What is wrong with Birth Control?

I am lost on this - I know what the Catholic Church says 'about it' - but that doesn't explain *what* is actually wrong with using birth control to not get pregnant until you're ready when married.

Explain - in ways the Church hasn't tried to.

Do Catholics all agree with the Church's view are are there those who are Catholics who still use birth control eventhough they're told not to?

How does the Catholic Church view these parisioners who go against their 'authority' on the matter?

Two misconceptions about the Church (or the Bible) and Birth Control.

1. There is no mention in the Bible specifically about Birth Control.
2. It is not as much about the use of Birth Control as the motivations behind not having a child (or enough children.)

Depends on how you interpret the story but the most relevant part of the Bible is Genesis 38:8-10. Basically, it is about the sin of Onan. Two subjects here mashed into one.

The biggest problem was Onan refused to produce offspring his deceased brother's wife, Tamar. According to "Levirate marriage" the idea is a type of marriage in which the brother of a deceased man is obligated (as a matter of spiritual law) to marry the brother's widow and ensure offspring. Either, by raising his brother's kids and/or producing offspring with the late brother's wife. In biblical terms is comes down to the continuance of the family line. Depending upon version of the Bible you like, the scripture specifically points to the sin of failure in family continuance. Some translations suggest Onan was to raise his brother's kids and produce new with Tamar as his wife. Some translations suggest Onan was to produce kids with Tamar as his wife. Either way, the concept of family offspring as a spiritual/religious duty.

The reason this is often used by the Church as a reason to frown upon motivations for birth control is the similarity to the principle of obligation to produce offspring. Even though it is an apples to oranges translation of the story meaning (or lesson,) it is about all you will find in the Bible that speaks to anything near the concept of birth control. Our issue is depending upon flavor of Christianity, some have gone to the next step of frowning upon any motivation for birth control (so by default, frowning on birth control.)

Follow now?

I'm sure they don't want you to have premarital sex. BC makes that easier.

Birth control gives women sexual and economic freedom.

The only problem I have with birth control is that he people who should be using it aren't.

OrphanSlug said:

Two misconceptions about the Church (or the Bible) and Birth Control.

1. There is no mention in the Bible specifically about Birth Control.
2. It is not as much about the use of Birth Control as the motivations behind not having a child (or enough children.)

Depends on how you interpret the story but the most relevant part of the Bible is Genesis 38:8-10. Basically, it is about the sin of Onan. Two subjects here mashed into one.

The biggest problem was Onan refused to produce offspring his deceased brother's wife, Tamar. According to "Levirate marriage" the idea is a type of marriage in which the brother of a deceased man is obligated (as a matter of spiritual law) to marry the brother's widow and ensure offspring. Either, by raising his brother's kids and/or producing offspring with the late brother's wife. In biblical terms is comes down to the continuance of the family line. Depending upon version of the Bible you like, the scripture specifically points to the sin of failure in family continuance. Some translations suggest Onan was to raise his brother's kids and produce new with Tamar as his wife. Some translations suggest Onan was to produce kids with Tamar as his wife. Either way, the concept of family offspring as a spiritual/religious duty.

The reason this is often used by the Church as a reason to frown upon motivations for birth control is the similarity to the principle of obligation to produce offspring. Even though it is an apples to oranges translation of the story meaning (or lesson,) it is about all you will find in the Bible that speaks to anything near the concept of birth control. Our issue is depending upon flavor of Christianity, some have gone to the next step of frowning upon any motivation for birth control (so by default, frowning on birth control.)

Follow now?

Click to expand...

if you look further into it onan was going a step further. he was having relations with his brothers wife but when it came time to plant he uprooted a bit early and used the pull out method.

this is what really got him in trouble.

however you are correct there is nothing in the bible that says you can't use birth control.

onan was in trouble like you said for really 3 reasons.

1. He refused to give his brothers wife a baby.
2. he was still having relations with her.
3. final nail in the coffin he was purposely not getting her pregnant.

I will explain the Church's reason for being opposed to birth control in the simplest way I can.

