HOME  Why its a mistake to give the Catholic Church support via membership or donations

 

Birth Control, a serious sin?

A COMPLETE ARGUMENT FOR CATHOLIC TEACHING EXAMINED
 
Questions and Answers on Sex and Marriage, Natural Fertility and Responsible Parenthood, Luton Good Counsel, Catholic Truth Society, London, 2007

Page 9 Argument

The Church forbids contraception not because sex is dirty or bad but because it is really good and a gift from God for our enjoyment and making babies

Refutation

Would you believe somebody that told you that you are not allowed a nice meal except maybe once a month because it is really good? Every religion has its taboos and uses a similar excuse to the Catholic Church for them. For example, the Jew will believe that it is wrong to eat a pig because God values him so much.
 
The claim that contraception is forbidden because sex is so good implies that using it will bring bad consequences. The Church teaches that God has attached bad consequences to certain actions. For example, if you steal a lot you will have no friends and people will despise you. This is how God punishes. So it follows that even if you don't intend to sin by using contraception and you think it is right the bad consequences will still occur. It would follow that you should see from the consequences that it must be bad and can be held to be morally accountable if you do not see for you do not want to see.
 
Doctrines such as that contraception will have bad results because it is bad imply that God will punish those who use contraception. Virtue should be its own reward. The religious tendency to be more interested in appeals to divine sanctions and rewards than in teaching virtue to be its own reward is plainly vindictive and another example of how belief in God offers counterfeit morality.
 
Suppose that God sets it up so that your sins will have bad consequences. Suppose he doesn't punish you in this indirect way but makes you suffer directly. The former suggests more hatred for the sinner than the latter. A person who pulls their punishment on themselves can expect no sympathy at all while a person who is punished at the free will of another might. It is foolish how liberal Christians teach that God does not punish but evil punishes itself by having bad consequences that God has created in the hope of making God seem nicer. It does not work. 
 
Page 11 Argument

The Church doesn’t ban contraception because it wants more Catholic babies but because sex is a beautiful language that says, “I love you totally bodily and mentally and your ways and your fertility”

Refutation

Jesus said that the love of God comes first. Love of others comes second. Of course the Church is more interested in making more Catholics. It believes that expanding the Church by making babies for God is more important than loving another person. Natural Family Planning is about religion not the couple or respecting sex.
 
All believers in God will hold that we should produce babies to glorify God by their religious lives and the more of such children the better. The belief is disgraceful.
 
The idea of loving somebody as completely as the Church suggests, is unrealistic and idealistic and crass. Could a husband love his wife sexually if she erupted in boils all over or aged 50 years in one night? If he hates sin, and she becomes a great sinner, he must hate her too in so far as she sins. We hate our enemies in so far as they offend us. If we hate them intensely though they are not that bad then we hate them as much as we think they offend us - we see faults where there are none. The language of sex is totally hypocritical if we take the Church's understanding of it to be correct.
 
Is the husband to love his wife’s acne even if she wants the acne and thinks it is a gift from God? Just because something is his wife’s doesn’t mean he should love it. The best love is between persons who generally love each other but who occasionally drive one another up the twist. A bit of hate is necessary.
 
The Church says contraception is always very seriously wrong. Yes I love you so much I would not use contraception to save your life! That is loving fertility more than the person.
 
If it is gravely sinful to have sex with your wife if you do not love her fertility then why it is not a grave sin to live with her? Living with her is more important than sex. What about the language of living together? Why is it not gravely sinful to sleep with your wife after you have beat her up? The doctrine that it is gravely sinful to sleep with your wife and use contraception is simply an incitement to hatred against people who use it. If that is not hate then what is?
 
Catholicism teaches that contraception is not bad because it has bad results. It teaches that it is bad in itself regardless of whether the results are good or bad. Such an idea plainly cares about doctrine not people.
 
If person x wins money, you may feel annoyed about it because you wish you had got half of it or some of it. The Church puts this down as the sin of envy despite the fact that don't want to take it all from the person and want the person to have a happy and fulfilled life and that you just think you should have a share too. But if wanting the same benefits as somebody else is bad then clearly other people come first and you don't matter. Church condemnations are related to the hidden hatred the Church bears towards people.
 
We know that we are surer that the Holocaust was wrong than we are that any theory of morality be it Catholicism or Utilitarianism (the doctrine that morality is about promoting the greatest happiness of the greatest number possible) is true. If God exists, what God wants and commands comes first. So we have to callously turn away from the knowledge that the Holocaust was wrong. Instead of that we have to condemn it on the basis of faith in God. God is a hateful doctrine. To loathe contraception because of faith in God is only for the twisted.
 
