At 08:44 AM 8/6/01 -0500 Marvin Long, Jr. wrote:
>Maybe I'm nitpicking, but exploiting that cycle for the purpose of
>reducing family size doesn't strike me as "natural." It's a byproduct of
>a certain combination of culture, wealth, and science that makes it
>possible to set aside the goal of maximum fecundity for the sake of
>increasing personal ease and stability. Yes, the menstrual cycle is
>natural, but all the stuff we do to cope with it is no more "natural" than
>any other human activity. (
Its natural to the extent that you believed that God intended for women to
be naturally fertile and infertile at regular intervals throughout a given
month, and that this is the only process that does not change this cycle.
(i.e. using a condom continuously effectively makes a woman continuously
infertile.) If you don't believe that there is anything inherently
natural or God-intended about this cycle, then it is completely reasonable
that you would look at it differently.
>(Eg. blow jobs, clam lapping, dry humping....) *
Actually, all of the above would be contraception by the Catholic Church,
since they are being used as a way of achieving orgasm with the complete
intent of not engaging in sexual intercourse. Thus, the Church would
consider them sinful..... I wasn't sure if you were clear on that based on
your final comment.
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
We are products of the same history, reaching from Jerusalem and
Athens to Warsaw and Washington. We share more than an alliance.
We share a civilization. - George W. Bush, Warsaw, 06/15/01
