Weekend question
The current issue of Precious Times, a black Christian women’s magazine, features a cover story about The View’s Sherri Shepherd, with this quote:
Before I converted to Christianity, I was a Jehovah’s Witness.
In 1993, my mother was dying from diabetic complications. My sister was heavy into drugs, and we would have to go and get her from crack houses. I was in a very physically abusive relationship. I was sleeping with a lot of guys and had more abortions than I would like to count. I had very low self-esteem and just wanted to die. I felt if someone killed me, it wouldn’t even make a difference.
But God showed me that it would make a difference….
Sherri discussed her abortion revelation on The View on July 23. To see the segment go here and scroll videos to “Hot Topics, 7/22, Sherri in.”
Afterward, fellow host Joy Behar, a liberal pro-abort, responded, “Very few people actually tell the abortions that they have. That’s interesting, though, that people don’t say, you know, even to their best friends.”
When someone asked, “Why?” Behar responded, “Because society puts a lot of shame on it.”
Is it true that society is to blame for abortion shame? According to liberals and the mainstream media, American society is predominantly pro-abortion.
[HT: proofreader Angela]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
According to liberals and the mainstream media, American society is predominantly pro-abortion.
I think that even if the majority is in favor of the right to abortion, there is still a sense of shame for having been so careless as to get pregnant in the first place. I have heard a LOT of women say that they aren’t ashamed of their abortion but they’re ashamed of being pregnant in the first place — and the abortion, obviously, signifies that you were pregnant at a time when you did not want to be. So I think a lot of women are ashamed about that.
Which is not to say that people think pregnancy is a shameful thing, but I think our culture places a lot of emphasis on some mythical ideal of readiness that a woman should have achieved before getting pregnant. ie she should have a college degree and a good job, be married to a man who has a college degree and a good job, own a house, etc. And I think there’s a sense of shame about getting pregnant when you haven’t met all of the “pre-requisites.”
Joy Behar…now THERE’S an individual who, oh,…nevermind.
Joy B. mistakenly believes the source of shame is a societal perspective on a particular act. But societal perspectives change with the direction of the wind. Shame comes from within man’s own heart, for there is where God inscribes Himself. An act such as abortion or premarital sex is in opposition, whether committed consciously or subconsciously, of God’s image in us. The consequences are shame and guilt, which serve to direct us back to God through repentance (i.e. Sherry’s on-air confession?) and forgiveness.
Unfortunately for Sherry, Joy is doing her no favor by giving her the false affirmation that society is to blame.
I don’t know…I never really felt shameful about being pregnant with my daughter, even though her father and I weren’t married at the time, and our situation was less than ideal…and this was despite the fact that it was obvious that my immediate family and much of the rural community wanted me to…I guess it’s just my outlook on things…It was, for me, a pleasant surprise against the odds. Now, I might’ve felt shameful about it if I had had an abortion…but it definitely wouldn’t have been because I had made a new life with the man that I loved. It would’ve been because of how that life was treated.
X, I think to some extent this is a self-selecting group of women. If you don’t feel ashamed about your pregnancy, you’re less likely to abort. Not to say that all women who are ashamed abort, or that all women who abort are ashamed, but in general I do think that if you’re not ashamed of being pregnant in the first place, you’re lacking one of the big reasons that women choose abortion.
If we were really powerful enough to be the source of post-abortion shame, wouldn’t we be powerful enough to cause enough shame to prevent the abortions in the first place?
I have heard a LOT of women say that they aren’t ashamed of their abortion but they’re ashamed of being pregnant in the first place ….
Which is not to say that people think pregnancy is a shameful thing, but I think our culture places a lot of emphasis on some mythical ideal of readiness that a woman should have achieved before getting pregnant…. And I think there’s a sense of shame about getting pregnant when you haven’t met all of the “pre-requisites.”
Alexandra, I was fixing to tear into what you said until I read the next paragraph!
I think that you are right that we place a lot of pressure — way too much, I think — on achieving idea circumstances prior to childbearing.
What’s really problematic is that society gives two messages that set women up for grief:
1. There is something fundamentally wrong with you if you’re not in a sexual relationship, regardless of your life circumstances.
2. There is something fundamentally wrong with you if you give birth under less than absolutely ideal circumstances.
That’s a recipe for failed birth control, just by sheer dint of numbers.
1. There is something fundamentally wrong with you if you’re not in a sexual relationship, regardless of your life circumstances.
2. There is something fundamentally wrong with you if you give birth under less than absolutely ideal circumstances.
Christina, it’s funny but I almost said the exact same thing in my post. I’m glad I didn’t, though, because you said it better than I was going to.
I think, actually, that a lot of the shame about being pregnant when you’re “not ready” is due to birth control. Because birth control is, for the most part, widely available, and if you really want to avoid pregnancy you can just double up — pill with condoms, spermicide, whatever. So being ready for kids — according to unrealistic or unimportant standards, in many cases — has become a duty, in a way, because it is a possibility.
“I have heard a LOT of women say that they aren’t ashamed of their abortion but they’re ashamed of being pregnant in the first place”
Really? what kind of people you hanging out with Alexandra?
I am still pro-access to birth control, by the way. I just think that an unfortunate social effect of it has been to create pressure to wait until you have your life all in place before having kids, because it has made such a thing more easily possible than it was before. And I consider dealing with these social effects to be a feminist issue, one I care quite a bit about.
They are ashamed that they are pregnant…and abortion is the cover up for the first wrong for the majority of people. The cover up which sacrifices a life to hide the shame and then the cycle is endless. The abortion is worse than the shame of pregnancy out of wedlock but the immediate thought is to cover up so no one will know. But they know and the shame comes from intrinsically knowing they did a horrible thing.
The shame comes from knowing somewhere deep down inside you, that you ended the life of your child. The knowledge of that becomes almost too much to bear.
“Very few people tell about the abortions they have.”
Not until you can into abortion recovery. Just how many is “very few?” :)
The fact is that the vast majority of Americans are against abortion. If it were to be put on the ballot in November 2008, it would be defeated by about 3 to 1.
Also, over 99% of abortions are for convenience. Yes, a baby is killed for convenience. When one admits to an abortion, the question of “why” will always come up.
In several recent surveys, 75% of women who had abortions admitted to killing her baby because it would somehow interfere with her career or her education.
The shame comes in admitting to callously killing a helpless baby for no reasons other than personal convenience.
I had very good medical insurance when I became pregnant with my daughter…I actually had an appointment to try and get a prescription for contraceptives a week or two before I ended up
pregnant with her. The doctor cancelled, and I was really upset…so much so, I cried when they sent me home. I’m actually glad the pressure for responsible contraceptive use exists, because it is important… But at the same time, the attitudes that now exist towards PREVENTING pregnancy are misplaced when it comes to pregnancies that already are growing. We’ve lost perspective, and the attitudes which should be there to help prevent abortions are helping to cause them. I’m glad I didn’t get my appointment now, though. :)
Whups! I guess that’s where my problem was, then. I didn’t realize I should be ashamed of my pre-marital sex, so I didn’t know I should try and cover it up with an abortion when I got pregnant! Dames these days, amirite?
I do not think society puts shame on women for aborting (in fact, it’s just the opposite since we have at least in Canada unrestricted abortion).
I think there is a shame that is innate to the act and is deeply felt by a woman who has killed her unborn child. Abortion is a total negation of the femininity of a woman – who by her physical and emotional make-up is designed to be open to and to nurture new life.
Abortion damages or perhaps I should say, goes against both of these basic instincts in the woman.
Natural law in written within all of us and so even those who have never heard of God or who don’t believe in Him still have this “knowledge” within themselves. They know it is wrong to kill.
This is where the shame comes from.
Because birth control is, for the most part, widely available, and if you really want to avoid pregnancy you can just double up — pill with condoms, spermicide, whatever. So being ready for kids — according to unrealistic or unimportant standards, in many cases — has become a duty, in a way, because it is a possibility.
How about the possibility of not being in a sexual relationship at all if it’s not the right time in your life?
I realize that not everybody embraces “wait until marriage”, but surely “wait until you’re not needlessly complicating your life” is one that society as a whole could embrace. After all, sexual activity is riskier for women than for men, because of the risk of pregnancy, occult STDs, increased cancer risk, and just the fact that women tend to get more easily emotionally entangled with their sex partners than men do. Why go looking for trouble?
Instead, the role model seems to be the woman who has to scratch every sexual itch, even if the only man at hand is a jerk, a dolt, a complete waste of her time.
And it’s the most vulnerable women who pay the highest price. I remember listening to a National Abortion Federation meeting session. Nurses were lamenting that the patients were not abstaining from sex after their abortions because their “partners” wouldn’t allow them to do so. Not only that, but they were exposing the women to a very high STD risk because they had multiple other women they were having sex with. The focus? “Do you think maybe we can get them to wear condoms?” The consensus? “Well, no.”
The idea of sending these women to a battered women’s shelter, or referring them for counseling on relationship issues, never came up. The idea that these women deserved better never seemed to enter those nurses’ minds. The expectation seemed to be, “Well, they’re adults, so of course they HAVE to be having sex with SOMEBODY, even if that somebody is a slimebag that no self-respecting woman would cross the street to spit on.”
I just think that an unfortunate social effect of it has been to create pressure to wait until you have your life all in place before having kids, because it has made such a thing more easily possible than it was before.
How about the unfortunate effect is that it puts the woman in the position where she “has no excuse” for not being in a sexual relationship at all?
It used to be that chaste women were considered fairly normative. Now we’re looked on as freaks of nature. The assumption used to be that we had self-respect and high standards. Now it’s that we’re “prudes” or “frigid”. Men have actually told me that there is “no excuse” for “frustrating” a man by not having sex with him, that if he’s attracted to her he’s attracted to her sexually as well and she owes it to him.
How are women supposed to keep from getting STDs and turning up pregnant in untenable situations in a society that considers them DEVIANT for saying no?
How about the unfortunate effect is that it puts the woman in the position where she “has no excuse” for not being in a sexual relationship at all?
I don’t think that’s necessarily the case. I didn’t have sex until I was at an age that many people get married at. I had plenty of reasons for waiting and I never had a problem letting any guy who was interested in me know about them.
The men you spoke to sound like jerks, but at least they have the decency to make their jerkishness obvious, so you can avoid them in the future. ;)
And it’s the most vulnerable women who pay the highest price. I remember listening to a National Abortion Federation meeting session. Nurses were lamenting that the patients were not abstaining from sex after their abortions because their “partners” wouldn’t allow them to do so. Not only that, but they were exposing the women to a very high STD risk because they had multiple other women they were having sex with. The focus? “Do you think maybe we can get them to wear condoms?” The consensus? “Well, no.”
Christina: I think it is the fact that the women ARE on BC that sets up this situation. A woman on BC is basically saying to men, “I am sexually available anywhere, anytime.”
I’m betting now that EVERY woman who is on BC on this board, is going to deny this fact – but that is EXACTLY how men perceive it. And if they don’t they are not being truthful. Would they date a woman NOT on BC, very few men will. Would they date a girl who’s not gonna be sexually active – very few men will.
I know – I have friends in on the dating scene too – and that’s the response I get EACH and EVERY time from men.
There is no need for the man to exercise self-restraint. If he can’t get the woman to divvy out the sex, he’ll go elsewhere to find another women who is also on BC and can.
It’s a win-win situation for the man and a losing one for women.
I disagree that society expects women to be in ideal circumstances before pregnancy or the woman is shamed- Women are only expected to be in one circumstance: MARRIED. 88% of abortions are performed on unmarried women. Regardless of income, education level, etc., a pregnant women who is married to the father of her child has nothing to be ashamed of and, surprise, surprise, is typically unashamed. Society doesn’t insist on college degrees or income levels for parents, but just excuses single mothers if they meet this criteria- “Yeah, she got knocked up. But she’s educated and makes a good living so it’s okay.”
I think there should be a degree of shame for being unmarried and pregnant, since it’s both evidence of immorality and stupidity. But I think the greater shame is when women kill their babies to hide their choices or deny the consequences of those choices, which is why out-of-wedlock pregnancies carry less stigma than abortions.
Society pressures the unmarried into sex all the time and turns around and bites them with shame with that sex yields the natural consequence of a baby. Those that choose abstinence are mocked as well. This is highly characteristic of the enemy.
Don’t know ’bout y’all, but I’d rather be mocked for making the right choice for myself and my children by not creating them until they have a real father than cave to societal pressure and carry shame for doing what is both unnatural and immoral.
You guys must not think much of women to say that they’d have sex with guys just because a guy expects it of her…or just because society says that NOT having sex is wrong…talk about missing the point of the women’s lib movement…You guys really don’t get it. Women, thanks to efforts made long ago, now have as much right to NOT have sex as they do TO HAVE sex…ugh. I give up. It’s sad when I can’t wait for the pro-choice people to stop by and help tell you why you’re wrong…
I think there should be a degree of shame for being unmarried and pregnant, since it’s both evidence of immorality and stupidity.
Real nice, Jacqueline.
For the mothers who didn’t abort their children after they were RAPED, your comment is disgusting and lacks every ounce of compassion. Who are you to judge HOW the unmarried woman got pregnant? It’s not like they will come right out and tell you.
Unbelievable.
X: do you HONESTLY believe that a woman can say no to man after man for sex and still have any hope of getting a boyfriend.
