Okay this is really not about birth control though it may come across as so....it's more about unanswered prayers.

My friend and I have been arguing about this subject for a while now. I have 2 boys under the age of 2. Lets just say they are a handfull. I have been on birth control for the past year. My body cannot handle carrying another child full term. Also I'm not sure if my marriage can handle another child, considering we are still kinda newly weds. My friend is giving me a little bit of a hard time about being on birth control. She says that I should just put my fate into God's hand and if I ask him for me not to get pregnant I won't. We both know that God's will be done. But what if it is indifferent to God's divine plan? Is it possible to even have anything be indifferent to God? And nothing is indifferent....is there even such a thing as an unanswered prayer? Or is there even a point is praying? And by that I mean asking things of God.

There is a never ending loop with this arguement. I guess I would just like to hear other peoples opinions on the matter.

Oracle

-- Ries Oracle (RiesOracle@hotmail.com), January 26, 2003

Answers

Dear Ries, I've emailed you. My response was too long, and a little private. Pax Christi.

-- Anna <>< (FloweroftheHour@hotmail.com), January 26, 2003.

Dear ORACLE, Sorry about the name reversal! (duh...!)

-- Anna <>< (FloweroftheHour@hotmail.com), January 26, 2003.

Having two children under the age of two IS a handful..been there and done that..wheeeee! Your situation is complex..on one hand, you are asking about "unanswered prayer"..on the other, you say you are using birth control, with the inference that you do not trust God to run your life..and then, there's the reference to your being unsure of the solidity of your marriage should another pregnancy occur..my goodness, THAT's a great deal to give an opinion on to a complete stranger...I don't think I would presume to "go there"..I do think I'd like to share with you some thoughts: By being Catholic and using birth control, a person is sinning..if a person is sinning, then how can that person expect God to smile upon them and grant them the grace to get through the day? Sin is sin is sin..if married people are not doing things the way God wants them to, then how can the marriage be strong in the face of adversities? It's like a small child not doing their chores and still expecting an allowance..it doesn't fly does it? Prayers ARE answered..yet they are answered to fit GOD's plan, not our own..when what we want happens to be what God wants too, that's nice..but remember how it goes, "THY will be done, NOT mine." It's very hard to give up our will to God..never heard anyone say it was easy..Yet, in all of my life so far, the happiest people I have ever met are those who have done so. We only live a short time on this planet. We will live forever and ever after we die. Personally, with that thought in mind, I try to spend my 70+ projected years here thinking about the never-ending time "there". Having children, raising them to love God with all of their hearts is a wonderful thing indeed, and a tremendous amount of WORK. Try to ask yourself as you make decisions, "who am I trying to please..God or myself?"

-- lesley (martchas@hotmail.com), January 26, 2003.

Dear Ries, Yes, there are many decisions we make in everyday life that are morally neutral. However, artificial birth control is not such an issue. I can't offer an opinion on this matter, for it is not a matter of opinion. But I can offer the facts. That's the beauty of being Catholic. You never have to debate or agonize over the moral acceptability of an action, or seek the conflicting opinions of others. The answer is right there for you, if you really want to know it. That's why Jesus gave us His Church, empowered to speak for Him, and to make His Word binding on earth. Without the Church, there is simply no way of answering your question with any kind of validity or authority. Is it God's will or not? On our own, we can think of many reasons why a proposed action might be acceptable, and other reasons why it might not; and if we approach moral decision making only from that perspective, then debate and uncertainty are the inevitable result. And, human nature being as it is, we will tend to lean in the direction of acceptability for actions we want to pursue. That is exactly the kind of moral dilemma God did not intend to subject us to. When we look to the teachings of His Church, we find the answer. It might not be our preferred answer, or the most convenient answer, but it is the true answer - that fact we can rely on. So really, how we approach moral decision making is an indication of whether we seriously want to know the truth, or whether we simply want to sooth our consciences while doing our own thing. However, the alternative here is not simply asking God not to prevent pregnancy. Nature is nature, and biology is biology, and God is not likely to suspend the laws of nature for you. What is available though, is a system called Natural Family Planning (NFP). This method of regulating conception is in accord with the will of God, and the teaching of the Church. It takes a little instruction to learn it, but once you do, it is at least as effective as artificial birth control, and does not pose any of the health risks of chemicals and devices. It cannot be used indiscriminately, but that information will be given to you along with the rest of the instruction. You should look into it.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 29, 2003.

i believe that it's not God will to use birth control because human race should be implemented by giving birth to an offspring as a sign of celebrating life. God gave us life to enjoy and to prosper.