1. If Catholics use birth control they will have fewer babies.
2. If Catholics have fewer babies then there will be fewer Catholics in the future.
3. If there are fewer Catholics then the Church will have less money coming in.

Any questions?

tarheel said:

*what* is actually wrong with using birth control to not get pregnant until you're ready when married.

Click to expand...

From a Christian perspective - there, that's what's wrong with it. Sex outside of marriage is one form of fornication/promiscuity. It's wrong.


1 Corinthians 7:2
But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.


1 Cor 7
8 Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do.
9 But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

OrphanSlug said:

Two misconceptions about the Church (or the Bible) and Birth Control.

1. There is no mention in the Bible specifically about Birth Control.
2. It is not as much about the use of Birth Control as the motivations behind not having a child (or enough children.)

Depends on how you interpret the story but the most relevant part of the Bible is Genesis 38:8-10. Basically, it is about the sin of Onan. Two subjects here mashed into one.

The biggest problem was Onan refused to produce offspring his deceased brother's wife, Tamar. According to "Levirate marriage" the idea is a type of marriage in which the brother of a deceased man is obligated (as a matter of spiritual law) to marry the brother's widow and ensure offspring. Either, by raising his brother's kids and/or producing offspring with the late brother's wife. In biblical terms is comes down to the continuance of the family line. Depending upon version of the Bible you like, the scripture specifically points to the sin of failure in family continuance. Some translations suggest Onan was to raise his brother's kids and produce new with Tamar as his wife. Some translations suggest Onan was to produce kids with Tamar as his wife. Either way, the concept of family offspring as a spiritual/religious duty.

The reason this is often used by the Church as a reason to frown upon motivations for birth control is the similarity to the principle of obligation to produce offspring. Even though it is an apples to oranges translation of the story meaning (or lesson,) it is about all you will find in the Bible that speaks to anything near the concept of birth control. Our issue is depending upon flavor of Christianity, some have gone to the next step of frowning upon any motivation for birth control (so by default, frowning on birth control.)

Follow now?

Click to expand...

The Bible speaks clearly against sex before marriage.

Thus the Church cannot be seen to condone contraceptives that people (with ways to prevent pregnancy), may freely indulge in sex before marriage.
To do so, is to contradict, or to go against what's in the Scriptures. It would also mean, "conforming to this world."
That would be like the Church saying, "it's okay to commit fornication."

tosca1 said:

The Bible speaks clearly against sex before marriage.

Thus the Church cannot be seen to condone contraceptives that people (with ways to prevent pregnancy), may freely indulge in sex before marriage.
To do so, is to contradict, or to go against what's in the Scriptures. It would also mean, "conforming to this world."
That would be like the Church saying, "it's okay to commit fornication."

Click to expand...

the two are mutually exclusive. having birth control does not require having sex before marriage.
however if there is a couple that are married and want to use birth control there is nothing in the bible that prevents them from doing so.

tarheel said:

I am lost on this - I know what the Catholic Church says 'about it' - but that doesn't explain *what* is actually wrong with using birth control to not get pregnant until you're ready when married.

Explain - in ways the Church hasn't tried to.

Do Catholics all agree with the Church's view are are there those who are Catholics who still use birth control eventhough they're told not to?

How does the Catholic Church view these parisioners who go against their 'authority' on the matter?

Click to expand...

The Catholic position is that the sole purpose of sex within a marriage is to procreate. Thus any use of sex, even within a marriage, outside of its intended purpose (procreation) is an abuse of sex.
Birth Control | Catholic Answers

Other Christian denominations do not have a problem with most contraception. However, there are some forms of contraception that Christians who are not Catholic do have a problem with. Many Christians view a human embryo as a human being and not just a potential human being. Therefore, any form of birth control that leads to the destruction of an embryo can be seen as a form of abortion and thus, in their eyes, a form of infanticide (muder of children). For that reason, many Christian groups are opposed to various forms of birth control that they believe either destroy embryos or prevent embryos from implanting; most notably this includes "morning after pills" and IUD.

tarheel said:

I am lost on this - I know what the Catholic Church says 'about it' - but that doesn't explain *what* is actually wrong with using birth control to not get pregnant until you're ready when married.