If you do you are not realistic and are sadly informed about today’s dating culture!
Even myself – a 40+ single woman cannot get a date with a man my age without sex being a part of that relationship. And I don’t even have to worry about pregnancy any more.
I just want a relationship that will start with a friendship and lead to marriage.
Women don’t have this choice any longer. The pill took this from them and has shifted the balance of power in the relationship to the man.
X: I’ve also told the story of my daughter’s 15 year old friend who was dumped this year because she wouldn’t give in. That boy now has another girl friend who presumably is on the pill and putting out.
The expectation is that if your not having sex by the 6th date there is something wrong with you. This perception has been promoted ad nauseaum in the media, movies and on talk shows.
It always seems to me on this blog that the liberals are putting themselves forward as the exceptions in behaviour.
We are living together – to get married.
We are having sex – but he’d still stay with me if we weren’t.
This may be the case, but you people are truly lucky and the exception. The sons and daughters of my friends are not experiencing what you claim is happening.
They are experiencing the angst of finding someone who truly wants to be chaste until marriage and will consider starting a relationship. The daughters/sons are spending many years dateless because they won’t have sex.
Jacqueline —
I disagree that society expects women to be in ideal circumstances before pregnancy or the woman is shamed- Women are only expected to be in one circumstance: MARRIED.
I don’t know. I think that we see single women using sperm banks with fairly little social disapproval, and I do think that our culture in general has come to think that the things that make raising a child EASIER — money, property that you own, etc — are the things that a responsible parent would line up before having a kid.
By the way, I totally thought of you the other day because I actually saw a barefoot and pregnant woman! I think she was a hippie, though, not oppressed or poverty-stricken.
x: You guys really don’t get it.
x,
You guys are all alike, generalizing about all us guys. :)
Can you PLEASE not generalize, instead talk to individuals if at all possible????? (You are not the only one here that does it…but I HAVE to bring it up.) It drives me crazy!!!! (Caps for emphasis, not anger.) Thank you.
Patricia —
The expectation is that if your not having sex by the 6th date there is something wrong with you. This perception has been promoted ad nauseaum in the media, movies and on talk shows.
There may be people for whom this is the norm, but if it’s not something you agree with then they’re not people you want to date.
yes that’s true Alexandra, but if 90% of men are of the opinion that sex in a dating relationship or even a more casual relationship is normal, it does not leave many possibilities for women, now does it?
The pill has completely changed Western society in ways that we are only now just beginning to understand – and most of those ways have not been beneficial to the physical and emotional health of women.
Dawn Eden and a few others have written about how the dating culture and the expectation of having to perform sexually is causing serious harm to young women, particularly in the college environment.
I was told when I was in university that I was the MOST asked about woman in my faculty by a tech who worked with all the students. Apparently, the question most asked was “will she?” to which he, also Catholic and a good friend, replied “Nope”.
I was never asked out even once in university by any of my fellow males students.
yes that’s true Alexandra, but if 90% of men are of the opinion that sex in a dating relationship or even a more casual relationship is normal, it does not leave many possibilities for women, now does it?
Well, the good news is that as far as I know, the men for whom sex is a requirement tend to be wanted by the women who think sex is a requirement as well. It’s not like sexually permissive, pill-popping women are trying to find the same 10% of the men that you are. If that helps.
For what it’s worth, I do understand what you’re saying. I have been accused of having impossibly high standards before, but really I just have a few deal-breakers in a relationship — not because I cannot tolerate or forgive something, but because there are a few things that signal a lack of respect, in my opinion. And I understand how crummy it is to feel like other women’s choices are making it harder for you to find what you’re looking for. I really do. I don’t, however, think that you can dictate other people’s choices just so your own will be easier to make.
I don’t, however, think that you can dictate other people’s choices just so your own will be easier to make.
Posted by: Alexandra at July 26, 2008 9:23 PM
Oh but that is EXACTLY what you are doing though isn’t it?
Your choice to use the pill means that men can get what they want without any responsibility or effort.
AT the same time this makes it harder for those women who wish to be chaste and who want sex to remain sacred and within the boundaries of marriage, both for herself and for her children.
Funny thing, you don’t hear about men complaining do you?
I wonder why…….
My question to people like x and any others:
Have you ever tried to live without sex, remaining chaste and attempting to date for 1, 2, 3 or even 4 years? Not taking any BC becuase you KNEW you would not need it because you were going to focus on getting to know the guy.
Patricia @ 9:30, Yes.
Patricia —
Your choice to use the pill means that men can get what they want without any responsibility or effort.
I don’t use the pill. But I will still address the following point:
Your choice to use the pill means that men can get what they want without any responsibility or effort.
AT the same time this makes it harder for those women who wish to be chaste and who want sex to remain sacred and within the boundaries of marriage, both for herself and for her children.
Women who use the pill are not trying to dictate your choices to make theirs easier. You would like to dictate their choices, in order to make yours easier. So women who use the pill are not “doing the same thing.”
Have you ever tried to live without sex, remaining chaste and attempting to date for 1, 2, 3 or even 4 years?
Yes, I have. As I said, I did not have sex until I was an adult — but I “dated” before then. How do you think I met my boyfriend?
A woman on BC is basically saying to men, “I am sexually available anywhere, anytime.”
More than one man has looked on a prochoice rally and thought, “I’ve died and gone to Heaven! As far as the eye can see, women who are sexually available and who will not be hitting me with a paternity suit!” (Check blogs after big prochoice rallies — you’ll find the comments.)
Jill said:Afterward, fellow host Joy Behar, a liberal pro-abort, responded, “Very few people actually tell the abortions that they have. That’s interesting, though, that people don’t say, you know, even to their best friends.” When someone asked, “Why?” Behar responded, “Because society puts a lot of shame on it.”
Is it true that society is to blame for abortion shame? According to liberals and the mainstream media, American society is predominantly pro-abortion.
There’s definitely a contradiction there. By “society”, maybe she is referring to the Catholic Church? It’s obvious she holds a lot of animosity towards the Church if you listen to “The View”.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
A different subject, but still on the topic of abortion, I did a lot of walking today, and I must have had abortion on the brain. For every woman I passed, I found myself wondering if she had ever had an abortion. It was very strange. Before I started reading this blog, I wouldn’t have done that in a million years. I wonder what it means.
A woman on BC is basically saying to men, “I am sexually available anywhere, anytime.”
That’s a pretty gross thing to say, too. ANYONE who thinks that a woman being on birth control means she’s available anywhere, anytime, is probably pretty messed up in the head.
A woman on BC is basically saying to men, “I am sexually available anywhere, anytime.”
More than one man has looked on a prochoice rally and thought, “I’ve died and gone to Heaven! As far as the eye can see, women who are sexually available and who will not be hitting me with a paternity suit!” (Check blogs after big prochoice rallies — you’ll find the comments.)
Posted by: Christina at July 26, 2008 10:16 PM
Pro-choicers, did you hear that? Not good!
That’s a pretty gross thing to say, too. ANYONE who thinks that a woman being on birth control means she’s available anywhere, anytime, is probably pretty messed up in the head.
Posted by: Alexandra at July 26, 2008 10:25 PM
I agree it’s gross, but possible. While he might not be thinking anywhere, anytime, he may be thinking, or hoping for next month or next summer, whatever. If you don’t think so, I think it’s a bit naive.
Janet —
Pro-choicers, did you hear that? Not good!
While I would need to see the actual comments, I don’t really care if some dimwitted guy thinks that pro-choice women are more likely to sleep with him. Someone else’s objectification of women does not dictate how I form my opinions on abortion or any other issue.
It would be like me pointing to creeps with a virginity fetish and being like, “Abstinence-only people, do you see what they’re saying about you?” Some perverted creep’s comments don’t change your decisions, and they shouldn’t.
And maybe I’m naive, but I honestly don’t know a single man who thinks that a woman being on birth control — for sex or for hormone regulation or whatever — means she’s “up for grabs.” I’m sure they’re out there, but I really don’t think they even approach a majority.
You guys really don’t get it. Women, thanks to efforts made long ago, now have as much right to NOT have sex as they do TO HAVE sex…ugh. I give up. It’s sad when I can’t wait for the pro-choice people to stop by and help tell you why you’re wrong…
Posted by: xalisae at July 26, 2008 7:01 PM
Okay, X, now who is on their high horse? :)
There is a great amount of pressure on young people today to have sex before they are ready and a lot of unhappiness as a result. The teen suicide rate has never been higher. There are multiple factors involved with that but sexual activity is one of them.
Alexandra:And maybe I’m naive, but I honestly don’t know a single man who thinks that a woman being on birth control — for sex or for hormone regulation or whatever — means she’s “up for grabs.” I’m sure they’re out there, but I really don’t think they even approach a majority.
Even if it’s not a majority, they don’t wear signs on their backs so you don’t know who they are. Guys brag to each other, you know?
Word gets around, believe me!
I met my hubby online, so I knew him for 6 months before we ever even HUGGED. We enjoyed talking to each other so much, and when we finally met it really was love at first sight…I never had believed in such a thing before I met him, either. When we dated, we lived very far apart, so we talked on the phone during the week and only saw each other on the weekends for roughly 2 days. If he was just with me for sex, I was a poor choice. You really need to stop blaming a pill for your dating woes, Patricia.
Yeah, Janet, there are sucky guys out there. There are sucky people in any demographic you can pull up. I guess all you can do is do your best to know that the guy you’re interested in isn’t a jerk.
A different subject, but still on the topic of abortion, I did a lot of walking today, and I must have had abortion on the brain. For every woman I passed, I found myself wondering if she had ever had an abortion.
Janet how very strange, for the first time in my life I also wondered this today. It was the first thing that came into my head, actually visualizing all the women who were in my line of sight today having an abortion. And I saw a lot of women. (I have been pro life for 3 years.)
And, even before I met the man I’m with now, I didn’t have a problem finding someone who loved and respected me (and my virginity and celibacy, which I still had at the time, by the way). Not being shallow helped me find a good man, as did placing more value on myself than any man or relationship at the time…and I always had some common ground with the people I’ve loved the most, beyond just values/faith/etc., so if you don’t have a hobby or anything, you should get one, because it’ll help. Just some advice…I hope you find someone…and I hope you realize other people are not to blame for your problems.
And Eileen, I’m not supposing any moral superiority here…I’m not the one claiming that loose women on the pill are luring all the best men away with their wicked, nasty lady parts. I really do hope Patricia finds someone…I think it would help her a lot, and I think it might change her outlook for the better. So far, the only people I’ve seen on a moral high horse were the two people talking about shaming women into keeping their legs closed because not doing so is “immoral and stupid”.
Also…I hate “The View”. If the show lived up to its name, it’d be nothing but a black screen from begining to end, because the only thing most of those ladies have a good view of is the inside of their colons.
“I just want a relationship that will start with a friendship and lead to marriage.
Women don’t have this choice any longer. The pill took this from them and has shifted the balance of power in the relationship to the man.”
No sir Patricia. I know plenty of men who will wait for sex till marriage. You just need to look in the right places. My lover ( not my boyfriend, but someone I have been physically and emotionally close to) of two years has never pressured me for sex. He says that he likes me for me, and he would love to have sex but he would give it up if it meant remaining close to me.
Janet @ 10:26pm, how do they know it’s not some crazy chick who is lying about birth control so they can have sex and get pregnant so they can have a reason to stay with the guy? I’ve heard that happen before.
Or the girl could say, “oh we can’t have sex I forgot to take my pills.” And then they don’t have sex for a month.
*shifty eyes*
xalisae, my great aunt was just hospitalized with an intestinal blockage (I say from eating meat) and I looked up some pics on google. Your colon is really a very fascinating organ I don’t think we give it enough attention. National Colon Day anyone?
I was actually going to school for that, colon cleansing, enemas, nutrition relating to your colon and cardiac rehab before I switched to creative writing. I am still fascinated by the colon and maybe one day I will go back into it.
Jess, writing a book on colons – that’s your calling. :)
Also, you’re right there are crazy chicks as well.
Jess, my dad had a colonoscopy because our family doctor is awesome, and it turned out ok, but now he shows the pics to EVERYONE. I think it’s absolutely hilarious, but some of our other family members don’t appreciate it that much. :P
Did I ever tell you I did the day-three-meat-free thing, Jess? I did, and I still love and eat meat, but I try and go more sparingly, and I don’t feel as though I need it for every meal. I was at somewhat of an advantage though, when I remembered that spinach and mushroom pizza is my favorite thing in the world.
And to think xalisae, one day I could be doing your colonoscopy : ) It’s great that you gave the three day thing a try. I did it with veganism but I still love and eat cheese, lol. It’s nice to try something different now and then though.
Janet I’m still working on that article about being a pro-choice vegetarian. Lets see how that goes : )
“How can you kill babies and not cows?!?!”
That’s the question I hope to answer.
Women who use the pill are not trying to dictate your choices to make theirs easier. You would like to dictate their choices, in order to make yours easier. So women who use the pill are not “doing the same thing.”
Have you ever tried to live without sex, remaining chaste and attempting to date for 1, 2, 3 or even 4 years?
Yes, I have. As I said, I did not have sex until I was an adult — but I “dated” before then. How do you think I met my boyfriend?
Posted by: Alexandra at July 26, 2008 10:09 PM
The fact is YOU still had sex outside of marriage and that was made possible by the pill.
BEfore the pill this was not the norm. The pill has completely changed the way dating is conducted, men’s expectations from women and the way they treat them.
And I’m not surprised that once again the liberals on this board are the exception! How lucky you all are!
This is not my experience, it is not my older children’s experience and it is not the experience of the adults I know who are in the dating world.
The expectation of men is that they will become sexually involved with the woman at some point in the near future (with no intention of marriage on the foreseeable horizon).
If this is not agreed upon, the relationship either does not begin or ends abruptly. The expectation is that the woman is on the pill or will be on the pill.
How many young teen women state they feel pressured to have sex?
How many college women would prefer to wait but feel they too are pressured to have sex to keep what they think are their boyfriends?
You cannot possibly deny this happens? And that it happens will alarming frequency?
It is also bourne out statistically by the rise in sexually active adults and teens and by the rise in STD’s which you get through sexual intercourse.
Not to mention the BC pill pushing antics of PP on women.
And X: they are not my dating woes. I would, as Alexandra stated, want nothing to do with a man who’s interest is in having premarital sex. I want a man who will treat me with respect and dignity and who will work on other aspects of the relationship.
Perhaps I should reword my question:
How many of the women on this board saved themselves for marriage?
No sir Patricia. I know plenty of men who will wait for sex till marriage. You just need to look in the right places. My lover ( not my boyfriend, but someone I have been physically and emotionally close to) of two years has never pressured me for sex. He says that he likes me for me, and he would love to have sex but he would give it up if it meant remaining close to me.
Posted by: Jess at July 27, 2008 12:41 AM
Then why don’t you suggest to him that you not have sex for a 6 months and then you marry, Jess?
The fact is YOU still had sex outside of marriage and that was made possible by the pill.
No, lots of women were having sex outside of marriage before the pill became widely used. Just because doing so was less socially acceptable does not mean that it wasn’t done.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16287113/
The pill has made it easier for women to have sex outside of marriage, this is true. And an unfortunate side effect is that women who do not want to have sex outside of marriage may sometimes feel pressured to. But you don’t get to dictate other people’s choices just to make your own choices easier.
How many young teen women state they feel pressured to have sex?
How many college women would prefer to wait but feel they too are pressured to have sex to keep what they think are their boyfriends?
You cannot possibly deny this happens?
I don’t deny that this happens. It makes me very sad for those women, and it makes me wish that they had felt as though they deserved to make their own choices. But it does not make me want to limit other women’s ability to choose what to do, just to protect them.
And I’m not surprised that once again the liberals on this board are the exception! How lucky you all are!
I agree that I am lucky, though I think you were probably being sarcastic.
But it does not make me want to limit other women’s ability to choose what to do, just to protect them.
YOu might feel differently when you have a daughter some day Alexandra and you realise just how women have contributed to this culture of abortion, divorce, and the sexualization of women.
Then again, maybe not. I have heard of mothers who strongly encourage their daughters to be sexually active and tell that if they don’t they will never have a boyfriend or partner.
What a terrible shame.
Pretty good thread – lots of good discussion. Unfortunately, it’s lacking male perspective (except for Frank).
I figure it takes both sperm and oocyte to make a baby, so male sexual procreative responsibility is at least 50% of the problem.
Not being involved in honest, heartfelt communication is big part of the problem itself. For most men sex at any price – priceless.
It has to do with respect.
Alexandra at July 26, 2008 10:34 PM – you’re naive because most men won’t admit that directly to a woman or mention it around a woman, but there’s no doubt it’s a green-light for sexual irresponsibility – guys also run red-lights. Given the right conditions, they’ll run over the stop signs, tear down the lights and spin donuts.
The fact is Chris that this behaviour is exactly what is portrayed in movies and TV shows.
A couple is attracted to one another. But they don’t show them having a real relationship demonstrating concern for one another and trying to learn about WHO the other person is.
They are shown having sex, either the same night they meet or very shortly afterwards.
I think this behaviour has become an expected part of our culture now for a long time.
A girlfriend of mine who went to hs with me told me that she tried remaining a virgin (this was in the late 1970’s!) but that she had NO dates for several years. She decided to become sexually active and soon had many dates.
The outcome: she got pregnant outside of marriage but had her baby and gave it up for adoption.
She then resumed her sexual activity – in her words to me “Patricia, I still just didn’t get it”
She then was given the lovely gift of an incurable sexual disease after only one encounter with a new boyfriend.
It was at this point she stopped being sexually active.
Chris: 8:36: Thanks for a guy’s perspective.
You are pro-life though, so what do you really know about sex? (sarcasm alert)
YOu might feel differently when you have a daughter some day Alexandra and you realise just how women have contributed to this culture of abortion, divorce, and the sexualization of women.
Then again, maybe not. I have heard of mothers who strongly encourage their daughters to be sexually active and tell that if they don’t they will never have a boyfriend or partner.
Of course I may feel differently in the future. I consider it unlikely in this case, but it is always possible. I think I would rather teach any hypothetical daughter I have that her own reasons for doing something are all the “excuse” she needs. And that anyone for whom her reasons are not good enough, is not good enough for her.
I would never limit a woman’s choice to wear a burqa, for example. If, in twenty years, a good number of women were wearing burqas, causing men to expect women to wear burqas, then I would not seek to outlaw burqas just because it made my choice (or my daughter’s choice) not to wear one a more difficult choice to make.
My best friend graduated from Wheaton College, in Illinois. I don’t think she knew very many people there who expected sex from their pre-marital relationships.
Chris, I think there’s a difference between “sexual irresponsibility” (particularly your definition, which I assume would be any sexual relationship outside of marriage) and believing that ANY woman is up for grabs for sex anytime and anyplace.
X, I was referring your condescending attitude that seemed to imply that some of us are dense. Can’t you take a little teasing? :)
Of course I may feel differently in the future. I consider it unlikely in this case, but it is always possible. I think I would rather teach any hypothetical daughter I have that her own reasons for doing something are all the “excuse” she needs.
yes, well that does appear to be the way most people function today doesn’t it.
yes, well that does appear to be the way andmost people function today doesn’t it.
Not according to your anecdotes. Which is sad. By the way, religious beliefs are reasons for abstaining, so I’m not really sure what you’re trying to say.
Patricia we have never had sex. For the whole two years we’ve known each other. And no I’m not going to marry him just so we can have sex. Maybe that’s why a lot of marriages today fall apart, people get married just to have sex and once they loose the lust they divorce. Marriage should be more then just having sex.
Maybe that’s why a lot of marriages today fall apart, people get married just to have sex and once they loose the lust they divorce. Marriage should be more then just having sex.
Posted by: Jess at July 27, 2008 1:23 PM
I don’t think that’s the reason — look at statistics involving percentages of people who were sexually active before marriage and the numbers of people who live together before marriage. The divorce rate is higher among people who cohabit before marriage. Some divorces result because of abuse of some kind but most happen as a result of basic selfishness on the part of one or the other spouse or both. Also, Pope Paul VI said that artificial birth control would lead to the objectification of women, adultery, divorce, abortion, etc.
In a round-about way I think that you are on the right track regarding lust in this regard: if a relationship is only based on lust and the sexual urge is all that is being met then eventually the relationship will fall apart. Men and women are made for love but it must be ordered toward self-giving and not self-seeking.
Chris, I think there’s a difference between “sexual irresponsibility” (particularly your definition, which I assume would be any sexual relationship outside of marriage) and believing that ANY woman is up for grabs for sex anytime and anyplace.
Posted by: Alexandra at July 27, 2008 11:16 AM
——-
Alexandra – I’m not stating all women are available for sex at anytime or place, nor do all men see that so. In my own experiences, contraceptives were literally and unmistakably used as a signal of intentions for casual sex.
Such signals relay a particular mindset that alters perspectives for guys. It’s no different than a woman getting drunk with a guy in a car, or suggestively drinking a beer from a bottle or any number of come-ons.
To men – women who personally promote such information are seen as “up for grabs”. Whether they actually are or not is another matter, but at a certain point for numerous men actual “controls” don’t matter. There’s a lot of confusion when it comes to rape because society blurs the lines, and women and men tend to blur the lines themselves.
I’m not defending rape here – it’s wrong. What I am saying is that the whole area of sex is something incredibly potent and life-altering, and yet we treat it – casually. Most people shoot, then aim.
If you lived nearby, we could walk into a bookstore and I could literally bury you with scores of magazines, tons of books and endless hours of video where women discuss men – without men involved, or minimally involved in the conversation. I think doing this is also being “sexually irresponsible” because it treats sex – casually.
In Hebrew there is a term: ahkariet – it means foreseeing dire consequences. The movie “The Graduate” (with Dustin Hoffman) is a perfect example of a young man failing to see the consequences and simply diving in to the sex.
As a culture we don’t promote the idea of ahkariet on sex, on an individual level or a cultural level, because we treat sex – casually.
Patricia we have never had sex. For the whole two years we’ve known each other. And no I’m not going to marry him just so we can have sex. Maybe that’s why a lot of marriages today fall apart, people get married just to have sex and once they loose the lust they divorce. Marriage should be more then just having sex.
Posted by: Jess at July 27, 2008 1:23 PM
The why did you use the term “lover” Jess? This has certain connotations and does not refer to a chaste relationship.
“if a relationship is only based on lust and the sexual urge is all that is being met then eventually the relationship will fall apart. Men and women are made for love but it must be ordered toward self-giving and not self-seeking.”
Posted by: Eileen at July 27, 2008 1:50 PM
Eileen: isn’t that what we see in Hollywood.
I mean people here are going to smack me for using that as an example, but these people, although very rich, live their lives in similar fashion to many couples today, just on a grander and more public stage.
They meet someone, are physically attracted and set up camp together. Because their relationships are very superficial, they fail- again and again.
I feel sorry for the Pitt-Jolie children – it would not surprise me if this “relationship” is dead in acouple of years. Maybe not, but likely.
Jess, I doubt many people get married “just” to have sex. Also, I think that by forgoing sex until marriage, a relaitonship is forced to build and strenghten beyond lust.
I agree that most marriages end when the warm fuzzies wear off, but I don’t think pre-marital abstinance makes this phenomena more likely.
Yes, Patricia, I think that you are right. Sadly, many people live on a pretty superficial level.
Jess, I doubt many people get married “just” to have sex. Also, I think that by forgoing sex until marriage, a relaitonship is forced to build and strenghten beyond lust.
I agree that most marriages end when the warm fuzzies wear off, but I don’t think pre-marital abstinance makes this phenomena more likely.
Posted by: lauren at July 27, 2008 2:31 PM
Lauren, very good points!
Chris —
I’m not stating all women are available for sex at anytime or place, nor do all men see that so.
No, I know you’re not. But it was that assertion, made by someone here, that I was arguing against. Patricia said: “A woman on BC is basically saying to men, ‘I am sexually available anywhere, anytime.'” I don’t think that’s the case, and I think it’s a pretty disturbing thing to infer from birth control.
It’s no different than a woman getting drunk with a guy in a car, or suggestively drinking a beer from a bottle or any number of come-ons.
Except that those actions are directed at, or at least specifically performed in the presence of, an individual man (or a few men). Whereas a woman taking birth control is her doing something, not necessarily with the intention of directing it at a man. Maybe she has poly-cystic ovarian syndrome, as my sister does. Maybe she is in a relationship but doesn’t want to get pregnant. Maybe she’s up for casual sex. A woman being on birth control is not at all the same as a woman flirting with a guy.
I’ve never seen The Graduate! My mom keeps telling me I should.
Jess – what’s your definition of “lover”? I was going to ask you the same exact question that Patricia asked @ 2:22 PM.
He says that he likes me for me, and he would love to have sex but he would give it up if it meant remaining close to me.
When I read that first post, I had assumed (I think fairly) that you were having sex with him, (that’s usually what “lover” means in the classical sense) and that he said he would stop if you needed him to.
When you suggested he was not your boyfriend, I assumed he was your “friend with benefits” – someone you’ve been physically and emotionally close to. – Your words.
So which one is it?
A woman being on birth control is not at all the same as a woman flirting with a guy.
Alexandra – you need to learn more about men! A woman could tell a guy she’s on birth control complete with a medical explanation about why, and all most guys would hear is she’s on birth control! ;-)
I’ll also let you in on a secret – even if a guy overhears this in a conversation among two women, if he’s like most men, he’ll eventually want to leverage it. It’s the sin nature.
Lauren: Eileen beat me to it, excellent points!
The longer a couple postpones sex, the better they get to know each other. That holds true whether you believe in chastity before marriage, or plan to eventually have a sexual relationship as a single couple.
“Pure Love” by Jason Everett is an excellent source of information on the subject for teens or parents looking for the words to explain the physical and emotional changes sex bring to the individual.
http://www.catholic.com/chastity/pure_love.asp
agree that most marriages end when the warm fuzzies wear off, but I don’t think pre-marital abstinance makes this phenomena more likely.
Posted by: lauren at July 27, 2008 2:31 PM
In fact studies show that divorce is more common amongst those couples who have co-habitated. And, less than 40% of cohabitating couples marry.
The idea is that sex is something sacred – so sacred because it bonds a man and a woman together in every way possibly and it is the way new life begins. The married couple’s love allows them to participate in creating a new human being which is born into a committed permanent relationship – marriage.
