<p>romanigypsyeyes, you make a good point. Catholics may be taught many different things depending upon what parish they grew up in and/or what Catholic school they attended. (I’m wondering if dietz199’s DD’s sex-ed class was taught by Jesuits or Dominicans. ;)) Even now, I can go five blocks south and attend mass at a Catholic church so conservative and so fundamentally different from my own parish that you would think they were two separate religions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There should be some common sense mechanism to reconsider what is just bad public policy. It made sense when so many children died very young and we needed to populate the world but we are way beyond that. Why do the Catholics not give credit to God that he/she might take a look at the numbers and change his/her mind. I realize there is no she/her in Catholicism because God is not given credit for being capable of becoming enlightened on any subject, except football.</p>
<p>Thats why matters of religion or topics that relate to the belief system of others should not be discussed…at least thats what I was taught. If there is disrepect or lack of understanding something so simple than how could anyone expect that their religion will be respected. Its called tolerance and if there is none shown towards others you risk seeing every religion maligned.</p>
<p>^^ It has nothing to do with controlling family size. The church is not against family planning only against birth control.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My parochial high school provides benefits for employees in same-sex partnerships, who are living together. One of those partnerships is a former nun, who left her religious order, met someone and is partnered with her; all the while, she has remained a teacher at this high school. And it was the head of the school, a nun, who pushed this through the board. Of course, they don’t have to worry about using birth control for contraception!</p>
<p>On another topic, they have admitted practicing Muslim students to the school, and provide prayer rugs in the chapel for them so they can engage their own faith during the day, while in school. </p>
<p>I have incredible admiration for this head of school, who was not hired there until the year after I graduated. We have had several email exchanges and spoken in person at reunions and I applaud her for her courage. If we were still living in my hometown, I would not hesitate to send my kids there (although I chose not to send them to a Catholic high school basically two miles down the road from where we live now). The academics are superb; much higher than they were when I was there. Very, very competitive now; just so-so competitive when I was there (which explains how I managed to graduate!). But I digress.</p>
<p>Mary13, I agree with you that we should understand doctrine better when we get involved in these debates, and that religious leaders need to do a better job of explaining the reasoning behind their proclamations.</p>
<p>My best understanding of the Catholic opposition to birth control holds that it is evil because it divorces sex from procreation. This subverts God’s will that sex is for procreation, AND for pleasure and emotional bonding. Those purposes are inextricably bound together, and to have one without the others is a perversion of the beautiful whole. In the absence of openness to pregnancy, a marital act that is meant to be holy becomes a selfish, carnal amusement park ride, and the parties to the act are reduced to animalistic beings using one another for pleasure. So birth control is a kind of Horcrux spell that rips the united purposes of sex into pieces. The essence of human existence is to be a sacred, immortal spirit in a body of flesh, and use of birth control slices the two apart.</p>
<p>Of course, people who aren’t celibate know that the world’s marriages feature plenty of selfish, carnal procreative sex, and plenty of generous, spiritual, loving protected sex. In my eyes, family planning is a uniquely human achievement, and it’s a lot more animalistic to just follow your instincts toward your spouse and let nature take its course. But the bishops didn’t ask me, so I just tried to grasp their point of view as best I could.</p>
<p>Thanks, Hanna. I wish the bishops would ask you. </p>
<p>I like to think that if God’s will is a baby, he will not be thwarted by mere mortals. I once joked to my husband that we had one child for each of the forms of birth control we had tried. But like teriwtt, I digress. :)</p>
<p>Speaking of selfish, carnal procreative sex and generous, spiritual, loving protected sex - happy Valentine’s Day to all!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So why shouldn’t the bcpill be covered if it’s prescribed for an unmarried girl, not having or planning to have sex, who needs it for ovarian cysts (a la romani), migraines, acne or period regulation?</p>