Loving your wife's fertility does not necessarily mean that you have to use her fertility this year. Maybe you and she have agreed not to have a baby for a while. Loving your girlfriend does not mean you have to marry her as soon as possible.
 
If loving fertility is so great and it is so wrong to not love it in the Catholic style, why isn’t it a serious sin to want a nose-job or a lip augmentation? Is that not refusing to love yourself as you are? The Church teaches that having some imperfection is an essential part of being human and should be accepted but it doesn’t disapprove deeply.
 
Why isn’t it a mortal sin (a sin that implies rejection of God for all eternity) for a husband to give his wife money because she wants a nosejob though there isn’t anything wrong with her nose except that she doesn’t like it? If the husband has to love his wife's fertility by being open to life, and the wife has to love his by being open to life, what about self-love? If the wife asks the husband to accept her totally by having sex with her, then should she not accept herself totally as well? Of course she should. The Church thinks lies are not necessarily mortal sins and it sees having contraceptive sex as a lie and its designation of it as a mortal sin is simply arbitrary. It hates the so-called sinners who use contraception by accusing them of mortal sin arbitrarily and therefore unfairly. A man who believes that his wife should be judged by God as a mortal sinner if she goes on the pill is lying to her that he loves her when he has sex with her. That would certainly be a vicious and very evil lie. It is that that should be a mortal sin!
 
The Church forbids a man to have sex with his wife if she is using contraception without his consent and takes all responsibility for it. For the Church to say that contraception is wrong even then for the husband for sex is him saying, “I love you totally bodily and mentally and your ways and your fertility” is just a plain lie. He is not going against the Church’s only real argument against contraception.
 
If a man really loves his wife’s fertility he will have sex with her in the time she can get pregnant. If you really love your wife’s fertility, what are you using the natural method for? You cannot love your wife’s fertility – it is her you love. There is a smoker who has lost the taste for curry. If he eats the curry and neglects food that he can taste, is it really true to say he respects and loves his sense of taste?
 
To accuse a husband of failing to love his wife if they use contraception is a vicious form of bullying.
 
Page 12

Argument

It is mutilation to try and stop fertility with drugs etc. Fertility and babies are not diseases to be avoided and you don’t use drugs to stop yourself seeing. We disapprove of drug addicts using drugs to stop their brains being normal. Contraception makes fertility and babies seem to be malfunctions when they are not so contraception is wrong.

Refutation

Then why is it not mutilation to drink alcohol? Why all the fuss about contraception? Why is it not considered serious mutilation to let yourself have a pot belly? Fertility is a disorder when the wife can die if she gets pregnant. Eating is natural but if it can kill you it must be stopped and a tube must be put in you to feed you. Strength is a good thing. But it is bad if the strong man is going to beat somebody to a pulp. Then you can fire a dart at him to weaken him. The Church simply and deliberately refuses to admit that sometimes fertility is bad. This messing about with people’s lives and relationships is deplorable.
 
The Church does not believe that contraception is bad for it is trying to fix what isn’t broken. It says it does and that is one of its lies. It teaches that suffering is a gift from God and you are to love suffering for it makes you depend on God and not yourself or anybody else. So it doesn’t believe that fixing only what is bad is intrinsically good. So then fixing what isn’t broken cannot be wrong either. It is worse to hold that it is good not to fix what is causes suffering than to hold that it is good to fix what is good.
 
It must be mutilation to try and stop a rape victim getting pregnant. You cannot say the sperms of the attacker are unjust aggressors because they are only cells and it was the attacker who was the unjust aggressor and now he is gone. Nature decrees that there is nothing wrong with her being fertile at this time or even getting pregnant. So you cannot do anything to stop her getting pregnant if the Church is right.
 
If a girl makes a mistake when drunk, are the sperms in her unjust aggressors? The Church says they are not and she cannot be taken to hospital to prevent conception even if she is Down’s Syndrome or unmarried.
 
The Church says a wife must expose herself to AIDS rather than use condoms with her AIDS stricken husband. It cannot accept the unjust aggressor idea though some theologians do.
 
Page 12 Argument

The Catholic Church refuses to marry couples who say they intend to use contraception or who vow never to have children. This is because children are so important in marriage and a great source of happiness for the parents.

Refutation

It is not up to the Catholic Church to tell couples they must have children. Besides if she is so concerned about their happiness then why does she make celibacy obligatory for priests?
 
The teaching of the Church that it can marry an old couple because they would have children if they could is total madness. They wouldn’t have children at say seventy years of age even if they could.
 
