Religion often describes intercourse as a means for begetting children, not as a means of gaining pleasure. With this view of sex in mind, it follows that any form of contraception is "immoral". This includes not only the more controversial methods like IUD's, the pill, and condoms, but also the rhythm method, which many religious people engage in as their only means of regulating their fertility.
If we follow the religious doctrine of having sex for procreation, then the intent behind the act is important. A man and woman who engage in sex without using birth control methods, but who are fervently hoping they don't get pregnant, are acting just as immorally as the couple that uses a condom. In both cases, the purpose of the act is for pleasure; the only difference is that one couple has a much lower "worry-factor" than the other regarding an unwanted pregnancy. Even a man and woman who plan the timing of intercourse around the woman's fertile periods are acting immorally, strictly speaking, as their intent as well is to avoid having a child.
While I understand claiming a moral aversion to any form of birth control that could lead to the fertilization of an egg which soon is aborted due to the use of the birth control method, I cannot understand the aversion to barrier methods like condoms, which carry no such risk. If you are willing to prevent a pregnancy by planning the timing of your intercourse, then you cannot be against a method which has the same effect but which does not require planning.
4 comments:
Clarification of terms, whilst I gather thoughts for this one: The rhythm method is ineffective, as it counts on ovulation at day 14. Fertility Awareness method allows a woman to take to note of her own fertility symptoms to determine the time of ovulation, be it day 10 or day 30.
Here is a link to Pope John Paul II's encyclical on this matter. Basically, if you directly interfere with the life-creating part of the act (as in using a condom to prevent a fertile woman from conceiving) it is morally wrong. If, however, you take advantage of natural infertile periods provided by God, and if your reasons are just, it is morally acceptable.
Funny you should ask this question. I've been thinking about a post on Marriage for about two weeks.
My link worked! I'm so excited! (There isn't a built in link function in comments.)
I found the link you provided very enlightening. I'm not in agreement with the statement made in the above comment, because I find the distinction between the two methods of "interference withthe life-creating part of the act" to be a semantic one. However, I believe that the Pope's sentiment regarding thoughtful consideration of the act and its consequences to be an excellent justification. Using the body's natural rhythms requires a sacrifice as well, since the couple must abstain during the fertile periods, bringing a true awareness and appreciation for the act.
It is the Church's responsibility to create not just moral but consciously moral people, and I believe that this response promotes such an aim.
Post a Comment