Originally Posted by bczmama
"I find it interesting that contraception was supposed to expand choices for everyone -- but it seems like it actually makes some feel more constricted. We now "have the choice" to control family size -- but it can feel more like a mandate to those of us who choose not to take control, and to let God decide."
This was what wasn't ringing true to me, since the choice to abstain (I thought) was and is a legitimate option for anti-contraceptive families.
How does what I said "not ring true?" Abstinence is certainly an option, if anyone wants to go that route. But what does that have to do with what I said? Some of us choose not
to control family size -- and your comment seems to simply be another criticism of this choice.
Abstinence may not technically be contraception, but it's still a means of controlling family size, is it not? It's theoretically an "option" (as are bc pills, depo-shots, condoms, and the like), but it would be hard on many marriages. That's why I call it a "theoretical" option, because I don't think many couples would see it as viable.
Again, I don't see what that has to do with what I said. I was referring to how the advent of more effective contraceptive methods was supposed to "free" women. Now it almost sounds like you're saying, "If you don't want to contracept, maybe you should quit having sex."
No, you didn't literally say that. But if that's not what you meant, what did you mean?