Inconsistency Regarding Artificial Birth Control?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Michaelo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I did not say I was unfamiliar with it. I asked if others were. I understand how this could imply that I’m not – however I am familiar with it. I was curious how many, if any, of the Catholics in this thread could actually articulate, in their own words, why the Catholic Church teaches that it is immoral.
AGAIN? 😉

The sexual union between a man and wife was created by God to have an interconnected and multifacted function. The pleasure it brings and the potential for it to result in new life are intertwined in a mysterious manner. When a couple takes an action to render their sexual coupling sterile, something subtly changes in the act. Instead of potentially being a mutual act of giving, it at least partially becomes a mutual act of taking. The intention of taking the pleasure of sex while acting to sterilize it not only blocks the procreative nature of sex, it inherently damages the unitive function of sex as well. The end result is a cheapening of the sexual union from a physical expression of love into an act of mere gratification (though the change isn’t night/day binary, it is more subtle).

Note that the above does NOT reduce to “sex is only to make babies.” God didn’t design the human body such that sexual attraction is limited to fertile times (like many other species are). Women are fertile only a small number of days in life overall and there is nothing wrong with a couple (even intentionally) making love on a day that GOD made infertile, just on changing a day the God made fertile into one that man made sterile for his selfish purposes.
 
AGAIN? 😉

The sexual union between a man and wife was created by God to have an interconnected and multifacted function. The pleasure it brings and the potential for it to result in new life are intertwined in a mysterious manner. When a couple takes an action to render their sexual coupling sterile, something subtly changes in the act. Instead of potentially being a mutual act of giving, it at least partially becomes a mutual act of taking. The intention of taking the pleasure of sex while acting to sterilize it not only blocks the procreative nature of sex, it inherently damages the unitive function of sex as well. The end result is a cheapening of the sexual union from a physical expression of love into an act of mere gratification (though the change isn’t night/day binary, it is more subtle).

Note that the above does NOT reduce to “sex is only to make babies.” God didn’t design the human body such that sexual attraction is limited to fertile times (like many other species are). Women are fertile only a small number of days in life overall and there is nothing wrong with a couple (even intentionally) making love on a day that GOD made infertile, just on changing a day the God made fertile into one that man made sterile for his selfish purposes.
Good try but not quite – give it another go. I’ll give you a hint it’s only about three sentences long for a complete summation of it.
 
Good try but not quite – give it another go. I’ll give you a hint it’s only about three sentences long for a complete summation of it.
You asked for it in my words. You got it.

Wanna call me wrong, prove it. Your turn.
 
I’d like to let some other people try first.
It may be that the web doesn’t convey tone very well, but you are coming off rather condescending, which may be why nobody is interested in playing your game.
 
It may be that the web doesn’t convey tone very well, but you are coming off rather condescending, which may be why nobody is interested in playing your game.
I didn’t intend to be condescending. I was just curious how many people could articulate the Catholic Church’s teaching in their own words.

It relates to renewal of the marriage Sacrament and its valid renewal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top