Contraception to Prevent Miscarriage?

[Rocco6196]

I absolutely respect your views , but don’t cut taxes on the rich at the expense of the working poor,

 

[R_C]

I absolutely respect your views , but don’t cut taxes on the rich at the expense of the working poor,

Oppression of the poor is a sin that cries to heaven for vengeance, just like murder of unborn children.

We prefer to have someone who will not promote murder of unborn children and other intrinsic evils as such, but we understand that other, lesser but still significant evils will come forth…

We try to pick the lesser of two evils, because God in His mercy will always help the poor, through people of good will and through His own blessing, but things such as willful killing of the unborn and promotion of practices that lead to the distortion and destruction of society must be stopped at all cost.

The day that a Catholic candidate shows up, outside of either party, promoting as his plan the social doctrine of the Church, that’ll be a great day. Until then, we’re stuck with trying to discern which of two evils is worse.

 

[thewanderer]

I absolutely respect your views , but don’t cut taxes on the rich at the expense of the working poor,

What I believe in is doing whatever it takes to get rid of this nations debt and improve this economy, my opinions on how that would feasibly be achieved differ from both the democratic and from the republican parties, but they lean towards those presented by the republican party. I am not against the truly rich paying extra in taxes, in fact I believe it will be absolutely essential in getting rid of this ridiculous debt Obama has saddled us with, but raising taxes by too much or on too many will only help slow growth in the economy. If you really want to know my opinion on these matters I believe it is unfortunately necessary to both raise taxes and cut discretionary spending, as well as reduce waste by moving as many functions as possible from the federal govt. down to the state level. Both sides of the aisle need to get over their party lines and come together to find real solutions for the very real problem we are now facing, and, unfortunately, bipartisanship is yet another thing Obama has proved himself unable or unwilling to accomplish.

 

[CopticChristian]

Hi Everyone!

This is my first post, but I’ve read Catholic Answers a number of times when I found myself facing a difficult question, and this community has been incredibly helpful. Thanks to you all!

===================

I recently read an article in which a former pro-life activist argued that contraception saves lives by preventing miscarriages. She pointed out that many new embryos die before the mother even realizes she’s pregnant, and that if pro-life individuals took their position seriously, they would try to maximize contraceptive use.

To de-couple the point from the contraception culture wars: Any sex that could cause pregnancy could also lead to that pregnancy’s death. Let’s take the NIH’s rather high estimate that 50% of all zygotes die prior to birth.

Questions: Does the risk of miscarriage obligate us to minimize procreative sex, either through contraception or abstinence?

It seems that the only way out of this conundrum is to invoke the principle of double effect, which I don’t really buy - if I can forsee the consequences of my actions, I should probably take those consequences into account.

===================

I’d really appreciate any and all help with this conundrum from people more wise and knowledgable than myself.

-Andrew

Lafayette,

The first thing you do is this…

How many pregnancies end in fulfillment of birth?

How many implanted eggs that are fertilized spontaneously abort?

What are the consequences ie health, risk of life of spontaneuos miscarriage?

 

[thewanderer]

Oppression of the poor is a sin that cries to heaven for vengeance, just like murder of unborn children.

And what made my vote very easy is that I saw both being encouraged by one side in this election and neither by the other. Although I should add that were it necessary for me to make a choice between these two, the lives of countless innocents or maintaining a higher standard of living for the poor (among whom I am all but certain to number in the coming years) I would have to choose the lives of the poor innocents killed. Nothing destroys respect for human dignity more than the casual, careless murder of innocent children.

 

[thewanderer]

Lafayette,

The first thing you do is this…

How many pregnancies end in fulfillment of birth?

How many implanted eggs that are fertilized spontaneously abort?

What are the consequences ie health, risk of life of spontaneuos miscarriage?

Thanks for the reminder that we are wildly off-topic. Sorry, OP, I’ll leave the thread now.

 

[St_Francis]

Hi Everyone!

This is my first post, but I’ve read Catholic Answers a number of times when I found myself facing a difficult question, and this community has been incredibly helpful. Thanks to you all!

