Birth control in less developed nations


#1

We are talking about prevention - just like Catholics allow when they call it rhythm method. Prevention is the key word here.

You do understand that NFP is quite different from the rythym method? And you do understand that not having sex when one is not prepared to have a baby is different from having sex and frustrating the end or goal of having sex? It’s like the difference between not stealing a car, and stealing a car and switching the plates; neither is caught, but one has committed 2 crimes and the other has not committed any.


#2

This post was picked up from the thread where this conversation started, which is linked in Kelt’s quote thingie just below:

That’s a strange analogy…while one is NOT stealing a car, the other IS having sex with the intention of avoiding pregnancy! ( more easy and reliable for some than others). Maybe they HAVE both stolen the car, but the one who changed the plates got away with it enough times to make the crime pay in the end???
We need to eat to sustain us…is it immoral to enjoy food when we’re not hungry? simply put; people do not agree with contraception (prevention) being wrong.
OK I’ll say “I” am not talking killing etc etc instead of WE.
The UN and WHO are accused of this horrible crime {Added by OP of *this *thread: the crime to which she refers to the situation regarding tetanus vaccines in Kenya} by this scurrilous rumour. Look at the effects on birth rates to prove it or otherwise and then act accordingly. Meanwhile its health programmes are put in jeopardy while the rumour is circulated - and there’s nothing people like more than a good rumour to get their teeth into, just like gossip.
In my experience of working with a health team in Mali families of 18 children are still common as is a shockingly high maternal death rate. The problem is getting the health teams there to educate and OFFER them the family planning that might well already be available, (it costs next to nothing to send the stuff out there) to people who have no idea as yet that they ARE available! If they’re using it already, all well and good…there will be less death and grief.
[/quote]


#3

Using NFP to avoid pregnancy requires *refraining from *sexual activity during the relevant time. So the couple is *not having *sex.

So in terms of my analogy, the guy who doesn’t steal the car is still permitted to drive, he just refrains from driving other people’s cars without their permission.

We need to eat to sustain us…is it immoral to enjoy food when we’re not hungry?

It can be–gluttony is one of the seven capital sins. But using abc (artificial birth control) would be like a person who vomits what has been eaten in order to eat more.

…In my experience of working with a health team in Mali families of 18 children are still common as is a shockingly high maternal death rate. The problem is getting the health teams there to educate and OFFER them the family planning that might well already be available, (it costs next to nothing to send the stuff out there) to people who have no idea as yet that they ARE available! If they’re using it already, all well and good…there will be less death and grief.

There will also be less life.


#4

No that doesn’t work now, because they’re BOTH permitted to drive, so where’s the need for stealing?
Having sex is having sex whether you’ve got your fingers crossed or not.
What IS the fuss about? YOU interpret things as sex is there just for procreation. It is an instinct for procreation yes. One assumes that other animals get some pleasure from it but I wonder if that is the driving force for them…does the animal think far enough ahead to do it for the pleasure? Or is the instinct triggered by pheromones? Anyway, we have developed it a step further and have added all sorts of emotional/moral/social and pleasure extras. It’s part of being human. Society has made us restrain our instincts. We all know the problems that come with promiscuity - not that people will ever stop pushing the boundaries. But that’s not what I’m talking about here.
A married couple can tie themselves in knots of anxiety and frustration because they have been told that it is a sin to use contraception. They can NOT want children and they can do everything else to avoid them, but never abc.
Sex is so obviously not just for procreation…it’s about cementing a relationship and for sharing PLEASURE! Just like food…not just for sustenance…but about cementing family relationships and PLEASURE! Chocolate is not necessary for life but it’s pleasurable in moderation…is it a sin then?
Obsession with food and/or sex is bad for you.
I could stretch the analogy to include eating on ones own…but I won’t !!


#5

Less life? Where do I begin? Less mothers? Less children as they’ve died through poverty brought about by being one of 18 children? Les life because the high population of a community can’t feed itself and therefore starves?


#6

Yes, less life. Why? Because the solution proposed to the problems you bring up are to have fewer children.

The solutions to these problems are not to spend millions or however much on abc; the solution is to *work on the problems. *Why is the only “health care” available for people in remote villages the distribution of abc? If they can get there to distribute abc, why can’t they bring along some malaria meds? Why can’t they bring along information about how to sterilize equipment? Why can’t they bring food or seeds or animals?

Yes, there are groups already doing these wonderful things. But they are generally not finded by the federal government like WHO, PP, and USAID are.

This just seems like very convoluted thinking to me.


#7

If one wants to drive but has not car…

Having sex is having sex whether you’ve got your fingers crossed or not.
What IS the fuss about? YOU interpret

First, “we” are not interpreting anything. The Church teaches the law of the Creator.

things as sex is there just for procreation. It is an instinct for procreation yes. One assumes that other animals get some pleasure from it but I wonder if that is the driving force for them…does the animal think far enough ahead to do it for the pleasure? Or is the instinct triggered by pheromones? Anyway, we have developed it a step further and have added all sorts of emotional/moral/social and pleasure extras. It’s part of being human. Society has made us restrain our instincts. We all know the problems that come with promiscuity - not that people will ever stop pushing the boundaries. But that’s not what I’m talking about here.
A married couple can tie themselves in knots of anxiety and frustration because they have been told that it is a sin to use contraception. They can NOT want children and they can do everything else to avoid them, but never abc.
Sex is so obviously not just for procreation…it’s about cementing a relationship and for sharing PLEASURE! Just like food…not just for sustenance…but about cementing family relationships and PLEASURE! Chocolate is not necessary for life but it’s pleasurable in moderation…is it a sin then?
Obsession with food and/or sex is bad for you.
I could stretch the analogy to include eating on ones own…but I won’t !!

You seem to be asking two separate questions here:
Why does the Church permit NFP while forbidding abc?
and,
What’s wrong with abc?

Is that about right?


#8

Fact is it’s wonderfully CHEAP and fairly simple to distribute contraceptives. You can do it by post! Apart from IUD’s, there is no need for a medic to hand them out. Other meds tend not to be so simple and they also require careful storage with refrigeration, sterilisation of equipment, training of personnel etc. And people ARE trying to provide this, more expensive help…and smaller communities are more sustainable and easier to help with a view to them being able to help themselves ultimately.
Malaria control is not a straightforward business, and as climate change happens, more people will be at risk.
Look up the WHO programmes on the internet.
The questions you ask are tackled all the time by organisations in the first world trying to help those in the third world! The problems are addressed time and time again…sometimes they work out well for a community…sometimes, climate, war or population growth sets everything back again! How many times have communities in Africa been sent stud animals to build up a flock or herd and allow the community to live sustainably? ( Poor communities by our standards, but relatively healthy and content). And then along comes a drought…OK, a small community can often sit out the lean time, conserve its stocks of brood animals and seed grain…but sometimes there are just TOO MANY mouths to feed and it all gets eaten in order for the community to survive until the next crisis! Sometimes it’s war or just crime…we have supported a group of farmers in UK who sends animals to Africa. One lot got immediately eaten by one ‘army’ or another who moved in and nicked them.
The UK and no doubt the US governments put aside a lot of money for health programmes for the third world. They have made mistakes and learned a lot of lessons too, in who to trust to distribute it - difficult where there’s a lot of corruption around - t’was ever thus!


#9

Still seems like both are stealing the car but the one accepts that he’ll have to pay for it ONLY if he gets caught. They both have the intention to enjoy the driving!!
The church seems to be convinced that the creator is obsessed by one particular aspect of human life, more than anything else. Judging by the angst it produces for so many posters here, it has a huge effect on people lives and, therefore, is a huge source of power for the church over its members. While it wasn’t the sole reason for the sex scandals, it was probably connected. Forced celibacy and then the double whammy of no private ‘relief’ of sexual tension. So the tension gets all pent up and…well, it finds an outlet which at worst causes others grief and at best just causes corrosive guilt.
I believe there used to be rules for when, where AND how…there may still be. What is the origin of the ‘missionary position’?
Sex is an appetite. We have other appetites too. There used to be lots of rules for the ‘food’ appetite but I think the Christian church abandoned those. Gluttony is on of the 7 deadly sins yes…but have you really seen anyone make themselves sick in order to go back to the table and eat more?? Bulimia is a mental health problem - not gluttony.
Are all fat people sinful? They can be fat without being what you might call gluttons.
No, I’m not really asking…I understand your thinking behind ‘being open to life’ but I also see that it’s a question of degree. You are being closed to it when you fight the sexual urge and sleep in a different room to your spouse! You are closed to it when you decide to be celibate and not to marry.
You don’t like abc because it thwarts what you (or the church) has decided is Gods will.
I think God might be much more interested in how one treats one’s fellow man.


#10

Oh, I’m sorry, I must have written the analogy badly:only one stole the car, the other one got a car legitimately (buying, borrowing with permission).