BTW, most marriages BEGIN when the warm fuzzies wear off! Until that point, it is all hormones and lust. It’s easy to be nice to a person you are crazy nuts for. But it becomes an act of the will to love someone who begins to show their real personality quirks and their true character. That’s when the true self-giving begins.
Patricia: 2:59: BTW, most marriages BEGIN when the warm fuzzies wear off! Until that point, it is all hormones and lust. It’s easy to be nice to a person you are crazy nuts for. But it becomes an act of the will to love someone who begins to show their real personality quirks and their true character. That’s when the true self-giving begins.
I agree Patricia!
The Catholic Church requires a waiting period of six months from the time a couple reserves a date for the wedding and the actual ceremony. Couples are required to undergo counseling and testing to help them see how compatible they are in a variety of categories. They learn what areas need more work. This is a common practice in many Protestant churches as well. They also strongly suggest that a couple live as celibates and live separately for the six months before the wedding in order to “test” their love for each other. (This is my interpretation of the rules for the sake of conversation here. You will need to see your Pastor for the specifics of the Catholic Parish where you want to marry.)
**Note to above:3:18: The word “test” is probably poorly chosen on my part. Perhaps “strengthen” is a better word to use?
Patricia @ 2:59 PM – I’ll second your 2nd and 3rd paragraphs.
Alexandra – you need to learn more about men! A woman could tell a guy she’s on birth control complete with a medical explanation about why, and all most guys would hear is she’s on birth control! ;-)
Ha, Chris, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree then. I mean, you’re a guy, but I think that one side effect of so many women being on birth control is that — and maybe this is just limited to younger generations — it has stopped becoming something ‘abnormal’ for a man to hear about a woman, and so has stopped somehow signaling that she’s a huge flirt who will sleep with anyone. Almost all the women I’m friends with are on birth control, but most of my friends are guys, and no one is ever trying to sleep with anyone else really.
The guys just kind of assume that the women are on BC. Which sucks if you’re trying to find a guy who doesn’t want to use birth control, but that’s a separate point, one I already talked about. But it’s kind of like wearing skirts or something — in some places a woman showing her ankles invites tons of attention, but in places where most women at least occasionally show their ankles, ankles garner virtually no attention at all.
X: do you HONESTLY believe that a woman can say no to man after man for sex and still have any hope of getting a boyfriend.
If you do you are not realistic and are sadly informed about today’s dating culture!
Even myself – a 40+ single woman cannot get a date with a man my age without sex being a part of that relationship. And I don’t even have to worry about pregnancy any more.
I just want a relationship that will start with a friendship and lead to marriage.
Women don’t have this choice any longer. The pill took this from them and has shifted the balance of power in the relationship to the man.
Posted by: Patricia at July 26, 2008 8:54 PM
…………………………………
You are looking for a passionless relationship with the goal of legal commitment? And wonder why you can’t find a man interested in dating you? Why would a man marry a woman that was just a friend? What’s in it for him? Finally getting you into bed? That would be sex for compensation Patricia. Most men don’t like being forced to pay for sex. Most women don’t enjoy being thought of as a sexual commodity.
Do you really think that men enjoy the company of a woman who’s primary interest is access to their bank accounts? Those that do, are already married at 40. Or divorced and too jaded by being financially bled dry paying for a passionless marriage to be interested in embarking on another.
Alexandra @ 3:29 PM
You’re making a statement here, but I’m not sure you realize it. All your female friends are on birth control – but they are not sleeping with their male “friends”. So why be on birth control? Isn’t that living up to an expectation to be ready to have casual non-committed sex with men who aren’t their friends? If so, why chastise the men for assuming what apparently is true?
Your male friends are not telling you who they are sleeping with.
Ask your male friends if they would “sleep” with women other than your group of “friends”. Ask them if it would be important for them to know those women they slept with were on “birth control”.
See you’re making my case for me, and for some reason you think we’re disagreeing.
Then you make a most curious statement:
Which sucks if you’re trying to find a guy who doesn’t want to use birth control, but that’s a separate point, one I already talked about.
Trying to find a guy who doesn’t want to use birth control?
You’re trying to find a guy who wants to produce kids or you’re trying to find a guy that doesn’t want to use condoms?
Huh? Either you’re trying to trap the guy or ??? Marriage?
You must mean something else, because to me that makes absolutely no sense, even with our prior conversation.
You appear to be supporting my argument: Culturally, guys are “taught” sex is available without commitment, and it’s a women’s responsibility to avoid pregnancy, and abortion is a viable option, and women want this social environment, then how is this not being sexual irresponsible?
To tie it back to Jill’s question – the primary reason why there is social shame related to abortion is that despite all efforts, life keeps being sexually transmitted.
Maybe it’s the mindset that the problem when something beautiful is considered a disease.
You’re making a statement here, but I’m not sure you realize it. All your female friends are on birth control – but they are not sleeping with their male “friends”. So why be on birth control?
For a variety of reasons. A couple of them use it to regulate menstrual cycles/pain, the rest are either in relationships or have been in relationships where it has been something they wanted to start using. A couple of them are married.
Your male friends are not telling you who they are sleeping with.
Well, they tell me at least some of the people they sleep with! lol. They tend to prefer condoms unless they’re in a long-term relationship, for obvious reasons.
Trying to find a guy who doesn’t want to use birth control?
Sorry I was so vague. I meant my conversation with Patricia upthread, where we were talking about how most men want a sexual relationship before they are ready for a commitment.
You appear to be supporting my argument: Culturally, guys are “taught” sex is available without commitment, and it’s a women’s responsibility to avoid pregnancy, and abortion is a viable option, and women want this social environment, then how is this not being sexual irresponsible?
I have never argued that men aren’t taught that sex should be available or that avoiding pregnancy shoul be a woman’s role! I consider those serious social problems. I don’t think you need to be anti-pre-marital sex to address them, though. All I was saying was that it was really gross for someone to look at a bunch of women who support abortion rights and say, “Awesome, they’re ready to go anytime, anywhere!”
Alexandra @ 5:42 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjW4i67YC04
I don’t think it’s funny.
Here’s some more Alexandra:
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/bordlee200502160740.asp
It’s not funny, Chris. I don’t think that abortion makes women into sex objects, though. And I don’t think birth control does either, which is what we were talking about.
The guys just kind of assume that the women are on BC.
And therein lies the problem – and they therefore know that the woman does not have a reason to refuse them sex. If she does, they move on.
Nice post in response to this Chris!
And you are absolutely correct, it is the mindset that EVERYTHING good and beautiful about women is considered a disease. Pregnancy is considered a disease to be avoided at all costs, babies are parasites to be eliminated at all costs.
Anon: you have a weird way of looking at things! Who said i was after compensation or a man’s wallet. I can quite take care of myself thank you very much.
Why would a man marry a woman that was just a friend? What’s in it for him?
Most women don’t enjoy being thought of as a sexual commodity.
Yeah, well why are they on BC. I can’t think of a single other action that would possibly commodify women then having them take a pill which makes them sterile and therefore sexually available all the time!
Because that’s what marriage is ANON. It’s sharing your life with a man/woman who is a companion, best friend, someone you could trust with your life and who would look after you if you became a cripple next week. The sexual aspect of marriage, while very important is not the be all and end all of a relationship. That’s what’s in it FOR HIM!
What I am interested in though, is a man who views me as a PERSON. Who does not objectify me. I think a man being involved with a woman sexually outside of marriage is focused on viewing a woman in a certain way. I think the sexual aspect of the relationship dominates for the man. It is the way he was designed by God.
All really good marriages have their basis in the foundation of a chaste friendship with shared values.
Sorry I screwed up this post so I’m reposting to make it coherent.
The guys just kind of assume that the women are on BC.
And therein lies the problem – and they therefore know that the woman does not have a reason to refuse them sex. If she does, they move on.
Anon: you have a weird way of looking at things! Who said i was after compensation or a man’s wallet. I can quite take care of myself thank you very much.
Most women don’t enjoy being thought of as a sexual commodity.
Yeah, well why are they on BC. I can’t think of a single other action that would possibly commodify women then having them take a pill which makes them sterile and therefore sexually available all the time!
Why would a man marry a woman that was just a friend? What’s in it for him?
Because that’s what marriage is ANON. It’s sharing your life with a man/woman who is a companion, best friend, someone you could trust with your life and who would look after you if you became a cripple next week. The sexual aspect of marriage, while very important is not the be all and end all of a relationship. That’s what’s in it FOR HIM!
What I am interested in though, is a man who views me as a PERSON. Who does not objectify me. I think a man being involved with a woman sexually outside of marriage is focused on viewing a woman in a certain way. I think the sexual aspect of the relationship dominates for the man. It is the way he was designed by God.
All really good marriages have their basis in the foundation of a chaste friendship with shared values.
Nice post in response to this Chris!
And you are absolutely correct, it is the mindset that EVERYTHING good and beautiful about women is considered a disease. Pregnancy is considered a disease to be avoided at all costs, babies are parasites to be eliminated at all costs.
Posted by: Patricia at July 27, 2008 6:04 PM
And therein lies the problem – and they therefore know that the woman does not have a reason to refuse them sex. If she does, they move on.
Patricia, that’s what I was saying before — a woman not wanting to have sex is JUST AS VALID a reason to abstain as a woman not being able to have sex for fear of getting pregnant. Any guy who has a problem with that is welcome to move right along.
Xalisae: It’s sad when I can’t wait for the pro-choice people to stop by and help tell you why you’re wrong…
Heh – and so it goes, X.
Alexandra @ 6:00 PM
Alexandra – it does. Your talk about how most men want sexual relationships before committing, and apparently that ‘sucks”.
You consider men’s predatory sexual nature and overall lack of procreative responsibility to be serious social problems, but will not consider the abortion mindset to be a major part of the problem.
The reason why Chris Rock got laughs from his audience is not because what he said was false or unrecognizable, but because it’s true, but unmentionable.
You personally may not think abortion objectifies women, but do men think that way? If so, that’s not merely a women’s problem, but a very human problem.
My girlfriend chose life when my son was conceived out of wedlock and we built a pile of baggage by living together for two years beforehand, but it wasn’t a fully committed relationship. We married a week before he was born. He’s now 20 and we’re still married. It took 20 years to really dig deep and address that pile of baggage. We loved each other, but such baggage not only keeps you from true intimacy, it leads to all sorts of additional problems.
When you work through that pile of baggage you open it up and find that the bad fruit that lay hidden in those bags has rotted – it’s not pretty. It’s painful.
I mentioned the Hebrew term ahkariet – seeing consequences. Those are the realities of our lives we live with. Looking ahead is wise.
You seem to want someone to be committed to you – that you want someone to love you unconditionally – but are you willing to do the same?
We talk sex and birth control and all these other things, but really it just comes down to love and relationships. That’s all that matters. And abortion is about killing a relationship that should be unconditionally loved.
I’m going to go tend my own relationships and I’ll catch you later. – May God bless you Alexandra with a beautiful life.
When you work through that pile of baggage you open it up and find that the bad fruit that lay hidden in those bags has rotted – it’s not pretty. It’s painful.
God bless you and your wife Chris.
Thanks for standing up here!
Night all.
You personally may not think abortion objectifies women, but do men think that way?
I am sure some of them do. I am also sure many do not.
You seem to want someone to be committed to you – that you want someone to love you unconditionally – but are you willing to do the same?
Yes, I am. Why would that come into this discussion? Because I think women should have the right to choose contraception, am I not willing to love someone unconditionally?
I appreciate you sharing your story, Chris.
Yes, I am. Why would that come into this discussion? Because I think women should have the right to choose contraception, am I not willing to love someone unconditionally?
I appreciate you sharing your story, Chris.
Posted by: Alexandra at July 27, 2008 6:46 PM
God bless you, Chris! I sure appreciate your contributions to the discussion.
Alexandra, when you choose artificial contraception you are closing yourself off to the possibility of new life — you are in effect telling your spouse: I love you but I don’t want any part of your fertility or your children. When you love unconditionally then you accept the whole person not just a part of them.
Eileen:
I am not using artificial contraception. But I think that women should have the option to do so.
Alexandra, when I use “you” I mean it in the universal sense.
Oh, I thought you were responding to my question about how my own willingness to love unconditionally came into this. Sorry.
Well, I don’t necessarily agree with you, but I think that even if birth control conclusively meant unwillingness to love unconditionally, women should still be allowed to use it.
I think there should be a degree of shame for being unmarried and pregnant, since it’s both evidence of immorality and stupidity
Yeahhh, make sure you share this with those women you’re counseling on the sidewalk outside the abortion clinic. I’m sure THAT should make them feel all warm and fuzzy inside, and they DEFINITELY will choose life then!
Alexandra, when you choose artificial contraception you are closing yourself off to the possibility of new life — you are in effect telling your spouse: I love you but I don’t want any part of your fertility or your children. When you love unconditionally then you accept the whole person not just a part of them.
Posted by: Eileen at July 27, 2008 8:55 PM
=================================================
Yeah…because NOBODY EVAR has had a child with a spouse/significant other/etc. that’s been a product of ANY kind of unsuccessful contraception, natural or otherwise, right?
And, I mean…it’s not like there are any PRACTICAL reasons that someone might not want to have kids with their husband/boyfriend/whatever at a given time…like…for instance…trying to avoid dire financial struggles, continuing an education or a career so that they might have the opportunity to raise VERY MUCH WANTED children under better circumstances…
No. It’s all just a matter of not loving your partner enough. Have you ever listened to yourself?
I was listening to music earlier, and a song came on that I thought was just too perfect. It’s called ‘Oh No, Not Another One’ by The Servant:
“Ooh girl, talkin’ ’bout your pain,
Talkin’ like there’s no one that’s ever felt the same,
Listen to yourself, lookin’ where to put the blame,
But don’t you know it’s you-it’s you that’s got to change.”
“She then was given the lovely gift of an incurable sexual disease after only one encounter with a new boyfriend.
It was at this point she stopped being sexually active.”
Patricia, I had a friend who had practically the exact same experience. That was her wake-up call.
As for that head count of women who saved themselves for marriage…how is that going? Count me on that list.
Anybody has any questions about that, just let me know. :D
And just to throw my 2 cents into the whole “birth control” discussion…I am not anti-birth control. I think I’m one of the few pro-lifers here who isn’t.
However, years ago I went off the pill and choose to never take it again, unless medically necessary (and even then, I’d research any other alternative before I’d choose the pill).
I really don’t have a problem with married couples using birth control to try and avoid children they feel might be too “close together” in age, or to avoid children at a time when it might not be at all practical to get pregnant. That is a choice that the married couple should make together.
I take issue with non-married persons who use birth control, not for medical reasons, but in order to be sexually active.
However, I guess there are times when I think that maybe married couples should always be open to having children, at any time. Maybe for me it’s a “trust” issue between me and God. So, I think that with married couples and birth control, they should do what they feel is best, after much prayerful consideration.
Hi X,
At one point in my marriage my husband and I were fighting all the time and facing huge financial difficulties. We were throwing the D word around quite a bit and didn’t know how to manage the 3 children we had. In debt over our heads. I found out I was pregnant. Very tough to face on top of everything else we were facing but I grew to love that baby that was growing and my husband and I got some help and are on our way to being debt free. That little boy with his Daddy’s dimples is such a blessing to me.
If we had waited for the “perfect time” to have children or until we “had the money” I doubt I would have any cherubs running around. :)
Good morning!
Alexandra @ 9:17 PM
Oh, I thought you were responding to my question about how my own willingness to love unconditionally came into this. Sorry.
I contend that to truly love another unconditionally there has to be a universal acceptance of that person: the good, bad and ugly. That acceptance applies both to our spouses and our children, and it must reside within each of us.
I’ll illustrate that – for many years I harbored the option of divorce. During that time, I never fully loved my wife. (There was still a “condition”, it wasn’t “unconditional” love.) When I realized this by God’s grace, I rejected the divorce option, fully loving my wife for the first time and it radically transformed our relationship. The difference and healing has been profound.
Eileen is right – the same principle applies to how we love our spouses and children when it comes to contraception. If we aren’t completely accepting to children during our entire marriage it tends to influence our family relationships. We cheat ourselves out of joy. By all means plan, use NFP, but don’t set your mind against your child if they show up unexpectedly, because eventually they will know how you felt: that their presence was unwanted.
Rejection shapes lives. Sometimes drastically. And sometimes old wounds refuse to heal.
Well, I don’t necessarily agree with you, but I think that even if birth control conclusively meant unwillingness to love unconditionally, women should still be allowed to use it.
So you chose conditional love with birth control, that’s your choice to make.
And culturally you believe we should conditionally love one another. Divorce & death are still options, and thus their impacts remain social problems.
Such beliefs will impact how you love, and thus your life. You won’t see the effect now, but later on in life, if you dare to look back and be honest with yourself, like I did, you’ll see.
All I can so is share. What you actually do is up to you.
However, your impact on the future is actually far greater than you’ve ever imagined.
So you chose conditional love with birth control, that’s your choice to make.
How am I making that choice? I merely want that choice to be available for women who want it.
And culturally you believe we should conditionally love one another. Divorce & death are still options, and thus their impacts remain social problems.
Yes, I believe that people should have the option to divorce, and I believe that people should have the option to use birth control. Whatever I think about either of the two things, I think that taking away the option is worse.
Yeah…because NOBODY EVAR has had a child with a spouse/significant other/etc. that’s been a product of ANY kind of unsuccessful contraception, natural or otherwise, right?
And, I mean…it’s not like there are any PRACTICAL reasons that someone might not want to have kids with their husband/boyfriend/whatever at a given time…like…for instance…trying to avoid dire financial struggles, continuing an education or a career so that they might have the opportunity to raise VERY MUCH WANTED children under better circumstances…
No. It’s all just a matter of not loving your partner enough. Have you ever listened to yourself?
Posted by: xalisae at July 27, 2008 11:16 PM
Yes, X, there have been pregnancies that have resulted. And yes, there are serious reasons to avoid a pregnancy; such as physical or mental health reasons, finances, etc. The point here is that when you use artificial bc you completely shut yourself off from your spouse’s fertility which is a part of their whole person. You want them for sexual pleasure and that is all. When NFP is used, you use the natural infertile period of a woman’s cycle that God designed. A man appreciates his wife’s fertility and can show his love in other ways during her fertile time.
I spent 17 yrs working in a dental office where I encountered a high volume of people. I lost count of the number of couples who would mention that they were finished (after 2 children) often implying, in front of the children, that they were too much work, etc. Children pick up on attitudes like that. How sad.
I teased you earlier about your attitude, X, but it appears that every time you disagree you are disrespectful. You could learn something from Alexandra who can disagree with someone’s opinion without being rude.
Oh Carla, what a beautiful witness you are! God bless you!
If anyone is interested there is an excellent article at Catholic.org who actually got it from LifeSite news about Pope Paul VI’s predictions about the fallout from the use of the bc pill. It contains quotes from unbiased researchers on the current culture. I don’t know how to provide direct links :( I am not very computer-savvy yet!
God bless you, Eileen!!
Kel: great life choice that will reap you many rewards!
You know there is a saying that we see a hole in the street and fall into it.
The next day we walk down that same street again and see the hole and fall into it.
The third day we walk down the street again, see the hole, stop look into it and fall into it again.
The fourth time we walk down that street again, see the hole and walk around it. :-D
Direct quotes from Humanae Vitae:
1.Upright men can even better convince themselves of the solid grounds on which the teaching of the Church in this field is based, if they are to reflect upon the consequences of methods of artificial birth control. Let them consider, firts of all, how wide and easy a road would this be opened up towards conjugal infidelity and the general lowering of morality. ….
2.It is also to be feared that the man, growing used to the employment of anti-conceptive practices, may finally lose respect for the woman and no longer caring for her physical and psychological equilibrium, may come to the point of considering her as a mere instrument of selfish enjoyment, and no longer as his respected and beloved companion.
3.Let it be considered also that a dangerous weapon would thus be placed in the hands of those public authorities who take no heed of moral exigencies.Who could blame a government for applying to the solution of the problems of the community those means acknowledged to be licit for married couples in the solution of a family problem. Who will stop rulers from favouring, from even imposing upon their peoples, if they were to consider it necessary, the method of contraception whch they judge to be most efficacious.
Pope Paul VI could not have been more prophetic if he tried!
For a great article on Humanae Vitae:
“The Vindication of Humanae Vitae”
Eileen: the attitude you mention is VERY common.
When I had my first child a boy, people said to me, “All you need is a girl and you will have the perfect family!”
Then when I had a girl, people then told me “how wonderful! You are all done your family – a boy AND a girl!”
Then when I got pregnant with my third,”Why do you want another child. You must be very brave! Don’t you have a TV?”
By my fourth pregnancy – I was beyond redemption. Mostly I just got puzzled looks and some nasty comments from my Catholic aunts who told me I was too petite to have soooo many babies.
Good grief Patricia, that is SICK!
How am I making that choice? I merely want that choice to be available for women who want it.
You want that choice for others – yes? Is that not choosing?
Whether or not you feel it applies to you, your advocation of that solution is indeed a choice. You seem to be offended by my pointing this out – why?
If I were your husband I could rightfully say that you don’t love me unconditionally. And that would be true because you believe divorce is a valid option. (You can’t logically dilute or divide universals.)
Could we reasonably advocate something for others that we ourselves would not choose? No. To do so would be hypocritical.
“Abortion is a viable option, but I won’t have one.”
“Divorce is a viable option, but I don’t want one.”
So whatever you say, your advocation indicates your choice and what you truly believe.
I must admit, unconditional love cannot be forced, it must be freely chosen. Yet our cultural mindset avoids unconditional love as a solution. You help me illustrate my point. That doesn’t make you a bad person Alexandra. We’re simply disagreeing here.
But in expressing our diametrically opposed views both of us cannot be right – particularly when we use universal terms such as unconditional love.
Eileen: the attitude you mention is VERY common.
When I had my first child a boy, people said to me, “All you need is a girl and you will have the perfect family!”
Then when I had a girl, people then told me “how wonderful! You are all done your family – a boy AND a girl!”
Then when I got pregnant with my third,”Why do you want another child. You must be very brave! Don’t you have a TV?”
By my fourth pregnancy – I was beyond redemption. Mostly I just got puzzled looks and some nasty comments from my Catholic aunts who told me I was too petite to have soooo many babies.
Everyone says the same types of things to me, Patricia…and I only have 3 so far!
Everyone that talks to me knows that I don’t want to limit the number of kids, and that I want to have as many as God lets me have.
I have had a lot of people asking me, “How can you handle having that many kids? Why would you want more? Don’t they drive you crazy? When are you going to stop? ARE you going to stop?” “I could NEVER have that many kids. I would kill myself first.” “Yeah, I am going to have a tubal because I don’t want to end up having that many kids.”
And many other things like that. I know it’ll probably get more intense as I have more children.
I think most of them mean well, and most people are trying to say it, sort of as a compliment for me, but they prove to me time and time again how ingrained this attitude that kids are a burden is on the minds and hearts of people in this society.
And it’s sad to think that this is the way children are perceived.
Here Here Bethany and Patricia!!
I had a boy and a girl and heard that now I had what I wanted. Done then? Nope. There was a lot of wondering as to WHY would we keep going?? We already had one of each….
I had another boy and another boy. Some have even said that it would have been “nice” to have 2 boys and 2 girls!! ?? Funny how the children that God has blessed you with and you love dearly seem to make others so puzzled….:)
You don’t even WANT to know the comments my friend expecting her ninth gets!
She once had a little girl come up to her in the mall and tell her she was SICK to have so many kids (I think she had 6 at the time). The mother was with this child and they were both staring at my friend. My girlfriend had a few choice words for her mom.
Yeah the other famous one is “Are all those yours?”
My goodness, I had NO idea that people will actually say that kind of stuff that often, even to someone who has only 3 kids like Bethany. I can’t believe how ingrained that attitude in our culture of “guy for dad, girl for mom and done” is. It’s like, if the first two are girls, then you’re allowed a third to try and get the boy (and vice-versa) but that’s it.
Hopefully I can share in these kinds of stories with ya’ll in the next several years too…
Could we reasonably advocate something for others that we ourselves would not choose? No. To do so would be hypocritical.
I’m not interested in advocating it, merely allowing it. I am interested in allowing tons of things I would not choose to do. I think people should have the right to smoke. Drop out of high school. Eat unhealthily. Go into debt. Divorce. None of these are things I, personally, hope to do — there but for the grace of God, and all — but I think it would be horrifying to outlaw things just because I have valid reasons for not wanting to do them.
Tell me, Chris, do you smoke? Because logically, you should either smoke or advocate the banning of cigarettes.
So whatever you say, your advocation indicates your choice and what you truly believe.
I truly believe, with all my heart, that people should have the option to make different choices than those I feel are the best choices. I consider this a crucial part of freedom and free will.
Hey Bobby,
I know of a family that had 6 girls and the 7th was a boy. They rented a billboard that said FINALLY! They had a huge party cause a son was born. Imagine how the daughters felt about that….
Patricia, Carla,
here are some good responses to “are they all yours?” I love these!
Are they all yours?
* No, this is not all of them, my oldest is at home with the triplets.
* No, actually two are the mailman’s and I am not sure whose is that one…..
* No, a couple of them starting following us a few minutes ago.
* No, I picked up a couple extra in the produce aisle.
* YES!
* No……….I have two more at home!
* I don’t know. How many do you count?
* Yes. But if you have any you don’t want, I’ll gladly take them, too
* Yes, at least that’s what I tell my husband.
You can see more funny responses to other large family questions here:
http://www.plomp.com/largefam/comebacks.htm
Oh my stars!! I love it!!
Patricia, Carla, Bethany —
I am paraphrasing but I believe Blessed Teresa of Calcutta said — “How can there be too many children? That is like saying there are too many flowers.”
God bless you!!
Call me crazy but I want to adopt someday.
I also wanted to say that I am one of 3 daughters. My father did want a boy. I tried to be a son. Honest. :)
Carla! I am the oldest of 3 girls also. When my youngest sister was born, my dad said, “Another girl?!” and the doctor said. “Hey, you should be happy that she is healthy!” :)
When I was expecting, my dad speculated about the baby being a boy and then said that it would be great if it is a girl — girls are more fun to tease! :D
Eileen:7:40; I spent 17 yrs working in a dental office where I encountered a high volume of people. I lost count of the number of couples who would mention that they were finished (after 2 children) often implying, in front of the children, that they were too much work, etc. Children pick up on attitudes like that. How sad.
