We see a direct connection between the practice of contraception and the practice of abortion. The mind-set that invites a couple to use contraception is an anti-child mind-set. So when a baby is conceived accidentally, the couple already have this negative attitude toward the child. Therefore seeking an abortion is a natural outcome. We oppose all forms of contraception.

Judie Brown, American Life League, quoted in Russell Shorto Contra-Contraception, New York Times, 7 May 2006 -

The American Life League is a lay Catholic organisation and it’s therefore no surprise when someone like Judie Brown outlines an anti-contraception rationale. But increasing numbers of American Protestant churches and para-religious groups like Focus on the Family are beginning to take the same line. For instance, R. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, recently wrote that:

The effective separation of sex from procreation may be one of the most important defining marks of our age - and one of the most ominous. This awareness is spreading among American evangelicals, and it threatens to set loose a firestorm … A growing number of evangelicals are rethinking the issue of birth control …

Mohler, along with many other Protestant leaders, regards the widespread use of the contraceptive pill as a major strike against the preservation of Christian moral standards:

Prior to [the pill], every time a couple had sex, there was a good chance of pregnancy … I think there could be no question that the pill gave incredible licence to everything from adultery and affairs to premarital sex … (Shorto op cit)

Do any Australian Protestants hold similar views? Protestant anti-feminist groups like the Queensland-based ‘Above Rubies’ organisation have always expressed grave reservations about contraception. Christian wives are simply supposed to have as many children as they possibly can. However, this view didn’t gain much support until 1997 when the Protestant-based Salt Shakers ‘ethics group’ published an article called ‘How contraception leads to abortion’ (Salt Shakers Newsletter, Aug. 1997, 16-17) by Gail Instance of the Australian branch of Human Life International (HLI). HLI is a Catholic group, but Salt Shakers never prints articles that do not reflect its own ideology. Instance’s arguments were wholly in keeping with the concerns expressed by Mohler:

One writer a few years ago described contraceptives as ’sexual diapers’ allowing men and women to behave totally irresponsibly but not get caught … When couples use contraception they place a barrier, not only between themselves in their most intimate moments, but also between themselves and God. In effect, they say to God, ‘Go away. Keep out.’ … Is it any wonder that life is not respected today?

One of the anti-contraception books listed at the end of this article was by a Lutheran doctor.

Perhaps the best recent example of growing Australian evangelical interest in contraception is a book review of Sam and Bethany Torode’s Open Embrace: A Protestant Couple Rethinks Contraception (2002) by Bill Muehlenberg (AD2000 [National Civic Council religious affairs journal], Sep. 2002, 16). Muehlenberg, currently Secretary of the (tiny) Family Council of Victoria feels that it’s time Australian Protestants gave careful attention to ‘the issue of contraception’:

… [F]or the first 19 centuries of the Christian Church, denominations of all stripes agreed that contraception was wrong … The truth is, there are many reasons why we should be suspicious of contraception.

Muehlenberg proceeds to reel off a number of very Catholic-sounding objections to contraception - breaking the sexuality/procreation link, medical risks, declining birthrates etc. - but I suspect that his main problem is with ‘contraception as abortion’:

…[M]any contraceptives are wrongly called contraceptives. They do not prevent conception … Instead they kill a tiny baby … For this reason, Christians of all persuasions should reject many forms of contraception just as they reject (or should reject) abortion.

Muehlenberg concludes with a warning against ‘the contraceptive mentality’, a term whose meaning is conveniently vague but which often figures in American anti-contraception literature. I’ll leave you with President Bush’s views on the question:

At a White House press briefing in May [2005] …Press Secretary Scott McClellan was asked four times by a WorldNetDaily correspondent, Les Kinsolving, if the president supported contraception. ‘I think the president’s views are very clear when it comes to building a culture of life,’ McClellan replied. Kinsolving said, ‘If they were clear, I wouldn’t have asked.’ McClellan replied: ‘And if you want to ask those questions, that’s fine. I’m just not going to dignify them with a response.’ (Shorto op cit)

Filed in: Christian Right, Family Values, Sexuality