Explain - in ways the Church hasn't tried to.

Click to expand...

The natural end of sex is procreation. Interfering with that natural end is imposing our desires on a natural process and also holding ourselves back entirely from our spouse.

For practical reasons, look at how the divorce rate has exploded since the rise of oral contraceptives. Look also at the rate of children born to unwed parents. It's a very sad state of affairs currently.

Do Catholics all agree with the Church's view are are there those who are Catholics who still use birth control eventhough they're told not to?

How does the Catholic Church view these parisioners who go against their 'authority' on the matter?

Click to expand...

All Catholics agree, but many self-professed Catholics disagree and practice it anyway, rendering themselves heretics.

OrphanSlug said:

2. It is not as much about the use of Birth Control as the motivations behind not having a child (or enough children.)

Click to expand...

It is all about the actual birth control.

Depends on how you interpret the story but the most relevant part of the Bible is Genesis 38:8-10. Basically, it is about the sin of Onan. Two subjects here mashed into one.

The biggest problem was Onan refused to produce offspring his deceased brother's wife, Tamar. According to "Levirate marriage" the idea is a type of marriage in which the brother of a deceased man is obligated (as a matter of spiritual law) to marry the brother's widow and ensure offspring. Either, by raising his brother's kids and/or producing offspring with the late brother's wife. In biblical terms is comes down to the continuance of the family line. Depending upon version of the Bible you like, the scripture specifically points to the sin of failure in family continuance. Some translations suggest Onan was to raise his brother's kids and produce new with Tamar as his wife. Some translations suggest Onan was to produce kids with Tamar as his wife. Either way, the concept of family offspring as a spiritual/religious duty.

The reason this is often used by the Church as a reason to frown upon motivations for birth control is the similarity to the principle of obligation to produce offspring. Even though it is an apples to oranges translation of the story meaning (or lesson,) it is about all you will find in the Bible that speaks to anything near the concept of birth control. Our issue is depending upon flavor of Christianity, some have gone to the next step of frowning upon any motivation for birth control (so by default, frowning on birth control.)

Follow now?

Click to expand...

Onan's sin in not begetting offspring was punishable by public humiliation (see Deuteronomy). The sin of spilling his seed intentionally got him killed.

ludin said:

the two are mutually exclusive. having birth control does not require having sex before marriage.
however if there is a couple that are married and want to use birth control there is nothing in the bible that prevents them from doing so.

Click to expand...

Except for Onan being killed by God.

CrabCake said:

The Catholic position is that the sole purpose of sex within a marriage is to procreate.

Click to expand...

False. Sex is unitive and procreative.

Other Christian denominations do not have a problem with most contraception. However, there are some forms of contraception that Christians who are not Catholic do have a problem with. Many Christians view a human embryo as a human being and not just a potential human being. Therefore, any form of birth control that leads to the destruction of an embryo can be seen as a form of abortion and thus, in their eyes, a form of infanticide (muder of children). For that reason, many Christian groups are opposed to various forms of birth control that they believe either destroy embryos or prevent embryos from implanting; most notably this includes "morning after pills" and IUD.

Click to expand...

Prior to the Lambeth Conference all Christians, Protestant and Catholic, all were morally opposed to contraception.

phattonez said:

It is all about the actual birth control.

Onan's sin in not begetting offspring was punishable by public humiliation (see Deuteronomy). The sin of spilling his seed intentionally got him killed.

Click to expand...

The point of this conversation was to answer an OP question about "what is wrong with birth control." My response was about what the Bible says, it becomes interpretive to suggest Onan's story is about Birth Control. In the context of the story, his sin was about refusing to fulfill the point of "Levirate Marriage." To give his seed to his sister-in-law to then raise up a child in his brother's memory. What got him killed was refusing God's wishes in that respect.

