The Catholic Church and Contraception - Responding to CosmicSkeptic (REBUTTAL)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 сен 2024
- Why is the Catholic Church opposed to the use of contraception, even in the context of marriage? Should the Church just "get with the times?" In this video, I respond to @CosmicSkeptic's video, The Catholic Church and Contraception, and address the real reason that contraception is immoral.
Become a Patron at / seanhussey
------------------------------- Sponsor -------------------------------
Hallow Catholic Prayer & Meditation App: www.hallow.com/...
------------------------------- Theme Song -------------------------------
Song: Make a Way
Artist: Connor Flanagan
Album: Skyscrapers
LINK: open.spotify.c...
![MISSING: SLIM SHADY [Expanded Mourner’s Edition Trailer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/xh8qgHrOO1g/mqdefault.jpg)
The Catholic Church approves contraception as a medical treatment to treat or alleviate medical conditions:
The Church does not consider illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from-provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever (Humanae Vitae 15).
@Sean Hussey Turn off auto-focus and manually set the focus on your camera.
It was constantly switching focus between the background, you & your mic
I don't understand the insistence on the claim that you can't separate the bonding aspect from the procreation aspect. Where does that come from? It's not a natural law. Animals have gay sex all the time. Humans can and regularly do have sex without wanting to have a child. It's a made up, authoritarian rule, from men, that we can't separate the two. Therefore if I reject your control mechanism based on some dusty old book, I'm just being human and making choices. It's not immoral.
And in Africa, which is by and large a Catholic stronghold, decades ago specifically the AIDS epidemic was rampant. And condoms would've prevented many deaths. So what's more immoral? A bunch of dudes citing a book saying just don't have sex? We know that we can prevent unnecessary deaths if we lift this arbitrary rule we made, but we're so backwards that we're going to stick with dogma over human life. How pro life is that?
So avoiding sex during the fertile ovulating period is also depriving human life?
Contraception DOES save lives. Contraception is essential because not all women can or should give birth, certainly not multiple births!
Well, then CC advises to abstain from any sexual intercourse whatsoever. Is it realistic approach? I think the answer is obvious.
@@jarosawszyc8287 No, it's not realistic. Human nature is human nature, and there's nothing so natural as having sexual drives. To condemn someone to a life of unwilling celibacy is cruel.
Why are these religious institutions still a thing? What is wrong with people deciding when and if to have a child? It's ridiculous to think that every time a couple has sex they are supposed to get pregnant. Religion may promote this idea, but in reality, the majority of religious people don't practice this (other than the "quiverful" types of course). Otherwise, most of them would have an insane amount of kids. It absolutely is healthy and wise to plan your family.
Natural Family Planning is not contraception, and allows couples to use God's design to determine the size of their families.
@@BekahHasACamera If a couple is deliberately having sex only on the days when she is least likely to conceive bc they dont want to get pregnant just yet, then that is a contraception method. I dont think it's a bad thing to say that God included in his design a way for a couple to decide when they want to conceive. Contraception is not a bad thing, including according to God apparently.
Excellent explanation of the Church's teaching on this very important issue. Many thanks.
Here’s the thing: Our catechism doesn’t teach us that it is wrong to refrain from sex whilst we’re fertile, nor does it instruct us that “pulling out” is wrong.
So, if the idea is that we must be open to procreation at all times within a Catholic marriage, then why doesn’t the church teach us that *purposely* refraining from sex is sinful (ie purposely refraining from sex to avoid another child when we’re fertile)?
There’s zero difference between refraining from sex to prevent pregnancy and using condoms or caps or even birth control pills.
I’ve questioned this Catholic family planning hypocrisy hundreds of times and have yet to find an answer that makes sense. People either ignore the whole question or only answer the part that fits the narrative. (You also didn’t specifically address this in your response to Alex.)
I think, in order to convince one of the elephant in the room, we can’t just call it a donkey and hope they don’t notice that both being grey doesn’t equate to it being the same animal.
PS In answer to your ignorance regarding how birth control saves lives:
It does so by keeping women from becoming pregnant when their families are not in a position to fully support the resulting child. Have you ever seen a starving child?
