Wombs: Fruitful and Barren

Posted By on August 11, 2010

The call of the water is the stuff of legend and romance. From Jimmy Buffet to the Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner to the book of Job, it haunts our poetry, our myths and our imaginations. When we stand at the place where the waters meet the dry land, our gaze is ever out to sea, never back at the land until we reluctantly turn away to our beds, our homes, our families, our lives. It has been compared so often to a womb, it is not surprising to find this line in a recent CT editorial:

“But worse is this: A sea hemorrhaging black oil now suffocates life instead of nurturing it.”

Yes, wombs should nurture life. Never suffocate it. The gulf oil spill is indeed a tragedy. And because it affects the sea-womb important to so much of our country’s economy, so many people’s livelihood, it has captured our imaginations like an earthquake never could. But in a moment of absolutely hideous irony, CT elsewhere published these lines about a genuine myth, overpopulation:

“There is a population and resource issue, and the best way to love our children and to love the future’s children and to love, really, all people, or all children, will be to limit our family size … . I love bringing babies into families. But there may be a higher calling, now that we have been fruitful and multiplied as a species, to think about limiting our families. ”

On the one hand, CT is fussing about the deaths of a few sea turtles and fish while publishing advocates of life-smothering birth control. Just as the sea should nurture many kinds of life, a woman’s womb is made to nurture human life. In the womb’s hidden depths, a new human life is nurtured. This new human life, endowed by God with an immortal soul, swims in the amniotic waters, cushioned and kept safe there. And yet CT’s “experts” would have Christians practice birth control (limit family size), would have them make woman’s womb a barren place.

It is obvious which wombs the folks at CT wish to see barren of life, and which womb more importantly nurtures it.

Addendum:  Since I have been taken to task for taking things out of context and attributing a view to CT that they might not hold, allow me to note that the second quote above is from Lisa Graham McMinn, who also blogs on CT’s women’s blog where she has written on similar themes, expressing similar views.

(this was originally posted at www.bravelass.blogspot.com)

About The Author

Kamilla is a former religious feminist, rescued by the grace of God and the prayers of dear brothers in Christ. She holds an MA in Philosophy of Religion from Denver Seminary where she was introduced to "Egalitarianism" (which she thinks is more appropriately called religious feminism). While she blogs and gathers the courage to write a book about her journey out of religious feminism she earns her keep as a Medical Technologist in the laboratory of a large teaching hospital in the Denver area. She shares a house with her mother, a dog and a cat.


6 Responses to “Wombs: Fruitful and Barren”

  1. Joy N says:

    This is doubly sad since the oil spill is already mostly dispersed or evaporated, and the compromised wetlands are already growing anew. Within five years at most, possibly less than a year, we’ll barely be able to tell that it even happened.

    I have to ask, who is “CT”? To me, the initials stand for “Connecticut”.

  2. Joy, it’s Christianity Today. Thanks for the comment!

  3. tmichelle says:

    Thank you Jennie, I was wondering what CT was too. It is hardly believable that a “Christian” magazine would write this. Where are they getting their information that we have a population crisis? Even if we did have a “crisis”, why would we go against God’s Word anyway? Shame on them.

  4. bravelass says:


    I agree. Last year, when Christianity Today launched their new blog for women, one of their first posts was on condoms and AIDS in Africa — it was published about the time of the Pope’s visit there. When I suggested they might want to use a more reliable (and Christian source) than a charity which published (ahem) instructions for teenagers — I was told I was being unreasonable (to put it politely).

    As far as I’m concerned, with what I’ve seen on their various websites over the last year or so, they are holding on to the Christian identity in name only — similar to some of the old mainline Protestant denominations.


    P.S. on the problem of overpopulation, as I’m typing this, the icon next to the com box is the one for the Demographic Winter video!

  5. Claudia Ritter says:

    I was afraid your were referencing Christianity Today. Now to be clear, this view is being supported on their women’s blog? What about the magazine itself?

    I continue to be disturbed by what I’m noticing more and more among Christians near me. It seems like there are many long-married couples with no more than two, maybe three kids. Anyone with more than that is considered a clan! Whispers abound of vasectomies and birth control, even in very young, barely growing families and I find it so hard to believe that so many are being led by the Holy Spirit to limit family size so severely.

    Sometimes I second-guess myself. Could Christians really be making the decision to have so few children with God at the center of it?

  6. bravelass says:


    I can’t speak to the magazine itself since I haven’t seen a print copy in years. Since this is not the first time Christianity Today has published such views on their various websites, it’s hard for me to take seriously the notion that they do *not* support the view that using birth control and limiting family size are good things.

    And no, I don’t think God could possibly be at the center of such a life-smothering philosophy.

%d bloggers like this: