You know, 'tis funny. Anti-gay marriage advocates cite this as a reason why gay marriage is bad.
Perhaps we should outlaw marriages to people who are sterile.
2007-04-11 05:32:21
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
0⤋
Yes and no...from a Catholic perspective. The purpose of sex in a marriage is NOT procreation first and foremost, but rather it is a physical manifestation of the marriage covenant. There are no restrictions for infertile couples. However, in the wedding vows you make to one another (in the Catholic tradition), you promise to be open to children. The Church sees deliberate prevention of conception as a breach of those vows. This does not mean that you simply leave your family planning up to God, although some couples do choose to. As Catholics, we are called to responsible parenting. We are allowed to choose when we want to actively begin trying to have children, and if we as a couple decide that the time is not right, we can use natural means of preventing conception...NFP, which is a very effective means of pregnancy prevention when practiced correctly, and has a much greater sucess rate than the Rhythym Method. Again, this is from a Catholic perspective....ultimately the couple must decide between the two of them what is best, and let their conscience dictate.
To Dave.....the church DOES NOT prohibit artificial means of contraception when used for disease control....if I understood you correctly. I myself am on the Pill for Endometriosis...I am not using it to prevent pregnancy. If you meant the condom issue regarding Aids prevention...the jury is still out. It is a grave problem, and there have been discussions within the church on this matter, but no final decision has been announced. However, I would hope that in the future you would research your statements regarding other religions before you begin pontificating about their doctrine. Your assesment of Church teaching is very obviously skewed in many regards.
2007-04-11 06:33:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by asrai780 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
It depends on which christian cult you belong to. It also depends on what you do when you have sex to prevent having children.
First of all, as far as I know, none of the protestant cults have any sex rules which would make this a sin. However, the catholic cult does hold that sex is primarily for procreation. It is a sin to use any form of birth control (even if you are using it for disease control) because that removes the possibility of procreation. You can try and avoid sex during the female's fertile periods (the rhythm method) although the theological rationalization for this is not exactly clear.
Note that if you cannot have children then sex is no problem but attempting to have children by artificial means (like in-vitro fertilization) is a sin for catholics. If there was a god, even he couldn't figure that reasoning out.
2007-04-11 05:32:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by Dave P 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Maybe....
If one member of the couple is infertile then it is not a sin what so ever. If the couple is trying for a child it is also not a sin in any religious sect.
In some churches, including the Catholic church, it is a sin to purposely try and avoid having children. The use of contraceptive methods including 'pulling out' is a sin according to the Vatican.
There are those in the Vatican who want to see this changed, but as it stands it says that contraceptives are sinful.
2007-04-11 05:42:19
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
If couples take steps to prevent the birth of a child then it is a sin because we were commanded to be fruitful & multiply. If they are trying to have a child & it doesn't happen then no it is not a sin, because it is beyond the couples power if they are trying. As long as there are no steps preventing a birth then a married couple may have all the sex they want.
2007-04-11 05:51:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by Luv&Rockets 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, of course not. In fact, if you have a nasty hereditary illness, it would actually be a good deed.
However, Organized Religion (TM) will tell you it's a sin to use birth control or limit your procreation in any way. That's because, even though religion starts with a sincere reformer like Yeshua or Mohammed, it ultimately becomes the tool of the 1% who own 99% of everything. Traditionally, Organized Religion (TM) wants you to produce as many future production/consumption units as possible--keeps labor rates low--and more kids means more cannon fodder for the next war.
2007-04-11 05:39:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by crypto_the_unknown 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
No way! God created sex for procreation, but also our pleasure! Too bad I'm not having any, sex that is. ie read my replys to 2 just answered questions "is their spiritual depression " & "is sex before marriage a sin!" I explain my unhappy life. I don't think God wants people to force themselves to have kids until they're ready, as you know it's a lifelong responsibility. But, hope my answer helps you anyway. P S I know someone who died, non-believer, unmarried in the act of sex, think about that. Self pleasure w/o the chance to ask forgiveness, I'd be terrified for my soul.
2007-04-11 05:38:33
·
answer #7
·
answered by past tense 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
No...you are referring to the attitude in the early church regarding sex for the purpose of "procreation" only. Having sex in and of itself is not a sin. Having sex in a manner that some may consider sinful, if it is sinful, is up to God to judge, not man. We all sin in some way.
The Skeptical Christian
Grace and Peace
Peg
2007-04-11 05:38:24
·
answer #8
·
answered by Dust in the Wind 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
NO!
I dont know what else to say really.
I'm sure people will quote bible references at you, but I think we live in a different world today that is over populated. I think the responsible thing to do is to use contraception unless you are absolutely sure you want to have children.
Sex, as long as it's within a loving relationship, is fine. Again, that's just my humble opinion.
2007-04-11 05:34:52
·
answer #9
·
answered by Searching 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
It is a sin to take a Vow of Marriage, an Oath of any kind.
2007-04-11 05:49:15
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
no, Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom
2007-04-11 05:35:58
·
answer #11
·
answered by Gods child 6
·
0⤊
0⤋