Posts

Showing posts with the label contraceptives

Contra Jacoby's Apologists

It has been a while since I posted my reply to Douglas Jacoby's short outline on contraception. I shortly received feedback, which I did request, but elsewhere, and not directly here, though I would appreciate it if it were posted on my blog. I didn't immediately respond, since I was busy with other things, like getting a girlfriend. A much wiser use of my time I think. Anyways, I'm finally getting around to responding to what the members of the ICOC have said in response to my response . 

Contra Jacoby

A friend from the ICOC has forwarded this link from one of his (very few) teachers. I haven't talked about the issue much, so I suppose this will be a good brushing up. Douglas Jacoby thinks it is permissible to use contraception. Let me begin by saying that I haven't listened to the podcast, but I read through his notes (it's faster to read than to listen). I will assume there isn't much left out, or at least, nothing important left out, so my response should suffice.  So, the relevant portion of scripture here is Genesis 38. Jacoby claims that the reason that God killed Onan was because of his failure to fulfill his duty. I have written about this particular interpretation , so I will just copy the relevant portion. 

Natural Law, Theology and Contraceptives

It started with marriage. I love debates, and one of the debates that brings light with its heat is the same-sex marriage debate. I'm a Christian, so my position is already determined for me theologically, yet when discussing with non-believers, starting with this presupposition is not adequate. So I thought to myself, how can I go about making such an argument against same-sex marriage? I read around, looked at some articles, some in books, some in magazines, and some online. I took what I thought were good points and meshed them into a general worldview. I also considered criticisms and I constructed my view with those in mind to sidestep some pitfalls. So what you see was that product of all that. Basically, what I came up with was this (as far as I know, my syllogism is original):