For the purpose of this conversation Onan's story is the closest thing the Bible has to talking about birth control but there is nothing else specifically frowning on all birth control. And that makes literary sense as birth control was not that widely known about at the time these texts were being written. The Bible says plenty about children in the gift sense, but it again becomes interpretative to suggest Onan's story is about birth control. And that also makes sense, as there is not clear consensus within the Christian community on birth control being morally wrong. Some make that distinction, others do not.

OrphanSlug said:

The point of this conversation was to answer an OP question about "what is wrong with birth control." My response was about what the Bible says, it becomes interpretive to suggest Onan's story is about Birth Control. In the context of the story, his sin was about refusing to fulfill the point of "Levirate Marriage." To give his seed to his sister-in-law to then raise up a child in his brother's memory. What got him killed was refusing God's wishes in that respect.

Click to expand...

The punishment for failing to produce offspring is public humiliation. See Deuteronomy 25:9-10.

However, Onan was killed. So clearly what he did was different than simply not producing offspring.

For the purpose of this conversation Onan's story is the closest thing the Bible has to talking about birth control but there is nothing else specifically frowning on all birth control. And that makes literary sense as birth control was not that widely known about at the time these texts were being written. The Bible says plenty about children in the gift sense, but it again becomes interpretative to suggest Onan's story is about birth control. And that also makes sense, as there is not clear consensus within the Christian community on birth control being morally wrong. Some make that distinction, others do not.

Click to expand...

The story of Onan is about trying to have sex but frustrating its natural end. That's exactly what contraception does.

phattonez said:

Except for Onan being killed by God.

Click to expand...

you need to re-read why he was killed. he wasn't killed for the reason that you think.

As a father God charges you to take care for and provide for your family.
if you have so many kids and can't provide for them that is a bigger sin in my eyes and God's.

Onan was killed because he was engaging in relations with his brothers wife but refused to get her pregnant because
the boy would have been his brothers son not his. therefore he would have first right to their fathers estate instead of his own kids.

he was killed for not fulfilling his duty while continueing to have relations with his brothers wife.

this does not mean that bible is anti-birth control. that is a distortion of scripture.

phattonez said:

The natural end of sex is procreation. Interfering with that natural end is imposing our desires on a natural process and also holding ourselves back entirely from our spouse.

For practical reasons, look at how the divorce rate has exploded since the rise of oral contraceptives. Look also at the rate of children born to unwed parents. It's a very sad state of affairs currently.

Click to expand...

Not really. Humans usually have sex for bonding purposes only, and it has always been that way. Humans used to only have 2 to 4 kids over the course of their lifetime, spaced 4 to 7 years apart, when they were living under natural conditions. Humans take decades of very attentive care to raise, and it's to everyone's benefit to have relatively few of them and not to have multiple infants and toddlers simultaneously so they can do this properly. It's also better for the sustainability of the tribe not to out-breed your resources.

The only reason that changed is because agricultural lifestyles alter the body fat composition of women. Our lifestyles used to keep us lean, which meant women weren't fertile very often. Agriculturalists eat fattier foods and the type of exercise they get doesn't reduce fat as much (even if they are in very good shape), which means women are fertile almost constantly. That's profoundly unnatural for humans, and also unhealthy.

Birth control has done nothing but restore the natural rhythm of human reproduction.

The divorce rate is only the official record. Couples were separating at high rates long before legal divorce became less taboo. Also, a lot more women were simply dying at young ages due to reproducing more times than their bodies were built to handle.

The divorce rate is the highest for the generation that married right before divorce became acceptable. They got divorced in a huge wave after their kids left for college. Couples since then divorce at much lower rates. In fact, for couples who married in the last 2 or 3 decades while in their mid-late 20's, the divorce rate is only 20%.

Couples who reproduce younger also divorce more often, and the early childraising years are the least happy years of marriages.

The biggest predictors of successful marriage are both partners being educated, marrying for the first time relatively late (25 to 30), and having well-spaced children (and relatively few of them, consequently).

phattonez said:

The punishment for failing to produce offspring is public humiliation. See Deuteronomy 25:9-10.

However, Onan was killed. So clearly what he did was different than simply not producing offspring.

The story of Onan is about trying to have sex but frustrating its natural end. That's exactly what contraception does.

Click to expand...

