The Catholic Church holds that all forms of birth control except using the safe period are always seriously wrong and deserve hellfire. Pius XI said all family planning is sinful in 1930. Pius XII said it was all sinful but the natural method in 1951, and on July 25th, 1968, Paul VI said the same in the infamous encyclical, Humanae Vitae. In 1987, Pope John Paul II taught that theologians must never believe that the Church changing her stance on birth control is possible – in other words, standing by the teaching is more important than it being right or wrong. The Church admits that it teaches that birth control is always wrong even when the large family cannot be sufficiently or adequately provided for (Question 1331, Radio Replies, Volume 1). The Church even forbids the sterilisation of mentally retarded disabled people who could be forced to commit suicide by pregnancy or who will die if they carry a child (Question 1585 says this by implication, Radio Replies, Vol 1). This is one reason for wishing there was no Roman Catholic God.
The Church says that we eat not primarily for pleasure but to live so sex is primarily for making babies and not for pleasure (Question 1304, Radio Replies, Volume 1). Then why is making babies harder for some than others? I would say that we have no choice but to eat but we do have a choice with sex so having to eat to live does not mean that you have to have sex for babies. The two are different. Living being the main purpose of eating does not mean that the main purpose of sex has to always be having babies. We eat for pleasure. We do not eat curries and crisps to live. We don’t need them just healthy foods. Life and strength are by-products of this enjoyment. We eat these "bad" foods principally for enjoyment. Also we have birthday parties and wedding dinners not just for eating but to celebrate an occasion and promote fellowship among one another. If eating food for enjoyment is not wrong then sex just for recreation cannot be wrong either. What good is life without pleasure? We eat for pleasure and to live so that we will have more pleasure. The person who will be dead in a few hours is not eating to live and are we to say that he should not be allowed to eat? Are we to condemn the child who eats a candy bar though the candy is nutritionally useless? Eating for pleasure is good and so sex for pleasure is good.
If God put testicles on your dog, are you not defying God if you get the dog neutered? Is that not denying that the testicles were a gift from God? Many deaf people and many blind people say their problem is a blessing. It must be a sin then for them to get a hearing aid and surgery to restore eyesight if that is the case. The Church says that fertility is a gift not an ailment so contraception is wrong and implies ingratitude towards God. Since being deaf or blind is an ailment it is okay to do something to remedy it. But maybe fertility is an ailment. Maybe those who find it hard to conceive are what was intended by nature. Just because most people are very fertile does not mean that this fertility is what we should call normal. If you feel your good hearing is an ailment then that is what it is. It depends on how you feel about it. But here we have the Catholic Church ignoring this fact to decree a blanket condemnation of treating fertility as an ailment.
And using contraception is not declaring fertility to be an ailment. That is like saying that if you have sturdy legs and don't do much walking that you are declaring that your strength in your legs is an ailment!!!!
Eating is more important than procreating because if we didn’t eat nobody would procreate. It follows then that eating for pleasure must be a far more graver and unnatural sin than contraception! I wish the pope would be consistent and teach this but he knows he doesn’t want to look like a fool. The inconsistency shows that the Church is just paying lip service when it speaks about sex being a wonderful gift from God.
The Church says that using the condom violates the integrity of the sex act. In other words, it distorts it. If it is wrong and unnatural to use a condom during sex then it is wrong to be fed intravenously. Such feeding then would be a violation of the act of eating.
The Catholic Church claims to have the gift of infallibility which means that when the Church intends to, it gives a doctrine without error due to the protection of the Holy Spirit which must be believed in by the faithful on pain of excommunication and eternal damnation. The only rule is that infallible doctrines must not contradict the past doctrines and doctrines always adhered to by the Church are regarded as being without error. The wickedness of contraception is one of the few doctrines that the Church has always adhered to. Since Catholics only use infallibility to defend tradition and define it as divinely revealed when it is questioned this teaching must be infallible for the absence of a definition in this case is only to do with neglect not with doubt about the doctrine.
It is disturbing how the Church claims to speak with authority on birth-control and to know that it is bad for us even without being able to foresee the exact statistics about how good or bad it will be in the long run and it is not able to speak with authority on other things. It was never able to tell us if thalidomide, television and many other things would be better or worse in the long run. The Church is just being inhuman.

The Church was against birth control probably because it was supposed that each sperm was a person and to waste semen was mass murder. The allegedly divinely inspired tradition is unreliable when it mistook birth control for murder. Sex would be wrong except for children though it is impossible to see how it could ever be right when it results in more murders than lives. But the murder theory was not the only reason. Tradition always said that sex for love and pleasure and not for procreation was evil and was slightly sinful even for procreation. Logically, when sex is always bad it must be badder than bad when it is just for love or fun. St Augustine was horrified by anybody having sex during pregnancy! Also, it could be that even if the Church was against contraception for the wrong reason before, it can be against it even after realising this for a different reason and that new reason could become authoritative tradition because it was the first opinion held and closest to the time of the apostles. The present-day Church is tradition too.

Believing the murder theory did not stop the Church from allowing sex without precautions being taken to ensure that as many pregnancies as possible were made with the sperm and as little as possible was used. She did not command that anyone who wasted sperm be put to death.
The more reasons the Church gives in opposition to contraception, the more ridiculous and insane and irresponsible the Church sounds. It is hiding behind nature to oppress women.


No Copyright