Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Al Mohler Responds: The Evangelical Unease Over Contraception
Charisma News ^ | 1/10/14 | R. Albert Mohler Jr.

Posted on 01/10/2014 8:06:50 PM PST by marshmallow

Is evangelical unease about contraception really just a cover for conservative white male evangelical leaders to keep women out of pulpits? Evidently some think so, or fear so, or perhaps even hope so.

That was made clear in a recent Religion News Service op-ed by Jacob Lupfer, raising a key question about the controversy over the Obama administration’s contraception mandate: Are evangelical protests rooted in concern about religious liberty or about birth control? The answer is yes.

Lupfer argues that while the concerns are ostensibly about religious liberty, evangelical leaders are actually “attempting to sow seeds of doubt about the morality of birth control itself.” On that count, he understates his own case.

A good many evangelicals hope to do far more than sow seeds of doubt about the morality of birth control. Our concern is to raise an alarm about the entire edifice of modern sexual morality and to acknowledge that millions of evangelicals have unwittingly aided and abetted that moral revolution by an unreflective and unfaithful embrace of the contraceptive revolution.

Lupfer observes that the embrace of contraception “has become a fact of life in America.” Thus, those who push back against the contraceptive revolution are the standouts in this cultural moment, and Lupfer clearly asserts that something other than concern about birth control must really lie behind the evangelical urgency.

What would that be? According to Lupfer, “the intended effect of bemoaning contraception is to idealize pre-feminist conceptions of marriage and family.” Futhermore, he says, the concerns about contraception are “a mere skirmish in a larger theological and ideological battle.”

According to Lupfer, those larger theological and ideological battles include an evangelical ambition to increase “market share” by out-breeding those with other worldviews. He also suggests that male evangelical leaders operate out of a logic that..........

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


TOPICS: Evangelical Christian; Moral Issues; Theology
KEYWORDS: christianity; contraception; contraceptives; margaretsanger; plannedparenthood; prolife; sexualrevolution
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-76 next last

1 posted on 01/10/2014 8:06:50 PM PST by marshmallow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Mind readers on the left.


2 posted on 01/10/2014 9:31:18 PM PST by ModelBreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
Fantastic news, thanks for posting.

Is the evangelical concern about birth control part of a larger worldview? Of course it is. As a matter of fact, evangelicals did not come to the conversation about birth control until a host of other moral issues forced the question. Lupfer states that evangelical leaders “will tell you that the Protestant embrace of birth control lacked adequate theological reflection.” We will tell you that because it is true—demonstrably true. In the words of historian Kathleen Tobin, “all major denominations in the Judeo-Christian world condemned contraception” until the 20th century. As she points out, it was the liberal and mainline Protestant groups driving the acceptance of birth control, with conservative Protestants solidly against it at least until World War II. As for theology—it hardly played a part in the debates among liberal Protestants.

For evangelicals, everything changed with the advent of The Pill. And evangelical acceptance of the oral contraceptives (and, beyond that, other forms of birth control) also happened without any adequate theological reflection. Today’s generation of evangelicals is indeed reconsidering birth control, and theological concerns are driving that reconsideration.


3 posted on 01/10/2014 9:42:02 PM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brian Kopp DPM; marshmallow; ModelBreaker

Where is the discussion among Protestant Freepers on this thread? The silence is deafening ((((((((((*))))))))))


4 posted on 01/10/2014 10:04:19 PM PST by jobim (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

You can’t talk about contraception without talking about fornication.


5 posted on 01/10/2014 10:06:14 PM PST by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jobim; Arthur McGowan; mc5cents; RichInOC; Prince of Space; JoeFromSidney; TNMountainMan; ...
+

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.

6 posted on 01/10/2014 10:09:08 PM PST by narses (... unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Brian Kopp DPM
For evangelicals, everything changed with the advent of The Pill. And evangelical acceptance of the oral contraceptives (and, beyond that, other forms of birth control) also happened without any adequate theological reflection. Today’s generation of evangelicals is indeed reconsidering birth control, and theological concerns are driving that reconsideration.

The "theological reflection" that happened was after the true effects of the birth control "pill" became more known. I doubt more than a handful of people (probably doctors and chemists that worked to invent it) knew that there was a secondary purpose of the pill which was to make the uterine lining inhospitable to implantation of a fertilized egg, should it occur. No pill has been invented that can stop ANY egg from being released and fertilized and it does happen, though no one knows for sure with what frequency. Until that fact came out, nobody understood that a mini-abortion can take place in women who use hormonal contraceptives.

I think it is disingenuous to accuse Evangelicals of EVER condoning premarital sex or adultery. That has always been considered a sin as is abortion. It is only when the life of the mother is threatened - meaning she will die (as will her baby) - unless the pregnancy is stopped, is taking the life of the baby warranted. In those cases, it is not really an abortion but a lifesaving surgery that unfortunately results in the baby dying.

7 posted on 01/10/2014 11:10:56 PM PST by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jobim
Where is the discussion among Protestant Freepers on this thread? The silence is deafening ((((((((((*))))))))))

You've not been reading any of the other threads on this subject? Seeing that you posted your sarcasm on Saturday, January 11, 2014 1:04:19 AM, I'd say be patient. It will come.

8 posted on 01/10/2014 11:13:15 PM PST by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jobim

Catholics are amazing sometimes. They are utterly mystified when different religions do not share their thinking and worries on every issue.
They really cannot grasp the concept of “not catholic”, and yet fully, happily, Christian.

And no, birth control does not always mean fornication. Many Christian married couples are happy to plan their family size and timing with contraception.

And last, Catholics are very hypocritical on the issue of birth control. What is Natural family planning” Well it’s a method to try to have sex and ***avoid pregnancy*** as much as possible. Hello??? Is this supposed to trick God?

But that Catholic belief is fine and I don’t begrudge followers of that Christian faith from observing it. Protestants are not always peeking in and analyzing the Catholic teaching and belief on the issue. Why are you so obsessed with the protestant viewpoint?
It makes us feel like the hot girl in school. You have our photo all over your walls, know our class schedule, and spy on us with binoculars,,,,, and we really don’t even know your name. It’s kinda weird.


9 posted on 01/10/2014 11:45:48 PM PST by DesertRhino (I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: thecodont

“You can’t talk about contraception without talking about fornication.”

The 31 year old married Christian couple uses contraception. They love their children Jimmy, Joe and Janet very much. After breakfast they told them it was time to hurry up and get dressed for Sunday School.

There, I did it.


10 posted on 01/10/2014 11:51:19 PM PST by DesertRhino (I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino

:) Great post and I’m lol’ing at the last paragraph!


11 posted on 01/11/2014 12:13:12 AM PST by bonfire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Why are protestants so obsessed with sex?


12 posted on 01/11/2014 2:59:27 AM PST by verga (Poor spiritual health often leads to poor physical and mental health)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

I think contraception is a spiritual attack on women. Most don’t realize it, but they are agreeing that they are defective from the moment of conception.


13 posted on 01/11/2014 4:01:34 AM PST by Tax-chick (Tell the mad chameleon he's not welcome anymore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jobim; metmom; boatbums; caww; presently no screen name; smvoice; redleghunter; ...
Where is the discussion among Protestant Freepers on this thread? The silence is deafening ((((((((((*))))))))))

RCs even think JWs are Prots, though they operate more according to the RC sola ecclesia model for authority, but its a bit early yet, and if it were not for evangelical types most RCs threads would never make it past 12 comments.

As re this, while being much more conservative overall than Catholics, evangelicals did miss it on this one, partly because the link btwn abortion was and still is little known.

Apart from that, I believe self control is the means by which reproduction is controlled, and not by synthetic means. And if married, conservative Christians should be the ones with the largest families. The use of the Pill has had an unseen by profound effect on society, besides conservatives costing elections.

14 posted on 01/11/2014 4:08:38 AM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino
And last, Catholics are very hypocritical on the issue of birth control. What is Natural family planning” Well it’s a method to try to have sex and ***avoid pregnancy*** as much as possible. Hello??? Is this supposed to trick God?

We know its not simply for procreation, but i do believe that a principle in Scripture is that with pleasure comes responsibility, and artificially circumventing that has consequences, so that using Olestra so you can indulge on potato chips has its own drawbacks.

But as faith is shown by works, as James states (2:18) what a church really believes is shown by its conduct, and in this Rome manifests it believes that neither using contraceptives or being liberal is unacceptable, as she treats even notorious public promoters of abortion and homosexual rightsas members in life and in death.

And there is not much difference btwn Catholic women and others as regards such (^ refers to last source: More .

26 percent of Catholics (2007) polled strongly agree with the Church's unequivocal position on abortion Catholic World Report; 2997 survey of 1,000 Catholic Americans by Roper Center for Public Opinion Research at the University of Connecticut


15 posted on 01/11/2014 4:39:44 AM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212
Note: stats on priests are from http://www.bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/reports/LAT-Priest-Survey.pdf , not Catholic World Report the ^ pointed to.
16 posted on 01/11/2014 4:44:28 AM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
The Evangelical Unease Over Contraception

That's the shiny object.

I'm 'uneasy' about the whole MESS!

17 posted on 01/11/2014 4:48:06 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jobim

HUH?


18 posted on 01/11/2014 4:48:55 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: boatbums
It will come.

I...

must...

resist...

19 posted on 01/11/2014 4:49:53 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: verga
Why are protestants so obsessed with sex?

Why are Catholics obsessed over the fact that Mary DID have sex?

20 posted on 01/11/2014 4:51:26 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
Lupfer observes that the embrace of contraception “has become a fact of life in America.”

A common way of framing an argument. It's so old (and still so false) that the Romans named it: Argumentum ad populum.

21 posted on 01/11/2014 4:58:00 AM PST by Jim Noble (When strong, avoid them. Attack their weaknesses. Emerge to their surprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thecodont
You can’t talk about contraception without talking about fornication

And fornication is even more popular than birth control.

22 posted on 01/11/2014 4:59:31 AM PST by Jim Noble (When strong, avoid them. Attack their weaknesses. Emerge to their surprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Brian Kopp DPM

In the last several months I’ve been looking into this issue. My wife has been on the pill for years, and I don’t like the health side effects. I started looking at other methods, then I looked at how some work, and I was horrified.

The UED I think they are called are inserted. They don’t stop the sperm from reaching the egg, just stop the egg from travelling down the tube. It essentially aborts the inseminated egg.

To all who say getting snipped is harmless and a good route, I would have to disagree after reading some Christian authors on the subject too, along with some other research. People don’t even fully comprehend the long term health hazards from this, not to mention it can go wrong to begin with.

If anyone has good suggestions on birth control, by all means, let me know, until then I’m looking at the calendar method (forget what the correct terminology is), and praying for God’s will. We have three kids already, and not really wishing for more, but who am I to even make that call?


23 posted on 01/11/2014 5:19:25 AM PST by Bulwyf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

I also don’t get why they flat out refuse to believe Jesus had siblings, when it’s very clear he did.


24 posted on 01/11/2014 5:25:14 AM PST by Bulwyf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

I myself am very unpopular with most people I work with and talk to in general because I say sex is for saving for marriage. The common argument is that if you were buying a car wouldn’t you want to test drive it first? I find that argument ludicrous on a few levels. My views aren’t popular, but they’re biblical, and that’s what matters to me.


25 posted on 01/11/2014 5:26:55 AM PST by Bulwyf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Bulwyf

-— The common argument is that if you were buying a car wouldn’t you want to test drive it first? -—

They’ll probably be surprised to learn that cohabiting couples are far more likely to divorce, if they get married.


