Protestants: defend your use of artificial contraception

[benedictus2]

First, a couple who abstains from sex when the woman is ovulating is practicing birth control, which is another way man attempts to intervene in God’s plan.

But the manner is within God’s plan. He was after all the designer of the body of the woman.

Second, it is an appropriate analogy. ABC that alters body chemistry works the same way as medications for conditions I listed.

Exactly. The conditions you listed were all diseases. When you take the medication you are trying to cure a disease.

So therefore you think that ABC is a medication meant to cure a disease called a baby.

Therefore in your view a baby is a disease.

ABCs that alter body chemistry to change fertility are the same as medications that alter body chemistry that stimulate the pancreas, or the pituitary gland, or the adrenals, you get the picture.

I get the picture all right. The medications you mentioned alter the body chemistry that regulate the pancreas, pituitary gland and adrenals because of a disease. We take these medication to stop a disease.

So again, in your view, therefore a baby is a sickness. Well if that is so, since you are a human being, then you are therefore a disease that somehow your parents failed to cure.

Get the picture?

So would you say that if someone were to end your life now, he would be doing the world a favour because that person is getting rid of a disease?

As to equating chilldren to these medical conditions let me say that pregnancy is a medical condition.

So again you confirm that being pregnant is being sick with a baby in the same way that cancer patients are sick with cancer.

Pregnancy necessitates improving lifestyle choices, eating better, exercise, doctor visits, ultrasounds, physical examinations, hormonal and physical changes in a woman’s body, and possibly medication to correct complications.

Aaah steve you are digging yourself deeper and deeper into this. You keep reiterating that a baby is a disease.

In addition, who says that the aformentioned diseases are a chastisement.

Obama did when he equated a baby to a punishment. Which is not far off from your take that a baby is a ailment that must be gotten rid of.

It is times of trouble that draw us closer to God as we lean on Him for support.

And yet you would reject the possible troubled times that might result from having children.

These conditions, along with pregnancy, often lead people to deeply examine their lives and make changes for the better.

Again, why then would you contracept a child if you think that troubled times bring one to examine one’s life.

You contracept because you want an easier life not a troubled life.

In this way even a cancer like me can do God’s work.

If that is so then why would you shun a child (which you have equated to a cancer) if it will make you do God’s work.*

We know that all things work together for the good of those who love God-those whom he has called according to his plan.

Rom 8:28
If we don’t meet in this life I’ll see you in heaven, brother.

Yes they do, but not the things that you do purposely in defiance of God.

 

[kathmandu]

You completely missed the point of my post.

kathmandu said that the reason why one should practice contraception is because she did not want children brought into a “bad situation”. If the “bad situation” is so evil one must never ever be born into it, then it stands to reason that it would be equally “loving” (as she puts) to get people out of existence just so they can get out of that situation.

Basically she is saying that not to be born is better than to be in this bad situation.

If this is true, then it is equally good to remove people from this bad situation even if it means killing them.

So dropping bombs in the starving regions of Africa becomes good because you are taking the people out of their misery.

If dropping a bomb killed all the suffering instantly it would be far more merciful than having the starving endure a long horrible death. Remember those skinny mothers who no longer have any breast milk for their babies and they are holding skeletal infants who are dying in their arms? That is one of those recurring images that I can never get out of my mind.

But aside, my don’t you find a good Catholic woman and have a lot of children? I believe you are lonely and could better spend you time raising children to know and serve God.

 

[benedictus2]

If dropping a bomb killed all the suffering instantly it would be far more merciful than having the starving endure a long horrible death. Remember those skinny mothers who no longer have any breast milk for their babies and they are holding skeletal infants who are dying in their arms? That is one of those recurring images that I can never get out of my mind.

Well, now we know what sort of mentality you have. So I suppose the tone of your post is not surprising.

Perhaps you could tell that to a certain lady named Imaculee Illibagiza.

It’s interesting that you can advocate this genocide because you have already been born. But the hypocrisy of course, escapes you.

You know what, several names came to mind after I read your post: Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao.

But I say top marks for comprehension. You did not dispute the validity of my conclusions.

But aside, my don’t you find a good Catholic woman and have a lot of children? I believe you are lonely and could better spend you time raising children to know and serve God.

Hmmm, now you’re suggesting I get into lesbian relationship. :tsktsk: Hardly produces offsprings you know.

BTW, that’s the kind of argument people resort to when they have not got any rational ones up their sleeve.

 

[Le_Cracquere]

No doubt it happens. But the fact that it happens does not eliminate the fact that the reason you are practicing ABC is because you want to stop this from happening. Otherwise, if God’s will is paramount, and if you think God will give you the chidren that He wants to give you, then why are you bothering to contracept at all. Therefore by using contraception, you are saying that man does have a say in the matter.

Do you realize what a stupid analogy you have just given?

You are equating a child to cancer, heart attack and diabetes.

Therefore to you, a child is a malady, a disease that must be stopped. Nice.

That is exactly what Obama thinks hence the reason for his statement about not wanting his daughter to be PUNISHED with a child. Children now are regarded as some form of chastisement.

Well then perhaps you should start looking at yourself in the same way. If a child, a human being, is a chastisement then you are a chastisement, you are a disease, you are a cancer.

Get my drift?

I don’t want to get too in-your-face about this, but you appear to have encountered different children in your life than I have! To dial it back a few notches, though: not everyone likes children. Not everyone is going to like children. Many of these same people, though, are married, love each other wholeheartedly, and don’t quite see the connection between their love and the love of a third party who drives them seethingly insane as a species, and who does a good impersonation of a punishment, whether or not it’s the case.

Loving one’s spouse and rearing a child are like baseball and tropical fish, or whittling and chartered accounting–they’re WHOLLY distinct affections/skill sets. A person may have a love/aptitude for both, but not necessarily–the traits don’t correlate very well, if at all. One may love A while detesting B. Treating them as an inseparable package continues to strike me as bizarre.

 

[samiam1611]

I don’t want to get too in-your-face about this, but you appear to have encountered different children in your life than I have! To dial it back a few notches, though: not everyone likes children. Not everyone is going to like children. Many of these same people, though, are** married, love each other wholeheartedly, and don’t quite see the connection between their love and the love of a third party who drives them seethingly insane as a species, and who does a good impersonation** of a punishment, whether or not it’s the case.

Loving one’s spouse and rearing a child are like baseball and tropical fish, or whittling and chartered accounting–they’re WHOLLY distinct affections/skill sets. A person may have a love/aptitude for both, but not necessarily–the traits don’t correlate very well, if at all. One may love A while detesting B. Treating them as an inseparable package continues to strike me as bizarre.

I agree. Pregnancy has is a diagnosis - from the International Statistical Classification of** Diseases **and Related Health Problems. This is my thread that in short, is about my issue with the procreative and unitive requirements of a Catholic marriage. It hasn’t had any new comments in awhile, but it’s still of interest to me so if anyone feels like it, I would appreciate your responses.

 

[benedictus2]

I don’t want to get too in-your-face about this, but you appear to have encountered different children in your life than I have! To dial it back a few notches, though: not everyone likes children.

It is not about whether we like children or don’t like children.

The issue here (just in case you missed it) is that children are being considered a disease.

But if a baby is a disease then YOU ARE A DISEASE. Your mother was just not successful at getting rid of the disease. Your mother’s mother and so forth ought to be blamed because her mother should have gotten rid of the disease that is your mother in the first place so that the disease that is yourself cannot afflict this world.

After all, they said that if you get to the cancer early enough, you can stop it spreading.

And yes it is necessary to be in-your-face in this instance because some people it seems just don’t exercise they’re rational faculty so don’t get it until you spell it to them in the blackest of black and the whitest of white.

Not everyone is going to

like children.
And many people don’t like working. So what is your point? Should we eliminate everything we don’t like. Should I hire a “cleaner” to eliminate my neighbour if I don’t like them?

Many of these same people, though, are married, love each other wholeheartedly, and don’t quite see the connection between their love and the love of a third party who drives them seethingly insane as a species, and who does a good impersonation

of a punishment, whether or not it’s the case.
I am quite horrified that you are writing this.This is a very un-Christian (even diabolic) perspective. Only the EvilOne could have whispered this in your ear.

If children are a punishment, then woe to the world because we have been punished with you and your like. Your mom has a lot to answer for by keeping and maintaining this disease that is you, when it should have been smothered at birth…

If children are a punishment, no one - not one single person- has a right to exist in this world because everyone is therefore a punishment. Everyone should thus be obliterated from the earth to remove this punishment called humanity. Perhaps the solution is to tell the UN that we drop a huge number of nuclear bombs to rid the world of its misery. David Koresh and Jim Jones in global proportions.

Hmmm I keep hearing Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot in all these posts.

Loving one’s spouse and rearing a child are like baseball and tropical fish, or whittling and chartered accounting–they’re WHOLLY distinct affections/skill sets.

And who says that having children is the same as having skills sets? You have are a really warped mentality if you think that.

A person may have a love/aptitude for both, but not necessarily–the traits don’t correlate very well, if at all. One may love A while detesting B.

And is love a mere feeling? No wonder people divorce, remarry, divorce remarry because they no longer have this feeling called “love”? Rather an immature view don’t you think?

Treating them as an inseparable package continues to strike me as bizarre.

Equating children to disease and punishment is not just bizarre. It is diabolic.

How does one reason with someone who thinks people are the scourge of the earth and yet thinks he has a right to exist?

 

[benedictus2]

I agree. Pregnancy has is a diagnosis - from the International Statistical Classification of** Diseases **and Related Health Problems. This is my thread that in short, is about my issue with the procreative and unitive requirements of a Catholic marriage. It hasn’t had any new comments in awhile, but it’s still of interest to me so if anyone feels like it, I would appreciate your responses.

So again you are a disease just like cancer. What right has a cancer to complain about other cancers?

 

[benedictus2]

For Samian, Kathmandu, Le Craquere and every one

youtube.com/watch?v=oGZYT50Bow4

youtube.com/watch?v=XZVfHoTROgQ&feature=related

 

[kathmandu]

Well, now we know what sort of mentality you have. So I suppose the tone of your post is not surprising.

Perhaps you could tell that to a certain lady named Imaculee Illibagiza.

It’s interesting that you can advocate this genocide because you have already been born. But the hypocrisy of course, escapes you.

You know what, several names came to mind after I read your post: Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao.

But I say top marks for comprehension. You did not dispute the validity of my conclusions.

Hmmm, now you’re suggesting I get into lesbian relationship. :tsktsk: Hardly produces offsprings you know.

BTW, that’s the kind of argument people resort to when they have not got any rational ones up their sleeve.

I did not ask to be born. I would have preferred to have been aborted.

I did not realize you were female. You give no indication of it. So in that case I recommend that you find a husband and have many children.

 

[stevekehl]

But the manner is within God’s plan. He was after all the designer of the body of the woman.

Ok, how about vitamins. We can get all the vitamins we need from natural sources, but many people take vitamin supplements. Is it a sin to take your morning Flintstones instead of getting nutrition solely from food?

Obama did when he equated a baby to a punishment. Which is not far off from your take that a baby is a ailment that must be gotten rid of.

Just a side note, no one has ever compared me to Obama, or any Democrat for that matter.

You contracept because you want an easier life not a troubled life.

So using things that make life easier is a sin, too. I guess no cars, cell phones, cable TV, internet, plumbing, electricity. Let’s get down to the heart of the matter, is there any scripture regarding contraception. I’ve been reading lots of opinions and lots of conjecture but haven’t seen much scripture.
Hope your Palm Sunday was a blessed one.

 

[benedictus2]

I did not ask to be born. I would have preferred to have been aborted.

If you would have preferred to have been aborted because life is so bad right now, then it stands to reason that you would prefer it if a gunman came to your house and shot you point blank or if someone were to drag you right now into a cliff and throw you over or if one of your friends poisoned you.

