What's the matter with birth control?

[not nom]

You never know when the plague, demons, consumption or even packs of wolves will take the little ones. It is better to side with being very fruitful and constantly multiplying than to live to a ripe old age with an empty basket.

we actually do know that the heat death of the universe will take the little ones, the big ones, and their graves as well. well, I say "we", but of course that's false... I guess it's so much easier to have children than to pay attention, so most people tend to side with that ^^

 

[Falvlun]

In general, yes. But it also depends in what capacity he speaks. Not everything he says is infallible. In fact, very little of what he says is infallible. The fact that it's not infallible doesn't mean he is wrong either, it just means you could possibly find some error. It generally deals with faith and morals. Not science, sports, or what have you......

Ah, gotcha. But theoretically the question of birth control could be something that the Pope could change since it is a matter of faith and morals.

I didn't understand your first question, sorry...

Fixed it. The word "what" was supposed to be a "why"-- it was just a restatement of what you were saying.

 

[waitasec]

Actually the RCC is not opposed to condom use for the prevention of STDs.

Just sayin'.

But the RCC is opposed to premarital or extramarital sex so there you have it.

See the post above.

Church officials argue that reliance on condoms to prevent transmission of AIDS can result in a false sense of security because of the problem of "leakage and breakage". Other more serious claims have been made, however. In 2003, contrary to empirical evidence, the president of the Vatican's Pontifical Council for the Family - "senior spokesman" Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo - claimed that condoms are permeable to the aids virus. He explained to BBC interviewers that "The Aids virus is roughly 450 times smaller than the spermatozoon. The spermatozoon can easily pass through the 'net' that is formed by the condom." These false claims were echoed by an archbishop of Nairobi, as well as by Catholics as far Asia and Latin America. Also according to The Guardian, the BBC confirmed that this misinformation has real, damaging effects at the ground level.[6]
The Church is concerned that promotion of condom use will lead to irresponsible, risky sexual behavior (promiscuity and prostitution). Both individuals and governments could come to rely on condoms as the primary line of defense rather than emphasizing the need for "partner fidelity".

Catholic Church and AIDS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

i'll fix that last statement...

The Church is concerned that promotion of condom use will cause people to decide for themselves in terms of risky sexual behavior (promiscuity and prostitution). Both individuals and governments could come to rely on freedom of choice as the primary line of defense rather than emphasizing the need for a controlling church.

 

[Quiddity]

Actually the RCC is not opposed to condom use for the prevention of STDs.

Just sayin'.

But the RCC is opposed to premarital or extramarital sex so there you have it.

Actually, (and I hate to correct you because I rarely disagree with you) but...

....this is incorrect.

Last years statements of the Pope caused plenty of controversy among our ranks and even more confusion outside of it.

See this article:

Pope: Condoms can be justified in some cases - Washington Times

Particularly this part:

There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants. But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality.

Then the reporter asks........Are you saying, then, that the Catholic Church is actually not opposed in principle to the use of condoms?

To which he responds:

She of course does not regard it as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality.

A couple things to point out:

1. This is specifically addressing extraordinary circumstances and not contraceptives in general.

2. What the pope is basically saying is that if a male prostitute happens to care enough about his “customer” not to want to infect him with AIDS, perhaps......that degree of concern could lead him someday to a more human view of sexuality. That is a psychological observation, not a recommendation or a claim about the ultimate moral character of the actions in question.

In a nutshell, there is nothing about the context or the content of the pope’s remarks that in any way modifies Catholic teaching.

 

[Shades-o-Blue]

what does it mean?

consider the philippines...
consider india...
consider any 3rd world country that is drowning in over population...
all because birth control is "one step down from an abortion"

I think all liberals should get together, buy plane tickets, fly to all third world countries and hand out a ten year supply of condoms for every man, woman & child.

Hail earth mother, and plant a tree while you're abroad. :bow:

 

[waitasec]

I think all liberals should get together, buy plane tickets, fly to all third world countries and hand out a ten year supply of condoms for every man, woman & child.

Hail earth mother, and plant a tree while you're abroad. :bow:

careful with that ax eugene...

 

[Kathryn]

Actually, (and I hate to correct you because I rarely disagree with you) but...

....this is incorrect.

Last years statements of the Pope caused plenty of controversy among our ranks and even more confusion outside of it.

See this article:

Pope: Condoms can be justified in some cases - Washington Times

Particularly this part:

There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants. But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality.

