I have been biting my tongue, figuratively speaking, trying hard not to be drawn into this silliness that virtually every Republican politician and most members of the Catholic clergy are calling a “war on freedom of religion” and a violation of the First Amendment.
Well politics is politics and as Isaac Newton once noted in his third law of politics, “For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.” Okay, so this wasn’t Newton’s third law of politics, but his third law of motion. Politics, physics...what’s the difference?
I’ve been trying to understand the logic behind the Catholic Church’s intractable and contradictory positions on birth control and abortion. Of course, trying to apply logic to religious belief is a fool’s errand, as logic and religious belief are wholly (or holy?) incompatible.
Some might argue that because I’m not Catholic...in fact, not a member of any organized religion...I have no standing on this matter or any right to question the dogma of the Catholic Church. But given that this has become a political hot potato that could effect the outcome of the presidential election in November, as an American citizen, I believe I do have standing.
Back to the subject at hand, I’m having trouble comprehending why the Church considers both artificial birth control and abortion to be sins. Does the Church really equate the “sin” of preventing a pregnancy through the use of contraceptives with the “sin” of terminating a pregnancy through abortion? Apparently it does.
I did some research and I learned a few interesting things that I hadn’t previously known. For example, I didn’t realize that prior to 1965, contraception, even for married couples, was illegal in many states. But in 1965, in the case Griswold v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court found that a Connecticut law prohibiting the use of contraceptions violated the “right to marital privacy.” Seriously? 1965!
I also learned, according to religiousconsultation.org, that the contemporary “Catholic position” on contraception only dates back to a 1930 encyclical of Pope Pius XI. The Pope decided to tidy up what was described as a “mixed and jumbled” tradition by declaring that “contraception and sterilization were sins against nature and abortion was a sin against life.”
And how about this gem? Until the 19th Century, the Church believed that sperm were “little homunculi, miniature people,” and for this reason male masturbation was sometimes called homicide. Honestly, I swear I am not making that up.
Perhaps that’s why God, so the bible says, took the life of Onan when he “wasted his seed on the ground” in order not to give offspring to his brother. Apparently that really pissed God off, and he smote the fifthy seed-waster. Hey, even for God, imposing the death penalty for masturbation seems a bit harsh.
But I still hadn’t figured out why the Catholic Church is so adamant about the seemingly incongruent positions banning both birth control and abortion. It seems to me that birth control would likely reduce the demand for abortions by preventing unplanned pregnancies in the first place.
I finally broke the code, though. It’s all about populating the planet with as many Catholics as possible. According to catholicsource.net, God said, “Behold, children are a gift of the Lord; the fruit of the womb is a reward.” In Genesis the bible states, “And God blessed them [Adam and Eve]; and God said to them, be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
So there it is. Fruitfulness in marriage is a commandment from God that is repeated numerous times in the bible. The use of contraceptives violates this commandment because it attempts to prevent couples from being fruitful and multiplying. In other words, the Catholic Church wants its members to be breeders for the Church. Perhaps that why they refer to their parishoners as “the flock.”
There is no argument from me that every religion has the right to its own set of beliefs, no matter how preposterous. But are the beliefs and practices of the Catholic Church today as applicable and relevant as they may have been when the bible, upon which those beliefs are based, was written centuries ago? And should the beliefs and convictions of one religion be imposed, in this case as restrictions to personal freedoms, on those who have a different set of beliefs?
Whether or not you support or oppose a woman’s right to choose, when it comes to birth control, there is simply no legitimate reason to oppose the use of contraceptives. The Catholic Church’s position on birth control is backward, regressive, and is clearly out of touch with the contemporary American needs of its followers. After all, according to the Guttmacher Institute, 98% of all sexually active Catholic women have used contraceptive methods banned by the Church.
I have a tough time comprehending how Republicans politicians object to government involvement when it comes to the economy and how they fight against imposing regulations over big buisness. Or how member of the clergy fight tooth and nail against any kind of government involvement in their religious practices. Yet when it comes to getting involved in and regulating the personal and private reproductive decisions of women, both Republicans and the clergy welcome government intervension.
It’s a true paradox, unless you happen to be a member of the Catholic clergy, a Republican politician, or an ultra-conservative pundit, in which case you embrace it.
This is totally absurd.
Comments