===================

I recently read an article in which a former pro-life activist argued that contraception saves lives by preventing miscarriages. She pointed out that many new embryos die before the mother even realizes she’s pregnant, and that if pro-life individuals took their position seriously, they would try to maximize contraceptive use.

To de-couple the point from the contraception culture wars: Any sex that could cause pregnancy could also lead to that pregnancy’s death. Let’s take the NIH’s rather high estimate that 50% of all zygotes die prior to birth.

Questions: Does the risk of miscarriage obligate us to minimize procreative sex, either through contraception or abstinence?

It seems that the only way out of this conundrum is to invoke the principle of double effect, which I don’t really buy - if I can forsee the consequences of my actions, I should probably take those consequences into account.

===================

I’d really appreciate any and all help with this conundrum from people more wise and knowledgable than myself.

-Andrew

The problem that the person you are referring to is having with her thinking is that she thinks that “pro-life” means we must prevent *death. *In reality, what those who are trying to outlaw abortion are trying to prevent is *murder. *

There is a huge difference between having a miscarriage and procuring an abortion. The latter involves the deliberate taking of an innocent human life. This is *wrong. *

However, some have gone a little overboard and now believe that the issue of procured abortion somehow covers miscarriages which simply occur naturally. Of course we want to prevent miscarriages, but miscarriages are not an aspect of being part of the “pro-life movement” which is dedicated to *stopping the evil of procured abortion. *

This is easier to see if one considers that the Church used to put things in a different form: people did not have rights as we talk about them now, people had obligations to refrain from certain actions. People did not have a right to freedom of religion, people had an obligation not to force conversion. It was not until the 1700s that anyone, Catholic or non-Catholic, started talking about rights, and this language and way of thinking eventually permeated western society to the point that the Church re-cast many of Her teachings in this new language. As a general rule, it does not make much difference, but in some areas, it causes a bit of confusion.

 

[R_C]

And what made my vote very easy is that I saw both being encouraged by one side in this election and neither by the other. Although I should add that were it necessary for me to make a choice between these two, the lives of countless innocents or maintaining a higher standard of living for the poor (among whom I am all but certain to number in the coming years) I would have to choose the lives of the poor innocents killed. Nothing destroys respect for human dignity more than the casual, careless murder of innocent children.

Of course! In the hierarchy of these awful sins, homicide (including abortion) is on the top!

 

[iloveangels]

Hi Everyone!

This is my first post, but I’ve read Catholic Answers a number of times when I found myself facing a difficult question, and this community has been incredibly helpful. Thanks to you all!

===================

Always looking for an excuse, aren’t we?

 

[Lafayette1834]

Thanks to everyone for the feedback! You’ve really helped me see more clearly on this issue. I wish I could respond to each of you individually, but I’m a busy student.

To summarize what you all have written: the author’s argument isn’t so much for contraception as it against any reproduction. This seems like an absurd line of thought, because following it would lead to the extinction of the human race.

So, would you agree with this formulation: Giving a child a chance to live is good, even if that child might not survive to birth. Of course, this gift doesn’t give us the power to abuse or kill the child.

Assuming marriage, interest from both spouses, etc., is procreation ever morally wrong? For example, late in life, when miscarriage and developmental abnormality rates increase, should couples abstain?

 

[thewanderer]

Thanks to everyone for the feedback! You’ve really helped me see more clearly on this issue. I wish I could respond to each of you individually, but I’m a busy student.

To summarize what you all have written: the author’s argument isn’t so much for contraception as it against any reproduction. This seems like an absurd line of thought, because following it would lead to the extinction of the human race.

So, would you agree with this formulation: Giving a child a chance to live is good, even if that child might not survive to birth. Of course, this gift doesn’t give us the power to abuse or kill the child.

Assuming marriage, interest from both spouses, etc., is procreation ever morally wrong? For example, late in life, when miscarriage and developmental abnormality rates increase, should couples abstain?

