Connection between contraception and acceptance of homosexuality as a social norm

  • Thread starter Thread starter tmellin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tmellin

Guest
I have heard this argument and see its merit:

Sex with contraception removes the procreative potential from the sexual act, making it functionally equivalent to homosexual sex. Thus as contraception becomes the norm, so does the picture of homosexual relationships as equivalent to a heterosexual relationships.

Your thoughts?
 
There is as much connection between contracteption and homosexuality as there is between homosexuality and pedophilia.

Namely, none.
 
tmellin said:
I have heard this argument and see its merit:

Sex with contraception removes the procreative potential from the sexual act, making it functionally equivalent to homosexual sex. Thus as contraception becomes the norm, so does the picture of homosexual relationships as equivalent to a heterosexual relationships.

Your thoughts?
Click to expand...
I see a connection, but they are not completely equivalent.

Heterosexual sex still retains the possibility of pro-creation because contraception can “fail” and result in pregnancy, yet contraception does attempt to remove the pro-creation element. Sex can become almost recreational rather pro-creational even within marriage.

When contraception became legal, those pressing to change the laws spoke about contraception within marriage, yet contraception quickly became used outside of marriage.

Without the “fear” of pregnancy, promiscuity and sex outside of marriage became a greater issue for society. Somewhat ironically, the out-of-wedlock birthrate rose following the widespread availabiliy of contraception. Children raised without fathers contributed to other problems within the culture.

With the general lowering of morals and the increased absence of fathers within the home, sexual sin flourished. The “who are we to judge” attitude became popular in large part because people didn’t want their own sins being judged.

I see this on a continuum. The sins relate to each other, but they are not the identical sin. In the culture at large, one sin can lead the next. Contraception gave birth to many of the sexual sins we witness today.
 
I agree. Contraception can be easily associated with the current, dismal moral compass of most persons in our society. The link, though, to homosexuality is much looser. While it can be followed out, it is not as clear; and there are other, unassociated issues that had to contribute in order for acceptance to occur and become widespread. I believe, as a result, that while contraception may have been necessary for widespread acceptance of homosexuality to occur, it was not sufficient. Other factors had to have been present. (i.e. an aggressive agenda of "in-your-face " lobbying of the public and political sectors for one).
 
The link is that once society accepted procreation as not being a primary end of marriage then it made homosexuality more acceptable. If marriage doesn’t mean making babies ( if possible) then other relationships where making babies is impossible must be ok. The acceptance in use of contraception is having a huge effect on society from low population to low morality.

nd.edu/~afreddos/courses/264/popepaul.htm

catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=431

catholicculture.org/commentary/articles.cfm?id=247
 
Cluny said:
There is as much connection between contracteption and homosexuality as there is between homosexuality and pedophilia.

Namely, none.
Click to expand...
Your first sentence is correct, your second is contradicted by numerous statitical studies and records. An example of this is the ghastly priest sex abuse scandal in the Church. In excess of 80% of the victims were male.

The only thing correct about your sentence is that it is politically correct. Like so many politically correct statements, it is factually wrong.

Women who use oral contraceptives end up urinating high amounts of estrogen. The elevated estrogen level have made their way into the environment and water supply in much of the western world. It is been postulated that these elevated levels of environmental estrogen may be a contributing factor in male homosexuality. Is it really? Who knows. 🤷

I would say that contraception has contributed to open homosexuality because it promotes promiscuity in general and gives people a false idea that contrception renders sex “safe”. Must unplanned pregnancies are a result of failed contraception, not a failure to use contraception. As for STD transmission, it is the increased promiscuity resulting from the promotion of contraception as “safe” that leads people to have relations with multiple partners increasing the risk of transmitting a disease.

We can see the results in in the fight against AIDS. Worldwide, where contraception is promoted as a way to prevent disease transmission, infection rates are either stable or increasing. However, in Uganda, hard hit by AIDS, they do not promote contraception, but rather encourage monogamy, hetersexuality and abstenance. Since this program began, Uganda has seen a dramtic drop in the spread of HIV.

Contraception, promiscuity, abortion and homosexual activities are all tangled together.
 
tmellin said:
I have heard this argument and see its merit:

Sex with contraception removes the procreative potential from the sexual act, making it functionally equivalent to homosexual sex. Thus as contraception becomes the norm, so does the picture of homosexual relationships as equivalent to a heterosexual relationships.

Your thoughts?
Click to expand...
You hit the nail on the head.
 
gardenswithkids said:
With the general lowering of morals and the increased absence of fathers within the home, sexual sin flourished. The “who are we to judge” attitude became popular in large part because people didn’t want their own sins being judged.
Click to expand...
Another nail hit right on the head and driven through the board!
 
Fr. Larry Richards advances this opinion on his Confession CD. Makes sense to me. Contraception, masturbation, homosexuality - all non-fruitful sex.

Betsy
 
tmellin said:
I have heard this argument and see its merit:

Sex with contraception removes the procreative potential from the sexual act, making it functionally equivalent to homosexual sex. Thus as contraception becomes the norm, so does the picture of homosexual relationships as equivalent to a heterosexual relationships.

Your thoughts?
Click to expand...
They are both part of the “Culture of Death”.

Sex without procreation (contraception, homosexuality, masturbation, abortion), and then of course, procreation without sex (IVF).

Also, in Romans 1:26-27, is it possible the first part is not just talking about lesbianism, but also contraception?

26For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,

27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
 
I’m not so sure about the language used in the OP. By that reasoning, post-menopausal married couples must cease from having sex.