-- mark loquias (hump_19@yahoo.com), February 26, 2003.

Paul I can never understand why NFP is seen as at least neutral morally and artifical contraception as immoral and evil. Surely the INTENT is the same, surely THE AIM is the same (preventing a pregnancy). I thought "wrong doing" was based on intent?

It seems (at least to someone as uniformed as me) as though NFP is a loophole through which the overarching SPIRIT of CAtholic doctrine on sex is mitigated in order to apease pressure from the laity.

I dont have a problem with atifical contraception but accept that this is one issue I need to try to change my own approach to.

Ries, Im no theolgian but I have a vauge recollection that there are certain reasons the church will allow artifical contraception, esp if the mothers health is in danger through preganancy. I must stress this is just a feeling and Im sure someone else will clarify it.

God Bless

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), February 26, 2003.

Funny how this forum keeps rehashing old issues. The following is a thread I had started 2 years ago or so where I also questioned this teaching. By the grace of God and the help of this forum, I now accept the Church's teaching on birth control. Hopefully, the following thread will help others also.
Birth Control

Kiwi, I do not believe the Church EVER condones birth control. What the Church teaches is that if the mother's health or the family situation dictates it, then NFP is allowed to be used to continually avoid pregnancy.

-- Glenn (glenn@nospam.com), February 26, 2003.

Thanks Glenn Ill have a read tommorow , its late here. Blessings

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), February 26, 2003.

"Paul I can never understand why NFP is seen as at least neutral morally and artifical contraception as immoral and evil. Surely the INTENT is the same, surely THE AIM is the same (preventing a pregnancy). I thought "wrong doing" was based on intent? It seems (at least to someone as uniformed as me) as though NFP is a loophole through which the overarching SPIRIT of CAtholic doctrine on sex is mitigated in order to apease pressure from the laity."

I'm inclined to think that you are exactly right.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), February 26, 2003.

I'm sure you already know this, but the Church allows for NFP for couples with GRAVE reasons to avoid pregnancy. (For instance, if I lived in China, and knew that the government was going to abort any children I conceived after the first one, I would practice NFP.)

However, NFP can also be used to ACHIEVE a pregnancy, as the couple can determine when ovulation is occuring. So, a couple who hasn't had success becoming pregnant, may be aided by monitoring the wife's fertility patterns.

Pax Christi. <><

-- Anna <>< (Flower@youknow.com), February 26, 2003.

Just my two cents about the moral equivalency argument re: artificial contraception and NFP.

The argument goes that since the intent (avoiding conception) is the same, the means (artificial vs. natural) shouldn't change the moral nature of the sexual act.

However this is a faulty argument for two reasons (at least).

One, because the morality of any act is not ONLY determined by the object or intent one desires but ALSO by the means used to achieve it. For example, eating when one is hungry is good, but if you steal your meal for the sake of filling your belly, you will have sinned.

The intent: feed my belly is good. The means: stolen food vs owned food changes the act.

So the HOW we go about "avoiding conception" does matter.

The second reason this argument is wrong is that it sells marriage short. It subtly redefines what marriage is by focusing on the biological fertility of the couple while completely avoiding their spiritual and moral ecology as two free, rational, and spiritual beings.

In the worldly system (that justifies not just contraception but also divorce etc.) "marriage" is merely a contract between two consenting adults. No big deal. The state couldn't care less what they actually do or don't do together provided no other laws are broken.

But Christian marriage is wholly different. It's not just a contract between consenting adults. Nor is it governed by convenience or self- interest.

For the Church (& Christ), in marriage the goal is binary: marital union(sanity) leading to holiness and procreation which also leads to holiness.

It's not an either/or dilemna. People in today's world of course have been conditioned to think that convenient sex is practically the ONLY worthy reason for marriage, but they're wrong.

Having children and having a happy life together IS THE ONLY WORTHY REASON for marriage and these two aspects are not contradictory.