Isn’t it sad? I cringe when I hear a woman say she’s finished. I wonder, “how does she know?” and I assume she’s going back on BC expecting never to be pregnant again. When I talk to a woman who has many children, I say “God Bless you” with a smile.
Reminds me of the line from “Bella”: “If you want to make God laugh, tell Him your plans!”
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Eileen: I am paraphrasing but I believe Blessed Teresa of Calcutta said — “How can there be too many children? That is like saying there are too many flowers.”
As a flower lover, I love this quote!! When children are raised in a family with this attitude, they grow up and raise their own families the same way. It’s a wonderful thing.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Carla: 9:40: I know of a family that had 6 girls and the 7th was a boy. They rented a billboard that said FINALLY! They had a huge party cause a son was born. Imagine how the daughters felt about that….
Your own experience surely influences how you feel about a billboard and I can empathize with you. I don’t know the family, obviously you do…but if that was done with a sense of humor and joy and not degrading to the girls, I can’t see how it would be harmful. I think most fathers secretly would love a boy, even if they won’t admit it. That’s not to say they love their little girls any less!
Bethany, How about this one:
Are they all yours?
“Mine? No, these are my siblings!”
Great comments everyone! :)
“Because that’s what marriage is ANON. It’s sharing your life with a man/woman who is a companion, best friend, someone you could trust with your life and who would look after you if you became a cripple next week. The sexual aspect of marriage, while very important is not the be all and end all of a relationship. That’s what’s in it FOR HIM!”
So women are in marriage for companionship and friendship, and men are in it for sex? Wow, if I believed that, I’d never want to get married. Why on earth would any woman want to be used in such a manner?
You know, NFP is birth control. You say that it is “open” to life, but then you brag about its effectiveness. If at the end of the day someone is pregnant, they keep it, isn’t it just like using birth control and then keeping the baby should something happen? People use NFP to avoid getting pregnant. I’d say that’s birth control. To be “truly open” the couple would have to have sex regardless of which time of the month it is. I actually have met several Catholics who also agree that NFP is birth control and therefore unacceptable.
Janet,
It was not done with a sense of humor. They only “kept trying” to have a boy. There was disappointment after each daughter was born. :(
Yes, X, there have been pregnancies that have resulted. And yes, there are serious reasons to avoid a pregnancy; such as physical or mental health reasons, finances, etc. The point here is that when you use artificial bc you completely shut yourself off from your spouse’s fertility which is a part of their whole person. You want them for sexual pleasure and that is all. When NFP is used, you use the natural infertile period of a woman’s cycle that God designed. A man appreciates his wife’s fertility and can show his love in other ways during her fertile time.
I spent 17 yrs working in a dental office where I encountered a high volume of people. I lost count of the number of couples who would mention that they were finished (after 2 children) often implying, in front of the children, that they were too much work, etc. Children pick up on attitudes like that. How sad.
I teased you earlier about your attitude, X, but it appears that every time you disagree you are disrespectful. You could learn something from Alexandra who can disagree with someone’s opinion without being rude.
Posted by: Eileen at July 28, 2008 7:40 AM
=================================================
Yes, funny that, how I tend to be rude to people who seem to have no greater joy in life than looking down their noses at people with different lifestyle choices and opinions…Just a character flaw of mine, I guess. 9_9
Do you not see the irony in your despicable attitude towards people in a relationship who-for whatever reason-don’t have the resources or desire for children at a given point in their lives (or ever, for that matter. Can you believe some ignorant people don’t EVER want kids?! What a bunch of morons!);a rude, condescending attitude towards people who have made a different choice for their lives than you have…and then you have the gall to tell ME that I am rude. (This after you state that couples who use contraceptives don’t completely love their kids and use each other for sex.) HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. HA. Ha. ha. I take that back about “looking down their noses at other people”. I seriously doubt at this point that you can even see past your own nose to look down on other people…you’re just going on second-hand information in order to do all your judging these days.
I have 2 kids (one unplanned via failed contraception and the other long awaited after a decent bit of trying, both of whom I happen to love dearly AND EQUALLY) and a tubal ligation. I have things in my life that I want to accomplish for myself and my family that, as much as I love children/my children in particular/big families (especially since I myself happen to come from one), having many children would hinder. It wouldn’t make it impossible to finish my education, but it certainly would get in the way to a degree, and I’m tired of barely making ends meet in our family. I grew up like that. It put a lot of stress on my parents and their relationship, and it’s not fun. I’d like more for my family, and myself, and if you want to fault me for that, oh well. I’m glad I don’t give a crap what you all think, or else I might’ve been “shamed” into not having the beautiful family I have now.
As I said, I love large families. I’m the oldest of 6 kids myself, and I adore children. I think it’s great that many people on this thread are in a place emotionally/financially/whatever to have large families and a lot of kids. That’s not for me though, and just as I respect people who have a lot of children, I expect the same respect from those people about MY personal choices, rather than harsh criticism and a lot of people talking about how my spouse and I are just using each other for sex, and contracepting (or even just thinking its ok to do so) means we don’t really love each other completely, etc.
“You’re all just using your spouses to have child after child after child, because you don’t really care about each other, you just want and love babies. It’s irresponsible to have so many kids anyway. You think that women are nothing but walking incubators and have no value outside their uterus. You just pop out brat after brat after brat because you’re all too stupid to think for yourselves and you listen to what some made-up man in the sky tells you to do with your reproductive organs.”
It’s obvious I don’t feel that way…but how does it make you feel to see those things said about you? You guys really need to think about other peoples’ thoughts/feelings/positions/etc. before you start spouting off. You really do. I hope that many of you eventually see the world for what it really is…and that is a diverse group of people all trying to make their own way within it. I don’t care what you do or say from here on out. I’ll stop by occasionally to read the articles, but that’s about it…Take care, and if anyone cares to, they can get in touch with me on AIM, same screen name: xalisae
You know, NFP is birth control. You say that it is “open” to life, but then you brag about its effectiveness. If at the end of the day someone is pregnant, they keep it, isn’t it just like using birth control and then keeping the baby should something happen? People use NFP to avoid getting pregnant. I’d say that’s birth control. To be “truly open” the couple would have to have sex regardless of which time of the month it is. I actually have met several Catholics who also agree that NFP is birth control and therefore unacceptable.
Posted by: reason at July 28, 2008 11:26 AMYou know, NFP is birth control. You say that it is “open” to life, but then you brag about its effectiveness. If at the end of the day someone is pregnant, they keep it, isn’t it just like using birth control and then keeping the baby should something happen? People use NFP to avoid getting pregnant. I’d say that’s birth control. To be “truly open” the couple would have to have sex regardless of which time of the month it is. I actually have met several Catholics who also agree that NFP is birth control and therefore unacceptable.
Posted by: reason at July 28, 2008 11:26 AM
Reason, when someone uses artificial bc then they are completely closed to life indefinitely until, that is, they stop using it. When one uses NFP to avoid a pregnancy they are supposed to be using it for a serious reason — from month to month — not indefinitely as in artificial bc. Your friends are not familiar with Church teaching on the subject. The Church teaches that for serious reasons, a married couple may practice NFP to avoid a pregnancy. I agree that to use it to avoid pregnancies without a valid reason would be — to be closed to life.
BTW, don’t you think that it is a good thing that with NFP the husband is involved — that is he gets to know and appreciate his wife’s fertility and love her on more than just on a physical level? With the pill and other forms, it is left to the woman to carry the burden, plus those things are not good for her body anyway.
Janet,It was not done with a sense of humor. They only “kept trying” to have a boy. There was disappointment after each daughter was born. :(
Posted by: Carla at July 28, 2008 11:42 AM
Now, THAT, is awful! Lord have mercy on us all.
people talking about how my spouse and I are just using each other for sex, and contracepting (or even just thinking its ok to do so) means we don’t really love each other completely, etc.
Or even just thinking people should be allowed to contracept — not even thinking it’s okay or doing it.
I’m sorry to see you go, X. This thread creeped me out as well, to be honest, so I can understand it, but I like having you here. I’m glad I got the opportunity to hear your opinion on so many things; you’re a pretty cool person.
Xalisae,
All I have done here is explained why I believe what I do. I have not judged you like you have me and some others. When you make unjust accusations about other beliefs then I am going to respond. You are the one who will not tolerate any other opinion but your own. I think that I can safely say that anyone on this blog is happy to hear your opinion if it is given respectfully. Peace…
I
reason, 11:26- I see NFP the same way, only it helps you to better KNOW your body and therefore avoid the fertile time of the month if you do not wish to get pregnant. Artificial birth control such as the pill really screws up your body (well, it did for me, personally, anyway).
Just curious: Do those who advocate strictly NFP consider the use of a condom to prevent pregnancy on the same level as popping the pill to prevent ovulation?
And btw, those people who say such things about large families are completely ignorant!!
Xalisae,
All I have done here is explained why I believe what I do. I have not judged you like you have me and some others. When you make unjust accusations about other beliefs then I am going to respond. You are the one who will not tolerate any other opinion but your own. I think that I can safely say that anyone on this blog is happy to hear your opinion if it is given respectfully. Peace…
Posted by: Eileen at July 28, 2008 12:04 PM
I also want to make it clear that when I explained my position, I was speaking in generalities and not applying it specificly to your situation. Peace.
“I have 2 kids (one unplanned via failed contraception and the other long awaited after a decent bit of trying, both of whom I happen to love dearly AND EQUALLY) and a tubal ligation. I have things in my life that I want to accomplish for myself and my family that, as much as I love children/my children in particular/big families (especially since I myself happen to come from one), having many children would hinder. It wouldn’t make it impossible to finish my education, but it certainly would get in the way to a degree, and I’m tired of barely making ends meet in our family. I grew up like that. It put a lot of stress on my parents and their relationship, and it’s not fun. I’d like more for my family, and myself, and if you want to fault me for that, oh well. I’m glad I don’t give a crap what you all think, or else I might’ve been “shamed” into not having the beautiful family I have now.”
Xalisae, I hate to see you go as well. I share some of your views on this, and I don’t fault you for the choices that you and your spouse have made together. No one should make you feel ashamed about this.
I’m sorry to see you go, X. This thread creeped me out as well, to be honest, so I can understand it, but I like having you here. I’m glad I got the opportunity to hear your opinion on so many things; you’re a pretty cool person.
Posted by: Alexandra at July 28, 2008 12:03 PM
=================================================
Thanks, Alexandra, you’re pretty cool yourself…I just don’t have the time or the effort to rebutt all of this stuff…especially Eileen who just can’t seem to comprehend that what she says is HIGHLY insulting and inflammatory to a good many people and then looks at me like I’m the jackass.
I will say though, that one thing this blog has done is given me respect for the pro-choice people and perspective, and it’s worked wonders for the disagreements I’ve had in my marriage with my husband, who happens to be pro-choice. :D
Alexandra @ 9:37 AM
I’m not interested in advocating it, merely allowing it.
Are not divorce and abortion matters of law? Your vote is on public policies related to these issues – that’s advocating and allowing. There’s quite a difference between divorce and unhealthy eating.
I don’t smoke and yes – I advocate against smoking. It deprived me of my two grandfathers who smoked continuously and both died of lung cancer. I never met them here on earth.
I truly believe, with all my heart, that people should have the option to make different choices than those I feel are the best choices. I consider this a crucial part of freedom and free will.
You know, from our discussions I truly believe you want the best for others, where we differ is in our understanding of what that is.
I have an observation, and I hope you receive it as it is intended, with care and concern: I’ve noticed you don’t firmly grasp the idea of inherent nature, universals and objective truth.
When I asked you to comment on my Bodily Rights article, you ended up agreeing with SoMG, which really was no feedback at all.
When it comes to issues of law, advocacy and allowance are the same. You advocate when you vote, the candidate who best expresses what you want allowed. You seemed to think advocacy was exclusively promotion.
SoMG reasoned that the unborn do not have “special rights” to have their life protected by their parents or government. And you agreed with him. So then you discriminate against the unborn as human beings because they simply have no choice in both their existence and where they are. You grant them no life, freedom or free will.
But you do not consider them as part of humanity that deserves that. They are excluded, but you want to call them human beings.
These are all illustrations of what you believe.
Is that a fair and accurate assessment?
My good friends Bethany and Jill (among others probably) also agree that NFP is morally unacceptable, so this is an interesting topic. I do sympathize with that position, and I think I can see where they are coming from.
But here is where I see the fundamental difference between artificial contraception and NFP. Suppose you are using artificial contraception and on a given day, at a specific time, you and your spouse wish to engage in the conjugal act. What you have done is enjoyed the pleasure of sex while thwarting its procreative good.
On the other hand, suppose that same couple is practicing NFP and at the same time and same day wish to engage in the conjugal act. According to their NFP charting, the wife is fertile that day, so the couple chooses not to engage in the conjugal act. They do NOT enjoy the pleasure of the conjugal act nor do they thwart the procreative good of the conjugal act because there IS NO conjugal act.
Thus the main difference is that a contracepting couple enjoys the sex without the consequences while the couple practicing NFP abstains from sex period.
A good analogy can be made with eating. What happens when you want the pleasure of eating but without the consequences i.e. gaining weight (or something like that)? That’s bulimia. Now if you don’t want the consequences of eating, you can work with the natural rhythm of your body by engaging in diet and exercise, just like a couple works with the natural rhythm of the body in NFP. I think there are also some good theological reasons why NFP should be permissible, too.
