What the heck is wrong with birth control?!

*can 'o' worms opened. Sorry*

(October 7, 2017 at 11:07 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: What the heck is wrong with birth control?!

*can 'o' worms opened. Sorry*

Nothing, in my opinion. It’s all about choice.

If a woman wants to wipe semen off herself every time, that’s her business and no one else’s. For the others, there’s birth control.

(October 7, 2017 at 11:07 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: What the heck is wrong with birth control?!

*can 'o' worms opened. Sorry*

Separating out the procreative aspect from sex. With timed abstinence you just don't have sex during the fertile week when you're trying to avoid pregnancy, which is fine. But when you take the pill or use a condom, you introduce something into the sex itself to render it sterile. Since we believe sex is a highly sacred thing, we think purposely changing its nature so fundamentally isn't right.

But that only applies to married couples. For unmarried folks, we don't think it's moral to be having sex at all, so whether or not they use artificial contraception doesn't matter. It becomes a moot point unless the couple is married.

Catholic_Lady Wrote:But that only applies to married couples. For unmarried folks, we don't think it's moral to be having sex at all, so whether or not they use artificial contraception doesn't matter. It becomes a moot point unless the couple is married.

You ahould be grateful for that “immorality” because you wouldn’t be here without it. I assure you that people were screwing long before there was marriage or before anyone thought to invent a story about god-sanctioned rules concerning when and who it was alright to fuck.

(October 7, 2017 at 11:28 pm)Crossless2.0 Wrote:

Catholic_Lady Wrote:But that only applies to married couples. For unmarried folks, we don't think it's moral to be having sex at all, so whether or not they use artificial contraception doesn't matter. It becomes a moot point unless the couple is married.

You ahould be grateful for that “immorality” because you wouldn’t be here without it. I assure you that people were screwing long before there was marriage or before anyone thought to invent a story about god-sanctioned rules concerning when and who it was alright to fuck.

I assume people weren't culpable for having premarital sex before lifelong monogamy/marriage became a thing.

(October 7, 2017 at 11:32 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(October 7, 2017 at 11:28 pm)Crossless2.0 Wrote: You ahould be grateful for that “immorality” because you wouldn’t be here without it. I assure you that people were screwing long before there was marriage or before anyone thought to invent a story about god-sanctioned rules concerning when and who it was alright to fuck.

I assume people weren't culpable for having premarital sex before lifelong monogamy/marriage became a thing.

Oh, I agree. But then I don’t believe in a divine plan that existed throughout eternity but just happened to be dropped into history at a particular backwater locale after hundreds of millennia of human pre-history.

Interesting that you agree it wasn’t a thing, despite what Genesis claims.

(October 7, 2017 at 11:32 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(October 7, 2017 at 11:28 pm)Crossless2.0 Wrote: You ahould be grateful for that “immorality” because you wouldn’t be here without it. I assure you that people were screwing long before there was marriage or before anyone thought to invent a story about god-sanctioned rules concerning when and who it was alright to fuck.

I assume people weren't culpable for having premarital sex before lifelong monogamy/marriage became a thing.

Or apparently after.

IIRC, I've seen something recently about heretical changes being made to church policies by administration.

(October 7, 2017 at 11:37 pm)Crossless2.0 Wrote:

(October 7, 2017 at 11:32 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I assume people weren't culpable for having premarital sex before lifelong monogamy/marriage became a thing.

Oh, I agree. But then I don’t believe in a divine plan that existed throughout eternity but just happened to be dropped into history at a particular backwater locale after hundreds of millennia of human pre-history.

Interesting that you agree it wasn’t a thing, despite what Genesis claims.

Lol not very many mainline Christians take Genesis as literal, historical fact...

(October 7, 2017 at 11:43 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(October 7, 2017 at 11:37 pm)Crossless2.0 Wrote: Oh, I agree. But then I don’t believe in a divine plan that existed throughout eternity but just happened to be dropped into history at a particular backwater locale after hundreds of millennia of human pre-history.

Interesting that you agree it wasn’t a thing, despite what Genesis claims.

Lol not very many mainline Christians take Genesis as literal, historical fact...

Calling folks failing to appreciate Holy Scripture as God breathed 'Christians' does not make them so.

(October 7, 2017 at 11:43 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(October 7, 2017 at 11:37 pm)Crossless2.0 Wrote: Oh, I agree. But then I don’t believe in a divine plan that existed throughout eternity but just happened to be dropped into history at a particular backwater locale after hundreds of millennia of human pre-history.

Interesting that you agree it wasn’t a thing, despite what Genesis claims.

Lol not very many mainline Christians take Genesis as literal, historical fact...

Yeah, I know that. But since we agree that the Adam and Eve story is just that and not history, it does make me wonder why there was no urgency in communicating these divine precepts to much earlier humans, considering the stakes. Given their very recent introduction, it doesn’t seem unreasonable to ask how important marriage — or any of the rest of the divine plan — was that your god couldn’t be bothered to lay it out much earlier.

It’s almost as if it was all man made.