It does so when a woman’s health is at risk. Have you ever seen a woman die from ruptured uterine linings?
It does so by making sure the family stays in harmony with the Lord by preventing overly-stressed men from taking their anger out on their families (ie financial stresses
of supporting so many children that his mental health is affected)?
Those are just a few of the types of deaths that can occur when one does not have access to contraceptives. Even if a woman is willing to take those risks, all women understand the question.
It’s a good thing I don’t follow Catholicism. Phew…that’s a close call.
Sameee
So you can continue in your sin.
@@rohan7224yes we are living in sin for an imaginary god who did not forbid slavery but forbids contraception .you guys are no better than the Taliban
If people want to have sex they should be allowed to, it's a normal part of human life, wanting sex. And that's why contraceptives exist.
When my parents went through pre-marital counseling with a Methodist minister in 1950, he said that The Methodist Church strongly believed in contraception, because every child should be planned and wanted.
Add to the fact that my mother was the last of eight, and my grandmother was 45 when my mother was born.
There was no way that my mother was going to have that many kids, or have babies and toddlers in her 40s.
Couple that with the fact that my father started college in his mid 20s and then became a road warrior, my mother wasn't interested in even three kids.
After learning of some potential health issues (both hers and future babies), my parents stopped at one.
Frankly, I think I'm a better person for being an only child.
sounds quite selfish to me
Great Arguments Sean!
My wife and I routinely engage in sexual activity without intercourse. Per your definition, since this is sex without procreation, and therefore contraception. If having lustful thoughts about someone is adultery, then mere arousal is sex, too. On numerous occasions, I’ve desired my wife without following through. This also is contraception. There’s no end to it.
I couldn't agree more!
I was raised Catholic, and stayed Catholic until a few years ago when I realized that I have absolutely ZERO passion for my religion, and when I began attending a Non-denominational Christian church, I saw the Bible and Jesus Christ in a way I had never seen them before.
One of the last straws that made me give up Catholicism for good was when my (now ex) husband and I did the required pre-marital counseling/group sessions before our wedding, and I learned that saving yourself for your spouse and not having sex before marriage (which, neither of us had done - neither of us were virgins) isn't good enough. I figured that once you are married, you and your spouse can enjoy all kinds of sexual intimacy together - have fun with it, explore what each of you enjoys in the bedroom, use some toys, etc. And then I find out that Nope! Any sex sessions that do not result in vaginal intercourse with ejaculation are WRONG and SINFUL. Meaning - oral sex, manual stimulation, etc.,etc. (not going to go into a list of sex acts here l) are BAD, EVEN if they are with the person you are married to. I mean, COME ON! The Catholic Church is thisclose to saying that the only Catholic approved non-sinful sex between a married couple is missionary style, with a sheet covering the woman that has a hole cut in it for the man's penis.
These rules make absolutely no sense, and I can't really find anything in the Bible that says all of these things are wrong or sinful. It's completely asinine.
@@cactuscallie5090 how sad, you love sex more than God.
@@cactuscallie5090 "rules make absolutely no sense" ----
Christ is our Ideal. Church teaching is intended to point to that ideal. Few of us attain to that ideal, yet we should ask for grace to desire such an attainment. We grow in grace. We are seldom able to imagine our future selves, for we are always our present selves: not ready, unprepared, and unwilling. Christ sees who we shall be, not who we are. Truth without mercy is a torment. Mercy without truth is a lie. Love always encompasses both, for God is Love and Christ is God made manifest.
"All the paths of the LORD are mercy and truth"
(Psalm 25)
"The LORD said, This is the resting place, let the weary rest, and, This is the place of repose-
but they would not listen. So then, the Word of the Lord to them has become nothing but:
do this, do that,
a rule for this, a rule for that;
a little here, a little there-
so then as they try to move forward, they fall backward and are injured and snared and captured"
(Isaiah 28)
"Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father"
(John 5)
Peace be with you.
Condoms do not harm the body!
