Preventing Pregnancy Displeases Thee Lord

[LysanderShapiro]

I don't get the same meaning from the story of Onan. Why doe God kill everyone that has performed coitus interruptus.

We don't know if God did or didn't back then. We only know what was recorded. Just because you didn't get the same meaning doesn't mean the fact doesn't remain.

Can you tell me why it took nearly 2000 years for only some Christians to condone Contraception? Why do the majority still oppose it? Why did the reformers oppose it? Why was Onan punished? Why do people hold the position against contraception and not simply promiscuity or infidelity separately?

 

[LysanderShapiro]

It is. I'm not saying it's wrong to do this, but it is birth control.

It isn't -- but again, that's still besides the point. If we're only talking about NFP, we should also be pointing out that it is also used explicitly to create life as people who practice it also recognize and use the days of fertility. My parents used NFP for this reason which lead to them having many kids.

But at the risk of getting off topic, we ought to look at whether contraception is wrong or not. If NFP is contraception, which I know it isn't, but let's say I'm wrong about that, then it means I am living in sin, but that doesn't mean contraception is no longer wrong.

Let's stick to the subject at hand.

 

[Sweet Pea]

It isn't -- but again, that's still besides the point. If we're only talking about NFP, we should also be pointing out that it is also used explicitly to create life as people who practice it also recognize and use the days of fertility. My parents used NFP for this reason which lead to them having many kids.

But at the risk of getting off topic, we ought to look at whether contraception is wrong or not. If NFP is contraception, which I know it isn't, but let's say I'm wrong about that, then it means I am living in sin, but that doesn't mean contraception is no longer wrong.

Let's stick to the subject at hand.

Would you and your wife have "unprotected" sex on her most fertile day if both of you had the desire?

It just seems from your POV, you should just have sex whenever and trust God won't give you more than you can handle.

As far as the main subject, I still do not know if birth control is okay or not. I know some are clearly wrong, but others I'm not so sure of.

 

[LysanderShapiro]

Would you and your wife have "unprotected" sex on her most fertile day if both of you had the desire?

It just seems from your POV, you should just have sex whenever and trust God won't give you more than you can handle.

As far as the main subject, I still do not know if birth control is okay or not. I know some are clearly wrong, but others I'm not so sure of.

Haha, I'm glad you put unprotected in quotations. Absolutely. In fact, we'd like to have children very soon. It's especially good because it allows us to communicate more and each contribute as much as we can toward this effort in unison.

No, that's not exactly where I'm coming from. Granted, a couple CAN do this and I think we would both agree there is absolutely nothing wrong with that if this is what they have decided within their marriage. I have to mention again that planning out a family is absolutely OK. What is not OK is side-stepping temperance, prudence, and contradicting one's marital vows of accepting one another entirely.

You are right that most forms of contraception are especially horrible as they are abortifacient. Unfortunately, these forms of birth control are also condoned by many Christians and are the most common forms as well.

 

[Sweet Pea]

Haha, I'm glad you put unprotected in quotations. Absolutely. In fact, we'd like to have children very soon. It's especially good because it allows us to communicate more and each contribute as much as we can toward this effort in unison.

No, that's not exactly where I'm coming from. Granted, a couple CAN do this and I think we would both agree there is absolutely nothing wrong with that if this is what they have decided within their marriage. I have to mention again that planning out a family is absolutely OK. What is not OK is side-stepping temperance, prudence, and contradicting one's marital vows of accepting one another entirely.

You are right that most forms of contraception are especially horrible as they are abortifacient. Unfortunately, these forms of birth control are also condoned by many Christians and are the most common forms as well.

It just seems so inappropriate to call sex between a married couple "unprotected", doesn't it?

My husband and I actually did that (left it up to God) for a long time. We were open to children so if it happened it did, and if it didn't happen, it didn't. No stress at all!

Now that we have four children, we aren't sure we want more. If God wants us to have more, of course that is what we will do. But, does He leave that up to us? Is it our decision, or is birth control a sin?

I wanted to try NFP, but to me, it's the same thing because I am most interested in marital relations during my fertile times. I'm not sure what we will wind up doing. I do see your point that it's not doing the act and then side-stepping what comes with it.