Then the reporter asks........Are you saying, then, that the Catholic Church is actually not opposed in principle to the use of condoms?

To which he responds:

She of course does not regard it as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality.

A couple things to point out:

1. This is specifically addressing extraordinary circumstances and not contraceptives in general.

2. What the pope is basically saying is that if a male prostitute happens to care enough about his “customer” not to want to infect him with AIDS, perhaps......that degree of concern could lead him someday to a more human view of sexuality. That is a psychological observation, not a recommendation or a claim about the ultimate moral character of the actions in question.

In a nutshell, there is nothing about the context or the content of the pope’s remarks that in any way modifies Catholic teaching.

More along the lines of what I had in mind was this:

Say that you have a married couple, one of which has an incurable STD. In that case, condom use is not prohibited by the RCC.

Of course, any premarital or extramarital sex is considered immoral by the RCC so in that context the RCC does not support condom use. Nor does it support the use of birth control other than the rhythm method or abstinence, so it doesn't support condom use for birth control

I don't see a change in policy from the RCC, only a clarification of policy.

And once again, I'm not supporting that teaching, just discussing it.

 

[Quiddity]

More along the lines of what I had in mind was this:

Say that you have a married couple, one of which has an incurable STD. In that case, condom use is not prohibited by the RCC.

Of course, any premarital or extramarital sex is considered immoral by the RCC so in that context the RCC does not support condom use. Nor does it support the use of birth control other than the rhythm method or abstinence, so it doesn't support condom use for birth control

I don't see a change in policy from the RCC, only a clarification of policy.

And once again, I'm not supporting that teaching, just discussing it.

I know you weren't.

 

[Pegg]

Church officials argue that reliance on condoms to prevent transmission of AIDS can result in a false sense of security because of the problem of "leakage and breakage". Other more serious claims have been made, however. In 2003, contrary to empirical evidence, the president of the Vatican's Pontifical Council for the Family - "senior spokesman" Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo - claimed that condoms are permeable to the aids virus. He explained to BBC interviewers that "The Aids virus is roughly 450 times smaller than the spermatozoon. The spermatozoon can easily pass through the 'net' that is formed by the condom." These false claims were echoed by an archbishop of Nairobi, as well as by Catholics as far Asia and Latin America. Also according to The Guardian, the BBC confirmed that this misinformation has real, damaging effects at the ground level.[6]
The Church is concerned that promotion of condom use will lead to irresponsible, risky sexual behavior (promiscuity and prostitution). Both individuals and governments could come to rely on condoms as the primary line of defense rather than emphasizing the need for "partner fidelity".

Catholic Church and AIDS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

i'll fix that last statement...

The Church is concerned that promotion of condom use will cause people to decide for themselves in terms of risky sexual behavior (promiscuity and prostitution). Both individuals and governments could come to rely on freedom of choice as the primary line of defense rather than emphasizing the need for a controlling church.

i wonder if sexually active priests use condoms?

 

[arthra]

It is my understanding that the Catholic church still bans birth control methods. What is the reasoning behind this? And, if you are a Christian, do you or don't you accept that reasoning?

Also, I was curious if other religious traditions banned birth control, and what their reasons were as well.

It just seems to me that we have been quite fruitful, and we have certainly multiplied, to the point where humans are no longer able to be good stewards of the Earth.

Additionally, birth control allows families to better raise children they already have, by better organizing their finances and time. What is the problem with this?

In the Baha'i Faith we don't have anything in our Writings about birth control per se..however altering someone such as with a sterilization would not be acceptable for Baha'is.. Abortion unless it is medically indicated is forbidden...There are countries where a sex can be determined of an unborn and then the foetus is aborted..this would be forbidden for Baha'is.

 

[Shades-o-Blue]

careful with that ax eugene...

Love it, or leave it, lola granola

 

[jtartar]

It is my understanding that the Catholic church still bans birth control methods. What is the reasoning behind this? And, if you are a Christian, do you or don't you accept that reasoning?

Also, I was curious if other religious traditions banned birth control, and what their reasons were as well.

It just seems to me that we have been quite fruitful, and we have certainly multiplied, to the point where humans are no longer able to be good stewards of the Earth.

Additionally, birth control allows families to better raise children they already have, by better organizing their finances and time. What is the problem with this?

