Posted on 01/03/2014 8:59:21 PM PST by matthewrobertolson
Protestants opposed contraception until the 1930 Lambeth Conference. After this, positions changed. So, did the Bible change, or did they?
“All other Christian denominations support baby killing or the culture of baby killing”
One must be honest.
Contraception is not baby killing.
“I am curious, is the “Rhythm Method” a form of birth control, or not? “
Yes sireee Bob.
So’s abstinence.
I don’t know why people post stuff like this.
Bizarre.
I can tell I am going to have a lot of fun with you.
Catholicism is its own screwed up form of Christianity. But you could ask the Saint of ScrewedUpNess for more about that.
Baptist i think would say they are are branch of Lutherans. via von Zinzendorf
and here in the USA they vote for baby killer politicians.
The idea of "the rhythm method" is to reserve intercourse for naturally infertile periods.
This is different in principle from artificial means of induced sterility, a.k.a., "birth control," akin to the difference between fasting and bulimia.
But there can be a similarity in intention, if couples are avoiding pregnancy for selfish reasons. IOW, natural methods of avoiding pregnancy (not including withdrawal, which is akin to bulimia) are reserved for grave circumstances and hardships, which have to be considered on a case-by-case basis.
Artificial means of induced sterility, OTOH, are intrinsically immoral, like bulimia.
“Baptists are of no note then?”
Baptists by and large support both birth control (including the use of abortifacients like The Pill) and abortion in some cases (”life of mother”, incest, rape). Jerry Falwell, for instance, said those things on more than one occasion. Here, for instance, the SBC says it is okay to murder babies to save the life of the mother: http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/amResolution.asp?ID=21
Thus, the SBC - the largest Baptist body in America supports murdering babies.
At least that was a little better than what these baby murdering supporting Baptists of the SBC said in 1971:
“That we call upon Southern Baptists to work for legislation that will allow the possibility of abortion under such conditions as rape, incest, clear evidence of severe fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother.”
http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/amResolution.asp?ID=13
Thus, Baptists in the SBC have a long history of supporting baby murdering.
do rubbers kill babies?
Bump.
More of the same old crap.
“Anybody but us is evil”.
“If you don’t do what we say you’re stupid”
—
I had never heard of the Lambert Conference. But I am not Catholic.
In a way, yes, because they prevent God’s will from happening, i.e. the conception of a baby.
No, they just serve a culture in which babies are treated as commodities rather than the natural and blessed result of conjugal love.
Not only was this universally understood and believed by Christians - at one time - but also by pagans as well: http://www.salon.com/2013/02/18/mahatma_gandhi_birth_control_is_criminal/
How can any adherence to something that can minimize the possibility of pregnancy in marriage be anything but selfish? Even if temporary abstinence was to prevent the likely death of an unhealthy potential mother, how can even her safety not be considered “selfish?”
kinda like celbacy
I support you, Mother Teresa, in your fight against abortion.
“One must be honest. Contraception is not baby killing.”
1) Be honest. Name a country or culture which embraced birth control which did not soon after embrace abortion. Can you? Even one? No, you really can’t. The reason is simple. If birth control becomes viewed as morally sound in a culture then abortion MUST become viewed as morally sound as well because abortion is then NECESSARY when birth control fails.
2) The Pill is an abortifacient. Thus, that form of birth control - which is probably the single most common one - can, in fact, kill babies. http://www.aaplog.org/position-and-papers/oral-contraceptive-controversy/birth-control-pill-abortifacient-and-contraceptive/
“kinda like celibacy”
So God prevented God’s will? I mean, Jesus is God, and He was celibate, so if celibacy prevents God’s will, then Jesus being celibate prevented God’s will, right? So, using your “logic” God stood against God. Government school grad, right?
Having lived in Winston-Salem, NC, for 15 years, I can tell you that Count Zinzendorf was instrumental in the founding of 1 of the 1st protestant denominations in central Europe - the Moravian Church, which preceeded Martin Luther's seperation from the RCC. W-S had a thriving community of Moravian churches.
My understanding of the Baptist denomination is that a sect of Puritans fled England to Holland and essentially founded what would become the Baptist denomination.
“Even if temporary abstinence was to prevent the likely death of an unhealthy potential mother, how can even her safety not be considered “selfish?””
Because the abstinence is mutual and voluntary and done out love and respect for the needs of the spouse and the family. It is sacrificial. None of that is selfish.
Broad brush? Like a Catholic assuming non Catholics are all prostestants?
That broad brush paints both ways.
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.