Why are condoms wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter AdamC
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

AdamC

Guest
This might not not be the right section for this.

I don’t understand why condoms are wrong for married couples. I can understand the pill, as it manipulates hormones and things, but why are condoms a problem? The only answer I’ve received from websites is this idea that condoms somehow get in the way of God creating life. This makes absolutely no sense to me. It’s a thin layer of latex, how could that possibly get in God’s way?

I don’t mean to offend anyone, and I DEFINITELY don’t mean to offend the Lord, but He’s GOD! He had Abraham’s wife get pregnant at quite an old age, he had Mary get pregnant with Jesus even though she never even had sex. If God wants a you to have a baby, YOU’RE HAVING A BABY! Again, I mean no offense, I’m just trying to demonstrate a point. God created all things from nothing, how can latex get in His way? Condoms even have a disclaimer that says they’re not 100% fail-safe. Even a hundredth of a percent would be miles to God. Or He could just disregard the condom altogether.

Besides any of this, doesn’t going out of your way to arrange specific times of the month to have sex amount to the same thing? If condoms get in the way of creating babies, wouldn’t designating special “sex days” do the same? So why is that sinful? It amounts to the same thing, having sex for the sake of sex. Yeah, there’s a bigger chance of pregnancy than with a condom, but the intent is the same.

I read on another thread that a person said people can’t just be baby machines, pumping out kid after kid. Others responded, “why not”? Well, money, for one. It’s a little tough to have a big family if they all starve to death or freeze in the streets because you can’t make mortgage payments.

Honestly, what is morally wrong with having sex with your spouse just for the sake of having sex? Don’t say it’s the same as masturbation, it’s not. Masturbation is a selfish act, and depends solely on lust. Married couples have sex because they’re in love, and they want to demonstrate that love by pleasuring each other physically. I don’t see how this could be wrong, it makes no sense to me.

Is there anything that can be said? If there is an honestly good reason, I’d like to hear it. I really don’t mean to sound like a troll, and please believe me, I really don’t want to offend anyone.
 
Even whilst I was Catholic, I had trouble coming to grips with why it would be immoral. I can certainly understand how condoms can promote infidelity, but you did specifiy within the context of marriage.

I guess to supplement your understanding of it, you’d have to read Humanae Vitae (1968) - which is an encyclical by Pope Paul VI who first wrote explicitly about it in response to increasing Church pressure to allow contraceptives within the Church. Others speak of “Theology of the Body” which was a series of lectures by Pope John Paul II over many years, it has been made into a book, and many Catholics find the reasonings clear through Theology of the Body, I haven’t read it, but I hear it’s good, perhaps you want to look into it.

I think the philosophy behind it isn’t very easy to grasp, so Pope John Paul II and other authors like Christopher West have put it into much easier language for the general populace to understand.
 
As a Protestant, you might want to start with the positions of the founders of Protestant denominations, such as Luther and Calvin and others. All of them considered artificial birth control to be sinful, and condemned it.

In fact the Protestant position on birth control was equivalent to the Catholic position for hundreds of years. The first denomination to break with this long doctrinal agreement was the Anglican church, and that first happened in 1930, when they Lambeth conference that year voted to allow artificial birth control only when needed for grave reasons, for married persons

touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=03-03-041-b
 
JimG said:
As a Protestant, you might want to start with the positions of the founders of Protestant denominations, such as Luther and Calvin and others. All of them considered artificial birth control to be sinful, and condemned it.

In fact the Protestant position on birth control was equivalent to the Catholic position for hundreds of years. The first denomination to break with this long doctrinal agreement was the Anglican church, and that first happened in 1930, when they Lambeth conference that year voted to allow artificial birth control only when needed for grave reasons, for married persons

touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=03-03-041-b
Click to expand...
I’m not a Protestant per se, I only stated that on my profile because I’m not Catholic. Maybe I should change it to non-denominational. I honestly don’t care what Luther or Calvin had to say. In fact, I’ve been attending a Catholic church for the past 9 or 10 weeks, and am seriously considering converting.
 
among other reasons, any form of intercourse not open to life is condemned by the Catholic Church
sex is meant for procreation, that is it’s purpose,
of course it was made to be enjoyable, and that is a good thing, but just like all good things, it can be misused.

it is also essentially like a “birth” control, insomuch as it is an attempt at preventing birth.

ok, hope this helps, take care.
 
EmeraldWings said:
among other reasons, any form of intercourse not open to life is condemned by the Catholic Church
sex is meant for procreation, that is it’s purpose,
of course it was made to be enjoyable, and that is a good thing, but just like all good things, it can be misused.

it is also essentially like a “birth” control, insomuch as it is an attempt at preventing birth.

ok, hope this helps, take care.
Click to expand...
But why is having sex just to enjoy time with your spouse a misuse? I’m not advocating hook-ups or prostitutes.
 
EmeraldWings said:
it is also essentially like a “birth” control, insomuch as it is an attempt at preventing birth.
Click to expand...
It’s not “birth” control; (abortion is “birth” control) condom usage is more properly termed “conception” control.

Both are wrong in the minds of the Church, but my personal opinion is that preventing conception is a lesser evil than aborting the unborn baby (even with a degree in English, I simply cannot wrap my head around calling an unborn child a “fetus”… that term is just so damned dehumanizing).
 
Ponyguy said:
It’s not “birth” control; (abortion is “birth” control) condom usage is more properly termed “conception” control.

Both are wrong in the minds of the Church, but my personal opinion is that preventing conception is a lesser evil than aborting the unborn baby (even with a degree in English, I simply cannot wrap my head around calling an unborn child a “fetus”… that term is just so damned dehumanizing).
Click to expand...
I agree, abortion is disgusting. Maybe I’ve been jaded by all the talk of it in the news and things, but when I was younger I became very disturbed and angry at the mention of it. It still bothers me, but my reaction is more internal now.
 
in the garden of eden,God said dont eat of the fruit of the tree in the center of the garden.using your line of reasoning what is wrong with eating fruit.it is nourishing ,pleasing to the taste and fun to eat.but the point is God said dont do it.the same thing has been applied to birth control. God said dont do it, through his Church.you can question God if you want to,but as a Catholic we are to live by faith,not by sight, and pray for understanding.if not in the life ,then in the next.
 
on_fire said:
in the garden of eden,God said dont eat of the fruit of the tree in the center of the garden.using your line of reasoning what is wrong with eating fruit.it is nourishing ,pleasing to the teste and fun to eat.but the point is God said dont do it.the same thing has been applied to birth control. God said dont do it, hrough his Church.you can question God if you want to,but as a Catholic we are to live by faith,not by sight, and pray for understanding.if not in the life ,then in the next.
Click to expand...
That’s not the same logic at all. God specifically condemned eating of the fruit. No one has shown me any evidence that sex for the sake of sex with one’s spouse is ungodly.
 
Personally, I agree with you. I don’t understand why condoms are wrong. But, I have found that the Church is right about a lot of things that weren’t obvious to me before. So, I trust her on the few things that still aren’t obvious to me. This is one of those.
 
JerryS said:
Personally, I agree with you. I don’t understand why condoms are wrong. But, I have found that the Church is right about a lot of things that weren’t obvious to me before. So, I trust her on the few things that still aren’t obvious to me. This is one of those.
Click to expand...
I just can’t do that, there must be a reason for things. Even in the case of the Eucharist, in which a non-apparent change takes place, there’s still a REASON for it. I can’t believe without reason, and God never works without it. He is the epitome of wisdom, He doesn’t just command things for no reason. If the Church says God doesn’t want us to use condoms, then I want to know why, otherwise I can’t regard that as a true commandment.
 
AdamC said:
That’s not the same logic at all. God specifically condemned eating of the fruit. No one has shown me any evidence that sex for the sake of sex with one’s spouse is ungodly.
Click to expand...
Basically, sex has two end 1) procreative (making babies) and 2) unitive (bonding the spouses together). For sex to be moral, both ends must be met.

If you violate the first (artificial birth control) or the second (in vitro) it’s not licit.

Christopher West has some good writings on the subject.

Hope that helps!

God Bless
 
Ponyguy said:
It’s not “birth” control; (abortion is “birth” control) condom usage is more properly termed “conception” control.

Both are wrong in the minds of the Church, but my personal opinion is that preventing conception is a lesser evil than aborting the unborn baby (even with a degree in English, I simply cannot wrap my head around calling an unborn child a “fetus”… that term is just so damned dehumanizing).
Click to expand...
Stop being so dramatic, it’s a medical term, you know in the field of medicine…? There are specific words for different biological stages and processes, there is nothing dehumanizing about it. So instead of doctors going around and saying “unborn child” they say “foetus” - it’s kind of like this:

fliiby.com

Fliiby

After 11 years of operating Fliiby and more than 200 millions visitors globally we’re shutting down the service today...
fliiby.com

Erm…banana?

I’m against abortion too.
 
bilop said:
Basically, sex has two end 1) procreative (making babies) and 2) unitive (bonding the spouses together). For sex to be moral, both ends must be met.

If you violate the first (artificial birth control) or the second (in vitro) it’s not licit.

Christopher West has some good writings on the subject.

Hope that helps!

God Bless
Click to expand...
There is a 3rd, which is pleasure, and there’s nothing wrong with it, it’s not the same as bonding.

Furthermore, even those are the aspects defined by the Church, they haven’t necessarily said that all 3 must be met for each act, if that was the case, even NFP would be contradictory. Even though NFP is open to life, because that possibility exists, couples who practice NFP obviously don’t INTEND to conceive. So either you’ve interpreted this wrong, or the Church is lacking some reasoning behind this.

If I’m wrong, please show me a definite teaching in relation to what you just said by the Church, I’m interested to know.

Cheers
 
Suspicious_Mind said:
Even though NFP is open to life, because that possibility exists, couples who practice NFP obviously don’t INTEND to conceive. So either you’ve interpreted this wrong, or the Church is lacking some reasoning behind this.
Click to expand...
EXACTLY!!

Though, I did find these verses:

“8 Then Judah said to Onan, “Unite with your brother’s widow, in fulfillment of your duty as brother-in-law, and thus preserve your brother’s line.”
9 Onan, however, knew that the descendants would not be counted as his; so whenever he had relations with his brother’s widow, he wasted his seed on the ground, to avoid contributing offspring for his brother.
10 What he did greatly offended the LORD, and the LORD took his life too.”

Genesis 38:8-10

So maybe there is Biblical basis, but maybe this was meant as a reaction to the fact that Onan disrespected his brother’s memory.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top