the “natural law” was fallen back on, saying that the natural purpose of sex is procreation, and any use of it for other purposes is “unnatural.” But a primary natural purpose does not of necessity exclude ancillary advantages. The purpose of eating is to sustain life, but that does not make all eating that is not necessary to subsistence “unnatural.” One can eat, beyond the bare minimum to exist, to express fellowship, as one can have sex, beyond the begetting of a child with each act, to express love.
What do you say, Vatican? Should we shut up and stop trying to use reason? Or accept the implication that eating food for fun is wrong? Or – just maybe – should we conclude that, actually, this is no argument for contraception’s immorality at all?
(HT here for the ‘ad’).