I think a lot of people that are okay with all forms of contraception just are unaware of how they actually work.

 

[LysanderShapiro]

It just seems so inappropriate to call sex between a married couple "unprotected", doesn't it?

My husband and I actually did that (left it up to God) for a long time. We were open to children so if it happened it did, and if it didn't happen, it didn't. No stress at all!

Now that we have four children, we aren't sure we want more. If God wants us to have more, of course that is what we will do. But, does He leave that up to us? Is it our decision, or is birth control a sin?

I wanted to try NFP, but to me, it's the same thing because I am most interested in marital relations during my fertile times. I'm not sure what we will wind up doing. I do see your point that it's not doing the act and then side-stepping what comes with it.

I think a lot of people that are okay with all forms of contraception just are unaware of how they actually work.

I think that's a very good observation.

I've heard some people explain that there is nothing wrong with contraception itself, but it is rather how it is acted out and if it contradicts God's model of sex which is why some famous voices for NFP, like Jason Evert, aren't afraid to regard it in that way, they still offer the distinction between what most people regard as birth control and what NFP actually does. Because there's nothing wrong with wanting to plan out your family with your husband or wife -- that's always excellent. It's a question of how it is done and if it works within God's blueprint of sex.

I think it's definitely worth looking into NFP again. I don't know you or your marriage so I can't say anything much other than what is most important is how we respond to God -- and our response ought to always be in His favor.

The passage about Onan does explicitly state the case for the withdraw method. The responses in here have been that it doesn't explicitly condemn it, that God was only angry at him for failing for fulfill this law. The reason why we know that's not what the reason was was because it was addressed in Deuteronomy 25:5-10 where the punishment is public humiliation, not death.

 

[Where is the Messiah]

I think that's a very good observation.

I've heard some people explain that there is nothing wrong with contraception itself, but it is rather how it is acted out and if it contradicts God's model of sex which is why some famous voices for NFP, like Jason Evert, aren't afraid to regard it in that way, they still offer the distinction between what most people regard as birth control and what NFP actually does. Because there's nothing wrong with wanting to plan out your family with your husband or wife -- that's always excellent. It's a question of how it is done and if it works within God's blueprint of sex.

I think it's definitely worth looking into NFP again. I don't know you or your marriage so I can't say anything much other than what is most important is how we respond to God -- and our response ought to always be in His favor.

The passage about Onan does explicitly state the case for the withdraw method. The responses in here have been that it doesn't explicitly condemn it, that God was only angry at him for failing for fulfill this law. The reason why we know that's not what the reason was was because it was addressed in Deuteronomy 25:5-10 where the punishment is public humiliation, not death.

Excellent point.

 

[God is Love]

There is nothing wrong with trying to avoid pregnancy, abortion on the other hand is murder and that is definitely wrong.

 

[naomanos]

As a follow-up to my posts within this thread. I am in the first steps of getting a vasectomy. Since my wife is pregnant with our second child (a boy we found out last Friday) we do not need to have more children than two, especially in regards to my wife's health.

This pregnancy has been much harder on her than the first one and since she is getting older (so am I as I turned 40 yesterday) and the multiple sclerosis is still progressing, we are only going to have two children.

 

[KingJ]

As a follow-up to my posts within this thread. I am in the first steps of getting a vasectomy. Since my wife is pregnant with our second child (a boy we found out last Friday) we do not need to have more children than two, especially in regards to my wife's health.

This pregnancy has been much harder on her than the first one and since she is getting older (so am I as I turned 40 yesterday) and the multiple sclerosis is still progressing, we are only going to have two children.

Happy birthday bud!!

 

[Godspell]

We don't know if God did or didn't back then. We only know what was recorded. Just because you didn't get the same meaning doesn't mean the fact doesn't remain.

Can you tell me why it took nearly 2000 years for only some Christians to condone Contraception? Why do the majority still oppose it? Why did the reformers oppose it? Why was Onan punished? Why do people hold the position against contraception and not simply promiscuity or infidelity separately?

Lysander, I've done quite a bit of research into the Catholic stance on this issue.

With all due respect, I've found their apologies against artificial contraception to be unsatisfying.