That is all interpretive on your part (or your faith,) and does not mean that your interpretation trumps all others. If you were right there would be no splinter within Christianity, and there would be no splinter in the interpretation of Onan's story or the entire point of Deuteronomy 25:5-12 (really, all of Deuteronomy 25.) Which is not really about failing to produce offspring, Deuteronomy 25:5-12 is about a set of customs under old Jewish Law for the express purpose of keeping inheritances and name lines distinct. And Deuteronomy 25 overall is about a set of laws and customs about social relations. Deuteronomy 25:5 expressly talks about Levirate Marriage, Deuteronomy 25:6 talks about preserving name and right, Deuteronomy 25:7-10 talks about a humiliation method to handling a man's rejection of Levirate Marriage, and Deuteronomy 25:11-12 talks about conflict between men, a woman intervening, and the idea of "lex talionis" (Latin for "law of retaliation.") We know that is accurate as the concept is covered in Exodus 21:23-27; Leviticus 24:18-20; and here in Deuteronomy 19:21. This was not uncommon theme throughout the text of the period. Cruel punishments and harsh treatments of women.

And... again... Contraception did not exist then in today's context. In our context the story of Onan applies far more than Deuteronomy 25:9-10.

But if we were to use your line of thinking than any failure to produce offspring deserves public humiliation, including what we know today to be infertility. To say that your line of thinking is barbaric and cruel is an understatement given what we know today including the context of this text for the period it was written in.

ludin said:

you need to re-read why he was killed. he wasn't killed for the reason that you think.

As a father God charges you to take care for and provide for your family.
if you have so many kids and can't provide for them that is a bigger sin in my eyes and God's.

Onan was killed because he was engaging in relations with his brothers wife but refused to get her pregnant because
the boy would have been his brothers son not his. therefore he would have first right to their fathers estate instead of his own kids.

he was killed for not fulfilling his duty while continueing to have relations with his brothers wife.

this does not mean that bible is anti-birth control. that is a distortion of scripture.

Click to expand...

The Law is clear.

Deuteronomy 9: "And if the man does not wish to take his brother’s wife, then his brother’s wife shall go up to the gate to the elders, and say, ‘My husband’s brother refuses to perpetuate his brother’s name in Israel; he will not perform the duty of a husband’s brother to me.’ 8 Then the elders of his city shall call him, and speak to him: and if he persists, saying, ‘I do not wish to take her,’ 9 then his brother’s wife shall go up to him in the presence of the elders, and pull his sandal off his foot, and spit in his face; and she shall answer and say, ‘So shall it be done to the man who does not build up his brother’s house.’"

The punishment for failing to produce offspring is not death. It's not even close to death. What Onan did deserved death. What did he do that was different? The only thing was intentionally rendering the act unfruitful. Haven't you wondered why all Christian denominations were against birth control before the Lambeth conference? There's a reason that we have the word Onanism, and no it doesn't mean infertility.

phattonez said:

Except for Onan being killed by God.

Click to expand...

Sure, and just like Ananias and Saphira, the sin he was killed for was falseness before God, not the item the falseness was about. It's no more wrong to "spill your seed" than it is to not give 100% of the proceeds of a land sale to the Church.

Onan disobeyed a direct order, but pretended that he hadn't. And yes, it was also sinful for him to refuse to let Tamar conceive since that was his duty as his father commanded.

Onan also lived prior to the Deuteronomistic law, as he was the son of Judah, and the Law of Moses wasn't given until... well, Moses. Claiming that Onan falls under the Mosaic Law is, therefore, a bit (well, more than a bit) of a stretch. "Oh well had that been the sin he would have been publicly humiliated".... in a forum that didn't exist, in a manner that hadn't been proscribed.....

SmokeAndMirrors said:

Not really. Humans usually have sex for bonding purposes only, and it has always been that way. Humans used to only have 2 to 4 kids over the course of their lifetime, spaced 4 to 7 years apart, when they were living under natural conditions. Humans take decades of very attentive care to raise, and it's to everyone's benefit to have relatively few of them and not to have multiple infants and toddlers simultaneously so they can do this properly. It's also better for the sustainability of the tribe not to out-breed your resources.