26 posted on 01/11/2014 5:38:56 AM PST by St_Thomas_Aquinas ( Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas

I wasn’t aware of that stat, but it makes perfect sense to me.


27 posted on 01/11/2014 5:43:37 AM PST by Bulwyf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Bulwyf
I wasn’t aware of that stat, but it makes perfect sense to me.

For interested Freepers to file away:

Couples who live together before marriage more likely to divorce.

28 posted on 01/11/2014 6:17:40 AM PST by St_Thomas_Aquinas ( Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212
Why don't you discuss the article (which is *about* Protestants, *by* a notable Protestant), instead of attempting a thread hijack to slam Catholicism?
29 posted on 01/11/2014 6:40:39 AM PST by Campion ("Social justice" begins in the womb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas
There was an interesting sociological study on that a few years back. It was on the net; I wish I could find it again. It was trying to determine exactly why cohabitation correlated with increased divorce rates.

The investigators noted that the divorce rate among couples who cohabited only after they were engaged wasn't elevated by much.

Then they questioned whether it was serial cohabitation which was making people take marriage less seriously. So they looked only at cohabitators who cohabited with only one partner (but without being engaged first), but saw that their divorce rate was still much higher. So that explained some of the difference, but not all, or even most.

Their conclusion was that couples who cohabited before deciding to marry (that is, before engagement) were basically putting themselves on a short path to marriage (and therefore divorce) without really consciously realizing or choosing it.

Either they conceived a baby, or they simply decided it was much easier to marry than break up, or one party made life miserable for the other party until they agreed to marriage. But in any case, they ended up getting married "by default," often without really wanting to be married, and even though there were often issues in the relationship which were glaring red flags warning against marriage.

30 posted on 01/11/2014 6:53:44 AM PST by Campion ("Social justice" begins in the womb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: boatbums; Brian Kopp DPM
". . . knew that there was a secondary purpose of the pill which was to make the uterine lining inhospitable to implantation of a fertilized egg."

Other than before clinical trials were even begun, there was never a time when "a handful of people" knew how such "contraceptives" worked nor was there ever a time when anyone who wasn't deliberately hiding from reality didn't know that such "contraceptives" were reliable only because their primary function was to ensure conception would nearly always result in an abortion. Any woman taking "contraceptives" of that sort who has had a late period followed by "heavy flow" has had a "contraceptive" induced abortion and that is exactly what formulations like "the Pill" have always been intended to do.

Any time after the early sixties, there is no way anyone honestly interested in the moral implications of such "contraceptives" could avoid knowing that endorsing their use was endorsing abortion. Going along to get along was and is the overriding "theological" dogma of those "leaders" who approved of such contraceptives, period. Any time after mid-1971 anyone who "didn't know" didn't want to know just like anyone who "didn't know" about the greatly increased cancer risk didn't want to know.

Starting in 1960 Barbara Seaman made a LOT of noise over the Pill causing abortions and greatly increasing the risk of cancer for those who use it. Her activism, articles, and especially her testimony before a Congressional committee not long after her book, The Doctors' Case Against The Pill, came out in 1969 are what led to all prescription and OTC medications having the lengthy and detailed package insert that is now required.

She was absolutely an abortion supporter but she was also absolutely against women taking a "contraceptive" that worked primarily by causing an abortion. She considered that point not being made clear on the outside of every package a deliberate violation of "informed consent" laws and therefore she fought the rest of her life to have a warning label clearly stating that a product worked primarily by causing abortions on any contraceptive formulation like "The Pill". She also wanted a warning about the huge increase in cancer risk associated with regular Estrogen use and the negative effects of multiple abortions whether they were done by invasive means or induced by a "contraceptive".

There was never any question of how such contraceptives work, only a question of whether the average consumer should be well informed. Overall I'm no fan of Barbara Seaman, but was right about "the Pill" and similar "contraceptives". She paid a heavy price for fighting for women having full knowledge of how "the Pill" worked, a battle she won as far as having the facts clearly stated in the package insert but lost with regard to the warning label on the outside of the package. Given the fact that warnings about even trace amount of peanut oil are stated on the outside of food packaging, she wasn't being the least bit unreasonable for wanting multiple clear warnings on the outside of each package of contraceptives that cause abortions.

