Abortion is wrong but not contraceptives?

[Matthewmatt]

I know an atheist who says they dont like the Catholic Church because they are against contraceptives. she knows that abortion is wrong but not contraceptives. How can i help explain why contraceptives are wrong. I am working on Evangelizing her but this is a big issue.

God bless

 

[SurlyMermaid]

Excellent question! I keep reading about this myself. I’ll be glad to read responses…

 

[asia53]

Contraceptives:
Barrier: physically prevents sperm from entering uterus
Hormonal: inhibits female ovulation or fertilization
Contragestion: devices which prevent/or interrupt embryo implantation in uterus, essentially, mini-abortion
Emergency: Morning-after pill—another, mini-abortion

As you can see, each method has problems with our Catholic beliefs.

May I suggest, you do some reading. Educate yourself. Take a mini-course in contraceptives, and you’ll be prepared to talk to your atheist friend.

 

[patmiron]

=Matthewmatt;8526569]I know an atheist who says they dont like the Catholic Church because they are against contraceptives. she knows that abortion is wrong but not contraceptives. How can i help explain why contraceptives are wrong. I am working on Evangelizing her but this is a big issue.

God bless

The first: Abortion is MURDER

The second: Contraception is ATTEMPTED MURDER

So what’s the difference? The intent is the same so is the guilt!

God Bless,

Either God is in charge or we are. Can’t be shared

Pat

 

[SurlyMermaid]

The first: Abortion is MURDER

The second: Contraception is ATTEMPTED MURDER

So what’s the difference? The intent is the same so is the guilt!

God Bless,

Either God is in charge or we are. Can’t be shared

Pat

Respectfully, if you’re trying not to get pregant, how is that the same? I understand that if you’re using something that can be abortifacient, sure. When we were using birth control we certainly would not have wanted to murder our child, which is why I never used an IUD. When I found out (the hard way ) the pill could be abortifacient, I got off of it.

Just asking! Thanks.

 

[Bezant]

The first: Abortion is MURDER

The second: Contraception is ATTEMPTED MURDER

So what’s the difference? The intent is the same so is the guilt!

God Bless,

Either God is in charge or we are. Can’t be shared

Pat

Probably the least tactful explanation and the fastest way to put him off.

 

[Newbie2]

Perhaps one needs to go back to square one in order to explain the evil in contraception:

Without going into a discourse in Philosophical matters, I’m sure many athiests would agree that there are certain “goods” relative to mankind. (Not speaking here of necessarily goods as physical objects, but concepts as well). He could probably be easily convinced that these good things are to be held in high esteem as things that we as mankind should strive for; to protect and foster.

For example, Friendship is a good. Life is a good. Marriage is a good. Having children and propagation of the species are goods. Charity is a good, and so on.

Having established that such things are goods to be sought after, the Church teaches that things that are contrary to these goods or actions that impede them are sinful:

Abortion is an action that goes directly against the good of life, in this the OP’s friend agrees.

Contraception is an action that goes against the good of life as well, impeding both life and the propagation of the species.

The Church is OK with NFP, because it does not go against the good of life or the conception of children.

That’s the short answer.

 

[Abu]

I like these two explanations of reality.

To “use NFP” is, objectively speaking, simply to measure fertility. What prevents pregnancy is the subsequent abstinence.
And obviously that’s not contraception, since there’s no sex to contracept in that case. (Fone Bone 2001).

