Sex is good

A discussion of sex-related issues from a sex-positive slant.

Thursday, December 29, 2005

Misinformation about contraception

Misinformation about contraception, such as that in this Christian Sexuality Slideshow at One More Soul, causes a great deal of unhappiness, so I'll take it on here. (Note this slideshow is in PowerPoint so if you don't have PowerPoint, you can't see it.)
  • Contraception leads to abortion—they don't really explain this one. Obviously, contraception is one way of preventing abortion. Duh.
  • The Pill is an abortifacent—the Pill, taken correctly, almost always prevents ovulation, so there is nothing to "abort". However, if someone does get pregnant while on the pill, it is very unlikely that taking the pill will harm the zygote/embryo. (source: Sexuality and U .ca, a site by the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada.
  • Contraception leads to unwanted pregnancy and single parenthood—huh?
  • Contraception contributes to divorce—how? Surely unwanted children are a stress on marriage (heck, even wanted children can stress a marriage)
  • Contraception contributes to "social chaos"—what is that supposed to mean?
  • Contraception is "a violation of the good of a woman's physical and psychological health". What? Unwanted pregnancy is a violation of women's psychological health, and any pregnancy carries with it health risks including possible death.
  • Contraception is "an impediment to the total self-giving of a spouse's love". I'd say worrying about pregnancy is more an impediment.
  • "Babies are Bonding"—surely that depends on whether the couple wanted a(nother) baby! Even a wanted baby can be a stress on a marriage. If babies really were bonding, the only single parents would be widows and widowers.

Strangely, One More Soul advocates "natural" family planning (which I'd say is the "least" natural method available—under natural conditions, animals have sex during their fertile period. I'm hard pressed to see how "N"FP is superior to other forms of contraception—surely it also is "an impediment to the total self-giving of a spouse's love" etc. etc. (The slideshow does have a slide entitled "NFP vs. Contraception" with a set of incomprehensible (to me) cartoons; if someone can figure it out, please post a comment.)

I'm guessing the reason "N"FP is okay is that it has the "benefit" of "requir[ing] mutual sacrifice". I guess a church run by people who aren't allowed to have sex can't bear the thought of the rest of us enjoying ourselves.


  • At 4:48 p.m., Anonymous A-A-B said…

    I can understand your issues with One More Soul. But the other folks at The Marriage Bed are about as pro-sex as you can get. The only place they disagree with you is about extra-marital (or pre) experimentation. They promote sex, sex, and more sex, in every marriage.

    They actually sound a lot like James in his SWAGE identity- one wife, stick with her, somehow get her to stop the selfishness and be a real wife.

  • At 8:08 p.m., Blogger Radical Ro said…

    Thanks for posting, a-a-b.

    I hadn't really looked at much of the Marriage Bed site before, just the pages on premarital sex (or lack thereof) which I got by Googling "no kissing before marriage" or something like that.

    They are pretty liberal for a Christian site, a lot more liberal than I expected.

    Of course, I disagree with them on premarital sex, homosexuality, group sex, and swinging, all of which I think are okay for consenting adults if no deception is involved (e.g. lying about whether one is using birth control, or has an STD, or is in a relationshop, etc.)

    BTW, there are 2 Jameses posting here: James Smart, who is a fellow moderator of this blog and is my boyfriend, and James from SWAGE.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home