When in clinical trials formulations with a much higher Estrogen content which actually did mostly avoid conception caused negative reactions (including several deaths) so often, pharmaceutical companies revised their goals and accepted abortion as the primary way to avoid having a child rather than sticking to their original goal of avoiding contraception in the first place. In spite of the questionable legality of inducing abortions at that time, drug companies were intent on marketing an oral contraceptive. A good bit of the big money behind the push to legalize abortion was directly and indirectly from pharmaceutical companies still worried about their legal liability for marketing "contraceptives" that routinely induced then illegal abortions.

31 posted on 01/11/2014 7:33:36 AM PST by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jobim

A thread is started at 11:06pm and at 1:00am you are accusing Protestants of being absent on a subject?

Can’t speak for other churches, but I will say the following:

-Reformed families are against chemical contraception

-I have had countless Roman Catholic women come into my office asking for oral contraceptives. These are not Christmas Catholics. They are all active in their local house of worship.

-I don’t prescribe oral contraceptives


32 posted on 01/11/2014 7:36:50 AM PST by Gamecock (Celebrating 20,000 posts of dubious quality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino; thecodont
Benny, Elaine, and Susie won't be going to church with the rest of the family, though. They're as dead as door nails after being conceived then aborted within days thanks to the "contraceptive" Mom and Dad rely on.

It's such a hassle to practice self-control a few days a month when you can just pop a pill and have a quiet abortion with no fuss. An added benefit is that everyone believes Mom and Dad when they say they're pro-Life and against legalized abortion. Their friends don't think about the fact that Mom and Dad really mean they're against the tacky invasive abortions performed at death clinics, not really all abortions.

33 posted on 01/11/2014 7:57:13 AM PST by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
-Reformed families are against chemical contraception"

I'm glad to hear that.

In the materials for their formal pre-marriage courses the SBC differentiates between contraceptives that cause abortions and those that don't then says those that do cause aboetion are unacceptable. Whether the same point is made in the occasional sermon for the congregation as a whole, I don't know.

34 posted on 01/11/2014 8:16:04 AM PST by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: boatbums

Sorry, I hadn’t seen recent threads on this topic, and as I live in Hawaii I come into something 3-5 hrs later than you folks, and I hadn’t checked the posting time.


35 posted on 01/11/2014 8:28:34 AM PST by jobim (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: jobim
Where is the discussion among Protestant Freepers on this thread? The silence is deafening ((((((((((*))))))))))

Any religion that calls a mere man Holy Father has no business commenting on anything biblical...The Holy Father is God and they can't tell the difference between a man and God...

Peter would have puked all over every one of of them that called him Holy Father...

The least of what you should be worrying about is what Protestants do or don't do...

36 posted on 01/11/2014 8:32:22 AM PST by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

Of COURSE; with STUPID taxpayers being handed the bill!

COWBIRDS


37 posted on 01/11/2014 9:10:24 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Bulwyf

Yeah, Joseph was around for at LEAST 12 years.

“Not tonight; I have a headache.” would get a little old...


38 posted on 01/11/2014 9:11:20 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Campion
Why don't you discuss the article (which is *about* Protestants, *by* a notable Protestant), instead of attempting a thread hijack to slam Catholicism?

WHO posted it?

39 posted on 01/11/2014 9:14:27 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212; marshmallow; Tax-chick
Apart from that, I believe self control is the means by which reproduction is controlled, and not by synthetic means.

I don't believe I've seen any arguments likening birth control pills to diet pills (i.e. appetite suppressants, metabolism boosters, carb-blockers, fat-blockers, etc.). Most doctors will tell the person wishing to lose weight to change eating habits and not rely on a pill. Funny how that doesn't translate to sexual behavior. If you don't want to get pregnant or don't want to pick up a disease, ABSTAIN.

