Is using birth control a sin?

#Plugins_WordPress, #wordpress, #datsfree.info

“Is using birth control a sin (specifically: condoms, diaphragms, family planning, hormonal implants, IUDs, RU-486, birth control pills, vasectomy, tubal ligation)?” Dr. Kenneth Magnuson answers…

READ  Cómo crear una página web con Wordpress | Siteground Tutorial


source

Bookmark the permalink.

16 Comments

  1. I use the pill to regulate my cycle. Nothing more.

  2. I appreciate that you at least distinguish different types of birth control and reasons for it. I'm a single, celibate young woman taking an oral pill that prevents ovulation solely to prevent ovarian cysts. After having surgery to remove an extremely large (over 12cm) cyst (performed by an oncologist due to concerns on the ultrasound). The oncologist then checked me again a few months later to see if I was developing more cysts (which I was, despite remaining on the pill). The dr told me that each time I have a cyst rupture it forms more scar tissue on the ovaries, which impairs fertility. So along with not wanting more extremely painful ruptured cysts, and the possibility of needing more surgical removals, if I ever want to have children once I marry, I need to stay on the birth control until I'm ready to try for children. I'd happily castrate (without anesthesia) any man who tells me my birth control is a) not medically necessary (oncologist told me "if the cyst ruptures before I can surgically remove it the infection will kill you in about a week. But don't worry about the pain. You'd be unconscious from the pain within minutes and we'd just keep you comatose afterwards. It's really the only way to control that much pain." or b) a sin. My birth control is the only thing preserving my fertility.

    Then there's my mother who required a hysterectomy in her 30's. After me (baby #4) she had a few very bloody miscarriages (admitted to the hospital after each one. 6 years after me, she was finaly able to conceive #5 that lived, but had complications (affecting only her, not the baby) the drs wanted to do a hysterectomy immediately after the birth even though lil sis slid out without even a proper push and was caught midair because they weren't quite ready. My mom objected to the hysterectomy saying she wanted at least one more, so they told her she better get busy as soon as she was healed, and 2 years later #6 was born (almost 11 lbs. with half a push) then they wanted her to heal before the hysterectomy, plus she didn't want to jeopardize nursing. But by then she was extremely anemic. Even with birth control (not nearly as good as some kinds now) she'd bleed for 3 weeks and be lucky to get a week off (while nursing and on strong oral pills). Four months after baby sis was born they decided to operate (left her ovaries tho) and took her months to recover because she was so anemic but also low on blood from the past 3 years (including 2 very hard pregnancies). What pisses me off to this day were that many of the "good Christian" women from church refused to help with her 5 children (thankfully the older kids could help lots), housework, caring for an infant and toddler while we were at school, and her recovery from surgery because it was a "sin". Eventually my 2 grandmothers each spent 2 months living with us to help with everything. So much for the "church family" helping.
    It is judgemental "Christians" like this who give true Christans a bad name and drive others away from Christ. Frankly, it's really just none of your business to judge if someone is worthy of assistance, and you need to just help those who need it if you are able to do so. Mind your own business, err on the side of helping, and let God sort out the rest. God won't punish someone who helps where it might not actually be needed, but you will be judged for refusing to help those who you could and should have helped.

  3. Reading the posts, birth control is not just about another form of abortion (equating the two as the only reason when to consider birth control as sinful) – in cases where embryos are destroyed. Prefertilization (preventative fertilization) birth control is sinful for other reasons not related to abortion, too; that is, using sex for an end other than its Godly ordained purpose (bodily, physical pleasure – which is only a means to the real end) – the intent of having children or at least to be open to new life through sex, whether or not that ever comes about.

  4. I feel compelled to point out that IUDs cannot prevent the embryo from embedding in any way. IUDs act simultaneously as a spermicide and a barrier, meaning the sperm never reaches the egg. Thus, it can't be abortion because conception is prevented, by your own definitions. Just FYI.

  5. I do not believe it is a form of abortion and that is horrible if it is a sin it should be a sin to bring children in that can not take care of if you abort a baby when the baby has developed than that is wrong. To use birth control should not be a sin.

  6. Is it a sin not to trust God?

    There was a time in church history when believing husbands and wives did not have the option of modern birth control methods , and they either obstained or simply trusted God with the outcome; or they knew something of the ovulation cycle and when pregnancy might or might not occur.
    "But now we have 'modern' methods of determining the outcome, who nees to trust God implicity as a child in this matter. We have the answer now and so we will determine our own future."

    The Bible is plain: It is God who gives the increase; it is God who said multiply and fill the earth; it is God who opens the womb and closes the womb.

    The Scripture says to cast our cares upon the Lord; to cast our own souls upon the Lord. The Scripture says that the body (whether man or woman) is for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. We are told as believers to trust in the Lord with ALL your heart and lean not to your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge Him adn he will direct your paths – Prov 3;5, 6
    Why is that now – apparently, too hard to do with respect to having or not having children?
    In whom or what do we really trust with our bodies?

  7. Summary: speaker is not totally wrong from a medical standpoint. But definitely does not give an accurate medical portrayal of IUD's and oral contraceptives.

    As a current medical student studying the reproductive system, wanted to clear up some of the medical points in this video, so that we can pay attention to what this man has to say about the ethics behind birth control and not get so thrown off about the medical points. After all, he's an ethics professor, not a health care professional like he states.

    1. He's making pretty broad claims about oral contraceptives and IUD's. Not totally right. But not totally wrong either. Here's what I mean. He states that IUD's work POST-conception. There's 2 types of IUD's: copper and hormonal. It is true that IUD's can impair implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterus. HOWEVER. The main mechanism of action is actually prior conception. IUD's will lead to sperm toxicity and death (copper) or no ovulation aka no released egg for the sperm to fertilize (hormonal). Meaning the chances of getting a fertilized egg with an IUD already in place is almost impossible in the first place. The only scenario that would make sense is if the egg is fertilized and the mother chooses to get an IUD placed somehow hours/days afterwards. Sure then, an IUD would work post-conception.

    2. Oral contraceptives are a similar case. The main type of oral contraceptives is a combination of estrogen/progesterone. Their main mechanism of action is to suppress hormones released from our brain (hypothalamus/pituitary gland) which then means no LH surge or ovulation. Which means no egg is released from the ovary. No egg. No fertilization. Sure there are certain types of oral contraceptives (progestin only) that will create an environment in the endometrium (womb) that less favors implantation. But progestin only oral contraceptives are not prescribed as much anymore. And progestin also works to thicken the cervical mucus, so that less sperm enters the uterus. So technically yes. If a woman is on a progestin-only contraceptive for some reason. And sperm happens to get pass the cervical mucus barrier and etc. It may work post-conception. But this is not the main mechanism and just wanted to highlight that for all you.

  8. Sir, you have many medical points incorrect in your video. IUDs actually prevent ovulation, meaning that they are pre-fertilization. Please make sure your content is medically accurate in the future.

  9. You are to the point in your considerations. Thank you.

  10. IUDs do not abort anything. They do not act after fertilization has taken place, they keep the sperm from fertilizing an egg. Facts need to be checked before sharing this with people.

  11. When will we stop saying "I'm not a doctor" to cover up our guilt of the murder of children via the pill? Southern should be ashamed and repent for confirming this wickedness. If you want to understand its wickedness you'll have to talk to Roman Catholics because we Protestants want to cover our eyes and ears. A hostile environment for implantation via " the pill" is akin to giving your kid Mercury to play with.

  12. A lot of honest information, but .. I suppose the answer for these videos is always 'it depends' (or it wouldn't warrant a video) but the answers could be more clear or presented in a more clearly structured format.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *