To: marshmallow
Using contraception is an intrinsic evil
= = =
How about the Abstinence method?
4 posted on
06/10/2018 7:29:14 PM PDT by
Scrambler Bob
(You know that I am full of /S)
To: Scrambler Bob
Archbishop Naumann confirmed the Churchs teaching on contraception as a moral evil, as well as Church teaching that each and every conjugal act must be open to life. Well, that kind of rules out NFP, doesnt it?
Funny, when God pronounced the curse on Adam and Eve, He said that Eve's conception would greatly increase. IOW, before the fall, most of sex would NOT have been for the purpose of having children.
5 posted on
06/10/2018 7:50:24 PM PDT by
metmom
( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith......)
To: Scrambler Bob
Abstinence is OK. So is Natural Family Planning — part of that planning is abstinence.
10 posted on
06/10/2018 8:33:14 PM PDT by
Salvation
("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
To: Scrambler Bob
But I thought we are supposed to submit to our partners if at all possible when they want sex? Read that somewhere in the Bible, yes I did. If one did such thing who could afford that many kids in this era?
20 posted on
06/11/2018 4:36:55 AM PDT by
kelly4c
To: Scrambler Bob; marshmallow
Abstinence is not contraception, which means altering the act of intercourse (by some action before, during or after) so as to sabotage its natural fertility.
Abstinence is to contraception as silence is to lying.
21 posted on
06/11/2018 4:52:01 AM PDT by
Mrs. Don-o
(In Ireland I still have left 700,000 who have not bent the knee to Baal nor kissed him on the mouth.)
To: Scrambler Bob; marshmallow; metmom
Abstinence is not contraception, which means altering the act of intercourse (by some action before, during or after) so as to sabotage its natural fertility.
Abstinence is to contraception as silence is to lying.
22 posted on
06/11/2018 4:53:10 AM PDT by
Mrs. Don-o
(In Ireland I still have left 700,000 who have not bent the knee to Baal nor kissed him on the mouth.)
To: Scrambler Bob
The abstinence method never intentionally impairs the fertility of a sexual act, as contraception does. And therein lies the problem with the drug-devices-surgery methods: the directly deliberate disabling of the "gift of self" which is marital union.
Ethically, any directly intended disabling of a bodily organ or system --- whether an eye, an ear, a leg, the reproductive system --- is morally objectionable.
When I say "directly intended," that means "not as a therapeutic measure." For instance, removal of a cancerous uterus. When I say "disabling," that means blocking normal function, whether temporarily or permanently.
It's particularly unethical with regards to the reproductive system, since (1) sex is sacred, meaning at least that you don't target parts of it to split off and reject, and (2) the cumulative results of a whole society accepting the premises (rejection of natural sex and fertility) is destroying a understanding of natural gender and sexual identity, destroying natural marriage as an institution, shrinking and weakening families, nations, and civilizations.
Note what contraception (as a mentality and as a technique) has "accomplished" in 50 years. It's the gateway of the "Culture of Death."
Think I'm kidding? Look around you.
113 posted on
06/12/2018 7:26:23 AM PDT by
Mrs. Don-o
("Let us commend ourselves, and one another, and our whole life, unto Christ Our God.")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson