Talk:Religion and birth control

Catholic Church set to change its views on condom use
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/pope/story/0,,1954759,00.html?gusrc=rs s&feed=1 Here] is a Guardian story outlining how in cases where AIDS or HIV is likely to be spread within a male-female marriage, the Pope is looking likely to condone it. As it is something in progress, however, it does not necessarily need to be included in the article as of yet; you should just be aware of its existence. Seegoon 13:56, 23 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I have added the info to the main article at Christian_views_on_contraception. CyberAnth 19:54, 23 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but in recent times, Pope Benedict explicitly denounced the use of condoms for AIDS-related purposes. ADM (talk) 07:40, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Catholic Church Contraception line. "This belief dates back to the first centuries of Christianity". Does it? I think not and the link to this wild assertion is missing --195.171.4.220 (talk) 15:31, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Recent reverted edit by User:64.25.129.90
I reverted the following edit to the end of the Roman Catholicism section: "It is said, however, that the Church is not a democracy and She will not change her beliefs simply because the populace does not accept them." This might be true, but it is 1. original research, 2. not cited, and 3. POV. I actually happen to agree with the sentiment expressed, but it is unencyclopedic, and really not necessary. Time will tell. I believe it is true that the church will not change its (her?) stance on condom use, but making that prediction based on your own observations not only does not contribute constructively to the article, but it will be known in time, anyway, when no such change occurs. Peace in Christ! MamaGeek (talk/contrib) 12:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Protestant View; Evangelical View
It would appear that the section on the Protestant view focuses only on American Evangelical or American Fundamentalist opinion. Also the terms used are being presented as authoritative and by extension (due to their presence here) somewhat academic, when they are neither Rotovia (talk) 12:07, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Contraception within marriage
Although it does seem improbable today that married people would be among the most likely to use contraception, when Humanae Vitae was written, the question of contraception among married men and women was especially acute. Since the 1968 encyclical is still the official position of the Church, it would still be relevant to indicate that the Church opposes contraception even within marriage. ADM (talk) 07:50, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Iran/Shia
1- In Iran, a Shia Islamic country, contraceptive methods are not only taught to married couples, but also encouraged to youngsters through posters and advertisements There are no citations for it, since 2007 (asking for citation @ 2007). In Iran contraceptive methods are taught to married couples, but there are no posters or advertisements for youngsters, and -as I've seen in the newspapers- Pictorial advertisement is even prohibited.

2- Sunni and Shia jurists, employing the legal principle of reasoning by analogy (qiyas), ... This sentence is wrong, as analogy is NOT accepted in Shia islam, as seen in analogy. --188.75.81.21 (talk) 08:26, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Religion and birth control. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051005212052/https://www.family.org/cforum/fosi/abstinence/ to http://www.family.org/cforum/fosi/abstinence/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 21:03, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 one external links on Religion and birth control. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060502135608/http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.22740,filter.all/pub_detail.asp to http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.22740,filter.all/pub_detail.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051001144025/http://www.familylife.com:80/fltoday/default.asp?id=5868&page=72&search=&strMonth=&strDay=&strYear=&guests=&keywords=&showType= to http://www.familylife.com/fltoday/default.asp?id=5868&page=72&search=&strMonth=&strDay=&strYear=&guests=&keywords=&showType=
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100209103633/http://www.islamonline.net:80/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503544224 to http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503544224
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070503060413/http://www.abortion.org.au:80/banpill.htm to http://www.abortion.org.au/banpill.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 09:50, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Religion and birth control. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5xI2Wz6n5?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vatican.va%2Fholy_father%2Fpaul_vi%2Fencyclicals%2Fdocuments%2Fhf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141027062117/http://www.vatican.va:80/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/family/documents/rc_pc_family_doc_12021997_vademecum_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/family/documents/rc_pc_family_doc_12021997_vademecum_en.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.catholic-legate.com/articles/winnipeg.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:24, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: JMC 440 Research Methods in Public Relations
— Assignment last updated by Selfrink (talk) 03:09, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

amoris laetitia
1) We have too many primary material (and it doesn't mention birth control) and not enough secondary.

2) We only include quotes from the introduction (and they don't mention birth control), so they could be applicable to all or some teachings later in the document.

3) We leave out quotes that do mention birth control (probably because they are vague and can be read either way):

paragraph 41: "The development of bio-technology has also had a major impact on the birth rate”.18 Added to this are other factors such as “industrialization, the sexual revolution, the fear of overpopulation and economic problems… Consumerism may also deter people from having children, simply so they can maintain a certain freedom and life-style”.19 The upright consciences of spouses who have been generous in transmitting life may lead them, for sufficiently serious reasons, to limit the number of their children, yet precisely “for the sake of this dignity of conscience, the Church strongly rejects the forced State intervention in favour of contraception, sterilization and even abortion”.20 Such measures are unacceptable even in places with high birth rates, yet also in countries with disturbingly low birth rates we see politicians encouraging them. As the bishops of Korea have said, this is “to act in a way that is self-contradictory and to neglect one’s duty”.21

Why is this vague: it doesn't exclude natural family planning so "he upright consciences of spouses who have been generous in transmitting life may lead them, for sufficiently serious reasons, to limit the number of their children" can be read either way.

It seems to be talking about forced contraception but also about encouraging contraception and the reference to the bishops of Korea is strange.

paragraph 82: "The Church’s teaching is meant to “help couples to experience in a complete, harmonious and conscious way their communion as husband and wife, together with their responsibility for procreating life. We need to return to the message of the Encyclical Humanae Vitae of Blessed Pope Paul VI, which highlights the need to respect the dignity of the person in morally assessing methods of regulating birth…" The tripple points are in the text, and what he is saying here is unclear. 2A02:1810:BC3A:D800:CD79:D26A:27B9:A5B7 (talk) 11:45, 30 August 2023 (UTC)