Assertion not in evidence. The catholic moral theology that is the basis for what the simple-minded like to call the catholic “ban” on contraception simply doesn’t apply to rape.
I outlined all my reasons in the post. If you want to refute it, try addressing the merits of the argument.
Except for the baby…
Indeed, good analogy.A married man intending on infidelity and wondering if he compounds his sin with a condom is morally rearranging the deck chair on the Titanic.
Exactomundo. Such a situation isn’t consensual marital intercourse.
Dr. Jeff is spot on. He wrote:
Yes - but the Pope did say that using contraception in these cases can represent a realisation of the effects of their sin and be a first step in the moral direction.
No it not “more moral”, but the idea may signify the possibility “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.” (Benedict XVI. See Jeff Miller at: tinyurl.com/2774mor )
I actually agree with your overall point. I must take issue with one of your statements. You said, “However unrealistic the scenario.” It actually has happened. It was a landmark case in California (I believe in the 1980s). I know of cases since then where the victim pleaded for the rapist to use a condom. The case law and statutes came down saying this does not constitute consent. I am a police officer, so I hear about these things, and unfortunately deal with them directly from time to time.Rape is fundamentally about power and domination. But for the sake of discussion, let’s look at it.
FIRST, you must step back and comprehend what Church teaching is ACTUALLY about. Contraception isn’t a sin because it’s “on the list”, it’s a sin because it inherently harms a human’s ability to give and receive love as God designed us. When a married couple contracepts, they not only sever the procreative function, but damage the unitive one as well.
When a rape victim begs a rapist to use a condom, she isn’t committing an act that degrades her innate sexuality. She is just trying to protect herself from SOME of the harm her attacker is attempting to inflict. There IS no mutual loving relationship there to be degraded by the act of contraception. However unrealistic the scenario, it would not be a sin. Similarly if there exists (and I’m no expert) a spermicidal treatment that a rape victim could take after the fact that doesn’t also have lethal effects on zygotes, that protective act would be morally justified.
Remember, catholic moral theology is not arbitrary. It is based on underlying principles. Understanding the principles is always better than memorizing the rules. It isn’t the condom that is evil, it is the degradation that it causes to human sexuality that is evil. Blow it up and twist it into an animal shape all you want!