Interesting video. This is a really great and clear explanation of the teaching. I guess though, what I take from this, is mostly just that people (including married couples) should very rarely have sex, given that so many people have good reasons to fear that they would be unable to take care of a child. Perhaps only a minority of people should be getting married at all. That does seem hard for people with medical issues, financial constraints and other hardships which would make it unwise for them to conceive, but I guess that the Church doesn't claim that its position is easy!
Hmm not really, there are natural methods of spacing pregnancies (various ones, not just one method) where you would identify fertile and infertile times in the woman's cycle and decide when to have sex and when to avoid it.
@@miszk5690 I'm aware of natural family planning methods, but they're meant (according to the Church) just for spacing pregnancies, not for either remaining childless or putting a limit on the number of children. If you think you wouldn't be able to care for, let's say 4 kids, you still shouldn't be getting married- let alone if you wouldn't be able to care for even one. I think that's hard, but as I said I don't think that the Church is pretending it's easy.
I also find NFP intellectually dishonest but that's a whole separate issue.
@@rebeccamcelroy1000 where did you get that idea? You don't need to be ready to have a dozen of kids when you get married! That's kind of why we want NFP to be a reliable method, not like the rhythm method. As for not having children at all... Might be more difficult. As you do say that you will accept the children given to you by God right before saying your wedding vows. On a side note, just because a lot of couples have a loose approach to NFP and see it more as spacing and being ready for surpsires, doesn't mean every Catholic needs to see it that way.
@@miszk5690 I didn't say a dozen- 4 seems like a reasonable estimate for a fertile couple spacing pregnancies out a bit,over the course of their marriage- hence the estimate of what you should need to be ready for. If following the spirit of this teaching, you should be ready for about this number over the course of the marriage, although not necessarily all at once!
My comment about spacing is not about how effective NFP is so much as the spirit of the law, which is that marriage should not be closed to life. If you are using modern scientific NFP, with its high efficacy, to really try to reduce the number of children you have (rather than just allowing the body to recover between pregnancies), I think you have gone beyond what the Church teaches.
Hence my comment that, taking this seriously, perhaps few people are really qualified for marriage- especially with how increasingly hard it is to support a family financially while young.
@@rebeccamcelroy1000 Hmm but even in Humanae Vitae, we read that it is up to the couple to decide while considering multiple factors, including duties to the existing children and to society! What you are describing sounds like bullying into more pregnancies to me, and leaving religious arguments behind for a second- noone is going to be pregnant, give birth, recover postpartum instead of you. You will. If you will pay with your health and life for this, it is still you who handles the most grave consequences of that new pregnancy. If your husband dies in an accident and you are left with no job, a newborn and your other young ones to survive- believe we, the church is not going to replace your husband (not your specifically, it's a figurative speech), noone will replace the role of the father, the protector. Sure, you can get help sometimes, but at the end, you will be the one who has to deal with all of this. So noone has a right to bully you into the pregnancy you're not ready for, no matter how noble their arguments are.
This video is nonsense.
Thank you
Thank you for walking through these hard topics of the church. Just found your channel and I love your kind approach with theology.
What about homosexuality and same sex relationships?
A good question, but I can see you got no answers.
They are wrong 🤧😔
I love when a Roman Catholic says “the church has held x, y, z, for 2000 years”…church history would immediately refute that entire statement. The Roman Catholic Church isn’t even 2000 years old lol.
Also, what scripture was quoted to prove this doctrine?
Sorry for the Protestant question, serious answers only!
Because rape ignores consent!! A different issue than contraception!
Hope all is well Sean!
Let me ask you some questions, Sir. Have you ever had the pleasure of rolling around on the bathroom floor because of severe cramps? Probably not. Did you ever take Tylenol or Advil but it had no effect on whatever type of pain you had? Did your period ever give you such horrible headaches that led to vomiting? Did you miss an insane amount or school or work because of these symptoms? I highly doubt it.
The Catholic Church approves of using birth control for cramps. They disapprove of using it for contraception though.
I highly doubt it!
But I feel this. My anemia symptoms have improved due to less heavy bleeding. I’m able to function without feeling constantly dizzy and light headed
Good talk, thanks! So Butker was wrong when he said NFP is "catholic contraception" then eh?