Contraception is of course a drug that changes the ecology and biological harmony of the woman's body so that what is naturally fertile is artificially suspended. Its effects are that neither man nor woman need to exercise self-control, reason, or virtue.

Certainly EASE and SIMPLICITY are values. But the end doesn't justify the means. It's certainly easier and simpler to just fornicate or commit adultery than go through the long courtship and expense of weddings etc. Yet, the WAY we get to something matters. Courtship and weddings are actions of self-control, respect, reserve, higher union than "quickies" or "hooking up" are.

Sometimes "short cuts" really change who we are - not by what we do but by how we do them.

For example: cheating on a test to get a good grade as opposed to studying hard to get a good grade. In both cases the "goal" is the same! And it's certainly self-evidently true that cheating is simpler and easier and less a hassle then studying all week or all semester. But one way is right and the other is wrong. One makes us wiser while the other makes us dumber...

Jesus promises to make us Blessed, not happy. To be blessed you have to be good - not just do good, but BE good. Don't just "make love", but BE LOVE. Love is defined as "self giving". Contraception is anything but self-giving or self-controlling.

Just my thoughts on this issue. :-) Peace

-- Joe Stong (joestong@yahoo.com), February 26, 2003.

Hi Joe ahhhhh... it makes much more sense to me looking at it like this.

Excuse my ignorance , Ive only recently started to think about these sort of things. My next probably stupid question relates to the "means" that you give as a comparison, ie comparing *evil actions* "cheating and stealing" as a "means" compared to a physical object (a condom for example).

Could it therefore be argued that because the means (condom)by itself is not evil then it only becomes immoral through the intent with what we use the object? In comparison, stealing and cheating are immoral in themselves whatever the intent or aim. Do you see what Im trying to get at? though Ive probably got the whole wrong end of the stick.

peace and thanks Joe

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), February 27, 2003.

No Kiwi, I don't think you're ignorant. It IS really hard to come up with good analogies because well, sex and marriage is unique.

Masturbation is wrong not because pleasure is wrong, but because the way one achieves pleasure in M is selfish, not promoting union with another person nor being open to life, and all sexual functions should be - to be human and not animal - about loving union and openess to life...

Using a condom is essentially masturbating with one's spouse (using her body for pleasure but artificially closing oneself off from openess and real selfgiving to possible life.

I'm not saying intention has NOTHING to do with moral actions. It does play a BIG ROLE. But intention alone isn't enough. The act itself and the means used also matter.

For example: Our Lord warned his disciples that "the days are coming when men who kill you will think they are offering true worship to God"... so their intent was good, but their actions were immoral.

Now to split hairs maybe if they were invincibly ignorant they may not incure moral guilt, but even so they are objectively doing something evil and will suffer certain consequences.

If we only look at the biological side-effects of contraception, it would be morally wrong as it truly messes up the female internal ecology. (Hormones are powerful things).

But I don't think I have a total handle on this stuff. Let's face it, these issues are highly complex at times and require alot of prayer, alot of patient pondering and weighing of issues and distinctions. I don't claim to be a total expert. Just giving my 2 cents....

-- Joe Stong (Joestong@yahoo.com), February 27, 2003.

lol Kiwi! I saw that.

Hey Joe: "It IS really hard to come up with good analogies because well, sex and marriage is unique."

Really? To me, it is the Master Analogy; it is the cookie cutter for creation, not unique but having at it's essence the principles that permeate the entire universe.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), February 27, 2003.

Yeah. Exactly. Marriage is the "princeps analogatum" which means it has a lot in common with most everything, yet at the same time, it makes exact analogies hard to come up with because not everything that is "like" something else is "exactly identical" with it!

So since God is Trinity of Persons, and one would expect all of creation to be informed with an analogous "unifying and fruitful interpersonal relationship" motif, marriage between a man and a woman who procreate children clearly echoes or resonates in our souls.

Great.

But that being said, there are lots of sins that are very different in kind with "women + man sins" though every sin is a crime against two persons (God and the soul). So the arguments surrounding the immorality of contraception - while analogous or similar to arguments surrounding war or robbery or perjury, etc. are also unique.

That's why my analogies suffer!

-- Joe Stong (joestong@yahoo.com), February 27, 2003.

