Hypocritical Contraception?

[holdencaulfield]

You do make a good point I donlt think that women should be expected to do such things in order to be equal. Though admittingly I think you could argue that having more control over her fertility does help a woman in things like gettign equal jobs and what not. But alot of that had a lot more to do with changing attitudes towards women then anything.

Why would fertility cycles have anything to do with getting jobs.

 

[holdencaulfield]

I can, of course, only speak for myself, but I consider ABC to be very liberating. And I have never been a sex slave. It’s not the man who chooses, it’s me. Before the pill women were pretty much forced into pregnancy because they had no alternative. Any sex was a gamble and married women who couldn’t get a decent job because “women’s” work was so limited had to depend on their husband so couldn’t really say no to sex - they were in more of a sex slave position than I’ve ever been. There were a lot of women who stayed in terrible marriages because they had kids and had no marketable skills. Not every woman was June Cleaver, not every man was Ward. I’m almost 50 now and am very happy that I never had kids (my reasons are personal). Clearly, I do not believe ABC is a sin but I’m no longer Catholic and I don’t mean to imply otherwise. One of the reasons I’m not is this very issue. If you are Catholic I am not suggesting by any means that you ignore the church teaching on this subject - just want to be clear on that.

That is because sex outside of marriage is a sin.

 

[KathleenBP]

Yeah,

Women feel over worked, over stressed, they feel guilt for not being there for their kids…yep, it’s been a walk through the park! My daughter was in day care from the time she was 3 months old and I really regret the missed time. I was of the mind that my nursing career had to be fulfilled…I didn’t have time for my daughter, my husband, my house…it was a rat race that I can never get back. You ask 50% of the women out there…do they feel fulfilled by trudging off to work everyday, away from their families and the homes that are merely a holding site? Come on…women are the nurturers and care takers and it is really hard to DO IT ALL! I am sorry, but I don’t know ONE, not ONE of “today’s women” that didn’t have to make a decision…family life or the corporate ladder. I hate to think of all the women out there that will be 70 and without the love of children to get them through the twilight years. Women have a position in the world and the Church recognizes their worth and contributions…look at Our Blessed Mother! To put chemicals in your body, to risk stroke, pulmonary embolisms, cancer, weight gain, etc…just so that sex is always available and children are not…has not worked. Women were not “barefoot and pregnant”. They were respected and loved by their large families. Did they work hard…darn right, but everybody worked hard. If women believe that their worth is only shown in monetary gain, then they have bought into the secular lie that $ is the way to happiness. Trust me…I am one of them. If I could do it all again, I would have found a way to work at home and be there for my baby…or better yet, find a way to budget with one income. Boy, the lie of having to have a profession out in the world has really come to roost, but if it is so enlightening and wonderful, why are antidepressants one of the most prescribed medications to date?
OK…well, I have said my peace…and mind you it is just my opinion, but the opinion of one who has been on both sides of the fence. God protect all the women out there that chose careers over families. Actually, now is the time to invest in pet care products, because as a part time receptionist at the local vet clinic, I see where their attention and love is going…there are some lucky pooches out there!
In Christ,
Kathleen

 

[Swan]

That is because sex outside of marriage is a sin.

I know you believe this and I respect that. I just don’t happen to agree that this is true in all cases (yes, I know “relativism” - but, IMO, the world just isn’t black and white and I don’t think God judges us in a black and white manner). Please note that I have put in all the disclaimers I could think of: 1) I’m not Catholic and 2) I don’t suggest the Catholics go against Church teaching.

Peace

 

[newbetx]

… I see where their attention and love is going…there are some lucky pooches out there!
In Christ,
Kathleen

Yep, further proof the world is going to the dogs… Sorry can’t resist this stuff sometimes.

 

[KathleenBP]

Amen to that Newbetx!

You know, it took me a long time to realize why God must be a part of our lives. God is love and he is the creator of life. I truly believe that changing the meaning of Love or Life is very dangerous and I am so glad that He gave me the grace to see the evil of MY ways. I thought I had it all nailed down, I was a today’s kind of woman, Love was not sex and sex was not love, it was all good, as long as I didn’t hurt anyone…but so many are hurt. Especially the innocent. I was head strong and thought I knew it all…after all, there was something worse than an abortion and that was an unwanted baby…oh brother, did I need to do some soul searching. God gave me my daughter to bring me to what really mattered. After all, I have never seen a funeral procession with a U Haul in the line. When everything is said and done, it is not what we had, but how we lived and how we loved our fellow man.
Love you guys, thank you for the lively conversation!
In Christ,
Kathleen:hug1:

 

[newbetx]

I know you believe this and I respect that. I just don’t happen to agree that this is true in all cases (yes, I know “relativism” - but, IMO, the world just isn’t black and white and I don’t think God judges us in a black and white manner). Please note that I have put in all the disclaimers I could think of: 1) I’m not Catholic and 2) I don’t suggest the Catholics go against Church teaching.