Sometimes the issue is intermingled with abortifacients, which are a related but different subject.

What I want to know is if and why there is a moral difference between natural family planning and "artificial" family planning.

Thus far, I cannot find one. The classic position is the Augustinian doctrine that sex is for, and only for, the purpose of procreation. However, if that is the case, the only moral form of sexual expression would be during the fertile parts of the month. Abstaining from it would then be just as bad as artificial contraception. I've yet heard a convincing reason why NFP and AFP are morally distinguishable and I'm also not convinced that sexuality is only for procreation. 1 Corinthians is highly at odds with that view.

With Onan, I believe that he was punished because he said one thing, and did another. As per Jewish custom, he was suppose to inseminate his brother's wife so that she would continue the family line. By failing to do so he was violating the custom and failing to fulfill his obligation as a brother. I get very little that his sin was coitus interruptus.

In any case, the reason this was opposed by most Christians for so long was because they didn't know biology. If you think that the sperm is all that is required for the production of a child, the moral instinct will be to reduce as much as possible, the loss of sperm. We now know that sperm is half the required ingredients.

I would also contest that most Christians oppose artificial family planning. Virtually all Protestant denominations accept its use, Eastern Orthodoxy for the most part, and I would say probably half the Catholic laity have a silent dissent to the Church's teaching.

 

[LysanderShapiro]

Lysander, I've done quite a bit of research into the Catholic stance on this issue.

With all due respect, I've found their apologies against artificial contraception to be unsatisfying.

Sometimes the issue is intermingled with abortifacients, which are a related but different subject.

What I want to know is if and why there is a moral difference between natural family planning and "artificial" family planning.

Thus far, I cannot find one. The classic position is the Augustinian doctrine that sex is for, and only for, the purpose of procreation. However, if that is the case, the only moral form of sexual expression would be during the fertile parts of the month. Abstaining from it would then be just as bad as artificial contraception. I've yet heard a convincing reason why NFP and AFP are morally distinguishable and I'm also not convinced that sexuality is only for procreation. 1 Corinthians is highly at odds with that view.

With Onan, I believe that he was punished because he said one thing, and did another. As per Jewish custom, he was suppose to inseminate his brother's wife so that she would continue the family line. By failing to do so he was violating the custom and failing to fulfill his obligation as a brother. I get very little that his sin was coitus interruptus.

In any case, the reason this was opposed by most Christians for so long was because they didn't know biology. If you think that the sperm is all that is required for the production of a child, the moral instinct will be to reduce as much as possible, the loss of sperm. We now know that sperm is half the required ingredients.

I would also contest that most Christians oppose artificial family planning. Virtually all Protestant denominations accept its use, Eastern Orthodoxy for the most part, and I would say probably half the Catholic laity have a silent dissent to the Church's teaching.

To begin, I'd say possibly even more than just half of the Catholic laity practice birth control and are going against Catholicism. It's one of the biggest problems we have today.

I'll do my best to explain the difference between the two -- it's ultimately a moral difference.

NFP is the practice of having sex with an openness to procreation. It may take place during a fertile period or not, but the moral idea is to accept the partner entirely -- not partially. To honor one's vows of honor and cherish the spouse and not only accept partially. If a couple chooses to abstain during a fertile period, they haven't neglected each other, they recognize that sex is an all-or-nothing (not some or even most) activity of love.

AFP is the practice of having sex with no openness to procreation and not accepting the partner entirely. Every act is the idea of having sex while also intentionally trying to stop any possibility of procreation, whether it be using the condom, the sponge, the pull-out method, etc. It's demeaning to women because it suggests sex strictly for pleasure and it separates the woman from her motherhood. It's saying "I want most of you, but not all of you."

Acceptance of contraception was predicted long ago as being the gateway to acceptance of birth control. Forgive me, but anyone who claims to be pro-life and pro-contraception is doing no good to promoting the pro-life concept. This is one of the biggest issues I have today--the acceptance of abortion. And the get to the root of it, it has to be traced back to selfish desires and much of it surrounds the use of contraception.

I know this offends people (not my intention), but I do believe it should be said regardless. Anyone who practices contraception doesn't fully accept their spouse. Perhaps not consciously, but that is the case. Sex is a giving and accepting of one another entirely, not partially.

 

[naomanos]

I know this offends people (not my intention), but I do believe it should be said regardless. Anyone who practices contraception doesn't fully accept their spouse. Perhaps not consciously, but that is the case. Sex is a giving and accepting of one another entirely, not partially.

Above is opinion and not a fact.

I know at least in my case where I am getting a vasectomy is not because I don't accept my wife fully to say it is would be a foolish remark. This was her idea, and one that I fully agree with based on us come February having two kids and her multiple sclerosis which continues it's degradation of her central nervous system.

This decision was made mutually between my wife and I. There is no non-acceptance involved by either spouse, only a prudent concern for one spouse's health and her ability to care for her children.

 

[LysanderShapiro]

Above is opinion and not a fact.

I know at least in my case where I am getting a vasectomy is not because I don't accept my wife fully to say it is would be a foolish remark. This was her idea, and one that I fully agree with based on us come February having two kids and her multiple sclerosis which continues it's degradation of her central nervous system.

This decision was made mutually between my wife and I. There is no non-acceptance involved by either spouse, only a prudent concern for one spouse's health and her ability to care for her children.

naomanos, it's my belief, not just my own opinion.

I really must stand by what I what I believe. Sex really is an all or nothing act between both parties. If neither the wife nor the husband can perform without separating their procreative, then they are aren't accepting one another entirely. It is more of a testament to their love to abstain if they must because of how they couldn't use one another outside of what God's model of sex for married partners.

It would be easier for me to just say "well, God understands," but that's not what I believe. Everyone has the choice to believe what they want, but we each have to take responsibility for our actions.

 

[naomanos]

naomanos, it's my belief, not just my own opinion.

I really must stand by what I what I believe. Sex really is an all or nothing act between both parties. If neither the wife nor the husband can perform without separating their procreative, then they are aren't accepting one another entirely. It is more of a testament to their love to abstain if they must because of how they couldn't use one another outside of what God's model of sex for married partners.

It would be easier for me to just say "well, God understands," but that's not what I believe. Everyone has the choice to believe what they want, but we each have to take responsibility for our actions.

Excuse me, let me correct myself. It's your belief. One that I fully disagree with and is one of the reasons that I am no longer Catholic as that is fully a Catholic belief.

 

[LysanderShapiro]

Excuse me, let me correct myself. It's your belief. One that I fully disagree with and is one of the reasons that I am no longer Catholic as that is fully a Catholic belief.

It isn't a fully Catholic belief, or at least it isn't exclusively a Catholic belief. Orthodox Christians and many other Christian groups (including many Protestant) oppose contraception for the same reason. In fact, every Christian group opposed it until the 1930s when the Anglicans were the first.

This statement isn't made to divide Catholics and Protestants, I say it because every Christian should recognize if it they too promote Godliness, holy matrimony, and the protection of the unborn.

 

[naomanos]

It isn't a fully Catholic belief, or at least it isn't exclusively a Catholic belief. Orthodox Christians and many other Christian groups (including many Protestant) oppose contraception for the same reason. In fact, every Christian group opposed it until the 1930s when the Anglicans were the first.

This statement isn't made to divide Catholics and Protestants, I say it because every Christian should recognize if it they too promote Godliness, holy matrimony, and the protection of the unborn.

So in other words what you're saying is that I'm not promoting godliness because I am getting a vasectomy because off concern for my wife's health.

Lets see if i remember correctly, my wife is to come before all quick includes any children we may or may not have, except for God who comes before all.

I do not believe that contraceptive is a sin against God, especially when having more children is detrimental to the mother's health. So, in my case I am putting my wife in the proper order because her health is important. Since I am not going against God, I am not promoting uh-Godliness our sin.

Oh and just so it is known. My wife prayed about this issue before talking with me about it. What she received is that it is not wrong. I prayed when she discussed it with me. I received the same thing. It is not wrong.

I'll go with what we prayerfully received over anything any other human had to say on the matter.

 

[LysanderShapiro]

So in other words what you're saying is that I'm not promoting godliness because I am getting a vasectomy because off concern for my wife's health.