"princeps analogatum"

Is that a long standing concept? Tell me more about it, whatever you've got on it.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), February 27, 2003.

Sorry. "princeps analogatum" is most commonly used in technical philosophic argumentation. It's simply latin for "Principle analogy" in any given area of discussion.

Thus the God the Father ("from whom all fatherhood comes") is the principle analogy for understanding the ideal human father.

The inner life of the Trinity is thus the principle analogy for understanding the ideal human family...

whereas many relativistic moralists choose "principle analogies" from the animal kingdom ("hey dogs behave like this...so we can too") Christians have always sought their ideal principles not in what was sub-human but what was super-human.

-- Joe Stong (joestong@yahoo.com), February 27, 2003.

I like it, Joe. Thanks!

Back to the topic, I think kiwi is right in his perceptions.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), February 27, 2003.

I um, don't follow what Kiwi was trying to say but I'm open to learning...

Could it be about the intrinsic nature of the pill or a condom?

I mean, sure, per se as chemicals or "sheathes" of whatever, they are not "intrinsically evil". Some women who have serious harmonal imbalances (and thus are not fertile anyway) take the pill to get their bodies back on track. In those cases the "pill" is not "contraceptive" in nature (because what it's doing is restoring the female ecology rather than mucking up an otherwise healthy body...)

In the Philippines some people use free condoms as balloons and other innocent uses.

In either case the intent and actual use of such things does render them harmless.

Is that what Kiwi was getting at?

-- Joe Stong (joestong@yahoo.com), February 27, 2003.

I think what Kiwi is saying is that when NFP is used to prevent pregnancy, at the very least in certain cases, it is no different in essence and intent from artificial contraception.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), February 27, 2003.

duh... I need to read the whole thread. Listen, I'll go do that; lol!

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), February 27, 2003.

Hi Joe

Help me out here Im not sure Ive got this sorted Avoiding pregnancy in itself is not evil but the means we use to achieve this aim can be. My line of thought was clearly the examples you have used (stealing and cheating) are evil means. No argument there. But what is so evil about a condom? (please ignore complicating the issue and just presume hormonal contraceptive pills are not an option)

Youve basically told me that a condom is evil because...

"Using a condom is essentially masturbating with one's spouse (using her body for pleasure but artificially closing oneself off from openess and real selfgiving to possible life."

I guess there is a few comments there from me. Materbation and sex with a condom are not essentially the same thing at all, not at least from my experience. I certainly believe you can "make love" with a condom and that it is not a selfish experience. The second comment would be that using a condom does not close off the possibility of life. Condoms can and do fail, in fact more regularly than NFP.

Could we not just as easily say....

"Using NFP is essentially masturbating with one's spouse (using her body for pleasure but naturally closing oneself off from openess and real selfgiving to possible life."

I presume the argument rests on the fact that a womans fertility cycle was "designed by God "to allow NFP to work, wheras a condom is "designed by man".

Surely NFP was designed by man as well and as such a clinical system it is inherently "unatural" and "artifical" in itself. Certainly I dont see other animals using NFP, it seems the most UNNATURAL thing in the world. PLANNED LOVEMAKING!

I condom is not evil by itself, the intent of avioding getting pregnant is not evil, so the physical ACT of using a condom when having sex is evil. I simply ask from a logical point of view, WHY?

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), February 27, 2003.

Kiwi,

Yeah, and God designed man to die, so why not just shoot people in the head?

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), February 28, 2003.

Ok quick, gotta train to catch ;-)

Kiwi, a condom is immoral because its only purpose is to keep the sperm from having any chance of possibly fertilizing an egg...

whereas NFP is moral because the couple are always open to the real possibility that conception could occur, though at times this is more or less unlikely.

NFP promotes the attitude of being open and respectful to the potency of life, whereas condoms and pills promote an attitude of the couple closing themselves off from life.

How we do things not only says something about who we are, it also determines who we want to be.

For example: if war was my first option when dealing with Iraq, I would be a war-monger. In the short term it does solve some problems...but not only is it messy, easy and early war immediately leads to an attitude of arrogance and moral relativism: might makes right.