I’m not so sure we have any business linking the two issues. Contraception is wrong because the couple PURPOSELY sterilizes their lovemaking. The fact of it being sterile isn’t the issue, it is the active sterilizing of it that is sinful.

Instead, I think we should focus on the fact that our very fertility is a gift from God that assists us in overcoming our sinful inclination towards using a partner for gratification rather than loving them. Couples that purposely sterilize themselves (contraception) or choose partners from whom noprocreative potential is possible reject that assistance that God built into our fertility. We should then expect that such couples should have a higher failure rate of the relationship than those who do NOT reject God’s gift of healthy fertility. Go do some observations.

So what about those older couples? Perhaps God expects them to have learned how to love each other without using by that time? I dunno. But I do think it is necessary to be very careful trying to link issues together without thinking the issues through thoroughly.
 
manualman said:
I’m not so sure about the language used in the OP…I’m not so sure we have any business linking the two issues. …
Click to expand...
lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/may/09050820.html

Perhaps Archbishop Raymond Burke’s comments at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast helps make the point:
…Burke also pointed to the current attacks on the family, saying that “the fundamental society, that is, the family, upon which the life of our nation is founded and depends, is under attack by legislation which redefines marriage to include a relationship between two persons of the same sex and permits them to adopt children.”
The archbishop said that the root of these attacks against the family is the so-called “contraceptive mentality,” “which would have us believe that the inherently procreative nature of the conjugal union can, in practice, be mechanically or chemically eliminated, while the marital act remains unitive.”
But, he said, “It cannot be so.”
Click to expand...
Archbishop Burke also said a few other things worth noting.
(I highlighted the part that I found most encouraging):
“The respect for the inviolable dignity of innocent human life and for the integrity of marriage and the family are so fundamental to the common good that they cannot be subordinated to any other cause, no matter how good it may be.”
**Burke also noted that at this junction in history the temptation for those fighting for life and the family is towards discouragement. “And it would be right to do so, if the outcome of the battle depended upon us alone,” he said. "But it does not. Christ is with us always in the Church **and, in a particular way, in the struggle to restore the respect for the right to life of all of our brothers and sisters, especially those who are helpless and who have the first title to our care, and to safeguard the integrity of marriage and the family.
“Christ Who is the Gospel of Life, encountered in prayer and through the Sacraments, will give us the strength to announce His word of life and to act upon His word of life, on behalf of all in our nation, especially those who depend upon us to care for them and protect their God-given rights.”
Click to expand...
 
tmellin said:
I have heard this argument and see its merit:

Sex with contraception removes the procreative potential from the sexual act, making it functionally equivalent to homosexual sex. Thus as contraception becomes the norm, so does the picture of homosexual relationships as equivalent to a heterosexual relationships.

Your thoughts?
Click to expand...
The removal of the procreative aspect isn’t what connects contraceptive sex to homosexual. Its more than that. I think the correlation is more that sex is only for pleasure not for procreation or unity. Therefore, as long as it ‘feels good’ its acceptable. That opens the door for masturbation, anal, oral, male-male, female-female, etc sex. All of which are disordered when done for sexual pleasure only. Also sex has become a ‘right’ that we all are supposed to have whenever, whereever, and however we choose to do it. Instead of being a priviledge between a man & a woman joined in marriage. Contraception helped that process along as well. Basically contraception IMO cheapens sex and makes it less important/special and more abused. Its obviously easier to ‘get away’ w/ having sex if there isn’t a pregnancy that soon follows. Once people start ‘getting away w/’ having casual sex, its no big jump to have sex in other methods.
 
Thanks for the Burke link. Perhaps my issue was with the way the OP presented it. As I mentioned, that language is too broad and would prohibit married folks from sex after menopause. I don’t believe that is catholic moral teaching.

There’s still something missing and I can’t put my finger on it.
 
tmellin said:
I have heard this argument and see its merit:

Sex with contraception removes the procreative potential from the sexual act, making it functionally equivalent to homosexual sex. Thus as contraception becomes the norm, so does the picture of homosexual relationships as equivalent to a heterosexual relationships.

Your thoughts?
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t phrase it that way, but I’ve observed myself that many arguments from the natural law against homosexuality and masturbation also inevitably apply to contraception; a person who accepts contraception as moral has a far weaker platform from which to argue against homosexuality and masturbation (indeed, we can see in Evangelical circles that the weakened argument against masturbation has already had a significant effect, e.g., in Dr. James Dobson’s “not a big deal with God” quotation) .

Jeremy
 
The connection is self control or self mastery. All I heard in the late 1960s was how “sexually repressed” Catholics were. Well, how were we repressed? The clear, logical and consistent Church teaching was sex with sincere love in marriage only. Period.

But, in 1968, the Church released Humanae Vitae. It knew how people would be tempted if the fear of pregnancy was removed. It clearly warned Catholics to stay away from The Pill. But that would have meant the loss of millions of sales of birth control pills. Can’t have that.

Send in the colorfully dressed Hippies! Free love. Sex with anyone. Sexual Revolution! (It was about sex, you know.)

1970s Let’s legalize images of graphic prostitution (gay and straight) and sell it in Adult Bookstores around the country. And let’s call fornication and adultery between “consenting adults,” Swinging.

Let’s create the National Organization of Women and put the fear of men into women everywhere.

1980s No-Fault Divorce and porn on cable.

Chastity is what we are all, gay and straight, called to.

Peace,
Ed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top