Which is a more effective argument against contraception?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Scholastic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
you cannot recieve a gift you aren’t open to. God will send you the grace if you are open to it. Not everyone is open to it. Not everyone will be saved. I am thinking we a going off the thread a little bit and this would make a good talk under salvation outside the church.
I don’t find it to be a circular argument that if my conscious is against what the church teaches than it is wrong. The church is guided and protected by the Holy Spirit. Obvioiusly I have the Spirit too but it is easy for one little person to be selfish and go against the Spirit for our own desires. Our bishops and popes were selected by God to guide and He reveals truths to them that are not revealed to me. It boils down to believing the the authority of the church which as a Catholic, I do.
Again, if a Protestant or any other non Christian doesn’t want the truth, isn’t looking for the truth and closes the door, God forces himself on no one. So to imply that God is or is not pouring out graces to bring people to the faith falls short in my mind. If we aren’t open to His gifts, He doesn’t send them.
Also where does the Catholic church teach He won’t send us more than we can handle? I have heard people say that in passing to comfort someone but never have I heard it as a teaching of the church
 
They are both true but I like the first one better because it is the most basic. The natural law argument is crucial in defending many Catholic doctrines and we would all do well to study up on Natural Law.
 
catholicforlife,

God knows us intimately and knows just how far we can go before we break and fail, he cannot allow us to receive more than we can endure, for if he does then we have no hope of enduring thus we must fail, if we fail his tests shall we say, then what is the outcome for those who fail Christ or shall we say die in mortal sin…

The reason I bought up the salvation meaning is that this directly impacts on the argument for and against contraception.

The whole idea of Church teaching is that God has given us the faith and the many sacrements etc. The reason he does this is to assist us in our attempts at salvation. It means that the various sacrements/laws/teachings etc, must make it easier to get to heaven assuming we are genuinely disposed.

Now in relation to contraception no one would doubt that if God allowed contraception then it would make the path to savation a lot easier. We know that the vast majority of people use artifical contraception, therefor it must be easier to use it than not use it, especially in relation to our sexual appetites etc.

So God has given us rules that make it very hard at times to avoid mortal sin, now here is the crux, if we allow that those who are ignorant of gods law regarding artifical contraception to be let off the hook becasue they don’t know or understand that it is wrong he is actually making the path to salvation easier for them than us (catholics)

Is the path to salvation easier for non catholics than catholics, Certainly the teaching of the Church would say no.

So either everyone has to abide by the no artificial contraception or we as catholics are being made to “work harder” for salvation than non catholics

If those who are supposedly ignorant of the evils of artifical contraception are not condemned for the practice of artifical contraception then neither should we be.
 
Catholicforlife

here is part of what you said.

Again, if a Protestant or any other non Christian doesn’t want the truth, isn’t looking for the truth and closes the door, God forces himself on no one. So to imply that God is or is not pouring out graces to bring people to the faith falls short in my mind. If we aren’t open to His gifts, He doesn’t send them.

Do you realise what you are saying in the above, What awaits those who turn their back on Gods Grace, is it not damnation.

If it is damnation then at the very least just about all protestants (let alone others) essentailly must be damned becasue they, by remaining protestant could not be opening themselves to the graces that God gives, they must be refusing them becasue if they did not then they would come to the Catholic Church.
 
Tim,

(Responding to several of your posts in this thread)

It sounds like you don’t believe people can act against their consciences; is that the case? Even if I am fully aware that a certain sin is wrong, I can commit it with that knowledge (making it more grevious, of course). So I disagree with your statement that if someone acts contrary to what the Church has revealed to be wrong, that person’s conscience is malformed.

Further, I think that natural reason or our God-given consciences can provide us with an innate knowledge that something (such as contraception) is wrong, even if it is our consciously-held belief that it is acceptable. If this were not the case, then anything we rationalized would be morally acceptable. Similarly, you can find people “ignorant” of the wrongness of any given sin; that does not automatically justify sin for us.

I know that, looking at contraception statistics, many Catholics and Protestants at this point in time are in mortal sin. It is sad, but “many are called, but few are chosen.” I don’t think the solution is to legitimize a sin committed by a majority, but to try to reverse the trend.

To say that God could get more souls into Heaven by allowing contraception, or that He has “made” it too hard on us would be an oversimplification; for that matter, why not allow everyone into Heaven and get rid of the idea of sin? I think that idea misses the point that sin is innately wrong because it violates the natural ordering of creation by God–the foundation of the first of the two approaches we’re being polled on in this thread.
 
Contraception is evil, not because God arbitrarily says so, but because of how He made us: in accordance to the truth and goodness that is God Himself.

Thus, “God allowing contraception” sounds like bad metaphysics: essentially it’s not only contrary to what we are but also to what God is.
 