On the other hand, diplomacy *(like NFP) requires self control, discipline, foresight and much prayer. If war comes it is always the last resort - or the resort after all feasible alternatives (short of unilateral surrender) are tried or foreseen to be useless from the start. In this case might doesn't make right, but it is used to re- establish right.

If a woman's cycle was all messed up she would try all sorts of remedies first...and then in the last resort use the pill to jumpstart her hormones... but in that case the pill would not be "contraceptive" and besides her health would be such she wouldn't even want to have relations... so condoms would be out of the question.

NFP treats fertility with respect and the couple don't try to cheat or check or plug or mess with it. Condoms (and pills) treat fertility with disrespect - an enemy to be fooled or foiled.

The NFP couple always knows that "hey, this could be the moment a little one is conceived" whereas the attitude of those who cheat with condoms is "I sure hope we don't conceive".

Same effect, completely different attitudes.

(btw, I admit the war analogies are strained.)

-- Joe Stong (joestong@yahoo.com), February 28, 2003.

Dear Frank I guess Im a bit strange having trouble equating stealing or cheating or using your great example SHOOTING SOMEONE IN THE HEAD with the use of a condom.

Hi Joe thanks for the patience, condoms do have other purposes outside prevention of pregnancy, the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases being the most noteable.

The NFP couple always knows that "hey, this could be the moment a little one is conceived" whereas the attitude of those who cheat with condoms is "I sure hope we don't conceive".

But surely when natural methods like NFP are MORE effective at preventing unwanted pregnancies and condoms LESS effective the attitudes could be reversed. That is the condom user accepts the possibilty of conception and the NFP users hopes like hell they dont get pregnant.

ANtway Im confusing myself, the Church says its wrong.. guess Ive just gotta lump it if I cant understnd it.

Blessings

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), February 28, 2003.

Hey Kiwi:

How are you my friend?

Just for your own info, MANY Protestants also do not agree with artificial birth control. So it's not just the Catholic Church. I don't like the idea of using hormones or invasive devices -- SOOO many side effects.

Here's a personal story, Kiwi, you might get a kick out of. 5 years ago I was listening to the radio and heard Dr. James Dobson on the radio interviewing a woman who was teaching women in 3rd world countries how to tell when they are ovulating, so as to avoid pregnancy (NFP). She was having a HUGE success rate in that many women were successful in keeping unplanned pregnancies to a minimum.

After listening to her describe "in detail" the subject I decided that I could utilize that method. Well, as a result of that endeavor, I now have a little strawberry blonde, blue-eyed girl, (5 years old) who is the apple of my eye! (Her Daddy is head over heals!)

So I am glad I gave God this window of opportunity! And that's what it is -- NFP is giving God the window of opportunity. LIFE! LIFE! What could be more precious!

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), February 28, 2003.

Glenn having read your link I think Chris latched onto the frustration I feel when he said simply when we ask WHY contraception is evil, that the answer is simply because God says so.

I guess if I was more honest I would feel more comfortable with our Church's position if it had some basis in scripture, nevertheless perhaps a read into Human Vitae is in order.

Hi Gail I hope you are well, Im good as gold, but a little hermit like lately. Im preferring to read philosophy/theology books rather than go out and get drunk, which is a worry... must be getting old and Im sure this whole "meaning of life" thing thats bugging me will just be a phase. I guess being a 27 year old bachelor is not the best position to appreciate just how closely marriage/love/life/sex/God all fits together. Thanks for your story, your daughter sounds a delight, you and your husband are blessed indeed. Glory be to God.

Love Courtenay

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), March 01, 2003.

Kiwi,

This has been discussed before. Rather than rehashing it all, why not try pulling up the Catechism and reading all the relevant sections within? It won't take more than 10 minutes and will give you some darn good reasons for the Church's position.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), March 01, 2003.

Hi Frank, firstly I knew you would get a bit angsty on this topic, I know weve been over it before ;-).

I have got a copy of "The Teaching of Christ" Catechism and have read the relevant sections. I can see the arguments based on the trivialising of the sacredness of marital love, of the moral evils of contraception that undermine this sacredness, on the necessity for chastity and self discipline in marriage, it is aboput repect for each other and God, on "preserving the full sense of mutual self giving and of human procreation". I just dont buy into it at all, I dont believe in my heart that a condom changes any of these premises and was asking WHY is it blameworthy, why does it undermine all of these values and I dont think it has to. I think it all comes down to the intention of the couple using the condom. Im prepared to take my chances on judgement day on this one.