I think its important to make a few distinctions… I mean, existence itself is a good thing. If a person exists, then it is a good thing. But, having said that, I think that it is definitely possible for parents to have children because of selfish reasons. In which case I would not say that the procreation itself was immoral, but that the intentions and motivation of the parents were. If you want an example, look at octo-mom, I have a hard time believing her reasons for getting pregnant were not selfish.

With respect to whether or not people should abstain later in life or not, I don’t think that is something you can make a decisive call on. Again, its all a matter of determining whether the people involved are acting out of selfish motives or not. But I do think it is important to note that if one claimed that it is immoral to make efforts to avoid conceiving a child who might have disabilities then it kind of sounds to me as though you are saying that such children should not exist, which is plainly false. Their lives are just as important and deserving of protection and love as the rest of us.

 

[Rocco6196]

My opinion is later in life the Godly thing to do is to continue to have sex with your spouse, while using contrecpetivies , and prevent the risk of a child being born with abnormalities,

 

[Richard320]

My opinion is later in life the Godly thing to do is to continue to have sex with your spouse, while using contrecpetivies , and prevent the risk of a child being born with abnormalities,

Later in life, abstinence during fertile periods is not that difficult. Trust me.

And as an aside, your opinion is quite different from the Catechism:

2399 The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood. Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception).

Just so you know.

 

[Rocco6196]

Well it’s time the catholic church changes is stance on contraception. Other wise you will continue to have churches full of hypocrites that may agree with your views to your face, but use contrceptions at home , amost every catholic I know uses contraceptives .

 

[Rocco6196]

Well it maybe against the catholic doctrine , but it’s the only sensible thing to do.
Also astenince will work for awhile then your spouse will go elsewhere gauranteed.
That’s what humans do.

 

[Rocco6196]

Also regarding contraception, especially when the odds of bringing a deformed or disabled child into the world should be thought right in the church.
Let’s see if the child is born with a deformity( god forbid) then the biblical extremist
shun him from church ( Leviticus 21 I believe)
Lets be reasonable .

 

[Richard320]

Well it maybe against the catholic doctrine , but it’s the only sensible thing to do.
Also astenince will work for awhile then your spouse will go elsewhere gauranteed.
That’s what humans do.

Three days without sex is not that difficult. It’s called Natural Family Planning.

 

[Rocco6196]

You are referring to the cycle pertaining to ovulation correct?
Well surprise it is about as accurate as the republucans thinking they would win by a land slide, sorry the truth is the truth

 

[R_C]

Well it’s time the catholic church changes is stance on contraception. Other wise you will continue to have churches full of hypocrites that may agree with your views to your face, but use contrceptions at home , amost every catholic I know uses contraceptives .

Well, considering how you regard the Sacred Tradition, it is not hard to believe.

On the other hand, I have quite a different experience.

And even if you were surrounded by hypocrites and sinners and saw all of the Sacred Tradition and of the Commandments and of Christ’s teachings broken and nobody condemning this but rather approving of it as a most natural and good thing, remember these words that the Holy Spirit spoke, in a wonderful address of the Father to the Son (Ez 12:2):

Son of man, you are living among a rebellious people. They have eyes to see but do not see and ears to hear but do not hear, for they are a rebellious people.

And what appears to be a most suffering yet beautiful reply (Ps 69):

Those who hate me without reason outnumber the hairs of my head; many are my enemies without cause, those who seek to destroy me. I am forced to restore what I did not steal. …] I endure scorn for your sake, and shame covers my face. I am a stranger to my brothers, an alien to my own mother’s sons; for zeal for your house consumes me, and the insults of those who insult you fall on me.

And you come and say that Holy Church should go against the Sacred Tradition She has faithfully preserved unblemished for over twenty centuries? Nothing could be more erroneous.

So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the tradition we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.

 

[Rocco6196]

Hey Matilda , who punished me you? Does it not get reviewed , I did not feel I was disrespectful , I simply stated true facts, but I guess thats not being a good Catholic?
Hypocrite