The church seems to be convinced that the creator is obsessed by one particular aspect of human life, more than anything else.

Not necessarily more than anything else, but 2 points: one, sex is indeed a very important activity because it is a privelege of sharing in God’s creating of His highest creation. God could make us each Himself, but instead He allows us to share in this process.

Second, we live in a time when the idea of the sinfulness of immoral sexual activity is completely lost, exchanged for the idea that sexual activity is practically a health necessity!

When the world looks at a problem, say, ebola in West Africa, does that mean there are no other problems in the world? No, it just means that ebola is a very *big *problem. In the same way, yes, gluttony is still a sin, but people are more aware of it as a problem.

Judging by the angst it produces for so many posters here, it has a huge effect on people lives

There is a high rate of angst shown here for two reasons: 1. people who do not have angst don’t post about their lack of angst, and 2. people with problems come here to discuss them.

and, therefore, is a huge source of power for the church over its members.

This has nothing ti do with power. The task of the Church is to help people attain Heaven and to avoid spending their eternities burning in Hell.

While it wasn’t the sole reason for the sex scandals, it was probably connected. Forced celibacy and then the double whammy of no private ‘relief’ of sexual tension. So the tension gets all pent up and…well, it finds an outlet which at worst causes others grief and at best just causes corrosive guilt.

Sorry, this just is not borne out by any evidence of anything at all. An extremely small number of priests, many if whom should never have been allowed into the priesthood, were unable to do what the *vast *majority of priests do.

I believe there used to be rules for when, where AND how…there may still be. What is the origin of the ‘missionary position’?

You believe… do you have any evidence?

Sex is an appetite.

And like other appetites needs to be governed by the will or by reason. When people do not govern their appetites, they generally end up sinning.

We have other appetites too. There used to be lots of rules for the ‘food’ appetite but I think the Christian church abandoned those. Gluttony is on of the 7 deadly sins yes…

Have you noticed the difference in reception between an apparent glutton and a “player” like James Bond?

but have you really seen anyone make themselves sick in order to go back to the table and eat more?? Bulimia is a mental health problem - not gluttony.

No, but many people eat too much despite its giving them terrible heartburn, gout, and obesity.

The point about throwing up to allow one to eat more is that forcing oneself to vomit is frustrating the end of eating. Eating is for nourishment. Getting rid if what one has eaten gets rid of the norusohment. By frustrating the end if eating in this way, one can eat more.

In the same way, using abc frustrates the end if sexual activity and allows one to partske more in the pleasure of the act.

Are all fat people sinful? They can be fat without being what you might call gluttons.
No, I’m not really asking…I understand your thinking behind ‘being open to life’ but I also see that it’s a question of degree. You are being closed to it when you fight the sexual urge and sleep in a different room to your spouse! You are closed to it when you decide to be celibate and not to marry.

No, i think that you do not understand the meaning of the phrase “being open to life.” It does not mean that you are trying to conceive (which can also lead to difficulties and angst, as I have read here and elsewhere). Being open to life means that one recognizes, accepts, and respects the procreative aspect of marital activity. Using abc instead if refraining shows a lack of acceptance of this aspect.

You don’t like abc because it thwarts what you (or the church) has decided is Gods will.

God was very clear about His will wrt sexual activity.

I think God might be much more interested in how one treats one’s fellow man.

Let’s look at what He actually says:
St Matthew 22:36:
“‘Master, which is the greatest commandment in the law?’
Jesus said to him: ‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind. This is the greatest and first commandment.’”

How do we love God? Christ said, “If you love me, you will obey my commanents.”

“‘And the second is like unto this: Thou shalt love they neighbor as thyself.’”

So we see that the first commandment is to love Gid, and that to love God is to obey Him. Loving our neighbor comes second, but is the most important law wrt earthly life.


#11

Sexual regulation by the church accounted for a great amount of literature and time. The church saw regulation as necessary to maintain the welfare of society.[21] Canon law banned premarital sex, lust, masturbation, adultery, bestiality, homosexuality, and any sort of sex outside of marriage. Adultery was broken up into various categories by the Statutes of Angers: prostitution and simple fornication, adultery, defloration of virgins, intercourse with nuns, incest, homosexuality, and incidental matters relating to sex such as looks, desires, touches, embraces, and kisses.[18] Adultery was typically grounds for divorce for a man if his wife fornicated with another, but adultery was not seen as a crime, just as a sin.[22] Prostitution, although within the category of fornication, was less concrete in the law. Because the medieval canon law originated as an “offshoot of moral theology” but also drew from Roman law, it contributed both legal and moral concepts to canonistic writing.[23] This split influence caused the treatment of prostitution to be more complex. Prostitution, although sinful, was tolerated. Without the availability of a prostitute, men could be lead to commit a different Anger: defloration of a virgin. It was better to tolerate prostitution with all of its associated evils, than to risk the perils which would follow the successful elimination of the harlot form society.[24] The church recognized sex as a natural inclination related to original sin, so sexual desires could not be ignored as a reality. Although the law attempted to strictly regulate prostitution, whorehouses abounded disguised as bathhouses or operated in secret within hotels and private residences. “Outside the official public brothels, prostitution in the public bathhouses, the inns and the taverns was common knowledge and was tolerated.[25]

Much of the church’s efforts were put toward controlling what was going on sexually in a marriage, especially regarding when a married couple could have sex. Sex was not allowed during pregnancy or menstruation, after a child birth, on Sunday, Wednesday, Friday, or Saturday, during each of the three Lents, feast days, quarterly ember days, or before communion.[26] The church also denounced “unnatural” sexual relations between those of the same sex and also married couples.[27] Also, upon marrying, a couple could not enter a church for thirty days.[28]


#12

First, this is someone’s opinion–there is no explanation as to how this opinion was reached, what it means, or what difference it makes.

The family is the basis of society–without families, a society would cease to exist in a generation. Seems to me there is even a movie about this…

The church saw regulation as necessary to maintain the welfare of society.[21] Canon law banned premarital sex, lust, masturbation, adultery, bestiality, homosexuality, and any sort of sex outside of marriage. Adultery was broken up into various categories by the Statutes of Angers: prostitution and simple fornication, adultery, defloration of virgins, intercourse with nuns, incest, homosexuality, and incidental matters relating to sex such as looks, desires, touches, embraces, and kisses.[18] Adultery was typically grounds for divorce for a man if his wife fornicated with another, but adultery was not seen as a crime, just as a sin.[22]

And the point is…? Do we not have family law in the US? Do we not even have *special courts *for families in the US? (Sorry, I’m assuming that you are American, but I am unfamiliar with what occurs in other nations, so I can only use the US as an example.)

Prostitution, although within the category of fornication, was less concrete in the law. Because the medieval canon law originated as an “offshoot of moral theology” but also drew from Roman law, it contributed both legal and moral concepts to canonistic writing.[23] This split influence caused the treatment of prostitution to be more complex. Prostitution, although sinful, was tolerated. Without the availability of a prostitute, men could be lead to commit a different Anger: defloration of a virgin. It was better to tolerate prostitution with all of its associated evils, than to risk the perils which would follow the successful elimination of the harlot form society.[24]

The issue of prostitution is often used as an example of what the Church sees as tolerance. Will the evils that result from probibition outweigh the goods obtained?

The church recognized sex as a natural inclination related to original sin, so sexual desires could not be ignored as a reality.

News break! Catholic Church recognizs that sinners sin!

Although the law attempted to strictly regulate prostitution, whorehouses abounded disguised as bathhouses or operated in secret within hotels and private residences. “Outside the official public brothels, prostitution in the public bathhouses, the inns and the taverns was common knowledge and was tolerated.[25]

Wow, sounds like what pretty much every society has gone through with prostitution.

Much of the church’s efforts were put toward controlling what was going on sexually in a marriage, especially regarding when a married couple could have sex. Sex was not allowed during pregnancy or menstruation,

At a time when many women suffered from miscarriage and problems eith childbirth and very little was known medically about how or why things were happening, this can also be seen as a move to protect women rather than to put people under someone’s thumb.

after a child birth,

Even I was cautioned about this by my non-Catholic medical practitioners.

on Sunday, Wednesday, Friday, or Saturday, during each of the three Lents, feast days, quarterly ember days, or before communion.[26]

All of these were fast days–food was also very “regulated” during these times as well.

The church also denounced “unnatural” sexual relations between those of the same sex and also married couples.[27]

As it still does. And in fact as Western nations continued to do until withon my children’s lifetimes.

Also, upon marrying, a couple could not enter a church for thirty days.[28]

Since the source of this information referenced a book to which I do not have access, I would postulate about this last “regulation” that the married couple was dispensed from Mass attendance because they were on their “honeymoon,” (a phrase we believe did not come into existence until later). Women also are dispensed from Mass attendance for a period of time after they go through childbirth.

I have some more, general comments ti write about this, but in another post.


#13

Quote: Since the source of this information referenced a book to which I do not have access, I would postulate about this last “regulation” that the married couple was dispensed from Mass attendance because they were on their “honeymoon,” (a phrase we believe did not come into existence until later). Women also are dispensed from Mass attendance for a period of time after they go through childbirth.

No, it wasn’t a kindness, with a nod and a wink so to speak. It was because they were UNCLEAN! Same with the woman after childbirth - she was unclean too and had to ‘churched’ before being allowed to be back in society. It was all to do with the idea that she must have enjoyed sex in order to conceive. That’s also why women who conceived after rape were considered so shameful.

Quote: The issue of prostitution is often used as an example of what the Church sees as tolerance. Will the evils that result from probibition outweigh the goods obtained?
I could use that argument to justify contraception.

Any medieval history books will tell you about these things…or original sources. I am in UK and maybe feel closer to the history than you in a modern country…haha!
My son is doing an MA on the Crusades. It’s a fascinating time in history!


#14

The Church does not justify prostitution this way; it *tolerates *prostitution at times when it seems necessary to do so.

Notice that the Church also tolerates abc, in contrast to abortion.

Any medieval history books will tell you about these things…or original sources. I am in UK and maybe feel closer to the history than you in a modern country…haha!
My son is doing an MA on the Crusades. It’s a fascinating time in history!

I have seen many different things written in many different history books… some contradictory. Hmmmm (can you believe that I misspelled hmmmm according to my spell-checker? Five m’s and it’s wrong!)

I notice that women are called unclean by the Church at times with blood flow. I have heard of ither groups, from Native Americans to people in the Himalayas who do/did the same. I wonder if there might not have been a different understanding if the word? I know that Orthodox Jews have the same way if thinking–it refers to being in a state not proper for rituals, and is easily “cleaned.”

I wish your son luck with his MA.


#15

What method of abc is it that the church tolerates? Surely with Aids in Africa it is tolerated?
Yes, menstruation has been considered ‘unclean’ by many cultures. My husband did VSO (Voluntary Service Overseas) in the Solomon Islands. On a visit there some years ago, I was taken to the hut where they had to sit out their periods. Due to the limited translation - and pigeon English is hilarious - and it was 15yrs ago, I’m not sure how much they use it today.
However, the church’s attitudes to sex were always uneasy at best and in my opinion, downright controlling and cruel at worst. Of course, people didn’t really understand the basics of how fertility works. Eve, by the prevailing early church fathers was blamed for everything basically! And then it was all downhill for so many women! If men felt guilty for having sexual thoughts they did or didn’t want, the woman got the blame for tempting them! I believe they were considered ‘the gateway to hell’ by some church father or other.
Motherhood was seen as good and desirable - BUT enjoyment of sex seems to have been a dodgy subject…they believed women needed an orgasm to conceive - like a man. I think it was all bound up with Eve being the temptress. Some saw her as the cause of all evil - punished by God by having painful childbirth. Anyway, new mothers had to go and be purified after giving birth. My friend in her 70s remembers women being ‘churched’ ( high Anglican).
Of course it didn’t help that women’s role model - the mother of Jesus - personified the two womanly virtues…virginity and motherhood! An unattainable perfection, for all of womankind!

Many thanks for the good wishes. It’s a great shame that he cannot travel to the near east, but at least there is evidence re the Crusades here, even if it isn’t so spectacular! What a tragedy it all is in Syria etc.


#16

One African woman present at the International Conference on Family Planning in Adis Ababa said this:

“We are thirsty and they give us condoms! We are hungry and they offer us contraceptive pills! We are sick and they offer us the most modern techniques of abortion! We are naked and they lead us into the arms of sexual hedonism! We are imprisoned by poverty and they offer us sexual liberation!!!”

The entire article is here.


#17

Well that’s a Catholic website…what would I expect to hear?
Africa lurches from one crisis to another…first world countries spend millions and millions on trying to alleviate their sufferings. One cheap thing they can do for themselves even if if they have to put up with corrupt governments/poverty/war/drought and famine, or maybe especially because of those things… is regulate their population.


#18

Where is the original quote from? I’d like to have a look at that thread


#19

In the second post of this thread, on the first page, there is a little blue square with an arrow in it next to Kelt’s name in the innermost quoted text. I would link it here for you but this device is not very good at that.

The thread is about the Kenyan bishops’ concern about the tetanus vaccine program.


#20

To be fair, most of the issues mentioned in that quote are directly related to population.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.