NORM Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 (edited) Then why allow the rhythm method? George Apparently they don't: In 1968, Pope Paul VI issued his landmark encyclical letter Humanae Vitae (Latin, "Human Life"), which reemphasized the Church’s constant teaching that it is always intrinsically wrong to use contraception to prevent new human beings from coming into existence. Contraception is "any action which, either in anticipation of the conjugal act [sexual intercourse], or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" (Humanae Vitae 14). This includes sterilization, condoms and other barrier methods, spermicides, coitus interruptus (withdrawal method), the Pill, and all other such methods. Emphasis mine NORM Edited February 17, 2012 by NORM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JenellYB Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 (edited) Norm, "withdrawal method" fits "interruptupting" natural consequences of the 'act'.....rythym "works" by not engaging in the "act" at certain times. Ie the farmer can choose not to plow the field, but once he's started plowing the field, he's gotta go ahead and plant the crop and tend the harvest,not waste the seed. and I see a signfificant 'if 'technical' difference there. Jenell Edited February 17, 2012 by JenellYB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeW Posted February 17, 2012 Author Share Posted February 17, 2012 (edited) Norm, "withdrawal method" fits "interruptupting" natural consequences of the 'act'.....rythym "works" by not engaging in the "act" at certain times. Ie the farmer can choose not to plow the field, but once he's started plowing the field, he's gotta go ahead and plant the crop and tend the harvest,not waste the seed. and I see a signfificant 'if 'technical' difference there. FWIW, the Hebrew word for seed zera' is the same as the word for semen. My pastor (PCUSA) thinks that the biblical views about homosexual relations (male, there is no female prohibition) and masturbation are related to this concept. Semen was viewed like seeds which were limited in supply and not to be wasted. This was also a time in which "be fruitful and multiply" was a valuable survival strategy for one's family and tribe. George Edited February 17, 2012 by GeorgeW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NORM Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Norm, "withdrawal method" fits "interruptupting" natural consequences of the 'act'.....rythym "works" by not engaging in the "act" at certain times. Ie the farmer can choose not to plow the field, but once he's started plowing the field, he's gotta go ahead and plant the crop and tend the harvest,not waste the seed. and I see a signfificant 'if 'technical' difference there. Jenell Which is why I highlighted the part that says "and other such methods." I spoke with a priest I know who is knowledgeable about the Vatican's wishes. The rhythm method is also prohibited, but "lightly tolerated," without official sanction, of course. I only know of one or two Catholic families who DON'T use some form of birth control. They are probably the only people who were keeping the 12 passenger Econoline van in production for so long into this millennium. I think it finally ended production about 10 years ago. I wonder if some bright, young research student could publish a scholarly study on the decline of RCC authority and disappearance of the full size passenger van. NORM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NORM Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 FWIW, the Hebrew word for seed zera' is the same as the word for semen. My pastor (PCUSA) thinks that the biblical views about homosexual relations (male, there is no female prohibition) and masturbation are related to this concept. Semen was viewed like seeds which were limited in supply and not to be wasted. This was also a time in which "be fruitful and multiply" was a valuable survival strategy for one's family and tribe. George That is consistent with what I learned in my conversion to Judaism. They felt they needed to explain why so many of the "older generation" were agitated and uncomfortable about discussing gay rights (I joined a Reformed community). NORM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JenellYB Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 ROFL @ Norm....I wonder if some bright, young research student could publish a scholarly study on the decline of RCC authority and disappearance of the full size passenger van. Jenell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulS Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) Having read Bishop Spong's latest newsletter this evening (concerning the interference of the Catholic hierarchy in politics in the US, and this Health Bill) he made a couple of comments concerning contraception that perhaps haven't been raised here: Because of successful family planning women have been freed to make major contributions in such fields as politics, business and the professions. The “pill” has been determined to be not only safe, but of great benefit in the emancipation of women from being chained to their biological destiny. This made me wonder if the root cause behind the Catholic institution's anti-contraception stance is actually that these men still feel, either consciously or not, that contraception simply doesn't keep women in their place and is a threat to them? Edited February 23, 2012 by PaulS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JenellYB Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) PaulS...I'd suspect so. Expect so? Keep 'em pregnant and barefoot. Honestly, a big part of what eventually destroyed both my first marriages was that attitude...I am of the 'older' generation that was just beginning to break free of it, both myself and my husbands from families with tradtional atttudes and beliefs, that being one of them. In my 2nd marriage especially, that lasted over 20 yrs, it was probably the greatest and most heartbreaking chalenge I was unable to overcome in the relationship. His being unable to accept I was there because I wanted to be, was in it freely, of my own desire to be there, but he couldn't turn loose of the deep belief that his only 'security' in "keeping" me was in keeping me hobbled and hogtied, unable to run, and that included pregnant even if he had use intentional subterfuge and manipulation to try to accomplish it as often as he was able. Sadly, in both those early marriages, it was both at top and forefront, and underlying everything else, that led to my eventually having to run. Once, even while quite pregnant and barefoot. it is also entirely possible that if either of them had actually performed their "role" in that old "system'" even marginally with any consistency, as "provider and protector", I might have, as generations of women, and even some of my own generation, never be driven to that point of having to break and run....a painful and bitter irony in those situations in many ways. So it is a tactic, a ploy, of the really powerless, the really incompetent, to force dependency upon another, to keep control over them. Jenell Edited February 23, 2012 by JenellYB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raven Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 I wanted to add here, as well, that the Pill has other uses besides controlling birth. Many women with conditions like endometriosis, PCOS, dysmenhorrea, etc have come to rely on the Pill to reduce symptoms and make life manageable. Without this medication, some women (I count myself in here) would not be able to work, go to school, contribute to the community, or be well enough to look after the family. I add this here because to me, limiting a woman's access to birth control also can limit her access to medical attention and support for health condition - to me, this is another example of the misogyny that is still rampant in some aspects of "Christianity." Personally, I don't think a group of celibate men have any right to control the medical well-being of women. This seems like just another way the church (in some cases) works to keep women "in our place," so to speak. I don't mean to come off like a crazed feminist (just the regular kind) but I get a bit hot under the collar about this topic. Women are more than baby factories. That kind of thinking not only degrades women and what we are truly capable of, but also devalues women who either do not want or cannot have children. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minsocal Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 For some, the category of "human being" does not sub divide into male or female. Put another way, again reversing the causal assumptions, it can be said that God and Creation are the same. Humans, perhaps, divided Creation ... not God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yvonne Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 I'll throw in my 2 cents worth. Growing up Catholic, I was taught that any contraception was wrong for several reasons. Any attempt to stop a life already started, regardless at what stage, was considered murder (life began at conception). Using other methods was wrong because the egg and the ###### contained the potential for life (or the "seed of life") and therefore to use anything that would kill the ###### and/or render the egg sterile was considered to be wrong. Plus, as someone else mentioned, sex was only to be for procreation. Yikes. No wonder I longer consider myself RC! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosephM Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 A maple tree is planted in my back yard and here in the spring ten thousand seeds fall like whirly birds in the wind. Yet none of them will be allowed to take root. Each seed has its potential for a new tree yet the tree knows nothing of right and wrong and just goes about producing and releasing seed as it was designed. Perhaps we could learn something from a tree. Just musing, Joseph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inthedark Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Muse away. More babies = more child indocterination into your faith at an early age, which in turn will mean more adults in your church. I think it might be as basic as that. Breeding a bigger church with no need to convince free thinking adults of your way because they were brought up in it. Regards Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JenellYB Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 (edited) Most people are ignorant, unless they've had personal expeirence, of the medical uses for drugs commonly used for birth control or how commonly they are used for those other medical purposes. In my own "peri-menopause" decade, Depo-Provera injections (popular at the time for brith control use) provided me an alternative other than the choice between over a decade of constant severe discomfort punctuated by as much as 2 weeks our of every month of excruciating and totally debilitating agony, or a complete surgical ovio-hysterectomy. That was more than a matter of convenience..already at that time, and now further established, is that women that can get through menopause with ovaries and uterus intact are at a signficant health advatnage against many of the common diseases and illnesses post menopausal women are prone to, including heart disease and osteoporosis. Edited April 16, 2012 by JenellYB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 What is the theological basis for abstaining from birth control other than the 'rhythm method?' George There are two components to birth control, conception and contraception. The Catholic Church is pro-conception and anti-contraception. Abstinence from birth control would mean taking no part in either, total neutrality. As I remember being brought up in my Catholic community, the purpose of marriage was for pro-creation, having a large family raised in the Catholic faith. Women were to be used as baby factories. The Church wants to control the woman and her womb; any theological argument would have to be an argument of total neutrality. There has been no such theological justification that I am aware of. Anyone? During the past couple of years Republican controlled state legislatures have been passing or trying to pass laws that define when human life begins. Last week Arizona passed a bill that says human life begins when the ovary releases the egg which is two weeks prior to the time conception can take place. Why are they doing this? It is part of a movement to overturn Roe v. Wade. Following is a letter to the editor I submitted yesterday to our local news paper. Some people of faith claim liberals are waging war against religion but facts show that some religions are trying to control women’s rights to conceive or not by making it difficult for them to obtain contraceptives, family planning services and abortion as part of their base line health insurance coverage. This is a conservative political agenda based on fundamentalist beliefs and it’s coming from churches paying no taxes because of First Amendment religious separation clause exemptions. Catholic bishops are the generals leading this assault on women’s rights. Throughout history “The Church” has subjugated women and murdered hundreds of thousands of non-believers to spread their irrational dogma. Religion has literally and figuratively been at war with truth and understanding for centuries. Religious fundamentalists feel more threatened today as their children are educated in public schools by an increasingly secular society that accepts truths discovered and proven through scientific endeavor. It’s not a war against religion but a continuing struggle against institutionalized ignorance and irrational dogmatic belief required by fundamentalist religions. The more scientists learn about the mechanics of the universe and the natural laws that govern its evolution the more irrelevant the myths and superstitions of religion become to our youth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJ Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Last week Arizona passed a bill that says human life begins when the ovary releases the egg which is two weeks prior to the time conception can take place. Why are they doing this? It is part of a movement to overturn Roe v. Wade. I was a little skeptical about this, so I figured I'd look into it myself. The bill actually says nothing about when life begins; it presumably proposes to use "gestational age" when making the determination regarding the 20 week limit. The government site linked to by Wikipedia states, "Gestational age is the common term used during pregnancy to describe how far along the pregnancy is. It is measured in weeks, from the first day of the woman's last menstrual cycle to the current date." No nefarious plot to overturn Roe -- just a common way of measuring the length of a pregnancy that any pregnant woman who has visited her OB/GYN is already familiar with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glintofpewter Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 The Arizona law does narrow the methods and opportunities for self chosen action. John Kerry in a faith based speech in 2004? said the achieving fewer abortions was something liberals and conservatives could agree on as a goal. So we have this on going conversation. I am in favor a setting a limit based on viability - healthy viability - of the fetus. My other suggestion is that if someones opposes abortion then step up to the delivery room and take responsibility for raising the child. Make them a wanted child and take them home. When there is no need for a Foster Child Care System then lets talk about abortions. Dutch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Ryan Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 (edited) The Arizona law does narrow the methods and opportunities for self chosen action. John Kerry in a faith based speech in 2004? said the achieving fewer abortions was something liberals and conservatives could agree on as a goal. So we have this on going conversation. I am in favor a setting a limit based on viability - healthy viability - of the fetus. My other suggestion is that if someones opposes abortion then step up to the delivery room and take responsibility for raising the child. Make them a wanted child and take them home. When there is no need for a Foster Child Care System then lets talk about abortions. Dutch If social conservatives actually cared about dead fetuses they would do everything in their power to teach safe-sex education to young and old alike; instead of bellowing holier-than-thou sermons about how pre-marital sex is immoral to gratify their own egos. If social conservatives actually cared about babies, they would support the welfare state instead of the Nietzschean-Social Darwinistic system touted by libertarians and Austrian economists. Edited April 17, 2012 by John Ryan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glintofpewter Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 John, It's like Obama's energy policy. It takes efforts by both liberals and conservatives. Not one or the other and not by demonizing the other. Dutch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeW Posted April 18, 2012 Author Share Posted April 18, 2012 It's like Obama's energy policy. It takes efforts by both liberals and conservatives. Not one or the other and not by demonizing the other. Yes. George Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raven Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 These policies just make it harder and harder on women. Where is the legislation making it harder for men to walk away after impregnating a woman? Where is the legislation requiring these men to step up and be parents, instead of leaving these women on their own? It makes me very sad. ###### banks aside, women don't get pregnant by themselves. But so often, they're the ones who end up raising the kids by themselves. Reduce access to birth control (but not condoms). Reduce access to abortions (but don't force men to participate in the child-raising or provide more support for single mothers). Cut funding to childcare programs (but don't help women stay at home with their children.) Deny access to correct safe-sex information (but be irritated when young girls get pregnant). The assault on women never ends. Those who would take stride to block access to abortions should be lined up to adopt these babies once their born. It doesn't happen that way though. Protect the fetus, but leave the child (and parent/s) to struggle once s/he is born. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JenellYB Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 I've begun to think what we are witnessing in the rise of outspoken and intrusive fundamentalist religion in our society might involve similarities and parallels to a common and readily recognized psychological phenomenon relating to abusive, controlling individuals in their relationships to others. A person with an abusive, controlling personality developes patterns, skills, coping devices, through which abusive tactics are used to intimidate, demoralize and manipulate their victims to maintiin their control over them. When the abusive, conntrolling person percieves a victim is starting to break those bonds of control, threatening the abuser's power to continue to hold them under control, the abuser/controlling person classically begins to escalate their demands and attempt to intimidate and maintian their position of control. There is abundance evidence that a victim is in the greatest danger of serious harm or even death when they try to break away, leave the abuser. Consider all the similarities of fundamentalist, oppressive religion to classic abusive/controlling personalities in individuals, the emotional and psychological tactics used to bring and hold others under their control, submitted to their abuse. Irrational, fundamentalist, authoritarian religion and religious intitutions have been losing power over larger and larger percentages of the population for a good while now, and I think that has hit the crisis point in the intitutions and culture of religion. The abuse is going on rampage trying to re-establish control through escalation of the same abusive old tactics that had worked in the past. But changes in society, including advances in science and other knowledge of reality, have evolved into a society in which that is less and less effective. Jenell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Ryan Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 (edited) John, It's like Obama's energy policy. It takes efforts by both liberals and conservatives. Not one or the other and not by demonizing the other. Dutch I just do not see any effort on the part of conservatives. The Republican base has become radicalized, and all hope is lost. Politics majors are usually very cynical. We have studied this stuff backwards and forwards, and we realize how impossible it all is. Edited April 18, 2012 by John Ryan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neon Genesis Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 My other suggestion is that if someones opposes abortion then step up to the delivery room and take responsibility for raising the child. Make them a wanted child and take them home. When there is no need for a Foster Child Care System then lets talk about abortions. Dutch Yet the same religious organizations that want to ban abortion and force women to give their children up for adoption want to ban gay couples who want to adopt from being able to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeW Posted April 18, 2012 Author Share Posted April 18, 2012 Irrational, fundamentalist, authoritarian religion and religious intitutions have been losing power over larger and larger percentages of the population for a good while now, and I think that has hit the crisis point in the intitutions and culture of religion. Jenell, I think it is the main-stream churches that have been the ones losing the most membership over recent years. George Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.