The OP doesn't make a distinction between what kinds of contraceptives. You think married people don't use them as well?
Threads like this prove birth control's used no where near often enough.
The OP doesn't make a distinction between what kinds of contraceptives. You think married people don't use them as well?
Their priority is controlling sex, not ending or reducing abortion.
There seems to be a blockage of sorts, where they don't realize that contraceptives DECREASES abortions. I've never understood this disconnect.
One of the characteristics of fundamentalists is an obsession with sex. The OP personifies that very well.
nonsense
there's a recognition that sex outside of marriage is bad
Recognized by whom?
What exactly is bad?
Sorry, but this is absolutely ludicrous, and full of straw men to boot .
It's one thing to be opposed to abortion, but to be also opposed to contraceptives is unbelievably stupid . Contraceptives PREVENT abortions .
Contraceptives, when used correctly, prevent pregnancies ... and diseases. However, that does not equate to safe sex.
In reality, there is no such thing as safe sex ... just safer sex. Being that some marriages include adultery, that would go for married couples as well.
Rhythm method.
Rhythm method.
Rhythm method.
Dr. Monica Miller of Citizens for a Pro-Life Society, one of the main organizers of this weekend’s protest rallies at Planned Parenthood clinics, said on Tuesday that even if Planned Parenthood were to stop performing abortions, she would still want to strip it of federal funding because it promotes a “corrupt view of human sexuality” including “sex for recreation, sex for mere pleasure.”
“Planned Parenthood from the top to the bottom is a corrupt organization,” Miller told Ave Maria Radio’s Teresa Tomeo, “corrupt in its view of the sanctity of human life and corrupt in its view of human sexuality. And I say even if Planned Parenthood didn’t perform one single abortion, just the mere fact that its sexual ethic is corrupted means right there, should be the reason right there, that they should not receive any federal money. The kind of sexual ethic that Planned Parenthood promotes is sex for recreation, sex for mere pleasure.”
If someone knows of a better way to do with the reality of a hypersexual culture that people will actually do, I hope they come forward with it.
A loving marriage for life, between one man, one woman and before God. If children come along, whether planned or by accident, they stand a better chance of being cared for in a committed relationship
In the UK, around twenty percent of three year old children, do not live with both their biological parents. By the time the child is fifteen, about half of them, will not be living with both their biological parents. Those children still living with both parents, must almost be living in fear of their parents splitting up, when they see how many of their mates are from separated families.
Children want to be in a loving relationship with parents, grandparents, brothers, sisters, uncles and aunts. I see the aftermath of family breakdowns, and it seems so sad, these bigger relationships also tend to break down too.
I agree, marriage is what ought to be and children really deserve a loving family to surround them. It is sad that reality turns out different for many folks. We still need to deal with the reality of unwanted pregnancies, though.
I wrote this thread on another forum. I thought you guys might like it:
Social liberalism, to my mind, is a social and spiritual disease. It is utterly repulsive in every way. It has no redeeming qualities. It is disgusting. [This is, of course, to say nothing about social liberals. An idealogy can be utterly and irredeemably flawed, wrong and disgusting. Idealogues, however, are not, at least, not this side of eternity.]
Before I go any further, let me briefly define my terms:
By "social liberalism," I understand the general ideaology or set of idealogies which lead to the acceptance of such doctrines as:
1. Homosexual conduct is morally permissible. It's not an unholy crime against nature which cries out to heaven for vengeance. In fact, it should receive State sponsorship (read: "gay marriage").
Making sure they don't happen in the first place might be a nice place to start.
It has been my observation over the years that when there is this kind of 'disconnect' between our ideals, and our actions, that BOTH of them need to be altered if we really want to achieve alignment. We humans are a kind of hybrid between animal and ideology. And it's unhealthy and unwise for us to try to be all or only one or the other. So we need to find ways to conjoin these two different modes of our existing.I don't think they're linked. Since the topic of sex is mentioned in the OP, consider this.
It's not that sex is expected of people nor is there a lack of people who understand that abstaining is a virtue. What happens is you have the group who do manage to abstain but you have a larger group that either fail to do so or they just don't care. Because they outnumber the folks who abstain, you end up with the belief that sex is just going to happen with most people and it does. Contraception and abortion are tools that get implemented to deal with the results of it.
There's what ought to be and reality, you have to hope for the first and deal with the latter. People who support ways of preventing pregnancy or unwanted births aren't practially atheists, instead they're solving problems the best way they know how. If someone knows of a better way to do with the reality of a hypersexual culture that people will actually do, I hope they come forward with it.