I’m really sorry to see you go, X. I really enjoyed your contributions to the discussions here, especially since we share a similar view on a lot of things.
I will say though, that one thing this blog has done is given me respect for the pro-choice people and perspective, and it’s worked wonders for the disagreements I’ve had in my marriage with my husband, who happens to be pro-choice. :D
I’ve had a similar reaction to Jill’s blog.
“But here is where I see the fundamental difference between artificial contraception and NFP. Suppose you are using artificial contraception and on a given day, at a specific time, you and your spouse wish to engage in the conjugal act. What you have done is enjoyed the pleasure of sex while thwarting its procreative good.”
So–it’s wrong for married couples to experience any sort of sexual pleasure if they’re not open to having a child at the time? Is that what you’re saying here?
“On the other hand, suppose that same couple is practicing NFP and at the same time and same day wish to engage in the conjugal act. According to their NFP charting, the wife is fertile that day, so the couple chooses not to engage in the conjugal act. They do NOT enjoy the pleasure of the conjugal act nor do they thwart the procreative good of the conjugal act because there IS NO conjugal act.
Thus the main difference is that a contracepting couple enjoys the sex without the consequences while the couple practicing NFP abstains from sex period.”
Do they abstain from ALL forms of sexual activity? Earlier, Eileen said, “A man appreciates his wife’s fertility and can show his love in other ways during her fertile time.”
I am wondering what was meant by that. I guess I should ask Eileen. :D Eileen, what did you mean by that statement?
Hey Kel.
“So–it’s wrong for married couples to experience any sort of sexual pleasure if they’re not open to having a child at the time? Is that what you’re saying here?”
No, I thought about making that point clear, but no, not at all. It’s when you have sex PURELY for pleasure WHILE REMOVING the procreative or unative good. Think back to my eating analogy. Nothing wrong with eating for fun as long as you don’t vomit it up (on purpose of course) later. We eat for fun all the time, but we live with the consequences usually.
“Do they abstain from ALL forms of sexual activity? Earlier, Eileen said, “A man appreciates his wife’s fertility and can show his love in other ways during her fertile time.””
I can’t speak for Eileen, but from what I’ve gleaned from her, I think the answer is “yes” and that she meant things like taking walks, holding hands, watching a movie, going on a date, etc. I would agree, but am not prepared to get into it too deeply right now. God love you, Kel.
So women are in marriage for companionship and friendship, and men are in it for sex? Wow, if I believed that, I’d never want to get married. Why on earth would any woman want to be used in such a manner?
Posted by: A. at July 28, 2008 11:23 AM
No A. That is not what I said. My comment was this:
“Because that’s what marriage is ANON. It’s sharing your life with a man/woman who is a companion, best friend, someone you could trust with your life and who would look after you if you became a cripple next week. The sexual aspect of marriage, while very important is not the be all and end all of a relationship. That’s what’s in it FOR HIM!”
It is this for BOTH sexes A. That’s what the aim should be!
You know, NFP is birth control. You say that it is “open” to life, but then you brag about its effectiveness. If at the end of the day someone is pregnant, they keep it, isn’t it just like using birth control and then keeping the baby should something happen? People use NFP to avoid getting pregnant. I’d say that’s birth control. To be “truly open” the couple would have to have sex regardless of which time of the month it is. I actually have met several Catholics who also agree that NFP is birth control and therefore unacceptable.
Posted by: reason at July 28, 2008 11:26 AM
I think Bobby B has done a wonderful job of explaining this here – I agree with his posts and I’ve heard the eating analogy before.
What I don’t like here is that the more liberal thinkers whine and get their knickers in a knot when they are challenged in their beliefs.
Why is this?
No one was rude to you xalisae.
IN fact you were condescending to ME with this wonderful post:
And Eileen, I’m not supposing any moral superiority here…I’m not the one claiming that loose women on the pill are luring all the best men away with their wicked, nasty lady parts. I really do hope Patricia finds someone…I think it would help her a lot, and I think it might change her outlook for the better. So far, the only people I’ve seen on a moral high horse were the two people talking about shaming women into keeping their legs closed because not doing so is “immoral and stupid”.
Posted by: xalisae at July 26, 2008 11:27 PM
This is NOT what I said xalisae and as is usual with liberals, you twist what was written.
My getting a spouse would NOT change my attitude for the better. The fact is that I respect men and I consider women to be the guardians of moral virture – a role they have largely relinquished in society today. The pill is THE major factor in this lack of virtue in women. We have had a man express his opinion of the message that the pill sends to men. I think women largely under-estimate and do not understand the male mind in the area of sexuality. Men do not think like us women. In sexual matters, they truly are the weaker sex. I could be wrong on this but I think society has worked for many years on this assumption. This is my position, my opinion and it is supported by 30 years of life experience. It is also supported by research.
And this post:
You guys must not think much of women to say that they’d have sex with guys just because a guy expects it of her…or just because society says that NOT having sex is wrong…talk about missing the point of the women’s lib movement…You guys really don’t get it. Women, thanks to efforts made long ago, now have as much right to NOT have sex as they do TO HAVE sex…ugh. I give up. It’s sad when I can’t wait for the pro-choice people to stop by and help tell you why you’re wrong…
Posted by: xalisae at July 26, 2008 7:01 PM
I think girls and women are having sex with men because it’s expected of them (due to the availability of contraceptives), because they see it as the only way to keep the boyfriend, and many times because they are simply coerced.
I think women have less options today than they did when I was a young women, 30 years ago. To remain chaste is now considered counter-cultural.
And as for the shame aspect – I think it is NORMAL for a woman or man to experience shame for having had sex outside of marriage – this is due to the innate sacredness of sex and the profaning it outside of marriage.
Having said that I would NEVER judge a woman/man for this.
Many blessings
“No, I thought about making that point clear, but no, not at all. It’s when you have sex PURELY for pleasure WHILE REMOVING the procreative or unative good. Think back to my eating analogy. Nothing wrong with eating for fun as long as you don’t vomit it up (on purpose of course) later. We eat for fun all the time, but we live with the consequences usually.”
Okay…I’m unclear. :D I guess I feel like you are saying that you should never have sex with your spouse unless you are open to having a child and not using any birth control. Period.
Now, if I should become pregnant, regardless of whether or not I was using birth control, would I be “open” to that life? Absolutely! And I would never look at that child as an “accident.”
Sex is for pleasure AND procreation, in my view. Otherwise, it wouldn’t be any fun. (lol)
I don’t smoke and yes – I advocate against smoking. It deprived me of my two grandfathers who smoked continuously and both died of lung cancer. I never met them here on earth.
So you think that smoking should be illegal?
When I asked you to comment on my Bodily Rights article, you ended up agreeing with SoMG, which really was no feedback at all.
No, I agreed with SoMG and elaborated by saying that I think that whatever other arguments you may make, we should not legally force another person to donate the use of their body to another.
When it comes to issues of law, advocacy and allowance are the same. You advocate when you vote, the candidate who best expresses what you want allowed. You seemed to think advocacy was exclusively promotion.
I don’t think that advocacy and allowance are the same.
advocate: http://tinyurl.com/6akwas
allow: http://tinyurl.com/6hzru8
I advocate the freedom to choose; I do not advocate all things that can be chosen.
I don’t even agree that advocating and allowing are the same in legal matters. I was just talking with someone else about this the other day. I think there is a difference between not criminalizing homosexual activity (allowing it) and supporting civil unions (advocating it). So to me, allowing women to access birth control is not the same as advocating the use of birth control, which would be more along the lines of forcing insurance companies to cover it.
Do you think people should be allowed to drop out of high school? Do you think people SHOULD drop out of high school? Do you think people should be allowed to be Hindu? Do you think people SHOULD be Hindu?
I have an observation, and I hope you receive it as it is intended, with care and concern: I’ve noticed you don’t firmly grasp the idea of inherent nature, universals and objective truth.
Well I suppose I don’t, because I don’t really see how they’re relevant to me not thinking that another woman’s use of birth control has any measurable impact on my own relationship.
I think that free will is a blessing and a curse. We can use it to hurt ourselves, or we can use it in ways that benefit us and the people around us. But in order to use it wisely, we need to have the option to use it poorly.
I have no desire to control other people’s lives.
x: Although I haven’t read all of your posts with Eileen, I’ve always found her comments to be respectful sincere and personally, I don’t think she has a mean bone in her body.
I can understand your discomfort and displeasure at times. Continuous Catholic bashing which occurred here in past drove me nuts as well. I stay away from those discussions now because that’s not the discussion I’m here for. I’m glad to hear this blog has helped you understand your husband’s’ position better. That’s a GOOD thing.
You have a good head on your shoulders, so please stick around for some good conversation and just stay away from topics you don’t want to discuss. It’s possible to do! It’s an important time in history to speak out against abortion. People will respect you for that. I do!
“I consider women to be the guardians of moral virture – a role they have largely relinquished in society today.”
Amen to that, Patricia!
“I think girls and women are having sex with men because it’s expected of them (due to the availability of contraceptives), because they see it as the only way to keep the boyfriend, and many times because they are simply coerced.”
YES. Exactly. And I am very much against the use of contraceptives by unmarried women, which naturally follows the fact that I don’t find sex outside of marriage acceptable.
“I think women have less options today than they did when I was a young women, 30 years ago. To remain chaste is now considered counter-cultural.”
It is, but you know…I think that if we could get some common sense into girls’ heads (amidst all the shouting from our culture that they should be having all the sex they can get), and if they would listen to the mistakes and experiences of the women who have already lived through, say, STDs and unplanned pregnancy, maybe they would consider chastity as the SMARTEST and most SELF-RESPECTING thing to do.
I also think that if birth control were not readily available to teenagers, they would be forced into, essentially, studying NFP. How great would THAT be? They would actually learn about their bodies and ovulation and fertility and their own cycle.
I can’t tell you HOW many young women I’ve talked to who think you can just get pregnant any ol’ time. And they have no idea about tracking their own signs of fertility. I have Catholic friends to thank for teaching me this. :D I still have my book on NFP. Taught me SO much about myself!
BTW, if you think that girls are getting teaching on how their own fertility works in school sex-ed classes, think again. I went to public school and thought I knew it all. I learned more about condoms than I learned about my own body.
Kel: 1:45: It is, but you know…I think that if we could get some common sense into girls’ heads (amidst all the shouting from our culture that they should be having all the sex they can get), and if they would listen to the mistakes and experiences of the women who have already lived through, say, STDs and unplanned pregnancy, maybe they would consider chastity as the SMARTEST and most SELF-RESPECTING thing to do.
You make such a good point about learning from women’s past experiences…..
Girls in their teens, for some reason (hormones?) don’t want to listen to their moms about relationships, sex, etc…”Mom is geeky, not cool, etc..”. They oftentimes will listen to their grandmothers. This is a perfect chance for a grandmother to make a difference in their granddaughter’s life. Of course, this can backfire if grandma’s opinions are different from the ones you want to teach your daughter, so you have to make sure you’re on the same page before arranging a meeting!
Hi Kel: yes I agree with you for the most part.
A few thoughts: I think most DOCTORS know absolutely nothing about the details of a woman’s body. In fact, I’m willing to bet that most Ob/gyn’s cannot name most of the fertility symptoms a woman experiences.
I’m glad that you have taken the time to learn about how wonderful you body is, how remarkably it has been designed! I remember doing my first chart before I was married and being in awe when I saw the symptoms and the temperature chart matching (I was using the sympto-thermal method then). It was a relief to see that everything was in “working order”!
Janet: I think if the mother is able to have a good relationship with her daughter then she CAN teach her about NFP. I’ve had a few preliminary discussions with my 16 year old – but she’s not there in maturity yet and is not for the most part interested. The time WILL come when she will be – I think it will be wonderful for me to pass on what i’ve learned and maybe get updated myself since there is much research in this area.
“A few thoughts: I think most DOCTORS know absolutely nothing about the details of a woman’s body. In fact, I’m willing to bet that most Ob/gyn’s cannot name most of the fertility symptoms a woman experiences.”
You may be right, Patricia.
Also, when my doctor put me on the pill when I got married, she never bothered to explain anything to me…not how it works or what it does. It was just “well, you seem healthy, so here’s your prescription.” It was years later, when I got wise enough to actually read about it for myself (go figure, duh!) that it did some things to my body that I didn’t care for. That’s why I stopped.
If she would’ve told me this before I got married, I probably would have looked for another option (as we got married while we were in college).
“I also think that if birth control were not readily available to teenagers, they would be forced into, essentially, studying NFP. How great would THAT be? They would actually learn about their bodies and ovulation and fertility and their own cycle.”
Kel, this is a doubtful scenario. Most likely, if birth control were not readily available to teens, most would not use the birth control at all. Those that would take the time to study NFP–wouldn’t they also care enough to go out of their way to seek birth control?
Well, obviously it’s a “doubtful scenario.”
But before birth control was so readily available, abstinence did not seem quite so counter-cultural. The idea of learning about our SELVES and not just about how to properly use condoms would be a worthwhile thing to learn, don’t you think?
The point is, young women are taught NOT to think about their own fertility or future fertility–everything is focused on the “get it now” mentality. The focus is not on knowing ourselves but about self-gratification without considering the repercussions. That was my point.
Also, when my doctor put me on the pill when I got married, she never bothered to explain anything to me…not how it works or what it does. It was just “well, you seem healthy, so here’s your prescription.” It was years later, when I got wise enough to actually read about it for myself (go figure, duh!) that it did some things to my body that I didn’t care for. That’s why I stopped.
If she would’ve told me this before I got married, I probably would have looked for another option (as we got married while we were in college).
Posted by: Kel at July 28, 2008 3:19 PM
This is done with MOST prescriptions, hence all the problems the elderly have when taking multiple medications that were never meant to be mixed together.
Ditto to your 3:54 pm post: exactly this not only are most women not taught to UNDERSTAND their bodies but also to treat them as just plain wrong.
Hence Brazil waxing, BC, plastic surgery to augment breasts just to name a few that younger women are subjecting themselves to.
Alexandra, when you choose artificial contraception you are closing yourself off to the possibility of new life — you are in effect telling your spouse: I love you but I don’t want any part of your fertility or your children. When you love unconditionally then you accept the whole person not just a part of them.
Posted by: Eileen at July 27, 2008 8:55 PM
………………………………
You have just stated a condition for love. That two people must be open to having children/more children. And of course you are wrong.
A girlfriend of mine who went to hs with me told me that she tried remaining a virgin (this was in the late 1970’s!) but that she had NO dates for several years. She decided to become sexually active and soon had many dates.
The outcome: she got pregnant outside of marriage but had her baby and gave it up for adoption.
She then resumed her sexual activity – in her words to me “Patricia, I still just didn’t get it”
She then was given the lovely gift of an incurable sexual disease after only one encounter with a new boyfriend.
It was at this point she stopped being sexually active.
Posted by: Patricia at July 27, 2008 9:00 AM
…………………………
I assume that there were condoms and various forms of BC available in the late 70’s Patricia. Not having lived in Canada at that time, I can’t say for sure. But it sounds like your friend was sloppy with protecting her health.
Well, obviously it’s a “doubtful scenario.”
But before birth control was so readily available, abstinence did not seem quite so counter-cultural. The idea of learning about our SELVES and not just about how to properly use condoms would be a worthwhile thing to learn, don’t you think?
The point is, young women are taught NOT to think about their own fertility or future fertility–everything is focused on the “get it now” mentality. The focus is not on knowing ourselves but about self-gratification without considering the repercussions. That was my point.
Posted by: Kel at July 28, 2008 3:54 PM
………………………………
When BC was not readily available women were most certainly not encouraged to understand their bodies either. The main agenda was to keep women ignorant about their naughty parts. It wasn’t that long ago that such education was considered pornographic and any educational material were illegal. Along with BC. My own mother was 13 before sex ed became legal. In her day, the word pregnant was impolite if not flat out vulgarity.
You and I are lucky we have been taught anything at all. Today’s women are lucky that they are even allowed to have their gradification considered. My grandmother would have had a heart attack if she had seen one of those KY his and hers commercials.
Sally *I* almost have a heart-attack after watching those commercials. Same with the new Viagra commercials. Why in the world would I want to know their names?
Most women don’t enjoy being thought of as a sexual commodity.
Yeah, well why are they on BC. I can’t think of a single other action that would possibly commodify women then having them take a pill which makes them sterile and therefore sexually available all the time!
………………………………………
People use BC to avoid pregnancy and disease. Consentual sex in and of itself is not selling anything to anyone. Holding out for anticipated financial and/or emotional security is sex for profit.
“People use BC to avoid pregnancy and disease.”
BC only protects you against pregnancy not sexually transmitted diseases.
“You have just stated a condition for love. That two people must be open to having children/more children. And of course you are wrong.”
Posted by: Sally at July 28, 2008 4:47 PM
Why do you think that I am wrong?
“People use BC to avoid pregnancy and disease.”
BC only protects you against pregnancy not sexually transmitted diseases.
“You have just stated a condition for love. That two people must be open to having children/more children. And of course you are wrong.”
Posted by: Sally at July 28, 2008 4:47 PM
Why do you think that I am wrong?
Posted by: Anonymous at July 28, 2008 7:13 PM
SORRY!! forgot to type my name again
People use BC to avoid pregnancy and disease.”
BC only protects you against pregnancy not sexually transmitted diseases.
“You have just stated a condition for love. That two people must be open to having children/more children. And of course you are wrong.”
Posted by: Sally at July 28, 2008 4:47 PM
Why do you think that I am wrong?
Posted by: Anonymous at July 28, 2008 7:13 PM
SORRY!! forgot to type my name again
Posted by: Eileen at July 28, 2008 7:24 PM
……………………..
I have the same problem with the name thing. Actually, sometimes I type it in and it still doesn’t appear. Puters!
Well, Eileen, setting conditions for unconditional love is contradictary. Either love is without condition or it is not. Therefore your premise would be wrong/nonsensical.
Obviously you believe that love must meet your criteria to be love. That is conditional love. Conditional upon your approval.
“People use BC to avoid pregnancy and disease.”
BC only protects you against pregnancy not sexually transmitted diseases.
……………………..
Sorry Eileen! I forgot this part. Condoms can prevent many a sexually transmitted disease. Condoms are birth control as well. Probably the first form. I read that Casanova used them. Made out of sheep gut or something, but you get the idea.
No, Sally, love is self-giving to the point of wanting the good of the other to the exclusion of yourself. It is an act of the will, not warm fuzzy feelings. Nice feelings are sometimes a result but they are not the definition of love. When a man and woman give themselves to each other without reservation or condition, as opposed to the practice of artificial contraception where they are withholding their fertility from each other, they are practicing unconditional love. Their love gives rise to spiritual fecundity even if it may not at that time give rise to material fecundity ( a new human being).
Sally *I* almost have a heart-attack after watching those commercials. Same with the new Viagra commercials. Why in the world would I want to know their names?
Posted by: lauren at July 28, 2008 5:42 PM
………………………
Really? I don’t know the name thing reference. Sorry. But I’m quite intrigued by the KY stuff. I just wonder if it is hypoallergenic.
Are you ashamed of sexuality Lauren?
Well, Eileen, setting conditions for unconditional love is contradictary. Either love is without condition or it is not. Therefore your premise would be wrong/nonsensical.
Obviously you believe that love must meet your criteria to be love. That is conditional love. Conditional upon your approval.
Posted by: Sally at July 28, 2008 7:41 PM
…………………………………..
No, Sally, love is self-giving to the point of wanting the good of the other to the exclusion of yourself. It is an act of the will, not warm fuzzy feelings. Nice feelings are sometimes a result but they are not the definition of love. When a man and woman give themselves to each other without reservation or condition, as opposed to the practice of artificial contraception where they are withholding their fertility from each other, they are practicing unconditional love. Their love gives rise to spiritual fecundity even if it may not at that time give rise to material fecundity ( a new human being).
Posted by: Eileen at July 28, 2008 8:04 PM
…………………….
Eileen, you continue to state your conditions for unconditional love. And those conditions seem to be based on fairy tales and romance novels.
Posted by: Anonymous at July 28, 2008 8:35 PM
………………….
Yes Anon police. That was me. : )
Eileen, you continue to state your conditions for unconditional love. And those conditions seem to be based on fairy tales and romance novels.
Posted by: Anonymous at July 28, 2008 8:35 PM
I never said that there will never be difficulties or unhappy times but those who love unconditionally have a better chance at overcoming those things.
“When BC was not readily available women were most certainly not encouraged to understand their bodies either.”
Oh, I have no doubt of this. I just don’t believe that we’ve progressed very much in this department. Women STILL don’t know how their own bodies naturally work, and the Pill, for instance, doesn’t really help in that regard.
“The main agenda was to keep women ignorant about their naughty parts.”
LOL- “naughty parts.” Yeah, I have no doubt about that. And I’m very thankful that *some* progress has been made in this area, but it’s not enough. We’re still in the dark about a lot of things. Many women I’ve talked to don’t really even realize that they have withdrawal bleeding while on birth control and not their own actual “period.” I’m talking about young women here–age 20 to 30. It’s really pretty shocking. With all the sex ed in schools, you’d think they’d have been taught about this, but no. It seems teaching them how to stick the condom on the banana is more time-worthy.
“It wasn’t that long ago that such education was considered pornographic and any educational material were illegal. Along with BC. My own mother was 13 before sex ed became legal. In her day, the word pregnant was impolite if not flat out vulgarity.
You and I are lucky we have been taught anything at all.”
Yes, terms like “expecting” were probably more likely, I’m guessing. Thank goodness we don’t look at pregnant women anymore as invalids who need to be secluded from society for months so that no one will know how babies actually get here! :D
I assume that there were condoms and various forms of BC available in the late 70’s Patricia. Not having lived in Canada at that time, I can’t say for sure. But it sounds like your friend was sloppy with protecting her health.
Posted by: Sally at July 28, 2008 5:02 PM
This implies that these methods would have prevented pregnancy and disease – yet this is NOT always the case Sally. I think you know this. There are many many women who get pregnant while using the pill or condoms. And condoms do not prevent STI from being transmitted.
Eileen, you continue to state your conditions for unconditional love. And those conditions seem to be based on fairy tales and romance novels.
Posted by: Anonymous at July 28, 2008 8:35 PM
I never said that there will never be difficulties or unhappy times but those who love unconditionally have a better chance at overcoming those things.
Posted by: Eileen at July 28, 2008 8:43 PM
………………………
Yes yes got your meaning Eileen. Anyone that would wish to be loved by you must abide by your conditions. You couldn’t make that much clearer.
How is that working for you?
I assume that there were condoms and various forms of BC available in the late 70’s Patricia. Not having lived in Canada at that time, I can’t say for sure. But it sounds like your friend was sloppy with protecting her health.
Posted by: Sally at July 28, 2008 5:02 PM
This implies that these methods would have prevented pregnancy and disease – yet this is NOT always the case Sally. I think you know this. There are many many women who get pregnant while using the pill or condoms. And condoms do not prevent STI from being transmitted.
Posted by: Patricia at July 28, 2008 9:12 PM
………………
Really? Condoms do not prevent STI’s or STD’s? I think that you know better.
http://www.cdc.gov/condomeffectiveness/latex.htm
The jury still appears to be out about that, Anon (Sally?).
In the boxes, the CDC says that condoms do help to prevent the spread of STDs, but if you continue to read, they later admit that some studies have shown little protection against some STDs and that more research is needed on condoms’ effectiveness in STDs other than HIV. For HIV, they appear to be a good preventative when properly used.
They’ve also stated that in skin-to-skin transmission, all lesions must be covered by the condom in order to decrease the risk of possible infection.
I have no desire to control other people’s lives.
Posted by: Alexandra at July 28, 2008 1:37 PM
———
Your continuing advocation of abortion on this board provides ample counter evidence to such statements.
There can be no greater control over someone’s life than the taking of it – and abortion undeniably takes a life.
You defend legal control for the strong and the powerful – the mother to kill the weak and defenseless – her own unborn.
You dress discrimination and intentional killing up in clothes of freewill, personal choice, and bodily rights that attacks the very essence of human life itself.
So when you say you have no desire to control other people’s lives Alexandra – that’s a flat out lie.
If you lie to me, I can forgive you.
But if you lie to yourself…will you forgive yourself?
Let’s take your argument, then — though I would be interested to know your response to the rest of what I wrote — and assume that my lack of desire to criminalize abortion means that I desire to control other people. (Which is not something I agree with, but I’ll use it as a given.)
I desire to control people who are living within my own body. You apparently desire to control people who live hundreds of miles away from you, people whose lives will never intersect with yours. Which person do you think has more grounds for wanting to control another?
I am really, really not interested in making this about abortion. I have had the abortion conversation 500,000 times, and will probably have it thousands more. I really want to know why I am incapable of unconditional love because I accept that other people may make different choices than I do.
“Why do you want another child. You must be very brave! Don’t you have a TV?”
:: laughing ::
Dang, Patricia….
Haha, seriously, Doug. I’d be like, “We’re going green and saving electricity.”
Or, “Well, when the second kid came we couldn’t afford cable anymore, and you know network TV is just so boring. How many cities can CSI go to anyway?”
Really? Condoms do not prevent STI’s or STD’s? I think that you know better.
Posted by: Anonymous at July 29, 2008 12:20 AM
Explain how condoms prevent herpes or veneral warts, dear?
Sally, not at all, I just don’t want to know about the way “Mike” responds to “Nancy” or the fact that the “Jones” family sneaks in quickies when their kids are out of the house!
I think t hat sex should be something private and not something to be discussed casually in commercials. While I will on occassion, discuss certain sexual issues with close friends, I would never dream of airing it to the entire world.
“Yes yes got your meaning Eileen. Anyone that would wish to be loved by you must abide by your conditions. You couldn’t make that much clearer.
How is that working for you?”
Posted by: Sally at July 29, 2008 12:06 AM
(I comprehend the intended sarcasm, Sally but I will go ahead and answer you.)
Actually Sally, I have to make efforts just about everyday and I am aware and appreciate the efforts my husband makes also. We are trying to teach and instill it in our little girl too. Mother Teresa said, “It isn’t important that we are successful but that we are faithful.” So, do I love perfectly everyday? No, but I am trying and with God’s grace I will get somewhere.
Exactly what conditions am I placing on love? If you are referring to “openness to life” that is something that proceeds from unconditonal love not a condition of love. What is your definition of unconditional love?