<p>Hey I’m proof that birth control doesn’t always work. Guess “God” really wanted me here. That, or my mom was taking antibiotics at the time. </p>
<p>Mary, I’m not religious, but I’ve always had the same thought- if there really is a God and he wants you to have a baby, a mere mortal pill isn’t gonna stand in his way!</p>
<p>We are free to question why the doctrine is in place and what motivated that doctrine. I don’t believe it was unaffected by policy and by selfish agendas. There are no groups that are as obsessed about power and influence as religious groups and institutions. They are no doctrines that are not affected by it. Why just to claim that anyone even knows God’s will is the biggest power play of all.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well said.</p>
<p>“I don’t believe it was unaffected by policy and by selfish agendas.”</p>
<p>Well, that too. We’re looking at a bunch of men whose hold on power depends in part on women accepting exclusion from the hierarchy. It’s a lot easier to keep that system going when women have their hands full with 5 or 6 (or more) kids. How power protection plays into anyone’s motivation can’t be known.</p>
<p>At least in the U.S., groups of nuns are way to the left of the bishops on this issue. I don’t believe they are less devout, but gender clearly plays a role in how clergypeople perceive birth control.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl: Just curious, should there also be a mandate that the Catholic church will be required to perform marriage ceremonies for ‘non-traditional’ pairings (trying to stay apolitical). After all, this is a civil right and it may be considered undue burden or a denial of services if your local church happens to be Catholic and you need to find a different provider for a service - that by dogma - they do not perform. Where does it stop.</p>
<p>
I disagree. I think there are other groups and individuals equally obsessed with power and influence. I would also say that those groups and individuals, whether religious or not, are very dangerous. It’s all a matter of which groups/individuals you agree with.</p>
<p>Performing marriages is a sacred religious rite limited (at least historically) to church members and performed by a priest following a period of required religious education. There’s a pretty bright line between that protected act and providing health insurance to the Buddhist janitor who cleans the bathrooms in your church-affiliated law school. The latter is an inherently secular employment function no matter what religion the boss may be.</p>
<p>Here’s a good test: if you’re hiring a Jew or an atheist to do the job, then performing that job is a secular function, and ordinary workplace rules should apply. If only a Catholic fulfill the duties of the job, it’s a religious function, and may be exempt from ordinary labor rules if they conflict with the religious function.</p>
<p>
This is very common in my area. The top Catholic girls’ school in this area is extremely popular with Muslim families because they want excellent, single-sex education.</p>
<p>In fact, many of the Muslim families I know (and I work with the board of a Muslim organization) seek out Catholic schools for their children. Particularly educated, professional Pakistanis.</p>
<p>@Dietz199 in post 327, I’d say that one is a straw argument. In NYState, the first large state to pass a Marriage Equality Act (aka same-sex marriages) last year, had an explicit clause that protected every kind of church from being required to perform the ceremony. The couples have to shop and they can’t, by law, sue any institution that turns them down. The churches aren’t mandated to do any ceremonies outside their own realm of conscience.</p>
<p>The national contraception mandate is a new thing, so one can’t say with certainty what conscience clauses will ever be allowed to remain.</p>
<p>Dietz, other posters said it far more articulately than I ever could: That’s QUITE the bright line. You simply cannot jump from providing basic health care services to “making the Catholic priest marry the same sex couple / making the Orthodox rabbi marry the Jew and the Protestant” or whatever other straw men you like to construct here.</p>
<p>"I would like to see a thoughtful explanation of Catholic doctrine that makes it clear why birth control is an intrinsic evil. "</p>
<p>Mary13,</p>
<p>Totally agree that, for the most part, the institutional Church dropped the ball on the human sexuality teachings over the past 40 years. Many of us spent far more time in religious education classes putting felt banner together and singing folk songs than learning what the Church actually teaches on anything. </p>
<p>If you want to understand Church teachings, the best place to start is with the relevant documents; in this case, Humanae Vitae. But here is an overview: [Birth</a> Control | Catholic Answers](<a href=“http://www.catholic.com/tracts/birth-control]Birth”>http://www.catholic.com/tracts/birth-control)</p>