Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Time To Admit It: The Church Has Always Been Right On Birth Control
Business Insider ^ | February 8, 2012 | Michael Brendan Dougherty and Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry

Posted on 02/09/2012 2:39:26 PM PST by Petrosius

Painting the Catholic Church as "out of touch" is like shooting fish in a barrel, what with the funny hats and gilded churches. And nothing makes it easier than the Church's stance against contraception.

Many people, (including our editor) are wondering why the Catholic Church doesn't just ditch this requirement. They note that most Catholics ignore it, and that most everyone else finds it divisive, or "out-dated." C'mon! It's the 21st century, they say! Don't they SEE that it's STUPID, they scream.

Here's the thing, though: the Catholic Church is the world's biggest and oldest organization. It has buried all of the greatest empires known to man, from the Romans to the Soviets. It has establishments literally all over the world, touching every area of human endeavor. It's given us some of the world's greatest thinkers, from Saint Augustine on down to René Girard. When it does things, it usually has a good reason. Everyone has a right to disagree, but it's not that they're a bunch of crazy old white dudes who are stuck in the Middle Ages. 

So, what's going on? 

The Church teaches that love, marriage, sex, and procreation are all things that belong together. That's it. But it's pretty important. And though the Church has been teaching this for 2,000 years, it's probably never been as salient as today.

(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 02/09/2012 2:39:30 PM PST by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Petrosius
Today's injunctions against birth control were re-affirmed in a 1968 document by Pope Paul VI called Humanae VitaeHe warned of four results if the widespread use of contraceptives was accepted:
  1. General lowering of moral standards
  2. A rise in infidelity, and illegitimacy
  3. The reduction of women to objects used to satisfy men. 
  4. Government coercion in reproductive matters. 

Does that sound familiar? 

Because it sure sounds like what's been happening for the past 40 years. 

2 posted on 02/09/2012 2:41:47 PM PST by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

As a Catholic, I have thought for a long time, that the reason the church opposed birth control was that 2000 years ago, Catholicism was very much a minority. The leaders wanted their fellows to increase and multiply, to increase the overall number of Catholics and make it more difficult for political regimes to oppress the faithful.

Also, more people to provide support for the clergy.


3 posted on 02/09/2012 2:46:03 PM PST by bballbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

“The Church teaches that love, marriage, sex, and procreation are all things that belong together. That’s it. But it’s pretty important.”

Pretty much it in a nutshell.

Since the “Playboy Philosophy” taught sex was a new form of acceptable in-door sport in any form or manner, we have had massive STD epidemics, AIDs, children having children, no morality, etc., etc.

The Catholic Church is right on this issue - all the way, as it is on Child murder (abortion).


4 posted on 02/09/2012 2:48:32 PM PST by ZULU (LIBERATE HAGIA SOPHIA!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

I remember reading somewhere that the push for Sex Ed was because out of wedlock births reached something like 5% in High Schools, and that was deemed “unacceptable”.

Funny how people have been arguing against such permissiveness for decades have been proven right, yet nobody pay attention.


5 posted on 02/09/2012 2:59:54 PM PST by Shadow44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

I agree with the article...but its a moot point.

People are already trying to take this argument down the path of “The Catholic Church should modernize”.

I refuse to go down that road...the argument is not about birth control at all...it is about government force used against a religious group.


6 posted on 02/09/2012 3:01:35 PM PST by lacrew (Mr. Soetoro, we regret to inform you that your race card is over the credit limit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ZULU

I am sick to death of these talking heads stating that women need
access to contraception, EVERYONE has access all they have to do is
PAY for it. This is NOT required for ones health it is elective I was not
aware insurance companies paid for anything elective!!!!! Catholic
women who want to use contraceptives are more than welcome to do
so they just can not receive the sacraments until they are no longer
using contraceptives and receive confession. It is their choice to leave
the grace of the church. If you are not happy with the teachings of the
church then FIND a different church plain and simple!!!!!”!


7 posted on 02/09/2012 3:09:38 PM PST by Kit cat (OBummer must go)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: bballbob

Pretty cynical.


8 posted on 02/09/2012 3:15:30 PM PST by Albion Wilde (A land of hyper-legalisms is not the same as a land of law. --Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde; bballbob

Some people will hear (or read) all the theological explanations, all the psychological and anthropological discussions, all the arguments from practical consequences ... and simply dismiss it all and make something up.

Others, of course, just make something up without ever doing the real work of learning why the Church believes what it does and what the results of error are.


9 posted on 02/09/2012 3:29:34 PM PST by Tax-chick (Email your grandmother!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: bballbob

If your theory were right, why wouldn’t they support IVF, etc. Have you ever bothered to read what the Church actually says about it, or just listened to what the media says? Maybe you should do some reading.


10 posted on 02/09/2012 3:44:25 PM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bballbob
I hate to give you another fact to burst your bubble, but no Christian denominations supported birth control until the Anglicans, started supporting it in some circumstances in 1930. All Christians, not just evil Catholics.
11 posted on 02/09/2012 3:46:44 PM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bballbob
increase and multiply

Interesting you choose that phrase, it sounds pretty similar to Genesis 1:28. How terrible of Catholics to read the Bible.

12 posted on 02/09/2012 3:49:17 PM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mears

bfl


13 posted on 02/09/2012 3:53:28 PM PST by Mears (Alcohol. Tobacco. Firearms. What's not to like?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: lacrew

“.the argument is not about birth control at all...it is about government force used against a religious group”
Government force against a CERTAIN religious group would be more accurate. (mind the tagline. It’s a true story)


14 posted on 02/09/2012 4:00:26 PM PST by yank in the UK ( A liberal mocking Christianity. I asked "why don't you mock Islam?" he replied "Muslims are violent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bballbob

And fight the wars, till the fields, man the factories, educate, serve, and influence the rest of the world, and—oh, yeah—continue the species.

The Church doesn’t compel ANYONE to obey its rules. It explains what it believes is the right course—not just for Catholics, but for humanity. Pius X came up with an even more chilling prediction when divorce was gaining sympathy:

First divorce
Then contraception
Then abortion
Then homosexuality
Then euthanasia.

I think I’ve missed a step, but surely you see the progression. Was he right? Sure looks that way.


15 posted on 02/09/2012 4:11:18 PM PST by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

It’s reading INTO the Bible that we try to avoid. Like finding social justice in Christ’s sermons.


16 posted on 02/09/2012 4:15:21 PM PST by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

What a neat article! Not that it has much to do with the Contstitutional question which I think needs far more plowing. But it does answer the the feminist twits on their own ground.


17 posted on 02/09/2012 4:21:31 PM PST by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

All we can do with some of these gay-defending posts is try to explain. After all, they may be young and infected by Marxist schooling.

We may not convince them by the end of the thread, and they may never want to lose face by backing down, but we may plant a seed.

I’ve always said a good moral education is a luxury.


18 posted on 02/09/2012 4:27:32 PM PST by Albion Wilde (A land of hyper-legalisms is not the same as a land of law. --Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

Excellent summary, in simple terms!


19 posted on 02/09/2012 4:33:14 PM PST by PGR88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mach9

Interesting - can you advise in which document did Pius X say this? I’d like to read the whole thing.


20 posted on 02/09/2012 4:36:15 PM PST by PGR88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: PGR88
See:

Pope Leo XII, Arcanum divinae sapientiae (1880)

and

Pope Pius Xi, Casti connubii (1930).

21 posted on 02/09/2012 4:58:20 PM PST by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

Notice how jerk off liberal lefties are always telling others what to do?

Here, I’ll try it: “Hey editors, drop dead. Mind your own damn business. It’s the 21st century for goodness sakes, haven’t you seen enough evidence that busy body little pukes like you make the world unbearable and cause more problems?

So, Just get over it and pay more attention to your daughter’s birth control and leave ours alone you self-centered, egotistical little punks.”

And these left wing idiots really can’t understand why we have the 2nd amendment?


22 posted on 02/09/2012 5:02:09 PM PST by Fledermaus (I can't fiddle so I'll just open a cold beer as I watch America burn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kit cat

30 years ago no insurance companies paid for contraceptives.

You paid for it out of your pocket if you wanted it.


23 posted on 02/09/2012 8:05:59 PM PST by TASMANIANRED (We kneel to no prince but the Prince of Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TeĆ³filo; Cronos; wagglebee; dsc; Deo volente; MarkBsnr; Mad Dawg; ArrogantBustard; ...

This EXCELLENT essay didn’t get near the amount of attention it deserved.

PING!


24 posted on 02/09/2012 10:09:23 PM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius; Graewoulf; VinceASA; Monkey Face; RIghtwardHo; pieces of time; Warthog-2; Tzar; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.


25 posted on 02/09/2012 10:15:13 PM PST by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

Mr. Obama? The Church Will Bury You

Posted on by Frank Weathers

So says a couple of secular journalists in the Business Insider article with the greatest title ever. Time to Admit it: The Church Has Always Been Right On Birth Control. Here’s a taste,

Painting the Catholic Church as “out of touch” is like shooting fish in a barrel, what with the funny hats and gilded churches. And nothing makes it easier than the Church’s stance against contraception.
Many people, (including our editor) are wondering why the Catholic Church doesn’t just ditch this requirement. They note that most Catholics ignore it, and that most everyone else finds it divisive, or “out-dated.”

C’mon! It’s the 21st century, they say! Don’t they SEE that it’s STUPID, they scream.

Here’s the thing, though: the Catholic Church is the world’s biggest and oldest organization. It has buried all of the greatest empires known to man, from the Romans to the Soviets. It has establishments literally all over the world, touching every area of human endeavor. It’s given us some of the world’s greatest thinkers, from Saint Augustine on down to René Girard. When it does things, it usually has a good reason. Everyone has a right to disagree, but it’s not that they’re a bunch of crazy old white dudes who are stuck in the Middle Ages.

Get it folks? Go read the whole thing.

And when the rest of the large portion of the populace realizes what the real issue is all about, freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution, the burial of this administration will be by avalanche.

Give ‘em a taste of that now. And remember, do it with love, as required in a corporal work of mercy such as this.

*Image credit: Sergio Dionisio/Getty


26 posted on 02/09/2012 10:33:09 PM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: bballbob
well, no, the opposition to birth control was linked to the idea of the OT that to spill one's seed is wrong, and that life is life, starts at conception.

The numbers increasing was not a factor in the early years as this was an underground movement. Birth control only really became a factor in the 1900s.

27 posted on 02/09/2012 10:40:38 PM PST by Cronos (Party like it's 12 20, 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

thanks for the ping. this is a good article


28 posted on 02/09/2012 10:48:03 PM PST by Cronos (Party like it's 12 20, 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

Thanks for the links!

Their Holiness’ are not as foolish as some may think.


29 posted on 02/10/2012 12:53:01 AM PST by EnglishCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Birth control was a big deal in Ancient Rome—they went through a big population crash. It has re-emerged in a big way only lately, but it has been a concern in the past.


30 posted on 02/10/2012 1:18:30 AM PST by Hieronymus ( (It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged. --G.K. Chesterton))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Mach9
Pius X came up with an even more chilling prediction when divorce was gaining sympathy:

Is this found in "Casti Conubii" (sp?), or another publication?

31 posted on 02/10/2012 4:33:19 AM PST by Tax-chick (Email your grandmother!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Hieronymus; Cronos; Albion Wilde

From the reign of Augustus Caesar onward, the Romans were trying to increase their citizen population. They had penalties for failing to marry, rewards for producing children, public celebrations of fertility, punishments for homosexuality and abortion ...

However, the experience of thousands of years strongly indicates that people generally make the sacrifices necessary to bring up children in significant numbers out of either religious conviction or economic necessity.


32 posted on 02/10/2012 4:42:54 AM PST by Tax-chick (Email your grandmother!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

I’m not sure that the lesson is that people are generally willing to make this sacrifice or that when the group of people unwilling to make this sacrifice reaches a critical mass, the society rapidly disappears.

St. Stephen of Hungary had a problem in this area, which he dealt with by implementing a tax on all unmarried laymen over a certain age. Frankly, this seems fair enough—some men contribute to society through raising children, those who don’t want to contribute in this way contribute in another way.

Castii Conubii was Pius XI.


33 posted on 02/10/2012 5:19:49 AM PST by Hieronymus ( (It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged. --G.K. Chesterton))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Hieronymus
when the group of people unwilling to make this sacrifice reaches a critical mass, the society rapidly disappears.

Good point.

I hesitate to use the word "sacrifice" in the context of having a family, because a sacrifice implies giving up something of great value, and I don't believe that I've done that.

Every choice you make in life involves the non-choice of all the alternatives available at the time. Being an accountant (for example) was not the "sacrifice" of being a nurse ... just a preference of one over the other. Being a wife and mother was not the "sacrifice" of being IRS Commissioner with an apartment in the Watergate and several catz - it's simply another path in life. (And I have catz now, as well as reptiles.)

34 posted on 02/10/2012 6:02:54 AM PST by Tax-chick (Email your grandmother!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: bballbob

Well that is definitely not why the Catholic church holds those positions, those are just an added bonus to the real reasons that life begins at conception and sex should be saved for marriage.


35 posted on 02/10/2012 7:37:36 AM PST by thesaleboat (Pray The Rosary Daily (Our Lady, July 13, 1917))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Hieronymus
Hi, I was intrigued by your post in the thread from a day or two ago about the FReeper whose son is was choosing a dual major in Engineering / Classics at Harvard, Hopkins, or Yale.

So I looked up your "about" page and then your posting history, and arrived here.

Your comment

St. Stephen of Hungary had a problem in this area, which he dealt with by implementing a tax on all unmarried laymen over a certain age. Frankly, this seems fair enough—some men contribute to society through raising children, those who don’t want to contribute in this way contribute in another way.

has some striking resemblances to the logic behind, and supposed rationale for, Obamacare.

It might be interesting to write an essay suggesting that St. Stephen's proposal be put into effect in Europe, Japan, and Russia, and a modified version -- taxing men who produce children out of wedlock at a far higher rate than married men children (like the lowered married rate vs. the single rate, but accelerated), for example -- for the United States.(*)

It would be a literary combination of Swift's Modest Proposal and the famous New Yorker Obama "revolutionary fist-bump" cover: like the first, it would be satire, but like the second, it would convey important truths about the left while portraying itself as satirizing the right.

Thanks for writing this, I'll have to look out for your posts more often. :-)







(*) The two drawbacks I can see from this is that it would GREATLY increase the use of contraception and incidence of abortions; and the logistics of carrying out the second, would invariably involve loss of privacy and then (by disparate impact) cries of "RAAAAACISM"...

Cheers!

36 posted on 04/07/2012 5:01:14 AM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

It was.


37 posted on 04/07/2012 5:03:42 AM PDT by esquirette ("Our hearts are restless until they find rest in Thee." ~ Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson