I haven't heard that about the Protestant Church. I think the Republican candiddates are just looking for reasons to jump on Obama and magnify the issues as big as they can...and because he tried to change the rules about contraception for Catholic employee's health insurance...they deemed it an insult to religious freedom. 

For someone to have a child that they are not prepared to love or unable to look after seems to me to be more of a 'sin'.  In the Catholic Church, I think their view is that contraception blocks life, so that's why it's a sin...but I don't hear a whole lot of consideration for the mother's or family's life, or quality of the child's life factored into the debate.

Yes I was just reading the story about this birth control controversy and it is as if one has fallen down the rabbit hole ... reality starts to tear at the edges ... things get weird... as if one is falling into an abyss ... into a sort of singularity ... I think they call it the Limbaugh Zone ... I would go on but I think I'm floating away ... sounds are getting blurry ... distorted ... thoughts are bending and fading ... if I don't get back, tell my wife I love her ... love her ... lover her 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/05/rush-limbaugh-apology-sandra-fluke-advertisers_n_1321450.html

Maybe its some sort of time warp ... a worm hole leading back to 1966

Yes, that's what I was thinking too....... Like the old controversery about "The Pill". It's rather odd.

No, it is not a sin. If more people used it there would not be so many unwanted pregnancies, and I would think that the rate of STD's would drop as well. The Catholic church really needs a reality check.

Not sure that the republican party and Rush Limbaughare a true reflection of the majority of Protestant Christians in the US though...just the most vocal. US politics the past few years has been especially weird.

Hi Mahakala,

Protestant Christianity is hardly monolithic.

In theory we are pro-contraception.  In practice we are all over the map.

Heck, we have some Christians who have been married for ages and they rarely share a bed with their spouse and even then it is because of some sense of "duty."

Grace and peace to you.

John

I really thought on this issue is was. What Protestant churches are against contraception?

Er, ok. Not going to ask anything more about that, but it doesn't sound like a birth control issue to me (though it probably works as one!).

Sums up most questions when it comes to religion.

My understanding was that even the Catholic church was alright with certain methods of birth control, like some variations of the rhythm method / natural family planning.

I think some of the issues in the states are from certain people being a little too concerned about pre-marital sex, and it's much less about married couples avoiding/delaying having children.

We Protestants are all over the place.

This topic came up yesterday, because of the U.S. row over it.

A couple folks were Protestant likely because of selling indulgences or divorce or some argument with a pope or something. Their birth control stance was not the reason. 

One gentleman believed condoms were the only ok contraception method "because they prevent disease" and because he is "against abortion and the pill and IUD is abortive". It is likely because he has not heard about female barrier options. I would have thought it was because he owns a penis and not a uterus, except a couple uterus owners agreed with him.

It was not my conversation, so I looked around for conversation, actually I think my eyes were rolling, but I saw others with their eyes rolling too.  

When directly asked I gave my opinion.

Someone took severe issue with my opinion on biblical silence and informed me that the Bible speaks of "wasted seed". When I politely asked about their take on the story of Onan (Genesis 38) as it related to nocturnal emissions, premature ejaculate, masturbation, oral sex, intercourse with a pregnant or menopausal woman... they seemed to need some time to think about it.

I will get back to you...

My personal opinion is that no, birth control is not a sin.

The Catholic church feels that sex was created for procreation. Anything that separates it from that ie barrier methods, withdrawal etc. is against the purpose of sex.

Rhythm method is ok provided sex is abstained from during fertile periods.

At least that is the theology I was taught during a University course years ago.

In reallity I know many Catholic teachers who shut the door during sex ed and tell their students about birth control.

A bigger issue for the Protestant church is sex outside of marriage. That's another whole kettle of fish!

Some would say that birth control is a sin because it prevents conception, thus negating God's plan.  Some would say that birth control is a sin because certain forms can prevent implantation, and thus act as an abortion rather than a contraceptive if one considers life to begin at conception, which happens before implantation.  Some would say that birth control is ok, but it's the wide access that is wrong because it makes it easier for unmarried people to engage in sexual activity, which they believe is a sin.

My personal opinion, which has nothing to do with any church, is that birth control is a tool.  I don't see how it can be wrong to stop conception on the grounds that the start of life is "God's plan" and then be ok with any kind of life saving measures or medical treatment at all.  You can't reattach that finger...losing it was part of God's plan!  You can't take a Tylenol...your headache was part of God's plan!  Unless you genuinely refuse to make use of any kind of technology, you're going against "God's plan" in this argument, in my opinion.  Apparently, God's plan was for millions of people to die of plagues and polio and scarlet fever and simple infections; does the availabilty of treatment or knowledge of prevention mean that God's plan changed, that we are going against God, or that there wasn't really a plan in the first place?

