Editor’s note: A version of this article was published by The Christian Post. To read it, please click here.
Birth control is a touchy subject that Evangelicals find extremely difficult to discuss. But as the President’s health care mandate officially launches and its oppressive contraception enforcements are questioned, some Evangelicals are reconsidering their embrace of oral contraception, or what is commonly referred to as the Pill.
Evangelical leaders like Dr. Albert Mohler who question the morality of contraception are garnering criticism from the Religious Left. Hurling accusations of sexism and selfishness, Georgetown student and Jim Wallis’ teacher’s assistant, Jacob Lupfer, penned the Washington Post op-ed “The Evangelical Unease Over Contraception.” His article claims that Evangelical leaders are denouncing contraception for purely biased theological and political ends. The problem with his argument is that it leaves Evangelical women with a disingenuous, if not intentionally deceptive, portrayal of the Pill’s moral, social, and physical costs.
To start, Lupfer does exactly what he criticizes his white male “fundamentalist” counterparts of doing. He, a white man, gallops to the forefront of a woman’s issue without regard for the overall welfare of women. Lupfer rebuts his conservative counterparts by writing, “contraception has had profound consequences. But safe, effective contraception has given thoughtful, faithful people the liberty and autonomy to ensure that their children are welcome, wanted and able to be cared for.”
But these “profound consequences” glossed over by the author are exactly what have some Evangelical leaders rethinking their promotion of the Pill.
Here’s why.
Church leaders have to confront the morality of the Pill because they have to deal with human sexuality. We cannot condemn the gay lifestyle, adultery, premarital sex or pornography based on their sinful implications and yet ignore the equally dangerous effects of contraception. To do so is hypocritical.
Renowned pro-life advocate and Vice President for Government Relations at the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, Wendy Wright, expressed, “Evangelicals need to be consistent – and think deeply – regarding abortion, birth control and children. To do what Catholics have done, get to the spiritual root, not simplistically reject the issue as ‘Catholic’ but instead consider what the Bible as well as science have to say.”
Evangelical leaders who chastise the Pill do not do so in a selfish pursuit to fill their pews with future congregants, as Lupfer asserts. Instead, they are recognizing how abuse of the Pill directly conflicts with God’s very first commandment given to man: “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.” (Gen. 1:28)
The principle behind this passage declares family a vital part of humanity. Yet, we see the priority of family dissipating as society tells women that her value is based upon her job title, pay check, and body image. Evangelical women and men need to think critically before embracing contraception for the sake of a carefree lifestyle. This is what Evangelical leader Dr. Mohler acknowledged when he wrote, “We must start with a rejection of the contraceptive mentality that sees pregnancy and children as impositions…This contraceptive mentality is an insidious attack upon God’s glory in creation, and the Creator’s gift of procreation to the married couple.”
Religious Leftists like Lupfer are reminiscent of second-wave feminists. Like secular feminists, who are bent on “liberating” women from their supposed oppressive roles of mother and wife, those on the Religious Left also refuse to acknowledge the consequences the Pill has on women’s status, health and safety.
The Pill is responsible for birthing the sexual revolution, which altered society’s moral standards and diminished women’s value by men. Mary Eberstadt, author of Adam and Eve After the Pill, explained that the sexual “revolution” destigmatized and demystified birth control, making it easier for money-hungry businessmen to objectify women’s once-cherished sexuality. Soon our photo-shopped bodies were plastered on the front pages of Cosmopolitan and Hustler, pornography became a $10 billion-dollar industry, emergency contraception became a sex trafficker’s best friend and out the door went men’s accountability. If this is liberation, then no thank you.
Liberation theologians and feminists should be furious over the implications of the Pill, and yet they continue to rally for it, even when women’s physical health is jeopardized.
Most recently 150 women filed complaints against Essure birth controls, reported ABC News. One woman shared her reaction to the drug stating, “Every time I would sit down, I would feel like something was poking my stomach. I would feel horrible, horrible pain.” Additionally, the National Cancer Institute acknowledged the Pill increases women’s chances of breast, cervical, and liver cancer. YAZ, one of the most popular oral contraceptives used by women, has a long list of harmful side-effects including gallbladder disease, vaginal infections, abdominal cramps, headache, nervousness, and irregular vaginal bleeding.
More and more Evangelical leaders will start to reexamine the Pill’s moral, societal and physical effects, as Lupfer predicts. But to do so by thinking critically and employing God-given common sense is neither sexist nor selfish. Such a quest by Evangelical leaders would demonstrate a heart-felt concern for truth, social justice, women’s health, equality, and most importantly, obedience to God’s Word.
Comment by Marco Bell on January 9, 2014 at 10:14 am
When God proclaimed, “…Be fruitful and multiply…” the planet didn’t host as many people as it does today, so the impact on our natural reserves weren’t in jeopardy of being depleted solely by Man and his descendants.
The argument for Evangelicals to seriously consider the impact of the Pill on society will be solved by only Evangelicals reproducing at a rate that is greater than non-evangelicals. Problem solved for the religious set!
Meanwhile, the rest of society at least have a choice regarding reproduction.
Comment by Donnie on January 9, 2014 at 5:59 pm
Out of curiosity, Marco, can you name a single positive outcome from the so-called “sexual revolution”?
Comment by Denny on January 9, 2014 at 8:56 pm
That question and the premise behind it is so flawed that the answer is irrelevant. First of all, the “sexual revolution” was spurred as much by the society that fostered it as it was by any form of contraception. Condoms have been around for quite a long time in case you were unaware. Correlation does not equal causality. More importantly, to suggest that mid-20th century America is the first society to experience a general sexual liberation and partake in activities such as promiscuous sex and pornography shows an utter lack of historical knowledge. I’m not making any judgement one way or the other, strictly pointing out the erroneous rationale behind your question and pretty much this entire article.
Comment by Marco Bell on January 11, 2014 at 2:25 pm
Donnie,
If I’m to borrow some of the logic from Chelsen Vicari’s article, I would have to take issue with her conclusion that the Pill gave birth to the Sexual Revolution.
Feminism (of which I like to claim to be a card-carrying member), was on the rise before the Suffragist movement of the early twentieth century, so maybe the Pill simply helped it along?
It is my opinion that women gained the ground that was denied them, when the Pill became widely available.
With reduced fear of pregnancy after having sex, (male-female), this gave society a chance to stave off the population boom which was quickly becoming a serious global problem, and it also empowered women to take control over their bodies.
Something that even today, is being fought against by MEN in power.
This, and many more reasons are what I think was good about the Sexual Revolution.
Please, let women decide for themselves what they wish to do with their bodies!
Comment by Didaskalos on January 10, 2014 at 5:36 am
Warren Cole Smith writes: “Approaching demographic winter. About half the countries of the world—now including the United States—have a fertility rate below the replacement level of 2.1. [ Source: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2127rank.html ] America’s population likely will continue to grow for the foreseeable future because of immigration and longer life spans, but population growth probably won’t continue unless something changes. A shrinking population—after 200 years of growth—will create enormous social and economic disruption. These disruptions are already making themselves felt in some European countries. If current trends continue, the centuries-long rise in global population will top out within the next 30 years or so and we’ll see a gradual reduction in worldwide population. Of course, predicting 100 years into the future is something of a fool’s errand. But demographic predictions 30 to 50 years into the future are remarkably reliable, since the factors that determine population in the near- to medium-term were fixed years ago.”
Comment by Bryan on January 9, 2014 at 1:00 pm
First the belief in using pill to stop over population is an ignorant argument. By that view we as a society should then stop food and medical aid to countries with high starvation and death from deseases. We should also not allow patients to be on life support. Christian view on contraception is based on basic commandments given to us by God. Honor your mother and father: I do not know any parent that tells their child starting age 11 or 12 ” have fun with your boy or girlfriend and give them sex if it makes you happy”. Parents I know of continue to tell their children into adulthood not to engage in premarital sex, as it is complicates their future when it happens outside marriage. Do not commit adultery, society feels that it only applies if your married. Webster dictionary defines as having sexual relations with someone outside of marriage. We have lost the full meaning which means anyone we have sex with through our lives that we are not married to, is adultery. Tho shalt not kill: medication given to stop, destroy, or alter the birth of a child that was conceived by breaking God’s laws in first place should not be given just to condone the sin by trying to cover it up.
Comment by Marco Bell on January 11, 2014 at 2:03 pm
Bryan,
I can think of several female friends of mine over the last forty-five years that have “controlled” their reproduction rate by using the pill.
Multiply that fact, by the millions who use oral contraception, and I think you’ll find that your argument isn’t sound.
We all hear parents of newly married couples proclaim: to ‘give’ them grandchildren. This is just a natural want to satisfy familial egos, as well as to extend the lineage of a particular gene pool.
I can remember during the sixties, the concern for global overpopulation being front-page news. It became apparent to me early on, that this was a serious matter, but I also noticed how many religious families were filling over-sized vans with their cargo of offspring. Still today, it seems that ego, drives many to reproduce. This, and the attitude of “Better to make more of ‘US’ than ‘THEM’ “, will only end when the planet sees a collapse in it’s resources.
I couldn’t imagine a God that would want such devastation for His creation(s)!
BTW, my parents gave both my brother, and sisters (and me) the same speech about sex. And that was to be careful to avoid all the possible outcomes of any sexual activity. At that time it was prioritized as: Pregnancy, and STD’s.
Sex was part of the experience of being human , and we weren’t made to feel shameful, like so many other folks were, just for being human.
You are absolutely right. Life is complicated!
Comment by Oskar Warner on January 9, 2014 at 6:53 pm
I fear that the Roman-Catholic influence is, as usual, not the best. If you read the Song of songs many of the mentioned fruits were considered contraception ítem in Solomon´s time. In other words, the “peru u rebú” (grow and multiply) commandment was not against contraception and, to be sincere, do you really believe that Roman-Catholics are obedient to this view? Spain and other Roman-Catholic countries have a ridiculous growth rate in comparison to Germany or the States. Please, do not be entangled in the Roman-Catholic agenda…
Comment by Holly on January 17, 2014 at 12:36 am
I love this article Chelsen. Thank you for writing some important truths. I’m a strong conservative woman, too, and I agree with you. Theological conservatives don’t really have a leg to stand on when it comes to arguing against many societal issues if they refuse to consider the effects of their stance regarding contraception. Integrity and cohesive theology means considering how marriage is supposed to be co-creative in nature. We must also consider how the two-genders represent the Image of God (and how intimacy in marriage is the putting back together of that Image which was split in the Garden) and the natural fruitfulness which is so beautifully and symbolically displayed (ideally) in marriage. We must use the full imagery of scripture, from beginning to end – not only in a few texts but in every genre and every image from Genesis to Revelation. Lassaiz-faire and unthinking use of contraception is the chink in our conservative theological armor.
I am glad that Dr. Mohler has been speaking about this, and I am glad that you are too.