Teenagers and birth control

  • Thread starter Thread starter moira
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
a_cermak said:
And I would say that what the Pope says is not binding on me. Even what all the Catholic Bishops working in a council say is not binding on me. Now, if all the Catholic Bishops and all the Eastern Orthodox Bishops and all the Episcopalian Bishops, Coptic Bishops, and other miscellaneous Bishops worldwide were to get into an Ecumenical Council and come to a conclusion, that would be binding on all Christians who belonged to those various denominations.
Click to expand...
Different levels of binding? Everyone is bound to bow the knee before God at the conclusion of one’s earthly walk and the conclusion of this world temporary existence as we know it.

I agree that a person can only be bound by the light offered to them by God. The Catholic Church has been entrusted by jesu Himself with the fullness of the truth (in matters of faith and morals) and the authority to boind on earth as it it is in heaven.

I hope that any non-Catholic (and Catholic) believer is not missing the forest for the trees in fragmenting by faction and sect the revelation our one true Judeo-Christian God.
 
a_cermak said:
It does not, only by Catholic rubrics does it bind, and if one does not agree to follow Catholic rubrics or authority structures, then one is not bound by any rule set forth by the Catholic church.

I think of it as consent of the governed. The person gives consent to follow a Church’s teaching by joining it.
Click to expand...
It does bind ALL.
“Truth is not determined be a majority vote.” Benedict XVI
 
a_cermak said:
It does not, only by Catholic rubrics does it bind, and if one does not agree to follow Catholic rubrics or authority structures, then one is not bound by any rule set forth by the Catholic church.

I think of it as consent of the governed. The person gives consent to follow a Church’s teaching by joining it.
Click to expand...
The Church does not invent right and wrong. She transmits the truth in these matters. How culpable any one person is I cannot say, but objectively contraception is intrinsically evil.
 
mikew262 said:
Just curious here. How many of you folks who answered, have actually raised daughters to adulthood?
Click to expand...
I haven’t raised a sixteen year old, but I once was one. The advice given in the five posts previous to your comment were right on the money.

I would have been crushed if my mother had offered me birth control pills at any age.
 
ALLFORHIM said:
Hi,

I just took my 13 year old daughter for her yearly check up and was approached and informed about that vaccine for HPV. Someone here told me it was a sexually transmitted disease that can cause cancer. I didnt get her the vaccine because I feel if I do I am pretty much saying it is ok to have sex. Am I not? I did tell my daughter all about the vaccine and why I didnt want her to have it. She of course shrugs it off as “WHATEVER”. I am told that THEY DO LISTEN even if it doesnt seem like it. Every opportunity I get, I teach her about abstinence and if she has sex she is defiling herself. My church also teaches our teen about what God expects from them. I have also told her that if she makes a mistake and has sex that she need to ask God for forgiveness and turn away from sexual sin. I wanted heer to know it is forgivable but she has to STOP, until she is married. My christian friend also told me to tell her that if a boy pressures her for sex and says I love you–say if you love me you wont want to defile my body through sex.

AFH
Click to expand...
I could be reading this all wrong but I hope your not giving your daughter the impression that sex itself is bad or dirty. Sex is a gift from God and is beautiful when shared betweened husband and wife - I hope your teaching her that too.
 
I have a manager at work who in conversation told me he & his wife put his teenage daughter on bc pills (he is a non-practicing Catholic, his wife is supposedly a “devout” Catholic.) She has a steady boyfriend and according to him its unrealistic to think they aren’t having sex. Putting aside church teaching-which they’ve apparently done already I said to him “Do you want you daughter to get a veneral disease -herpes that she would carry for the rest of her life or worse AIDS?” He said “No, ofcourse not.”
I said “Do you think that your daughter is going to get her now or future boyfriends to use a condom now that she’s on the pill?” He goes on to tell me yes she will in order to protect herself from STD’s.
So I say "So I’m unrealistic to think you can teach abstinence to teenagers but your completely realistic in your assumption that a teenage girl is going to get her boyfriend to use a condom when he knows she’s on the pill. FYI teenagers think STD’s happen to other people. A pregnancy is not the worse thing that happen to your daughter if she has sex. By putting your daughter on the pill you have just encouraged her to engage in even more risky sexual behavior. He kept insisting she would still have her boyfriend use a condom.

So if a person is completely unimpressed with church teaching even from a secular point of view when someone says to you “You should put your 16 year old daughter on the pill.” You can say and what-expose her to every STD out there? I think not."
 
LeahInancsi said:
I haven’t raised a sixteen year old, but I once was one. The advice given in the five posts previous to your comment were right on the money.

I would have been crushed if my mother had offered me birth control pills at any age.
Click to expand...
I didn’t say offer birth control pills. I said educate on all the options with a primary emphasis on abstinence.
 
moira said:
How would you answer someone who said to you, “You should think about getting some form of birth control for your sixteen year old daughter. I know your Church doesn’t approve of birth control, but that won’t stop her from having sex. And you wouldn’t want her to get pregnant.”
Click to expand...
The thinking that underlies the assertion is very common and very confused. It dismisses the fact the contraceptive intercourse is evil, no matter be it in marriage or in fornication. Young people and older people ought to be educated in the truth. Part of that truth is that fornication and contraception are gravely immoral. How can one claim that commiting one mortal sin upon another is logical or helpful as we look to eternity?

