to the species' survival, but--like the desire to procreate--they are hardwired.

Since when have I argued from the survival of the species? All I have been talking about is biology and evolution. Individuals without a desire to reproduce would have died off a long time ago. The only way you can get to this point now is by having it hardwired, this was done long before the rise the rise of mammals, even before the first animals crawled out of the sea.
In the case of the lion, that is related to the increase in frequency of the genes of the lion. He is killing off competing lines, increasing the odds for his offspring to survive.
In the case of bonobos, you are referring to female-female sexual relations, which is done as part of a female-dominated society. Their cousins the chimps are male dominated and do not engage in male-male sexual relations.

Defending your territory and increasing your children's chances of survival is what it is all about. All people and animals have a biological urge to reproduce and increase their gene frequency in the population.

Whoa, hold up. Since when do the desires of a few scattered people reflect on the desire of the entire species? Did you somehow get the idea that because I don't want kids, I don't want anybody to have kids?

I didn't say that. In fact, I was replying to mhattan, not you.

Exaggerate much?? When did anybody ever say that humans have no instinctive desire to have kids? Just because a few of us don't, doesn't mean none of us do.

The was the implication of the post, she needed 'links' to prove the obvious.

 

[praying]

No, humans and all other mammals have a desire to have (and raise) children. That's why all mammals have breasts, because they are intended to naturally care for their young.

No No No, all animals do not raise their young there are quite a fews species that do not.

 

[stray bullet]

No No No, all animals do not raise their young there are quite a fews species that do not.

I said mammals (mammary glands), not animals. From the egg layings mammals, the marsupials and the placentals all care for their young.

 

[Ouch]

In the case of bonobos, you are referring to female-female sexual relations, which is done as part of a female-dominated society. Their cousins the chimps are male dominated and do not engage in male-male sexual relations.

But it is still something that occurs in nature. The point isn't who dominates the society, but that it is a naturally occurring behavior in the society. The point is still relevant.

Defending your territory and increasing your children's chances of survival is what it is all about. All people and animals have a biological urge to reproduce and increase their gene frequency in the population.

All people do not have a biological urge to reproduce. My uncle & aunt did not have it, because they just didn't want kids. Paul did not have it, because we know he was unmarried. There are obviously plenty more examples. And I actually opened my DSM-IV just to make sure, but there is nothing psychologically wrong with a person just because they don't want children. These people are not mentally impaired in any way.

 

[Chrono Traveler]

Stray...

You really have no right to say "well thats unnatural". People arent completely bound by instinct. Besides...my post said

"many do, a few don't"(have the inborn desire to have children)
Some people just want romance.

 

[praying]

I said mammals (mammary glands), not animals. From the egg layings mammals, the marsupials and the placentals all care for their young.

I will concede that point.

 

[stray bullet]

But it is still something that occurs in nature. The point isn't who dominates the society, but that it is a naturally occurring behavior in the society. The point is still relevant.

How is it relevant? How does it relate to ANYTHING I have said?

All people do not have a biological urge to reproduce. My uncle & aunt did not have it, because they just didn't want kids. Paul did not have it, because we know he was unmarried. There are obviously plenty more examples. And I actually opened my DSM-IV just to make sure, but there is nothing psychologically wrong with a person just because they don't want children. These people are not mentally impaired in any way.

All people have a biological urge, which can be repressed by material goods. In the case of Paul, he sacrificed his change to reproduce and surpressed his urges for the betterment of Christianity.

There is nothing wrong with being celibate, so long as the motivates are right.

 

[HazyRigby]

Stray Bullet thinks I'm certifiably insane. Well, that's hardly surprising.

I'm another person who finds this "radical feminism" idea laughable. I've always been this way, even before I watched television or had the vocabulary to understand feminism at all. Face it, Bullet. Your idea isn't supported by anyone in the psychiatric community. You've taken your personal viewpoint--that you can't believe that someone wouldn't want to have kids--and made it into an illness. Well, I can't believe that anyone would believe in the Bible, but that doesn't mean that I think you're all crazy!

I'm married. I don't want kids. I love my husband more than my own life, and I want to spend my time with him. I don't want to waste the years I have with him changing diapers, waking up at three a.m. for feedings, and arguing over the proper way to discipline little junior. I want to take trips with my beloved when I want to and make love on the kitchen floor if I so desire. It's my life, and who are you to call me crazy for wanting to live it as I choose?