Page 15 Argument

Natural Family Planning isn’t right in itself. It is wrong is used for selfish reasons. If you don’t want to conceive because you want to go on holiday that would be bad.

Refutation

Natural Family Planning is really about blackmailing the couple on pain of Hell into having children unless there is a serious reason not to. Postponing conception until the holiday is past is not selfish. There is plenty of time.
 
And such selfishness doesn't do anybody any harm!
 
Page 15 Argument

It may be right to intend not to have a child and those who use contraception use a bad way to do it and using Natural Family Planning would be the right way to do it

Refutation

Contraception is bad for it treats fertility as something to be feared but the natural method does that too. Is it wrong to take hormones to bulk your body up if you are a weight-trainer instead of solely depending on the natural method of hard graft?
  
Page 16 Argument

Natural Family Planning is safer than the other methods which can lead to infections etc. The truly loving husband will want his wife to use Natural Family Planning.

Refutation

Try saying that to a girl who was saved from HIV by using condoms. The insult to most Catholic marriages is evident. What about women who suspect or know that their husbands are having rendezvous with prostitutes? The Church has no problem with women marrying men who had been very promiscuous and then exposing themselves to whatever viruses these men were carrying on the wedding night.
 
Page 17 Argument

Natural Family Planning seems to stop husband and wife enjoying sex spontaneously. This thought is wrong for it confuses spontaneity with slavery. Self-control with sex is not deprivation but just the couple abstaining from sex in self-denial for the good of each other.

Refutation

The husband then does the most self-denial for it is good for the wife to have no pregnancy for it is not the most enjoyable experience in the world and the man has the easy deal.
 
They are saying that to have sex whenever you want is slavery. This is totally ridiculous. It must be slavery to drink water when you want it or to cuddle when you want it. Is it not slavery to have sex when you want during the safe period? How much sex must take place before it becomes slavery?
 
It is just a load of drivel to excuse how Natural Family Planning cares little for the husband and wife or marriage. It is about control and power. Those who promote it just want to inflict Catholicism on others because they feel trapped in it themselves.

Page 17

Argument

Beware that you don’t think that having less spontaneous sex as with the Natural Family Planning will lessen love. Many marriages have times when a spouse is away working for long periods during which no sex happens.

Refutation

Some couples need regular sex to maintain love. Not all couples are the same. The Church cares little for such couples.
  
Page 18 Argument

Overpopulation is not a concern for there is enough room and food in the world to feed everybody in it and it is our greed that has led to famine in the Third World

Refutation

One day it will be a concern even if this is true. And when that day comes the Church will still be opposing contraception.
 
Page 18 Argument

Catholics believe that a person can go to Hell to suffer forever for using contraception for God loves us so much that he lets us have what we choose even if it is hell

Refutation

So you choose Hell when you choose contraception. This is Christian bullying of the worst kind.
  
Page 19 Argument

If we use contraception we are offending against the proper use of sex and sex is so good that this is a very serious sin. All sin is rejecting a gift of God. For example, the gift of loving human life is rejected by murder. The gift of loving sex is rejected by lust.

Refutation

It is not offending against the proper use of sex but the proper use of fertility. What if a man used condoms for he didn’t like the feel of his wife’s vagina against his skin and then emptied the sperm in the condom into her afterwards?
 
The Church forbids coitus interruptus as a method of contraception. It follows that if a man enters his wife and she hurts and she protests he must carry on until ejaculation even if he leaves her bleeding and feeling raped. Contraception is always wrong in the eyes of the Church. Nobody can say that he can pull out for the intention is not to contracept but to spare her pain. Why? Because it follows then that if a man and wife try for a baby and he ejaculates and she decides it could do her grave harm if she got pregnant she can go to a doctor and have the egg killed before it gets fertilized. The Church would forbid that.
 
Page 21 Argument

Contraception is never right and always wrong for the same reason that one act of rape is never right or one act of racism is never right.

Refutation

Yet this faith allows a lie to be told to save your brother from the hit squad. Contraception even if bad cannot be as bad as racism or rape. You cannot rape or be racist for a good purpose but you can use contraception for a good purpose. It cannot be always wrong.  
 
Page 21 Argument

Are contraception and losing virginity before marriage the worst sins in the Catholic book? Our sins are so serious that Jesus had to be crucified to save us from them but the worst sin is to refuse to go to him in repentance

Refutation

The question isn’t answered and the authors get evasive. Though they say unrepentance is the worst sin it is clear that they shamefully don’t think that the sins they mention are too far behind it. The sins killed Jesus. Contraception nailed Jesus to the cross! This is heavy pressurizing stuff.