40 posted on 01/11/2014 9:25:24 AM PST by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: boatbums

The pill as a theological reflection didn’t come first, but in our lives the pill did make us think. When it became apparent that it wasn’t safe for my wife to use, we abandoned it. But, it did cause reflection.

The physical danger it presented taught us that it was not “natural” or healthy for my wife.

And that is a starting point for a theological reflection.


41 posted on 01/11/2014 9:25:41 AM PST by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Bulwyf; Jim Noble
The common argument is that if you were buying a car wouldn’t you want to test drive it first?

It's generally men making this argument about women, right? I don't believe I have ever heard a woman making it about a man.

42 posted on 01/11/2014 9:28:11 AM PST by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: thecodont

Moderation, self-control, self-mastery, continence ... those are considered virtues in every context except sex.


43 posted on 01/11/2014 9:32:27 AM PST by Tax-chick (Tell the mad chameleon he's not welcome anymore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

I came to know the Lord as a married woman with one child. As I poured over scripture it became very apparent to me that birth control/family planning is motivated by the desire rule over self. It is a heart issue and only God can change the heart. That being said I have only been able to conceive 2 children in the 24 years I have been married.


44 posted on 01/11/2014 9:34:28 AM PST by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino
**What is Natural family planning**

Essays for Lent: Natural Family Planning
Divorce Rate Comparisons Between Couples Using NFP & Artificial Birth Control

'Amazing Grace for Those Who Suffer'
Natural and Unnatural (father of 5 shocks mother of 1)
NFP — It Ain’t Your Momma’s Rhythm
Responsible Parenthood in a Birth Control Culture, Part Two [Open]
Responsible Parenthood in a Birth Control Culture, Part One [Open]
Contraception v. Natural Family Planning — Part 5 of 6 [Open]
Journey to the Truth (Natural Family Planning) [Open]
Enslaving Women One Pill at a Time (Birth Control Pills and Natural Family Planning)
New Study Shows Natural Family Planning Technique More “Effective” Than Contraception
Fargo) Diocese set to require pre-marriage course in natural family planning

Making Babies: A Very Different Look at Natural Family Planning
Clerical Contraception (Important Read! By Fr. Thomas J. Euteneuer)
(Fargo) Diocese set to require pre-marriage course in natural family planning
Natural Family Planning Awareness Week, July 25, 2004
IS NATURAL FAMILY PLANNING A 'HERESY'? (Trads, please take note)
Thanks Doc: More (and Younger) Doctors Support Natural Family Planning
Couple say Natural Family Planning strengthens marriage
Reflections: Natural family planning vs sexism
British Medical Journal: Natural Family Planning= Effective Birth Control Supported by Catholic Chrch
Natural Family Planning

45 posted on 01/11/2014 9:34:46 AM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: thecodont

Ya, I’ve only heard that from men, that mentality drives me nuts. Cars and women are not alike. For starters cars lack a soul, and feelings.

Wait, on second thought, I have heard some girls say this. Two come to mind.


46 posted on 01/11/2014 9:37:48 AM PST by Bulwyf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Yes, not only that, but the American Doctor’s association claims that loving relations cures headaches heh.


47 posted on 01/11/2014 9:38:34 AM PST by Bulwyf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
Moderation, self-control, self-mastery, continence ... those are considered virtues in every context except sex.

That is truly amazing.

48 posted on 01/11/2014 9:43:09 AM PST by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Bulwyf
My views aren’t popular, but they’re biblical, and that’s what matters to me.

Remaining a virgin until marriage was a little easier to do back when people married shortly after reaching puberty.

49 posted on 01/11/2014 9:51:53 AM PST by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Drew68

Maybe we should be doing that then? Start marrying again at 20?


50 posted on 01/11/2014 9:52:35 AM PST by Bulwyf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-76 next last

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
Religion
Topics · Post Article

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