Falvlun,
The official rules of the Catholic Church is no to use birth control, I believe.
The reasoning is that you are interfering with a conception. I disagree with this idea, because using most birth control methods, conception has not taken place.
There is a great difference between birth control methods that stop conception, and birth control methods that stop the life that has started after conception, such as the Morning After pill. The morning after pill is actually an abortion pill, if conception has taken place. As can be seen in the Holy Bible this is the same as infanticide, or murder, Ex 21:22-25.

 

[Skylark]

It's my understanding that Catholics follow Natural Law, this therefore opposes any contraception. Also they believe that sex is for creating children, not for pleasure, which is mainly true. That IS the main function of sex, but mostly is not the motivation of humans today.

Correct me if I'm wrong!

 

[waitasec]

It's my understanding that Catholics follow Natural Law, this therefore opposes any contraception. Also they believe that sex is for creating children, not for pleasure, which is mainly true. That IS the main function of sex, but mostly is not the motivation of humans today.

Correct me if I'm wrong!

didn't our natural law change when we figured a way to curb the odds of getting pregnant?

i find it interesting that it's ok to prolong life with the use of medicine, isn't it natural to get sick and die?
but yet we can't control our lives with the same medical advancements...

i see a double standard.

 

[Looncall]

It's my understanding that Catholics follow Natural Law, this therefore opposes any contraception. Also they believe that sex is for creating children, not for pleasure, which is mainly true. That IS the main function of sex, but mostly is not the motivation of humans today.

Correct me if I'm wrong!

You certainly are wrong. The pleasure of sex helps to keep couples together. In a way, it is one's reward for staying in the relationship. Procreation is only involved incidentally and could have used some other mechanism.

The purpose of the catholic doctrine is to get power over people by making them feel guilty about an important part of their biology. That keeps bums in pews and dollars in collection plates.

 

[Skylark]

You certainly are wrong. The pleasure of sex helps to keep couples together. In a way, it is one's reward for staying in the relationship. Procreation is only involved incidentally and could have used some other mechanism.

The purpose of the catholic doctrine is to get power over people by making them feel guilty about an important part of their biology. That keeps bums in pews and dollars in collection plates.

I take back what I said about sex for creation then (sorry!).

This is my textbook answer to the thread then:
"The Roman Catholic Church considers that conception is a natural outcome of sexual intercourse and believes that anything which prevents this happening is wrong. It says that humans have an obligation to "Be fruitful and increase in number" (from Genesis 1:28). This means that the Roman Catholic Church does not approve of any artificial form of contraception such as the pill, coil or condoms."

 

[Falvlun]

I take back what I said about sex for creation then (sorry!).

This is my textbook answer to the thread then:
"The Roman Catholic Church considers that conception is a natural outcome of sexual intercourse and believes that anything which prevents this happening is wrong. It says that humans have an obligation to "Be fruitful and increase in number" (from Genesis 1:28). This means that the Roman Catholic Church does not approve of any artificial form of contraception such as the pill, coil or condoms."

Do you think that is a reasonable position to hold, Skylark?

I think it could be argued that we have been fruitful and multiplied, and in order for the health of our race to continue into the future, we need to be a little wiser about how much we are procreating, and thereby gobbling up natural resources.

And both waitasec and Penguin made good points in this thread that there are many things we do that the Catholic Church seems to have no problem with that are "unnatural" and not used for their "original" or "intended" purpose.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think it could be argued that we have been fruitful and multiplied, and in order for the health of our race to continue into the future, we need to be a little wiser about how much we are procreating, and thereby gobbling up natural resources.

I agree.

The passage in Genesis about Adam being given "dominion" over the animals can be interpreting as charging humanity with stewardship of the Earth.

 

[Looncall]

I take back what I said about sex for creation then (sorry!).

This is my textbook answer to the thread then:
"The Roman Catholic Church considers that conception is a natural outcome of sexual intercourse and believes that anything which prevents this happening is wrong. It says that humans have an obligation to "Be fruitful and increase in number" (from Genesis 1:28). This means that the Roman Catholic Church does not approve of any artificial form of contraception such as the pill, coil or condoms."

Does the RCC then disapprove of medical treatment since that would fall under the same consideration?

No? I didn't think so.

Does the RCC approve of overpopulation? Who can tell, with their policies of promoting both overpopulation and the spread of AIDS at the same time?

Its just a cynical and cruel scheme to get the obedience and money of catholics by promoting morbid feelings of guilt.

 

[Falvlun]

Apparently, 98% of Catholic women have used various methods of contraception. It seems like this is a case where the Church and the members really aren't seeing eye-to-eye.