Damnation is precisely what awaits those who turn their back on God and His truth. He didn’t say everyone gets to go, he said the path is narrow, the path to destruction wide.
Yes, I think it is harder for Catholics in a sense. We know the truth and are accountable for it. Other Christians or anyone for that matter through NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN who do not know of the fullness of truth will not be held responsible for their ignorance (that is in the catechism).
Most people who aren’t Catholic don’t know anything other than the reilgion they were raised in. That is not their fault. Now if you choose to leave the fullness of faith in the Catholic church for something else, then you have a problem.
Sometimes God allows us great suffering, more than we can handle. I have experienced that myself and seen it many times over. He allows this to bring us to our knees and draw us closer to Him. You have never seen someone hit rock bottom? I assure you it happens every day to many people. God does not take away all suffering, it has it’s place in our life. He never sends us the suffering, but He does allow us to suffer. Most people would say that is indeed more than we can (or want) to handle.
 
Catholic for Life,

Wonderful insights about the responsibility that comes with the knowledge we have as Catholics. 👍 One thing, though:
40.png
Catholicforlife:
Sometimes God allows us great suffering, more than we can handle.
Click to expand...
I think in a sense you’re right; God sends us more than we can bear on our own. But there is a scripture (1 Cor 10:13) that says we won’t be tried beyond what we can bear… this might be what Tim is referring to by “It is also taught that he will not give us anything we cannot handle”–and I’d have to agree with him in the sense indicated by the verse above.
 
I think both arguments are good. I also think people sometimes need a small analogy to understand it better. When we are married we are really three not two. The two are joined and make it one in the physical sense, but in the spiritual sense we are joined as three. This helps understand the trinity. Three persons in one God. When we use contraception, even the condomn. We have sent a wedding invitation to the Lord asking him to cooperate with us in the beauty of the marriage act and asking him for the gift of a child if it is his will. When we use a condomn we have sent him an invitation to come and then told him that he is not welcome after all. Is it better to send someone an invitation and then tell them that they are not welcome, or not to send him one at all when the decision to space children is present.

I have found this to be very successful with contracepting people to help them understand the evil of the situation.

God bless.
 
. said:
Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred, Human life is sacred.
Click to expand...

Sweetners are not sacred. Animal life is not sacred. Therefore we can use artificial sweetners. We can neuter our dogs.

When we hold something sacred, we don’t change it, or we are carefull not to entirely change the character of it. That’s what that means when we say “Sacred Tradition”, we (or the Holy Spirit) will never allow it to evolve so much that it is unrecognizable from the original. That’s why Bible translations must be done with the utmost care.

Also when we regard something as sacred, the instruments associated with it are set aside.

Special china is only used for special meals. It is the very act of reserving the china for special meals that helps set those meals apart. If that same china is then used for ordinary meals, it no longer has the power to make the special meals visibly special.

Likewise, if that act, which initiates a sacred human life is also used as mere recreation. The act loses it’s power to make visible just how beautiful, precious, and sacred human life is.

One of the “fruits” of contraception is jokes about how miserable parenting is. Jokes like: People arguing over when life begins: At conception? At birth? No, after the kids leave the house. Rather than children being the fruit of a very special and sacred act, children are now viewed as a burden that results from a “failure” of ABC.

I am a new catholic and i have to admit that it is wanting to obey the Church that was the only compelling reason I had until this post by Black Jaque. What you say Black Jaque starts to make since. I add to your reputation.

The only other argument I have heard somewhat relates. It is that the purpose of Marriage is the raising of children. Nothing men and women do together except sex requires marriage. I can have a woman as a friend, we can help each other, live in the same house, pay each others bills, ( all reason given for marriage) without marriage and without sin. It is only when we try to make children that the relationship requires Marriage. Protestants have under cut their argument against gay marriage by contracepting.
 
40.png
Catholicforlife:
Damnation is precisely what awaits those who turn their back on God and His truth. He didn’t say everyone gets to go, he said the path is narrow, the path to destruction wide.
Yes, I think it is harder for Catholics in a sense. We know the truth and are accountable for it. Other Christians or anyone for that matter through NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN who do not know of the fullness of truth will not be held responsible for their ignorance (that is in the catechism).
Most people who aren’t Catholic don’t know anything other than the reilgion they were raised in. That is not their fault. Now if you choose to leave the fullness of faith in the Catholic church for something else, then you have a problem.
Sometimes God allows us great suffering, more than we can handle. I have experienced that myself and seen it many times over. He allows this to bring us to our knees and draw us closer to Him. You have never seen someone hit rock bottom? I assure you it happens every day to many people. God does not take away all suffering, it has it’s place in our life. He never sends us the suffering, but He does allow us to suffer. Most people would say that is indeed more than we can (or want) to handle.
Click to expand...
Your quote from CCC I think is in regard to invincible ignorance. Is that not referring to those outside the Church not knowing that they should join the visible Church? I would argue that contraception is a violation of the natural law. Protestants still must be in a state of grace to enter heaven. Some have argued that it is harder for a Protestant to be in a state of grace than a catholic. A Catholic has the sacraments. Protestants need perfect contrition. Contraception, I believe, is mortal in most cases today for both Catholics and Protestants.

In fact, today we are more educated and have more avenues to seek the truth which means we are more culpable. We each are given many talents and much will be expected of us.
 
St. Ambrose:
I don’t really find either argument compelling. I believe the doctrine on contraception only because the Church has always taught it.

The argument about it being “artificial” and not as God intended… I have often wondered how this is different from using artificial sweetener and fat substitutes. Normally if we eat a certain amount of food then weight gain happens. We want to continue eating the same amount of food and use an unnatural means to avoid the consequences of doing so. Yet nobody regards this as sin. How is this different from artificiallness in artificial contraception?
Click to expand...
I saw no mention of “artificiality” in the original post. Anticipating NFP arguments?
 
I will enter this debate from a health of the woman standpoint. There is evidence that the Birth Control Pill causes breast cancer. If for any reason at all, a woman should consider the risk of using chemical contraceptives too dangerous for her delicate and complex reproductive health. Most chemical contraceptives are abortifacients. That is a scientific fact mentioned in every doctor’s Desk Reference book. Abortion is the result of failed contraception in most cases. Also see: www.AbortionBreastCancer.com

… Essential Background ( link between breast cancer, abortion, & the pill), by Chris Kahlenborn, M.D. … B. Links between “The Pill” and Breast Cancers: …
www.lrc.edu/rel/blosser/Cancers.htm - 8k - Cached

New evidence of a link between abortion, THE PILL, and breast cancer … in prominent medical circles. A link between abortion and breast cancer was recently acknowledged in the …
Catholic.net - Catholics on the net - 32k - Cached

However, If you visit the same search site that I got this information, you will see how many sources would deny this link completely. Does this remind you of the tobacco industry?
search.yahoo.com/search?fr=slv1-&p=Link+between+Pill+and+Breast+Cancer

I find it contemptible that drug companies and the population control tyrants would endanger the health and welfare of women by exposing them to large doses of carcinogens contained in THE PILL. I applaud the Vatican for prophesying years ago, that the use of contraceptives endangers women and eventually leads to abortion and the breakdown of traditional societal structures. Their prophecy came thru.
 
The Church’s stance on contraception is scriptural. Originally contraception was called Onamism and forbidden by all Christian denominations. Its basis is the Old Testament - sorry I can’t remember what Book but the Catholic Answers pamphlet on contraception is an excellent read. There should be no need for a more effective argument that Scripture.
 
I like the second one because it takes emotion into account. holding back a part of yourself from your spouse is an emotional issue. I find when debating that emotionla issues often have greater impact on the people you are speaking to because they can feel it rather than the inner workings of the body which cannot necessarily be felt and can be argued more clearly either way.
 
40.png
RCEllis:
To my mind, the only argument against birth control is a simple one: it encourages people to think of sex as recreation - when it is far more than even the means of reproduction; it impacts nearly every facet of ones life, from emotional, to practical, to physical health, to the prospective and/or potential lives of others.

This is going to sound dumb, but think about it: sex is not fun.

Clint
Click to expand...
No? well, it is in my house!

Arguments like yours are what make me think the Church’s position on birth control is nonsense.

Naprous
 
I didn’t vote because I didn’t think either of the positions matched up completely with what got me to change my mind on artificial contraception (although #1 comes closer).

For me, it was the realization that by using the Pill, I was purposely screwing up an otherwise mostly healthy set of organs that God had given to me, and causing (hopefully reversible) damage to my body. Now that I’m off of the Pill, quite frankly I can’t imagine going back on it. And I’m quite appalled at how little publicity there is concerning the amount of damage it causes to the cervix, the liver, breast tissue, etc. Instead we get commercials for the new Pill that lets you have “only 4 periods a year!” How is that healthy or normal? It’s taking what is healthy and screwing it up. :mad:

The more I look at society, the more I’m struck by how much damage has been done to women and the family. So the Pill and abortion were supposed to be new routes for women’s freedom? Hardly. They’re new cages in which to trap women. They are of the mindset that a woman’s fertility is a burden (ironically, other than the condom there is nothing to alter a man’s fertility, even though he is ALWAYS fertile and a woman is only fertile for a few days per cycle), and that she is worthwhile only if her fertility can be contained and subdued rather than respected. And of course it’s solely the woman’s responsibility if her birth control fails, and she’s the one who feels forced to make the choice between having a child and struggling, often alone, or allowing her child to be killed and taken away in an abortion.

It also saddens me to see how often children are regarded as burdens, as necessary evils that one must have to “fit in” or to provide grandchildren, etc. Children are gifts of light and love and joy from God- not burdens, and not disposable. I pray that the chemicals that were supposed to “free” me haven’t left me unable to bear my husband’s and my children.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top