Refuting Raul Pangalanan of Philippine Daily Inquirer On 'Animals Mate Only to Breed' by Fr. Jojo Zerrudo

Adam and Eve In the Garden of Eden

In his column “Passion for Reason: Animals mate only to breed” (Philippine Daily Inquirer, October 8, 2010), Raul Pangalanganan’s contention was false: “Human being have advanced beyond the animal stage, yet the Church will retard that evolutionary advance and force us back to the caveman’s notion that mating is only for breeding. They would constrain even married couples from having sex for the old-fashioned reasons like romance and the joys of courtship and seduction…The irony is that the clergy unwittingly abets animalistic attitudes by insisting that humans follow the animal practice that sex is only for producing offspring.” May I ask Mr. Pangalangan to cite a single official Catholic document that says that sex is only for producing offspring?

In fact, if we follow his line of argument that while “animals mate only to breed”, “humans have sex ‘even during the wrong part of the ovulatory cycle’ when conception is unlikely to occur”, we would immediately see that the Natural Family Planning method (which is the method supported by the Catholic Church) is the one that truly upholds the dignity of sex between humans. What is the Natural Family Planning method all about? Is it not about the preference to “have sex…during the wrong part of the ovulatory cycle when conception is unlikely to occur”? Did he not say that what sets humans apart from the rest of the animal kingdom is this capability to have sex even during the wrong part of the ovulatory cycle?

In fact, the use of artificial contraception itself dehumanizes its users. He quoted David Linden who claims: “[M]ost non human mammals have sex that is very accurately timed to match ovulation.” He added: “neither males nor females (animals) will approach each other for sex during non fertile times.” I agree with his observation. But what he does not say is that in times when the female animal is in “heat” the male is “compelled” by instinct to have sex with the female. I have dogs and so I observed that when the female is in “heat” the male makes it a point to copulate with it. In my effort to control their reproduction, I put the female dog in a cage and the night-long barking of the male dog would cost me a good night’s sleep. What does this say? It means that animals cannot help but be driven by their instincts.

Precisely, this is what artificial contraceptives do. When the woman is ovulating and the husband wants to have sex with her, he could just make use of the contraceptives in order to enjoy sex without having to worry about the possibility of begetting a child. But is the man simply an animal who is driven by instinct to have sex with his wife whenever she is “in heat”? Of course not! Being human, if he can choose to have sex “during the wrong part of the ovulation cycle”, he can definitely choose to abstain from sex during the “right” part of the same ovulation cycle. And here he becomes truly human – he is not driven or compelled by any animal instinct that dictates the necessity of sex during the fertile times of the woman. To be truly human involves the capacity to transcend instincts. The choice to abstain in such moments when instincts seem strongest – this capability differentiates the humans from beasts.

The Church’s teaching against artificial contraceptives keeps the sexual intercourse between husband and wife truly human. It protects the integrity of the sexual act as a God-given gift. Artificial contraception – the adjective “artificial” itself is the word to watch – is the real intrusion into such a wonderful life-giving expression of human love. We are human beings and therefore, we cannot be driven by instincts and simply use contraceptives to make up for our lack of will power. To rise above instincts – that is the stuff that our humanity is made of.