Page 27 Argument

Is it cruel to ask one to give away all ones money to the poor? No.

Refutation

This is what you would expect them to say if you tell them you think the contraception ban is cruel. Hitler would have said it was not cruel to get rid of the Jews and that it would be cruel to let them live for destruction was the only answer where they were were concerned.
 
CONCLUSION 
 
The doctrine that contraception is wrong may be dressed up in the robes of charity. But it is actually a woman-hating and dangerous doctrine that gives men the right to procreate through rape. It plainly gives husbands carrying killer sex diseases the right to pass on the disease to their wives and future children by forbidding condoms even then. Contraception like all things human has had some bad results. But the results would be totally horrendous if the Catholic doctrine were followed consistently and in bigger numbers.  Catholicism should believe that birth control is evil - its part of its identity as a religion. Catholicism can't be the true religion if it is wrong about how sinful birth control is. But people should separate from it so that there will be no Catholicism left to believe it. If you belong to or claim to belong to a religion that should believe evil things, then even if it doesn't, you are being evil and supporting evil. A religion that doesn't understand or admit or see how evil it is meant to be is a religion that is being praised for going against itself. It is no compliment to praise it for you are praising ignorance and disobedience. Separate from it.
 
The pope knows fine well that if you believe in morality there are only two options:
 
One, the legalistic idea that actions are wrong in all circumstances, eg changing religion or using contraception.
 
Two, the idea that it all depends on the situation so a woman can use spermicide if she is about to be raped even if contraception is generally wrong etc. This being so, he has no right to order people and must leave them to decide. Instead, without compromise he orders all to believe on God's authority that birth control and using spermicides is always wrong. Though it leads to contradiction, he accepts one when it suits him and when it doesn't he accepts two. He has no right to expect people to believe he condemns in good faith.
 
WORKS CONSULTED

A Catechism of Christian Doctrine, Catholic Truth Society, Westminster, 1985
A Teenager’s Answer to “Shall I Go to the Prom?” Sherry Burgess, Guardian of Truth Publications, Kentucky
A Work of the Flesh: Sexualism, Weldon E Warnock, Guardian of Truth Publications, Kentucky
Believing in God, PJ McGrath, Wolfhound Press, Dublin, 1995
Biblical Dictionary and Concordance of the New American Bible, Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Washington DC, 1971
Contraception and Chastity, Elizabeth Anscombe, Catholic Truth Society, London
Contraception, John T Noonan, Jr., A Mentor-Omega Book, New American Library, New York, 1965
Courtship and the Dangers of Petting, John R Rice, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1943
Divorce, John R Rice, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, 1946
Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven, Uta Ranke Heinmann, Penguin, London, 1991
God Is Not Great, The Case Against Religion, Christopher Hitchens, Atlantic Books, London, 2007
Moral Questions, Bishops Conference, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1971
New Catholic Encyclopedia, The Catholic University of America and the McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., Washington, District of Columbia, 1967
Papal Sin, Structures of Deceit, Garry Wills, Darton Longman and Todd, London, 2000
Pornography – A Psychiatrist’s Verdict, Melvin Anchell MD, Liguori Publications, Missouri
Preparing for a Mixed Marriage, Irish Episcopal Conference, Veritas, Dublin, 1984
Questions and Answers on Sex and Marriage, Natural Fertility and Responsible Parenthood, Luton Good Counsel, Catholic Truth Society, London, 2007
Rediscovering Gay History, John Boswell, Gay Christian Movement, UK, 1982
Rome has Spoken, A Guide to Forgotten Papal Statements and How They Have Changed Through the Centuries, Maureen Fiedler and Linda Rabben (Editors), Crossroad Publishing, New York, 1998
Scattered Vows, Exodus From the Priesthood, David Rice, Blackstaff Press, Belfast, 1990
Sex & Marriage A Catholic Perspective, John M Hamrogue C SS R, Liguori, Illinois, 1987
Shall We Dance? Dick Blackford, Guardian of Truth Publications, Kentucky
Son of Joseph, The Parentage of Jesus, Geoffrey Parrinder, T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1992
The Emancipation of a Freethinker, Herbert Ellsworth Cory, The Bruce Publishing Company, Milwaukee, 1947
“The Lord Hateth Putting Away!” and Reflections on Marriage and Divorce The Committee of the Christadelphian, Birmingham, 1985
The Pope and Contraception, Brenda Maddox, Counterblasts 18, Chatto & Windus, London 1991
The Puzzle of Ethics, Peter Vardy and Paul Grosch, Fount, London, 1994
Vicars of Christ, Peter de Rosa, Corgi, London, 1993