The right to what?
The whole argument for contraception - like your original comment - is profoundly misogynistic, taking as its primary assumption that there is something *wrong* with the way women are. As the Wiley article referenced earlier said, it assumes that when God created human beings, He did it wrong. This is the Aristotelian view of humanity - that women are a failed attemped at a man - not the Biblical view.
Since the problem with women is that they're not enough like men, homosexuality is the obvious solution. Always ready for a quick sex act; no tiresome emotional entanglement or expectations that it "means something"; instantly ready to move on to the next partner; and of course, no terrifying infants.
What has a contraceptive society produced, if not women who seem to be fulfilling the dreams of homosexual men? The corruption is profound, and the self-contradictions apparently not even observed by those who celebrate contraception and IVF in the same sentence.
If one believes human beings are simply an evolutionary wrong turn from the more practically-effective gorilla, then none of this matters. What is confusing to me is how this could possibly be considered a part of Christianity.
“The right to what?”
“to make decisions for myself about what I value.”
Excellent post, TC.
In your opinion, is sex sinful unless it is intended to lead to pregnancy?
Outstanding post!
Tax-chick! What a wonderful comment! Made my skin chill, absolutely beautiful and profound.
Geez, so true. As Richard Rodriguez (a very talented West Coast writer who is gay-- or "morose," as he once called his preference) once said, "Contraceptive couples are heterosexual gays."