Where do you find the objective history of birth control being bad for all Christians before 1930? I agree with you I would just like to have the source to site.
Wow this is crazy that now I get motivation. Yesterday I visited the dermatologist and was told acutane would be by best bet to solve my acne. However, it had a huge list of side effects, especially birth defects. I spoke with my 16 year old coworker today and found out she is going to try acutane. Her dermatologist is REQUIRING her, a 16 year old Pentecostal who’s never even had a boyfriend, to be on birth control so the doctor is not held accountable for birth defects or trauma of an abortion.
I was stunned. I was thinking where are her parents? Do Pentecostals believe in birth control? Doesn’t it bother her when she casually said “if I got pregnant I would have to abort the baby”?
Wicked stuff!!!
Hope everything works out for you, try cutting out dairy completely, worked well for me :)
@@SteveC-Aus thanks, Steve! I’m actually working on that right now. Cheese is hard to quit! I chose the less extreme regimen to clear my face and it’s working a lot better than I thought.
The "doctors" make money off of this stuff. Just like a politician who gets kickbacks from laws that help certain businesses (*cough* Pelosi *cough* Krenshaw!) doctors get kickbacks from Big Pharma.
Anyways, I'm a Protestant, born and raised and current. I've never heard the subject of contraception come up in a Protestant church. It's only when I became interested in Catholic ideas that I learned about the theological implications. Very happy I did. While I doubt ya'll will ever convince me on Mary or the pope, I can happily say that you've convinced me on this issue.
I'm a Catholic and went on Accutane when I was a teenager. The doctor pushed strongly for some form of birth control but thankfully my mother was with me. She's a lot tougher than I am, and while I was about to crack and agree to go on it because I'm easily swayed and hate conflict, my mother put her foot down and said no. It's against our religion and it wasn't going to happen. The doctor wasn't too happy but had me sign a contract of sorts that I would never have sex while I was on the medication. I wasn't planning to anyway so it was easy to agree to and sign the paper. Long story short, anyone out there who might want to use Accutane, put your foot down with the doctor that it's against your religion. If they're a good doctor, they'll back off from the birth control push. God bless y'all ❤
Thank you so much, Sean!
Great video again, thanks Sean!
Although Alex did a terrible job and his reasoning was a big joke, you did a great job explaining the real Catholic position wich is the only consistent one. Keep up the good work!
God Bless!
Totally agree with you Sean
It seriously blows my mind at how clueless people are about WHY contraception is sinful. The Catholic Church didn't just make this up so that there'd be more Catholic babies. God bless you!
Parenthood is not for everyone you know? And wanting sex is a normal part of life, unless you're asexual.
So NFP is sinful?
So NFP is sinful?
It's a very fair question. On Catholic websites, you seldom get answers. Sorry.
Only Catholics can make having sex and not having it both sinful!
Woah, going against Alex, this is bold.
Could you do a response to the Friendly Atheist? The name of the video is Why Catholic Hospitals are bad for America
I just call him the Brown klansman. He's every bit as bigoted, he just does it with a smile.
@@thepalegalilean what do you think about that moronic atheost dude? And should Sean respond to that video?
@@diegofuentes6639
TBH, he's not smart enough to warrant a response. It's like asking whether or not Sean should respond to a holocaust denier. The position is too stupid to be taken seriously.
@@thepalegalilean What is your opinion about the "friendly atheist" dude? What do you mean by calling him the Brown Klansman?
@@diegofuentes6639
Because he is completely in favor of introducing legislation in order to force people of faith to contradict their deeply held beliefs. This is not dissimilar from what the Ku-Klux Klan campaigned for when they tried to use legislation to oppose Catholic schools.
These are the exact same principles and beliefs on display but the perpetrator has a darker skin tone.
8:17 "How far can we extend this logic. Contraceptives are not the undergirding principle." -- translation: Let's engage in pilpul, hair-splitting, and casuistry to move the goal posts and have a different argument entirely! This guy is so dishonest. And it is intentional.