And to extend the logic of that line of thought, you wish the same thing for your two children to put them out of their misery?

I truly feel terrible that you should think that it was better if your mother had aborted you. I think that is terribly, terribly sad. And that is the whole problem with agnosticism and atheism. Without God everything becomes permissible and life has absolutely no meaning.

I pray that God’s Spirit come upon you so that you will know how tenderly you are loved and how precious you are in His sight. I will really pray that He give you His Peace and His Joy.

I did not realize you were female. You give no indication of it.

Why? Because I stick to reason in this forum? Are women supposed to be deprived of this faculty? Should all women be irrational and over emotional creatures?

Or if you are hinting that I come across as “too hard” like a “male”, for the record let it be noted that I am not the one advocating dropping a bomb on the starving people of Africa to put them out of their misery. It horrifies me that that suggestion actually came from a woman.

You’re not upset with me. You are upset that what I say makes sense and it is something that you have not thought of and you are probably coming to realize the utter evil of your line of thinking.

So in that case I recommend that you find a husband and have many children.

Being most likely an agnostic or an atheist, you would not have any idea about following God’s will as regard’s one’s state of life. But if He had wanted me to get married, then I would have followed His will in that state of life too in the manner that His Church has prescribed.

That kind of reasoning will probably whiz pass your head right now, but I think (no, I am sure) one day you will know what I mean - with God’s grace.

 

[benedictus2]

Ok, how about vitamins. We can get all the vitamins we need from natural sources, but many people take vitamin supplements. Is it a sin to take your morning Flintstones instead of getting nutrition solely from food?

What has that got to do with what we are talking about here?

Just a side note, no one has ever compared me to Obama, or any Democrat for that matter.

Your line of thinking compares. So now someone has compared you to Obama.

So using things that make life easier is a sin, too. I guess no cars, cell phones, cable TV, internet, plumbing, electricity.

My goodness, you really are not getting this.

When did I say using things to make life easy is a sin?

I am showing you the convoluted and irrational line of thinking you have displayed in your post. First you say that you derive a benefit from having “troubled life” and yet here you are contracepting to get out of a supposed “troubled life” that kids might bring.

If you truly think that hardship presents an avenue for growth, why would you go against God’s plan if you truly believe that any hardship that children may bring will be an avenue for growth?

Let’s get down to the heart of the matter, is there any scripture regarding contraception. I’ve been reading lots of opinions and lots of conjecture but haven’t seen much scripture.

I have shown that over and over again in this thread, first against Rev Kevin and then with another lady just recently. Go over my posts in the past few weeks on this thread.

Hope your Palm Sunday was a blessed one.

Hope yours was too. We acclaim Christ Lord and next thing we are shouting crucify Him.

But God is great and His mercy unbounded so we are able to sing at the Easter Vigil Mass: O happy fault, O necessary sin of Adam, which gained for us so great a Redeemer

 

[kathmandu]

If you would have preferred to have been aborted because life is so bad right now, then it stands to reason that you would prefer it if a gunman came to your house and shot you point blank or if someone were to drag you right now into a cliff and throw you over or if one of your friends poisoned you.

And to extend the logic of that line of thought, you wish the same thing for your two children to put them out of their misery?

I truly feel terrible that you should think that it was better if your mother had aborted you. I think that is terribly, terribly sad. And that is the whole problem with agnosticism and atheism. Without God everything becomes permissible and life has absolutely no meaning.

I pray that God’s Spirit come upon you so that you will know how tenderly you are loved and how precious you are in His sight. I will really pray that He give you His Peace and His Joy.

Why? Because I stick to reason in this forum? Are women supposed to be deprived of this faculty? Should all women be irrational and over emotional creatures?

Or if you are hinting that I come across as “too hard” like a “male”, for the record let it be noted that I am not the one advocating dropping a bomb on the starving people of Africa to put them out of their misery. It horrifies me that that suggestion actually came from a woman.

You’re not upset with me. You are upset that what I say makes sense and it is something that you have not thought of and you are probably coming to realize the utter evil of your line of thinking.

