I just read through the rest of your post and think we will just have to disagree that only people who want children should get married.
And I don't want to offend you, because I like you and think you've very well-intentioned, but such a view is a Catholic viewpoint. I'm fairly sure most Protestants do not share that belief. And we read our Bibles too.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't Catholics allowed to use the rhythm method of birth control? Why is that? It's still birth control, and it still means they would be trying to not have a baby.
And I remember what Dr. Keyes said in his argument against homosexual marriage. Here's a snippet:
"KEYES: No, you don't understand the difference between incident and essence. Homosexuals are essentially incapable of procreation. They cannot mate. They are not made to do so. Therefore the idea of marriage for two such individuals is an absurdity."
I thought it was interesting that throughout the interview he made sure to emphasize the *capability* of procreation rather than the actual execution of it.
To my knowledge, Keyes has never made any public statements directly addressing the issue of birth control, which I find interesting since he has taken such bold, righteous stands against abortion and homosexual marriage. He's obviously not spoken about birth control on purpose, and the only reason that seems to make any sense is that his beliefs on the subject are somehow different from yours.
LutherPlease correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't Catholics allowed to use the rhythm method of birth control? Why is that? It's still birth control, and it still means they would be trying to not have a baby."[T]he exceedingly foul deed of Onan, the basest of wretches . . . is a most disgraceful sin. It is far more atrocious than incest and adultery. We call it unchastity, yes, a sodomitic sin. For Onan goes in to her; that is, he lies with her and copulates, and when it comes to the point of insemination, spills the semen, lest the woman conceive. Surely at such a time the order of nature established by God in procreation should be followed. Accordingly, it was a most disgraceful crime. . . . Consequently, he deserved to be killed by God. He committed an evil deed. Therefore, God punished him."
John Calvin
"The voluntary spilling of semen outside of intercourse between man and woman is a monstrous thing. Deliberately to withdraw from coitus in order that semen may fall on the ground is doubly monstrous. For this is to extinguish the hope of the race and to kill before he is born the hoped-for offspring."
John Wesley
"Those sins that dishonor the body are very displeasing to God, and the evidence of vile affections. Observe, the thing which he [Onan] did displeased the Lord—and it is to be feared; thousands, especially of single persons, by this very thing, still displease the Lord, and destroy their own souls." (These passages are quoted in Charles D. Provan, The Bible and Birth Control, which contains many quotes by historic Protestant figures who recognize contraception’s evils.)
Lambeth Conference (1930)
Anglican bishops formally declare that couples are free to decide for themselves which methods of contraception they wish to use for purposes of family planning. They also condemned the use of contraceptives for "motives of selfishness, luxury or mere convenience."
Lambeth on ContraceptivesBy Charles Gore, D.D., D.C.L., LL. D.
Bishop of Oxford (1930)The Conference, while declining to lay down rules which will meet the needs of every abnormal case, regards with grave concern the spread in modern society of theories and practices hostile to the family. We utter an emphatic warning against the use of unnatural means for the avoidance of conception, together with the grave dangers—physical, moral, and religious—thereby incurred, and against the evils with which the extension of such use threatens the race. In opposition to the teaching which, under the name of science and religion, encourages married people in the deliberate cultivation of sexual union as an end in itself, we steadfastly uphold what must always be regarded as the governing considerations of Christian marriage. One is the primary purpose for which marriage exists—namely the continuation of the race through the gift and heritage of children; the other is the paramount importance in married life of deliberate and thoughtful self-control. We desire solemnly to commend what we have said to Christian people and to all who will hear.
Here we have a refusal to go into detail about abnormal 'hard cases,' but a quite general condemnation of contraceptive methods. The recent Conference, on the contrary, has given a restricted approval of them. To be quite fair we will analyse the Resolutions 13—18...
That's a tougher question. The pope criticizes using natural methods of birth control if done with "a contraceptive mentality." My understanding of this phrase is that he opposes the use of natural means of contraception if done for convenience.
However, there is a real difference between natural and artificial means of birth control. God designed periods of fertility and infertility into a woman's cycle. Naturally, not every act of intercourse will result in pregnancy. Intercourse during infertile periods serves only one of the two ends of intercourse, the unity of the couple.
The natural purpose of intercourse is two-fold: procreation and the unity of the couple. If the possibility of a pregnancy threatens the unity of the couple and the marriage itself (i.e., grave medical dangers or grave financial hardship), the couple may make use of infertile periods to prevent pregnancy, but the couple must at the same time be open to the possibility of pregnancy.
An interesting and informative intra-Catholic dialogue on the subject.
To my knowledge, Keyes has never made any public statements directly addressing the issue of birth control, which I find interesting since he has taken such bold, righteous stands against abortion and homosexual marriage.
I read the speech he gave in Faneuil Hall about a year ago regarding homosexual marriage, and he traced the root of the problem to birth control, the separating of the marital act from procreation.
He's obviously not spoken about birth control on purpose, and the only reason that seems to make any sense is that his beliefs on the subject are somehow different from yours.
He may not want to bring it up in Catholic/Protestant audiences for prudential reasons, but his speech at Fanueil Hall was to a general audience.
The issue came up in this interview with Sean Hannity.