Peace

Thank you for respecting our beliefs. I will respect yours.

I want to add that at one time I, too, thought I was “good enough” for God as I was. And I agree, His mercy is capable of so much and I don’t think there is a “checklist.” But what enables you to be “at Peace” with Him if so much that is written in scripture seems to say you should not be?

 

[Calliso]

Control doesn’t equal cessation. Obviously slaves wanted control over their freedom, but that doesn’t mean they bleached their skin, changed their names and pretended to be white. So why does it mean women have to damage their reproductive organs and kill their offspring to reach equality? And is that true equality? How come I as a woman have to take a pill everyday to get the same job as a man?

And how does this theory fit in with Sanger’s campaign to sterilize the poor, minority and mentally ill? Does that mean women in general are in this category, unfit to breed and deserving of being controlled as if cattle or household pets?

This is a very interesting discussion, thanks for starting it. :tiphat: I’m not leveling all these questions at you to get a defense, as much as I am wondering out loud. Have you wondered about these things?

Well I donlt think they should have too, but you can;t deny that pregnancy does put a physical toll on a woman. It may mean she is not working at her 100% best and even mean that she has to take extended time off work. And neither of those are going to look good to a current or potential employee. So the pill gave them more control other things like that. It gave married couples more control over how big their families got. But like I said before it also had a lot to do with changing attitudes towards women too. The shift towards seeing us not as lesser beings but as more equal ones did help a lot too. The pill helped things but I do think you could say it isn;t THE thing that liberated women.

 

[Calliso]

That is because sex outside of marriage is a sin.

I am curious but what does that have to do with women being trapped in bad marriages because they can’t get a good job? Or having very limited control of their fertility especially if there husband says no to abstaining at certain times of the month?

 

[ForMary]

Don’t try to read too much logic into NFP. It is legal circumvention.

The teaching is what it is; if a couple have sex there must be the open possibility that life can be formed (even if the probability is low).

 

[Scottgun]

Don’t try to read too much logic into NFP. It is legal circumvention.

I can understand that, but we can’t duck it–people make the claim that NFP is logically the equivalent of ABC, so we must logically show that it isn’t. Which we have done because every argument against it has been consequentialist. And the Church is deontologicalist, not consequentialist. Not by a long shot. It just demonstrates how far the ends-trump mentality has infected even good Catholic’s thinking.

 

[newbetx]

I am curious but what does that have to do with women being trapped in bad marriages because they can’t get a good job? Or having very limited control of their fertility especially if there husband says no to abstaining at certain times of the month?

NFP only works with a cooperating spouse. True. Isn’t that the goal of a good marriage/family. This information is provide to couples planning to get married in the Catholic Church. If he is abusive or is not responsible, there are services available for the woman to help her either reconcile with the husband or leave him altogether.

So you are saying you believe it is better for a woman to violate what we believe to be God’s rules for self preservation? There’s that moral delema… There are other options. And wouldn’t leaving a bad releationship be healthier than staying? A pill won’t fix this, it just prolongs it.

Every argument that says the pill or IUD is the solution has an alternative. Always has. Because these situations existed prior to those items being invented. It’s amazing isn’t it? Since the pill became readily available there are more unplanned/unwanted pregnancies than before. So how did it fix this?

The key argument against ABC is that sex as entertainment isn’t a birthright. Sex was created for humans for two things. Unitive and procreation. With whom? Your spouse. When you separate the two or have sex with the “wrong” people, relational damage can result. I won’t say always because there are exceptions. Because the releationship is exceptional. But then they may be missing the true sacramental value of the relationship but if you don’t know about it, maybe ignorance is bliss.

As a convert to this way of thinking I can tell you it is not the pill itself that is the problem. It’s the poor judgement of the use of sex that it enabled that is the problem. Our argument is that the proper use of sex makes ABC unneeded.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Me, I will! (it hasn’t been a disaster for the family and for women’s dignity). Women were barefoot and pregnant before the pill.

? did the pill build shoes?

The only job they could have in business was “Secretary”. How pathetic!

? did the pill educate these women or produce false diplomas?

Once liberated, they quickly showed men that they could do as well as we, not only in the business world, but in most other life challenges too. I think the pill (ABC) liberated 1/2 of the worlds population, esp here in the US, and our nation and the world has benefitte to high-heaven since women found that they didn’t have to stay at home, barefoot and pregnant. Personally, I don’t think the Church has a problem with the liberation of females at all. But, I think lots of men do, RC men not excepted…

So was school illegal before the 1960’s?

How pathetic… unbelieveable… pitiful… sad… you guys…!

What are you going to do when you wake up in eternity, go to meet your maker and SHE says, “… ahem, you were saying,…?” HA HA!

( has God been talking for 2000 years?)

Seriously 50+% of the women now are legally single, 25% have a STD (and that will go up). Women make up a larger percent of poverty. Relations for sale are becoming common. A large percent of children are not raised by their biologoical parents. I do hope solutions are found however I am not sure we are seeing positive affects

 

[Scottgun]

? did the pill build shoes? ? did the pill educate these women or produce false diplomas? So was school illegal before the 1960’s?

( has God been talking for 2000 years?)

Seriously 50+% of the women now are legally single, 25% have a STD (and that will go up). Women make up a larger percent of poverty. Relations for sale are becoming common. A large percent of children are not raised by their biologoical parents. I do hope solutions are found however I am not sure we are seeing positive affects

Excellent response and you have more patience than I do to interact with shotgun objections loaded with 12-gauge 00 bs. The pill has not liberated, it has dehumanized women to the equivalent of a “Spay and neuter your pets” program.

 

[homeloan]

Since the pill became readily available there are more unplanned/unwanted pregnancies than before. So how did it fix this?

There are also about a gazillion more people here (US) and on the planet since the “pill” was introduced.

The key argument against ABC is that sex as entertainment isn’t a birthright.

Ever wonder why God made it so fun?

Sex was created for humans for two things. Unitive and procreation. With whom? Your spouse. When you separate the two or have sex with the “wrong” people, relational damage can result.

OT patriarchs had the theology that more was better (wives) even add a harlot or two if needed… And then, there’s Lot’s story, and those conniving daughters…

As a convert to this way of thinking I can tell you it is not the pill itself that is the problem. It’s the poor judgement of the use of sex that it enabled that is the problem. Our argument is that the proper use of sex makes ABC unneeded.

As a convert, I would say that poor judgement when it comes to sex falls unduly heavy on the woman. In this regard, if a “girl is going to do what a girl is going to do”, much like guys have always done, then ABC should be required.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

…Ever wonder why God made it so fun?

fun is a relative term many men complain the wife no longer sees fun in it, so are you speaking for them?

OT patriarchs had the theology that more was better (wives) even add a harlot or two if needed… And then, there’s Lot’s story, and those conniving daughters…

OT men were responsible for all the unmarried women in their family, they had no option in this responsibility. Read Onan & Ruth

As a convert, I would say that poor judgement when it comes to sex falls unduly heavy on the woman. In this regard, if a “girl is going to do what a girl is going to do”, much like guys have always done, then ABC should be required.

Actually the responsibility is shared equally under the catholic system. With ABC the guy does not even need to know the girls name he can simply blame her, or the ABC mfg. Hey, anybody but him.

 

[newbetx]

There are also about a gazillion more people here (US) and on the planet since the “pill” was introduced.
A bit of an exageration, but if you don’t want to believe that out of wedlock pregnancies plus abortions is higher per capita today than 50 yrs ago, go ahead.

Ever wonder why God made it so fun?
It is fun. and addicting. On purpose. I have seen sex wreck lives. When improperly approached, it’s a dangerous as drugs. “Sex is harmless fun” Ask those who suffer because of that wrong attitude.

OT patriarchs had the theology that more was better (wives) even add a harlot or two if needed… And then, there’s Lot’s story, and those conniving daughters…
Any proof that more than a small percentage of marriages in history are not one on one? That affairs are the exception, not the rule? Trying to win a general argument with a fringe example is weak at best.

As a convert, I would say that poor judgement when it comes to sex falls unduly heavy on the woman. In my day, women used to be stronger than they are today. I wonder why?

In this regard, if a “girl is going to do what a girl is going to do”, much like guys have always done, then ABC should be required.

Two ways to look at equality… One is to raise the standards of those that require it. The other is to lower the standards of those with them. If one believes being self-serving is a better life, then we can see the “good” the pill has done.

Proper approach to sex and it would wipe out AIDS and other STDs… without spending a dime. But what would be the “fun” in that?

 

[Good_Daughter]

Don’t try to read too much logic into NFP. It is legal circumvention.

The teaching is what it is; if a couple have sex there must be the open possibility that life can be formed (even if the probability is low).

I’m confused.

If a couple have sex while the wife is pregnant, how can there be “an open possibility that life can be formed” (which you say is a must)? Are expectant Catholic couples allowed to have sex if that sex can’t form a life?

Please, help me understand.

 

[KathleenBP]

Hey All,

The sacred union of marriage and the intimacy that goes with it must be open to life, but as stated before, if the woman has had a hysterectomy or is pregnant, there is no need to abstain. Some folks never have children and that is God’s will, but we must be OPEN to life. It does not mean that each act of intercourse must produce offspring or hope to do so. Some couples know they will never have children. Life just needs to be respected.
In Christ,
Kathleen

 

[Em_in_FL]

I’m confused.

If a couple have sex while the wife is pregnant, how can there be “an open possibility that life can be formed” (which you say is a must)? Are expectant Catholic couples allowed to have sex if that sex can’t form a life?

Please, help me understand.

“Procreative” does NOT mean “Fertile”…

The term “procreative” means “done in a manner that COULD result in life IF fertility is present”…