Click to expand...

I wonder where you're getting this information, because:



I don't see how you're going to get just 2-4 births from a fertility rate of 7.

The only reason that changed is because agricultural lifestyles alter the body fat composition of women. Our lifestyles used to keep us lean, which meant women weren't fertile very often. Agriculturalists eat fattier foods and the type of exercise they get doesn't reduce fat as much (even if they are in very good shape), which means women are fertile almost constantly. That's profoundly unnatural for humans, and also unhealthy.

Birth control has done nothing but restore the natural rhythm of human reproduction.

Click to expand...

Utterly baseless.

The divorce rate is only the official record. Couples were separating at high rates long before legal divorce became less taboo. Also, a lot more women were simply dying at young ages due to reproducing more times than their bodies were built to handle.

Click to expand...

Again baseless. The divorce rate at the turn of the 20th century was about 10%. After the Lambeth conference it rose to about 25%. After the Pill it rose to about 50%.

The divorce rate is the highest for the generation that married right before divorce became acceptable. They got divorced in a huge wave after their kids left for college. Couples since then divorce at much lower rates. In fact, for couples who married in the last 2 or 3 decades while in their mid-late 20's, the divorce rate is only 20%.

Click to expand...

I've heard of this also, and it seems due to the fact that the children of divorce really want to avoid divorce for themselves.

Couples who reproduce younger also divorce more often, and the early childraising years are the least happy years of marriages.

The biggest predictors of successful marriage are both partners being educated, marrying for the first time relatively late (25 to 30), and having well-spaced children (and relatively few of them, consequently).

Click to expand...

I'd like to see a study that says fewer children results in a lower divorce rate when everything else is controlled for.

phattonez said:

I wonder where you're getting this information, because:

I don't see how you're going to get just 2-4 births from a fertility rate of 7.



Utterly baseless.



Again baseless. The divorce rate at the turn of the 20th century was about 10%. After the Lambeth conference it rose to about 25%. After the Pill it rose to about 50%.



I've heard of this also, and it seems due to the fact that the children of divorce really want to avoid divorce for themselves.



I'd like to see a study that says fewer children results in a lower divorce rate when everything else is controlled for.

Click to expand...

Um... Birth control. :lol: You do know condoms count too, right?

You can't just claim something is "baseless" and then not offer anything real in response. Well, you can, but it makes your post a waste of time to read, so I won't.

OrphanSlug said:

Two misconceptions about the Church (or the Bible) and Birth Control.

1. There is no mention in the Bible specifically about Birth Control.
2. It is not as much about the use of Birth Control as the motivations behind not having a child (or enough children.)

Depends on how you interpret the story but the most relevant part of the Bible is Genesis 38:8-10. Basically, it is about the sin of Onan. Two subjects here mashed into one.

The biggest problem was Onan refused to produce offspring his deceased brother's wife, Tamar. According to "Levirate marriage" the idea is a type of marriage in which the brother of a deceased man is obligated (as a matter of spiritual law) to marry the brother's widow and ensure offspring. Either, by raising his brother's kids and/or producing offspring with the late brother's wife. In biblical terms is comes down to the continuance of the family line. Depending upon version of the Bible you like, the scripture specifically points to the sin of failure in family continuance. Some translations suggest Onan was to raise his brother's kids and produce new with Tamar as his wife. Some translations suggest Onan was to produce kids with Tamar as his wife. Either way, the concept of family offspring as a spiritual/religious duty.

The reason this is often used by the Church as a reason to frown upon motivations for birth control is the similarity to the principle of obligation to produce offspring. Even though it is an apples to oranges translation of the story meaning (or lesson,) it is about all you will find in the Bible that speaks to anything near the concept of birth control. Our issue is depending upon flavor of Christianity, some have gone to the next step of frowning upon any motivation for birth control (so by default, frowning on birth control.)

Follow now?

Click to expand...

If you search through the Hebrew Old Testament carefully you can find a story about birth control where the male practitioner was struck down.