The second argument which isn't against birth control as a concept but rather specific hormonal forms that prevent implantation is at least easier to understand.  In this mindset, it would be ok to use barrier methods of contraception such as condoms or diaphragms because they prevent conception.  Hormonal methods like the pill, on the other hand, would be wrong because conception could potentially occur (creating life) and then the fertilized egg would not be able to implant properly (causing death).  On these grounds, hormonal methods of birth control are considered the same as abortions, albeit unknown abortions.  I see the point, even though I don't agree with it.  This becomes an abortion debate, in any case, not a birth control debate.

Now for the group that doesn't necessarily oppose birth control, but which just doesn't want it to be available to anyone who wants it.  Honestly, why do they think they should be the judge and jury over everyone else's behaviour?  What right was bestowed upon them to say who can and who can't have sex?  There are times when the larger society does have to control and consequence the behaviour of citizens, but those situations usually have victims.  We aren't allowed to murder, rape or steal.  Whether or not our sexual experiences are sinful (or even merely regretable) doesn't change that we should each have the right to make our own decisions and to protect ourselves to the best of our ability when we make them.

NO

lol, I am with crazyheart

Actually, condoms are a no-no for Catholics, as well. Maybe unless they're specifically being used to prevent disease, i.e. if one of two lawfully wedded spouses has a disease that can be transmitted via piv intercourse, they might possibly receive a dispensation to use a condom to prevent transmission. (This being my lay understanding of Benedict's various unclear attempts to wrestle his foot out of his mouth after saying in public in Africa that condoms were a contributing factor to the spread of AIDS. )

I'm not really sure why the Bishops aren't up in arms about condoms and vasectomies, actually. Everytime they pull this kind of "every sperm is sacred" crap, it's obvious that their real agenda is tired, perpetually pregnant, obedient wives. I grew up with a few of those RCC families with 14 kids. Almost inevitably, the mother drank or had "a bit of a valium problem". If the true issue were birth control, male and female use would be equally targetted.

don't worry, you'll all be released from the birthing duty soonishly when the artifical wombs come online...keep the population up and have more choice in how the baby will be...there will be even more tribes formed as a result of this; those who think that a natural birth is right, those who think that artificial wombs are good,  but to let sexual shuffling take its course, all the way up to those who are artists with their children...

Bette, who were you responding to?  I didn't see anyone here imply that the Catholic Church was alright with condoms.

Not a sin in Eastern Orthodoxy.

I personally would not join a church that took this line.

Catholics do accept natural family planning though. That method makes a lot of sence, when you understand it properly.

IT is't about Birth Control.  It isn't about the chance of pregnancy.

It is all about attitudes towards sex.  Sex in marriage (John's comment about "duty"). Sex outside of marriage.  All about sex and some people's definition of morality.

And in the case of The Pill it involves forgetting that there are a lot of other reasons (as has been pointed out this week in response to Bloward Limbaugh) women take it--whether they are sexually active or not.

We have such hang-ups about sex and about gender. It often means we are ignorant and decisions we make are rooted in that ignorance.

As GordW mentions, women can take birth control pills for hormone regulation and not to prevent pregnancy.

Do we realize that anejaculation is real? Retrograde ejaculation? In those cases, using a condom may be to prevent disease and not pregnancy.

For me, there can be very good moral reasons for using birth control.

With the spread of STI's going on lately I think the using birthcontrol especially condoms should be mandatory. The days of mariaige before sex and monogomy are long gone. That is not to say that I am altogether happy with that.

Musicsooths, if BC was mandatory we might have a bit of a problem as everyone retires and no new young people are there to start working :)

"The Catholic church feels that sex was created for procreation. Anything that separates it from that ie barrier methods, withdrawal etc. is against the purpose of sex.

Rhythm method is ok provided sex is abstained from during fertile periods."

This is quite interesting in that the Rhythm method is  Pagan.

SG

"We have such hang-ups about sex and about gender. It often means we are ignorant and decisions we make are rooted in that ignorance."

I think that the ritualization of sex means that we establish a secret vendetta against the world and in this metaphor we pour out our anxieties.  Thus , the sex defeats us  and we empower the defeat.  Do you know what I mean, SG?

So, within a relationship for instance, we percieve our truth as our sexual intimacy and we agree over the last few decades that openness about that can be abusive to the relationship, but it destroys in us, at the same time, our ability to communicate the most basic and sane animal we often are able to get hold of.

sigh

I really dont understand how somebody could think the pill is abortive if it prevents the conception from happening.

I think that discouraging the birth control pill is bad news.

And I would like to know how many older aged people (catholic or not) actually understand how the female body, the  pill and other conctraceptives work, seeing as topics such as this one were not exactly talked about by our grandmothers in everday conversation

Not personally against birth control.

I don't think birth control is sinful.  For many people it protects them from disease, regulates there menstrual cycle, prevents unplanned pregnancies.  To me that sounds like more is good about it than bad.

musicsooths - there has never been a time when there was no sex before marriage.  Vast numbers of couples married 'in the olden days' once the woman had 'proved' her fertility.  Many people discover when researching family history that the oldest child in there family was born after a six month long pregnancy!

One of the things I find strange is that I know people who are very outspoken and judgemental about unmarried girls being pregnant - but they themselves were pregnant when they married.  I don't 'get' that attitude.

Hi Mahakala,

Off the top of my head I cannot think of specific positions taken by all denominations.  We have had some converstions here where the issue of contraceptives being abortifacient has been raised (and corrected).

Even if the individuals who raised the issue labour under a misunderstanding it would appear that they would not support contraceptives if they thought contraceptives destroyed fertilized eggs.

Others would be opposed to contraceptives based on the premise that access to birth control makes sexual promiscurity more of a certainty.  That also may be misunderstanding.  It would be enough.

You are right that it doesn't sound like birth control.  It speaks to attitudes toward sex.  Attitudes which do not allow for room for things like contraception.  If you don't want babies, don't have sex is how it sounds when you say it out loud.  Following close behind is the idea that if you are having sex and trying not to get pregnant while having sex you are clearly having sex for selfish reasons.

Again, even though such attitudes might spring from misunderstanding they still take a contrary posture.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Sorry I should have emphasized that if there are multiple partners it should be.

I am more apt to think of lack of birth control as a sin. 

Is Birth Control a Sin?

Sin against who . . . or what?

Sin against myself . . . I don't think so.  Not if I don't want to have a pregnancy/baby, but am in a committed relationship that involves an intimacy and a sharing of love through physical love where there is the possibility of pregnancy.

Sin against God . . . I personally don't think so.

Sin against the church . . . As the above discussions indicate . . . it appears to be a no-no in the Roman Catholic church.  I'm not sure if I've ever heard of any kind of protestant church who takes such as stand.  I'm curious about other world religions though . . . anyone aware of others who believe it is against God's will?

Some Protestant churches have no stance, some have said it is ok, and others that it is a sin. That is just within my mom's Lutheran faith. =)
Missouri and Wisconsin synods take no official stance (mom will tell you what she has been taught the Missouri synod stance is, it is just not on record), ELCA (Evangelical Lutherans) allow it, and Lutheran Church of the Reformation say it is a sin.

Did we quit counting Amish as Protestant? Also Old Colony Mennonites believe birth control is a sin.

There is a joke out there: 

Question: What do you call couples that use the rhythm method of birth control?

Answer: Parents

There is another method called the fertility awareness method that is based on observation rather than assumption as to when the fertile and non-fertile days occur. It can change a bit every month, so assuming you are always fertile on day 14 of your cycle is just foolish.

The Catholic church even approved, by Golly!  And if you are in a commited monogamous condom-free relationship, it 's a great way to go.

http://catholicism.about.com/od/catholicliving/p/Nat_Fam_Plan.htm

Now next thing:

When I had my son by cesarean, I got the doctor to tie the tubes.  My thoughts:  I am 41, I have had two late term still births and we now have our son  as well as our two daughers.  IT'S TIME TO CLOSE THE FACTORY.

I am sure there are some out there who would judge me for  not trusting God in this and taking fertility matters into my own hands but who cares.  That's between me and God and none of their business.

trishcuit, I thought that the fertility awareness method was for those trying to get pregnant, and natural family planning were for those who were avoiding it.  Basically, very similar methods but opposite on when to have sex.  Could be wrong as I never looked too much into any of it.

trishcuit - as I said above, I think that there are times when not using birth control might be a sin. 

You, very sensibly in my opinion, choose not to have any more children.   I had an IUD implanted after the birth of my second child in less than 13 months.   I had a serious health problem, we were living in two rooms and struggling to get on our feet financially; we had no family nearby to help, and I felt that my two babies needed me.  I couldn't risk another pregnancy.  

And even for those in good health and financially able to support a large family, I might question the morality of having a  dozen or more children.  The planet is overcrowded.  Polution is a huge problem.  Every extra person on earth adds to the problem - and the more affluent one is the bigger the footprint.   So if a couple feels that they have enough love to share with more children, why not foster or adopt some of the children of the world who need loving homes -  and practice birth control themselves.  

On the importance of proper birth control watch entomologist mark moffett carry a bot fly larva to birth; what caring/crazy mother for not aborting (notice the disclaimer at the beginning)

ps i always thought the best form of birth control is laughter

There is a book out called "Taking Charge of Your Fertility". It explains how well it works to prevent pregnancy too. 

trishcuit - as I said above, I think that there are times when not using birth control might be a sin. 

You, very sensibly in my opinion, choose not to have any more children.   I had an IUD implanted after the birth of my second child in less than 13 months.   I had a serious health problem, we were living in two rooms and struggling to get on our feet financially; we had no family nearby to help, and I felt that my two babies needed me.  I couldn't risk another pregnancy.  

And even for those in good health and financially able to support a large family, I might question the morality of having a  dozen or more children.  The planet is overcrowded.  Polution is a huge problem.  Every extra person on earth adds to the problem - and the more affluent one is the bigger the footprint.   So if a couple feels that they have enough love to share with more children, why not foster or adopt some of the children of the world who need loving homes -  and practice birth control themselves. 

***

I agree completley. If you can't afford them, try to not have them (although things happen).   And if there are health concerns also. So many extenuating circumstances.

To be absolutely clear, the GOP candidates are racing to the bottom of the barrel to decry the:

'requirement for company supported health insurance plans to include the coverage of birth control'

arguing that Christian organizations are being UNFAIRLY COMPELLED TO FUND MORE SEX FOR EMPLOYEES...which is such a load of garbage as to be hardly worth mentioning except for the fact that this is somehow spinning into a really disturbing move to limit women's access to basic healthcare.

(I've heard Michelle Bachman opine that President Obama will now be deciding on who can have children. They sound more and more insane as the electoral process continues...but I digress.)

Consider for a moment if YOU paid hundreds of dollars per month for health insurance only to find you are not covered for birth control because you work for a church, or another 'christian' organization.

(This is NOT the case for United Church members, or Canadians.)

The Roman Catholic church has no credibility in this area, as their moronic and anachonistic approach to the AIDS crisis in Africa was to insist condoms were forbidden, leading to the loss of--basically--a generation to this scourge.

i had severe endometriosis.  one of the methods i used to treat it and lessen the pain was to take the birth control pill... it worked quite well.

whenever i hear about the church or santorum or limbaugh blather on about how birth control is a sin or logically means you are having sex, i just shake my head in amazement... do they not bother to read, or do they just figure that their opinion trumps facts???

Hi sighsnootles,

Rhetorical question?

Grace and peace to you.

John

sighsnootles,

The thinking would be hilarious if it was not so dangerous.

Me... yes, me...

I was on birth control pills as a teen, because of primary amenorrhea. They believed I was just a "late bloomer".

News flash... I was not trying to prevent a pregnancy DUH
and it did not make me rush out for sex either.

As far as I am concerned it doesn't really matter what the "church" thinks.  Decisions about sex, birth control and so on remain between me, my partner and God.  No one else is, or should be, part of the conversation.

I have no problem whatsoever with birth control and despite growing up in a very conservative Southern Baptist church I don't recall it ever being preached against.

What century is this?

The short answer is NO

The long answer is YES because the Church wants to make everyone abstinant.  Fear of pregnancy should be a deterrent to sexual activity.  But that has never worked. So why would it work now?

As far as in a marriage if God wanted a baby born then whatever birth control methods were used God could circumvent.  Look at Abraham and Sarah?  She wasnt taking birth control she had passed menopause.  Look at Mary?  She didn't even have sex.  Look at Elizabeth and her husband.  She had passed menopause.  So for the Pastors to preach no birth control cuz God has a plan for the baby are talking out of both sides of their mouth.  One one hand there is the omnipotent all powerful God that can make virgins and post menopausal women pregnant.  On the other hand a condom which is not 100 percent fool proof can prevent God's plan.  It doesn't make sense.

Now that I no longer have to worry about birth control I think it's a sin, but it wasn't when I needed to use it.