I read Pope Paul VI words "every act that INTENDSto imdede procreation must be repudiated.

NFP then is dependant on the intention of the couple, I simply believe that the intention of those using NFP and condoms is sometimes not that different at all.

Blessings

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), March 01, 2003.

Okay if it is God's will for me to get pregnant then it will happen no matter what. Whether I'm on birth control or not. Take a look at some statistics on the effectivness of birth control methods.

Chance of getting pregnant within one year of use nothing 85% rythm 26% spounge 40% diaphram 20% withdrawel 19% condom 14-20% pill 5% IUD 2% Depo .3% Female sterilization .5% Male sterilization .15%

If you are sterilized and can still concieve then I think that is The Almighty at work. Bottom line..... What if a pregnancy is indifferent to God? What if it has nothing to do with his divine plan? I don't think there is a way to interfere with God's will, birth control or no birth control.

Pregnancy is a health concern right now for me. If God wants me to have a baby I will get pregnant either way. But if is indifferent to him then why shouldn't I take a form of birth control that is not like an abortion, such as the Pill or IUD. I'm on the Depo shot right now. It prevents ovulation all together so it's not like it's not allowing my body to hang on to a fertilized egg, like the pill and many other forms of birth control.

Bottom line God's will be done! But if it's indifferent to God is it wrong for me to choose weather i get pregnant or not?

Oracle

-- Ries Oracle (RiesOracle@hotmail.com), March 02, 2003.

What is the church position on men getting a vasectomy (sp?)?

Clearly it is violation to the doctrine of "preserving the full sense of mutual self giving and of human procreation" So where does the Church stand, any loopholes to jump through here?

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), March 02, 2003.

I truly enjoy that it is often the "men" who have so many opinions about birth and birth control. I do think the next time a male has kidney stones the church should allow the process to work itself out naturally, and let god decide what is good for the penis.

And "on the other, you say you are using birth control, with the inference that you do not trust God to run your life"

I think one should trust God fully not partially. Stop visiting the Doctors when you are ill, trust in God. Stop taking medication, suffering and death may be the will of God if you are diseased! Give up control of decisions in your life...trust in God and you will land where he wishes you to be. Don't bother steering the wheels of your car...let God do it. Don't bother caring for your children...trust god to do it.

-- mmm (m&ns@aol.com), March 02, 2003.

Note the comparison of new life to a disease...

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), March 02, 2003.

Now this is pretty funny, mmm, come to think of it... comparing kidney stones to a fetus. Just think of the implications of this. If it is true, we could then think of anyone as this huge, giant walking kidney stone. Maybe I'm a walking kidney stone. Maybe you're a walking kidney stone. Maybe this whole time we've all been deceived, and we are fully matured kidney stones.

We could start the Church of the Culture of Death, and upon this rock, you know...

Every analogy falls down eventually, but it is particularly amusing sometimes when one grovels on the ground and never stands up in the first place.

Enough with the insulting garbage that likens little babies to something out of the digestive tract; del diablo.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), March 02, 2003.

Hi Ries:

You said, "Okay if it is God's will for me to get pregnant then it will happen no matter what. Whether I'm on birth control or not." That's like saying, "Well I am going to smoke three packs of cigarettes a day, and if it's God's will that I live, then I won't get cancer." Our actions ALWAYS have a consequence. The consequence of using artificial birth control, is that you likely will not give birth.

God gives us a free will, and with that free will we have a huge responsibility -- to submit that will to His. That should be the goal of every Christian. You see, the battle of our will versus God's will is a battle that has been raging from day one. We want control of our lives, and yet we want God to bless our plans. It doesn't work like that. We need to follow Him, not visa versa. He's God, we are not!

If you use artificial birth control, you may be thwarting the plan of God for your life; interfering in the process of life -- which is a very serious matter indeed. You are, in essence, putting yourself on the throne, and de-throning Him. You are saying, "I know what's best for me, and I don't need you (God) to make these decisions for me." And that my dear, is the work of the devil.

Love,

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), March 02, 2003.