The ends never justify the means. I would want to ask this person in what other moral decisions do we accept it is acceptable to commit evil so that some good may come out of it?
 
mikew262 said:
I didn’t say offer birth control pills. I said educate on all the options with a primary emphasis on abstinence.
Click to expand...
What moral imperative does a Catholic have to educate the young and impressionable in both moral and immoral “options” for committing grave sin?
 
mikew262 said:
I didn’t say offer birth control pills. I said educate on all the options with a primary emphasis on abstinence.
Click to expand...
I submit that there is no need to educate any one, young or old, in the oh-so-NOT-new idea that sin is an “option”. Such knowledge is inborn in us, thanks to the Original Sin, and is called concupiscence. All, young and old, but especially young, need to be educated in how to AVOID the “option” of sin. THAT is what does not come naturally.

So-called “sex education” should not be about “options”. It should be about learning how and why to choose virtue over sin, and in that respect should start from the time a child is born. :yup:
 
siamesecat said:
But if I made the poor decision to have sex, they would NOT want me to face the more severe consequences, such as a pregnancy or STD. If a man use me as a sexual object and then left, they’d want me to learn from the experience. But even though having sex was irresponsible,they don’t want me to live with a child or an STD to keep me from doing it again. they want to prevent that from ever happening. The consequences are alot greater and would alter my whole life…not teach me a simple lesson.
Click to expand...
I cannot agree with your reasoning here and I am wondering if someone could point out my error? It seems that we are only looking at results here. We are saying the only aspect in making moral decisions is the result. That often leads to the end justifying the means. If the result is all that matters then the reasoning you provide here can lead to all types of bad things.

In the issue in the OP the logic is that the most important good is to remain not pregnant and not infected and how that is achieved is of no matter. What is left out is the truth and the knowledge of right and wrong.

I am not against children, depending on age, learning about scientific issues. Things like how the circulatory systems functions, or how drugs work in the body like contraceptive agents. But, the child should also learn proper moral reasoning.

The choice is not how can I achieve the end in any way possible. The choice is understanding what freedom actually is and why we must do good and avoid evil.
 
Consecrated said:
I submit that there is no need to educate any one, young or old, in the oh-so-NOT-new idea that sin is an “option”. Such knowledge is inborn in us, thanks to the Original Sin, and is called concupiscence. All, young and old, but especially young, need to be educated in how to AVOID the “option” of sin. THAT is what does not come naturally.

So-called “sex education” should not be about “options”. It should be about learning how and why to choose virtue over sin, and in that respect should start from the time a child is born. :yup:
Click to expand...
Noble idea, but a little unrealistic in today’s world. While I agree you certainly should emphasize abstinence in a teenager growing up, however IMO to not educate a young person on the other options has probably resulted in more unwanted pregnancies, abortions, and STDs that we’ll ever know.

Certainly, there have been teenagers that have remained chaste till marriage, but I feel that has been more the exception than the rule in recent times.
 
setter said:
What moral imperative does a Catholic have to educate the young and impressionable in both moral and immoral “options” for committing grave sin?
Click to expand...
I see the trap you are laying, however, as you know, the majority of US Catholics, as well as, many around the world virtually ignor the Church’s rule on contraception. You know that and I know that. Many do not recognize contraception, particularly the non-abortion kind as grave sin or immoral.

I’m sorry if you don’t like that answer, but thats the way it is.
 
mikew262 said:
I see the trap you are laying, however, as you know, the majority of US Catholics, as well as, many around the world virtually ignor the Church’s rule on contraception. You know that and I know that. Many do not recognize contraception, particularly the non-abortion kind as grave sin or immoral.

I’m sorry if you don’t like that answer, but thats the way it is.
Click to expand...
Exactly what I was referring to (note item #4): forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=1505478#post1505478

BTW – I am not laying any trap; and it appears anyways that you are already snared.
 
Consecrated said:
So-called “sex education” should not be about “options”. It should be about learning how and why to choose virtue over sin, and in that respect should start from the time a child is born. :yup:
Click to expand...
Yes, and it seems often the phrase “sex education” simply means relating specific types of information about how to do this or that and what devices to use to avoid getting pregnant or catching venereal diseases. That cannot be an authentic education.

Should education not mean relating what sex is, why it exists and how it is to be treated? It seems we want to claim that teenagers absolutely will have sex therefore we ought to forget all that moral reasoning stuff and chalk it up to a nice idea, but not really obtainable. Then we go on to “practical” things like violating God’s will and justifying evil actions because we demand a certain outcome. It seems illogical and very disingenuous.
 
fix said:
Yes, and it seems often the phrase “sex education” simply means relating specific types of information about how to do this or that and what devices to use to avoid getting pregnant or catching venereal diseases. That cannot be an authentic education.

Should education not mean relating what sex is, why it exists and how it is to be treated? It seems we want to claim that teenagers absolutely will have sex therefore we ought to forget all that moral reasoning stuff and chalk it up to a nice idea, but not really obtainable. Then we go on to “practical” things like violating God’s will and justifying evil actions because we demand a certain outcome. It seems illogical and very disingenuous.
Click to expand...
Sigh!

Authentic education involves learning everything you can about a specific subject. IMO, if done properly, one can educate a young person on the merits of staying chaste from both a moral and a practical point of view, as well as, on other available options if for some reason, someday, they feel obligated to engage in sexual activity.

This is authentic education.
 
setter said:
I would invite you to dialogue and intellectual discourse beyond personal opinion and consensus morality.
Click to expand...
I’ve given you my opinion, and you’ve given me yours. We disagree. What else is there to discuss? I’m not interested in going in circles.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top