Being most likely an agnostic or an atheist, you would not have any idea about following God’s will as regard’s one’s state of life. But if He had wanted me to get married, then I would have followed His will in that state of life too in the manner that His Church has prescribed.

That kind of reasoning will probably whiz pass your head right now, but I think (no, I am sure) one day you will know what I mean - with God’s grace.

Honestly you make no sense at all. You are like someone who has not experienced life. Are you in a cloister somewhere because you are afraid of life?

And I am not an agnostic or an atheist. I believe in quality of life for all. I don’t believe people should have to live hell on earth. But then again I believe in reincarnation. I remember being alive in heaven before this existence and I am not sure why I came here. I bit off more than I could chew this life time. Trying to make the best of if and learn my lessons.

 

[benedictus2]

Honestly you make no sense at all. You are like someone who has not experienced life. Are you in a cloister somewhere because you are afraid of life?

What has that got to do with the fact that your responses are ill thought and non rational?

You are equating experiencing life with a solution to bomb thousands of people to take them out of misery? Is that what your experience of life has taught you? You obviously need to deal with the issues that has left you so bitter but taking it out on others is no solution.

And I am not an agnostic or an atheist. I believe in quality of life for all. I don’t believe people should have to live hell on earth. But then again I believe in reincarnation. I remember being alive in heaven before this existence

Sure, sure, I suppose we can take that on your word

and I am not sure why I came here. I bit off more than I could chew this life time. Trying to make the best of if and learn my lessons.

Since you believe in re=incarnation then perhaps this is your karma? Isn;t it that Hindu teaching says that one deserves one’s karma?

 

[kathmandu]

What has that got to do with the fact that your responses are ill thought and non rational?

You are equating experiencing life with a solution to bomb thousands of people to take them out of misery? Is that what your experience of life has taught you? You obviously need to deal with the issues that has left you so bitter but taking it out on others is no solution.

Sure, sure, I suppose we can take that on your word

Since you believe in re=incarnation then perhaps this is your karma? Isn;t it that Hindu teaching says that one deserves one’s karma?

Yes, it is my karma. I am trying to make the best of it.

 

[kathmandu]

Yes, it is my karma. I am trying to make the best of it.

And actually the gross suffering we see on this planet is the karma of those people. I just have a hard time dealing with all the suffering. I don’t celebrate the suffering of others the way I see some Roman Catholics do.

 

[benedictus2]

And actually the gross suffering we see on this planet is the karma of those people. I just have a hard time dealing with all the suffering. I don’t celebrate the suffering of others the way I see some Roman Catholics do.

Because you do not see the value in it.

But just because you do not see the value in it does not mean it does not have value.

As for some Roman Catholics celebrating the suffering of others, it is called embracing the cross and helping others embrace the cross.

As a matter of fact, it is the Hindu religion that entrenches suffering. It is the Catholic Church that is the biggest provider of aid to those in need worldwide.

 

[kathmandu]

For Samian, Kathmandu, Le Craquere and every one

youtube.com/watch?v=oGZYT50Bow4

youtube.com/watch?v=XZVfHoTROgQ&feature=related

That is rather disturbing. Life is hard enough without having to deal with that and be dependent on others.

 

[benedictus2]

That is rather disturbing. Life is hard enough without having to deal with that and be dependent on others.

And yet what joy there is in that guy.

That is the big difference. Christ is the big difference.

 

[kathmandu]

Because you do not see the value in it.

But just because you do not see the value in it does not mean it does not have value.

As for some Roman Catholics celebrating the suffering of others, it is called embracing the cross and helping others embrace the cross.

As a matter of fact, it is the Hindu religion that entrenches suffering. It is the Catholic Church that is the biggest provider of aid to those in need worldwide.

The RCC is the only organization in the world that has dead bodies handing on crosses in every room of their buildings. I find it strange that people are so desensitized to them. I asked my husband why it did not bother him. He said he is used to it. I was in a restaurant in northern Maine and there was one hanging on the wall in their dining room! I was appalled. I thought Christ was risen? But in all these places he is still dead. It diminishes His power.