Reproduction (Category: Kooks • Reproduction )

I also think Ms Stanek is a kook.

I base my thinking on several Biblical concepts. The foremost concept is that God is always described in Scripture as the sole procreative decision-maker. To my knowledge, every incident in Scripture describing pregnancy or barrenness gives God complete credit.

If that premise is true, who has the right to say no to God? Who can say they have a better grip on timing than God?

She's honest, I'll give her that, but she's sailing off into loony-land with this stuff. I don't quite get how she's drawing that conclusion: does the Bible describe every pregnancy that ever occurred in the history of the world? I know people who reflexively assign every good thing that happens to them in their life to their god; that doesn't mean he exists or that he's responsible, it just means that's what they believe. And face it, the Bible is the unvarnished, over-the-top hagiography of the Judeo-Christian deity…it credits him with everything, but that doesn't mean it's credible.

If I give Ms Stanek the benefit of the doubt, though, and take her claim as a given, doesn't it lead to a different conclusion than she wants? If her god has absolute, complete control over whether one becomes pregnant or not, than contraception is irrelevant. If her god wants you to be pregnant, he'll do so whether a condom is used or not; if he doesn't want you to be pregnant, never mind what the fertility clinic doctors do. It's that easy. Why not just assume that contraception is the mechanism of god's will?