I have to ask you to extend your view of what in Onan's actions was displeasing to the Lord. I propose it was two things: an omission (what he didn't do), and an act or actions (what he did). What he didn't do, was have children by Tamar, and that was evidently because of selfishness (or maybe he hated his late brother.) That pattern of selfishness or enmity was surely displeasing to God But in addition to that, you have to consider what the text actually says: "What he DID was evil in the sight of the Lord." It clearly refers to an act, not an omission.
Your view that "what he did"--- the very act --- was not displeasing, is not well supported by the text. It is weighty, too, that all Christendom agreed with this Biblical view --- including the Reformers of the 16th century and their fellow believers through the centuries ---until 1930. What changed? The Bible? In 1930?
"I wonder if you get that "limiting pregnancy" for grave or other moral duty is an issue that each couple should decide for themselves between them and God and which is not the duty of their church to make this determination for them with blanket verdicts which do not take into consideration the responsibilities of each couple?"
We're in 100% agreement on that. Each couple must decide this between themselves: that is exactly the Catholic teaching.
"It boils down to the method of this limiting of pregnancy and whether or not it causes death, which would be a grave moral wrong."
Yes, it boils down to the method.
Yes, those that cause death involve a grave moral wrong.
But --- death is not the only possible moral wrong. There are other moral wrongs, short of death, which are still grave. (After all, Onan didn't kill anybody, but "...what he did was evil in the sight of the Lord.")
Tell me this: do you think it is morally right for people to attempt to change their so-called "gender" with sex-change "therapies" --- hormones and surgery?
Would you explain why?
I know you'll give me a thoughtful answer, and then we can build off of that.
Gotta go do dishes.
What Onan "did" in the sight of the Lord he DID many times, right? It wasn't one time and he was zapped. The passage in Genesis 39 says EVERY time he had sex with Tamar he did the same thing and it says the reason very clearly that he didn't want his firstborn son to "belong" to his dead brother. He wasn't treating her as his wife, wasn't giving her a child as was the agreement he made when he married her and his actions were a rejection of his obligation before God as well as his family. That is simply why I disagree that his "act" of withdrawal was the cause of his death - it doesn't add up and is too simplistic a reason. Let's not forget that it was only in the last several centuries or so that human biology advanced to the point that it became common knowledge that the man's sperm did NOT contain a tiny baby that he "planted" in the woman's womb. That just could be the basis for what theologians as well as physicians thought about the act of conception. At least factor that into the idea of what may have been held by Christians on the subject.
But --- death is not the only possible moral wrong. There are other moral wrongs, short of death, which are still grave. (After all, Onan didn't kill anybody, but "...what he did was evil in the sight of the Lord.") Tell me this: do you think it is morally right for people to attempt to change their so-called "gender" with sex-change "therapies" --- hormones and surgery? Would you explain why?
Absolutely there are moral wrongs that are grave that don't involve death. I just don't agree that a married couple using a barrier method or withdrawal to prevent pregnancy is one of them. As I think back, I also know of a couple who DID use withdrawal and STILL got pregnant. They did marry and have the child. So that isn't even a 100% effective way either. Condoms break, spermicides fail, vasectomies and tubal ligations don't always work either. I am 100% POSITIVE, though, that not having a uterus anymore would qualify as 100% though that's a pretty extreme way to avoid pregnancy and no moral doctor would do so.
As with "gender" reassignment, transsexualism and such, my opinion isn't a factor. I know that in rare cases, some people are born with what is called "Gender Identity Disorder" or gender dysphoria as well as some with real biological existence of BOTH genders within the same body (I don't recall the medical term for that). I am not a medical doctor or psychologist to pass judgment on people effected by this problem. Homosexual acts are grave moral wrongs - and we know that not only from science but from the giver of all moral law - our Creator God.