Contra-Contraception

[Pangloss62]

There was a really interesting article in the NYT Magazine yesterday. It's an overview of the dogmatic philosophy of a growing number of "Contra-Contraceptionists." Their main target is the abortion pill, but actually it's ANY contraception that worries them.

Their main concern is about what they see as the immorality of interrupting the natural cycle of life that begins after fertilization and implantation of the female egg. From a strictly physiological perspective, this would seemingly allow for both cunnilingus and fellatio, and even anal intercourse, especially since these anticontraceptionists have not gone as far as invoking Life of Brian's "Every Sperm is Sacred" argument; though I would not be surprised if they do believe this. If they did go forward with that idea, the phenomenon of the nocturnal emission would then have to be addressed. Can it be immoral to simply dream of having sex? "Only if you actually ejaculate" I can hear them say. It's a slippery (and sticky) slope indeed.

What they really believe, but rarely come out and say, is that sexual pleasure (especially orgasm), in and of itself, is wrong if it does not occur between a married Christian man and Christian woman in a simultaneous prayer-like homage to the potential life that "might" occur as a result of their missionary coitus. Sexual pleasure, as opposed to, say, getting a back rub, or relaxing in a bath tub, is to be avoided entirely. And even the pleasure that occurs between the couple as described above must be subservient to the Christian miracle of life (even if fertilization and implantation do not occur).

Does anyone agree with this?