Lets see if i remember correctly, my wife is to come before all quick includes any children we may or may not have, except for God who comes before all.

At the risk of creating division between us, the answer is no, you are not promoting God's will by getting a vasectomy. I don't doubt that you are totally concerned for your wife's health, which is the right attitude--you should honor her--but to have sex with every attempt to block off any possibility of creating life takes God's rationale for sex and rearranges it for a downgraded act outside of God's rationale.

I do not believe that contraceptive is a sin against God, especially when having more children is detrimental to the mother's health. So, in my case I am putting my wife in the proper order because her health is important. Since I am not going against God, I am not promoting uh-Godliness our sin.

If a husband and a wife end up in a situation where sex can cause severe problems to one or the other, the way to honor one another and God is to abstain. In fact, because they love each other and God that much, they know that sex, an act which cannot be departed from procreation, cannot be tampered with and so they continue to love one another and honor each other through honoring God and His commandments to us.

If they decided that contraception is OK because of their situation, whether it be financial or health, then they are doing this out of convenience and not sincerity. How convenient it would be for them that it is no longer a sin. No one--not one person--has the authority to decide what is or isn't a sin anymore. I'm not holding this position because I want to, but because if I have faith in God, I have to accept it entirely.

Oh and just so it is known. My wife prayed about this issue before talking with me about it. What she received is that it is not wrong. I prayed when she discussed it with me. I received the same thing. It is not wrong.

I'll go with what we prayerfully received over anything any other human had to say on the matter.

Well, either the Holy Ghost told us two different things or one of us misinterpreted. If we were told two different things, then God loves to cause confusion. But because we know that's not the case, then we have to conclude that one of us is wrong. If one of us is wrong, we should look at Scripture and reason. If Scripture has spoken about marriage as knowledge of the man and woman and not sex and has also followed up sex outside of marriage and its cause according to God, we have to conclude that sex must always be practiced with an openness to life, or not practiced if there is a valid reason for abstaining. But one cannot eat his cake and have it too.

For those couples who are faced with health or financial difficulty when it comes to pregnancy, it is trials like these that God is especially wanting to make them saints, because if they do His will, they will rejected temptation.

 

[naomanos]

At the risk of creating division between us, the answer is no, you are not promoting God's will by getting a vasectomy. I don't doubt that you are totally concerned for your wife's health, which is the right attitude--you should honor her--but to have sex with every attempt to block off any possibility of creating life takes God's rationale for sex and rearranges it for a downgraded act outside of God's rationale.



If a husband and a wife end up in a situation where sex can cause severe problems to one or the other, the way to honor one another and God is to abstain. In fact, because they love each other and God that much, they know that sex, an act which cannot be departed from procreation, cannot be tampered with and so they continue to love one another and honor each other through honoring God and His commandments to us.

If they decided that contraception is OK because of their situation, whether it be financial or health, then they are doing this out of convenience and not sincerity. How convenient it would be for them that it is no longer a sin. No one--not one person--has the authority to decide what is or isn't a sin anymore. I'm not holding this position because I want to, but because if I have faith in God, I have to accept it entirely.



Well, either the Holy Ghost told us two different things or one of us misinterpreted. If we were told two different things, then God loves to cause confusion. But because we know that's not the case, then we have to conclude that one of us is wrong. If one of us is wrong, we should look at Scripture and reason. If Scripture has spoken about marriage as knowledge of the man and woman and not sex and has also followed up sex outside of marriage and its cause according to God, we have to conclude that sex must always be practiced with an openness to life, or not practiced if there is a valid reason for abstaining. But one cannot eat his cake and have it too.

For those couples who are faced with health or financial difficulty when it comes to pregnancy, it is trials like these that God is especially wanting to make them saints, because if they do His will, they will rejected temptation.

We are going to go round and round and it will only cause division because neither of us will change our minds.

So for that reason alone I am going to agree to disagree.

 

[LysanderShapiro]

We are going to go round and round and it will only cause division because neither of us will change our minds.

So for that reason alone I am going to agree to disagree.

Indeed. I can't imagine most people having a change of heart. Though I think everyone should be able to defend why they hold their beliefs. By no means was I trying to change your mind -- that's entirely up to you. And to change my mind is up to me as well.