Immorality behind contraception

By Lawrence Abello

On college campuses there is often an outcry by students clamoring for the distribution of condoms. This raises two issues: the issue of premarital sex, and the issue of contraception.

Premarital sex does not enhance a loving relationship -- it, instead, develops the divorce mentality. The partners say to each other, "I'll be faithful if you please me." They have not pledged their lives in as sacred and social a manner as possible, and have not yet closed the doors to another sex partner.

Any narcissistic use of sex is unloving and addictive, which is clear both experientially and scientifically. The difference between a sexual dream and, say, masturbation illustrates this. In a sexual dream, the attention is on the dream, not on a narcissistic high of pleasure. The endorphin hormone released by the pituitary gland to stimulate the body is normal in its molecules, and is discharged from the body after the dream.

In sharp contrast, masturbation is a narcissistic act in which the person is in a self-centered high of pleasure, and the endorphin is of an abnormal type that is retained by the body. Hence, any narcissistic act of sex, such as masturbation, is addictive in two ways: the person wants to return, again and again, to the psychedelic effect, and the body becomes chemically dependent on the false endorphin.

There are only two uses of sex that are not narcissistic: the sexual dream, and the proper use of sex within the bonds of marriage. Many reject the claim that contraception is narcissistic within the confines of marriage outrightly, but let's look at the evidence.

From the ancient Greeks and Romans (who widely practiced contraception) until today, any society using contraception has always had an increase in infidelity. Why? By its nature as an individualistic act, contraception demands neither communication, self-control, nor respect for the spouse. A husband who dons a condom can use his wife as a mere object to satisfy his addiction without demonstrating respect for her. Accordingly, the narcissistic nature of contraception leads many to experience sexual dysfunction in marriage and, therefore, seek sexual satisfaction outside the marriage. Hence, contraception can never have a positive effect on any marriage.

Every society, from past to present, that has accepted contraception has had undergone a sexual revolution. This revolution leads to other sexual perversions. These perversions, beginning with contraception, finally result in a negative birthrate. For example, the North American and European countries, having abrogated the laws forbidding the promotion of contraception, are now paying the deadly price -- their indigenous populations are all dying due to a low birthrate.

Let me now contrast natural family planning and contraception as two ways a married couple can regulate pregnancy. Natural family planning does not pervert the conjugal act by self-manipulation, as does contraception. The moral difference between the natural and self-manipulative ways to control birth can easily be explained if compared to one's attempts to control weight.

Choosing low-calorie, healthy foods and abstaining from the high-calorie ones is a natural way to control weight. This is not gluttonous. But swallowing tablets to render the excess food indigestible is both unnatural and self-manipulative.

Similarly, when practicing family planning, choosing the woman's non-fertile phases and abstaining during the fertile one is a natural way to control birth. This is not self-manipulative and lustful as is inserting spermicidal tablets or creams.

Clamoring for contraception on college campuses is a fight for two modes of behavior that are narcissistic and addictive.

Premarital sex is an addictive practice as explained above and, in addition, contraceptives are, by their very nature, a self-manipulation that is also narcissistic and, hence, addictive. Accordingly, a university that condones contraceptives on campus is as irresponsible as one that allows the dispensation of narcotics.

Lawrence Abello, S.J., worked with a Donovan Fellow this summer at the Mother Teresa House in Calcutta, India. He wrote this article for The Santa Clara.