Henry Blodget, editor and chief of “Business Insider” decided today to write a letter to the Catholic church. In it he was condemning them for belief and practice that their birth control edict is “ridiculous” and outdated. I would advise Henry to keep pondering business statistics and stay away from theological interests.
Mr. Blodget says:
Our current betting is that Obama will cave and allow Catholic organizations to buy insurance that does not cover birth control—which some Catholic leaders still apparently, ludicrously, say is a sin.
Read the entire article here.
There is good reason why the church practices and adheres to Humnae Vitae . Humanae Vitae reflects the sexuality of the individual not the animalistic responses of the libido. There is a difference. You should also note that the Health Insurance law does not only affect Catholics but a multitude of Protestant denominations as well. This is neither a democratic nor republican issue in nature. This is a matter of freedom of religion. But, since you wish to question why the Catholics believe and practice I will give you the background. First, it is not about re-populating our pews. We do not charge per head, nor ask you to tithe. It is not a business my friend. The myth that money mysteriously appears and re-appears for papal use is nonsense! It does not run that way. It hasn’t run that way since the Borgias.
Make sure to read: Our History Makers: Bill Russell
What your readers disrespectfully refer to as the “rhythm & blues” method is called Natural Family Planning. Statistically, NFP is as effective as hormonal contraceptives like the pill and couples with truly serious reasons to avoid pregnancy almost never become pregnant while using NFP. There is, however, a tremendous difference in the level of responsibility NFP users must assume.
|Contraceptive Method||Failure Rate in Preventing Pregnancies (pregnancies per 100 users per year)||Protection Against STDs|
|Depo Provera Injection||3% with typical use1||None|
|Patch (Ortho Evra)||8%2||None|
|Vaginal Ring (Nuva Ring)||8%2||None|
|Mini-pills (progestin-only pills)||8% with typical use1||None|
|IUD (dependent upon type of IUD)||1.8%2||None|
|Birth Control Pills||8% with typical use1||None|
|Condom: Male||15% with typical use1||85% protection against HIV/AIDs, some protection from other STDs3|
|Condom: Female||21% with typical use1||Some protection|
(Women who have not delivered vaginally)
|16% with typical use in women who have not delivered vaginally1||None|
|Reality Sponge (women with no children||16%2||None|
|Reality Sponge (women with children)||32%2||None|
|Diaphram||16% with typical use1||None|
(Women who have delivered vaginally)
|32% with typical use in women who have delivered vaginally1||None|
Secondly, we like many christians follow the bible. It is the basic tenet of our belief. Though we don’t find the word abortion mentioned in any biblical text, we can deduce from Scripture, not to mention natural law, reason, Church teaching, and patristic witness that abortion is intrinsically evil. On abortion, consider these Scripture passages: Job 10:8, Psalms 22:9-10, Psalms 139:13-15, Isaiah 44:2, and Luke 1:41.
- Genesis 16:11: Behold, said he, thou art with child, and thou shalt bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name Ismael, because the Lord hath heard thy affliction.
- Genesis 25:21-22: And Isaac besought the Lord for his wife, because she was barren: and he heard him, and made Rebecca to conceive. But the children struggled in her womb…
- Hosea 12:3: In the womb he supplanted his brother, and as a man he contended with God.
- Romans 9:10-11: But when Rebecca also had conceived at once of Isaac our father. For when the children were not yet born, nor had done any good or evil (that the purpose of God according to election might stand) . . .
The truth that these verses tell is that life begins at conception. Rebekah conceived a child—not what would be or could be a child. Note James 2:26: “. . . a body apart from the spirit is dead. . .” Since the soul is the principle which gives life to the body, then a child carried in the womb of its mother has a soul because it is alive. To kill it is murder.
Finally, the idea that “population” is irresponsible is mythic beliefs that came to be in the 1960’s and 1970’s.
The world, indeed, has a lot of people. By the end of 2011, it was estimated that there were nearly 7 billion people living on the planet. But population growth rates will not sustain at those levels. An analysis by The Economist describes how each subsequent billion will take longer and longer to achieve, until population growth eventually plateaus at around 9 billion people by 2050.
A 2003 assessment by the United Nations concurs. The UN projects, under its medium-growth scenario, that the human population will remain relatively stable at 9 billion until the year 2300. The reason is that birth rates are naturally falling around the world. The current growth in world population exceeds the replacement rate of 2.1 births per woman, but there are good reasons to believe that growth will slow down in the future. As countries become more technologically and economically advanced, people naturally choose to have fewer children. Also, there is a link between increasing female education and a declining birth rate. Research shows that families around the world, particularly in Asia, selectively abort female infants. This “gendercide” distorts natural male-female ratios in the population. In some provinces in China, the ratio is perversely skewed in favor of boys, with 130 male births for every 100 female births. Obviously, this will have dire consequences for society.
While I appreciate your right to have an opinion, I wish more people would take time to actually understand the reason why people of Faith deplore the new insurance law. It is not because we are uneducated, socially immature individuals. It is because we reserve the right to practice and live our faiths according to our tenet beliefs. That Mr. Blodget is why Catholics, Baptists, Episcopalians and Evangelicals are up in arms with this law.
Notes:1Consumer Reports, Condoms and Contraception, February 2005.
2Trussel J. Contraceptive Efficacy. In Hatcher RA, Trussell J, Stewart F, Nelson A, Cates W, Guest F, Kowal D. Contraceptive Technology: 18th Revised Edition. New York NY: Ardent Media, 2004.