Contraception gravely immoral; NFP praiseworthy for serious reasons
Clear cut:
Answer by Fr.Stephen F. Torraco on June 19, 2006 (EWTN):
“If you want an objective reason as to why contraception is a serious evil and NFP is not only morally justifiable but also praiseworthy, that objective reason is this: with contraception, there is the deliberate rupture of the intimate link between the unitive and procreative meanings of the marital act. With NFP, there is no such rupture. Even in the case in which a couple, using NFP, resorts to the infertile period for marital relations so as to avoid pregnancy (assuming for the sake of argument, for serious reasons) there is no such objective rupture of that link precisely because there is nothing there to contracept. You need to understand that morality is not simply about results. It is also about our actions in and of themselves. The argument to which you refer (the results are the same with NFP and contraception) is purely utilitarian and does not take into consideration the entire human act. Furthermore, as I have pointed out several times, the condoning of contraception quite logically is also the condoning of genital activity with anyone or anything, as well as of in vitro fertilization and cloning. The Church’s teaching on contraception does not at all depend on faith. It is a clear and rational defense of the very essence of civilization.”

[The late Fr Torraco was the Executive Director of the Society for the Study of the Magisterial Teaching of the Church (SSMTC), and answered questions for Mother Angelica’s Eternal Word Television Network].

 

[manualman]

Where I would start would be to explain the phenomenon of cultural blindness.

How is it possible that so many otherwise normal, decent, moral Americans could not see the inhumanity in the institution of slavery before the Civil War? It simply will not answer to label them all evil, and so dismiss them.

How is it possible that the Aztec civilization could practice human sacrifice and believe that such a thing would be pleasing to God? Were they all just monsters?

Since she seems to ‘get it’ about abortion, you can add that one in too for an illustration for our own day. Humans, even basically god ones, have an amazing capacity for refusing to notice inconvenient realities that they don’t want to hear: cultural blindness.

Now that we’ve introduced the concept of cultural blindness, we can talk about how our culture has adopted a blindness about the true nature of what contraception really IS. Prior to about 80 years ago or so, it was culturally considered basic common sense that marriage, sex and babies were inseperably related topics if civilization was to endure. Any dope could see that only with intact families having kids would there be a next generation to care for the current one when they got old and to pass the torch to.

But somewhere around the 1930’s, the idea got started that marriage and sex could be divorced from babies with no consequences occurring, making life so much easier and cheaper for families. That quickly evolved by the 1970’s to sex being divorced from both marriage and babies until we have the situation we have today. What’s that? Massive numbers of single parent families where kids get little car time from their mother and often no contact at all with the father. STD’s have increased geometrically in frequency (and deadly effect). Divorce became rampant as marriage lost the full meaning it was intended to have. Birth rates in EVERY nation where contraceptives are readily available and culturally acceptable are far below replacement rate.

THE major common source for all these problems has been the adoption of the contraceptive mentality that marriage, sex and babies are three distinct topics that can be engaged in ala carte. But the reality is that sex practiced in a mindset closed to the potential for life is subtly cheapened. Instead of a mutually giving experience, at least in part, it becomes a mutually taking experience. Once that happens, sexual intimacy loses much of its power to bind a couple together.

It’s easy and common for people to notice societal problems and to theorize about causation. It’s a lot harder to recognize the problem early and predict what will happen if the problem is not corrected. This prediction is exactly what happened in catholic teaching on contraception during these time periods in the documents Casti Connubi and Humanae Vitae, available online.

She’ll think your nuts, probably. Just remind her to think about it and consider if it’s possible she’s just being a stubborn slave owner…

 

[Tomek]

I know an atheist who says they dont like the Catholic Church because they are against contraceptives. she knows that abortion is wrong but not contraceptives. How can i help explain why contraceptives are wrong. I am working on Evangelizing her but this is a big issue.

God bless

I don’t understand why someone would dislike the Catholic Church because of one issue. If you look at Catholicism as a whole, the teaching on contraception is a very small, although very valid point.

The reason why contraception is wrong is because it is contrary to nature. It does violence to a woman’s natural hormonal cycle, and is associated with many side effects. And anything contrary to our nature is contrary to the way of God (i.e. sin.) Also, such contraception leads to sexual relationships that are also unnatural because the procreative component is removed. Sex is meant to be primarily procreative, that’s why thousands of procreative cells are ejected from a man at the height of climax, and a woman is more eager for love making when she is more fertile. To remove the procreative component is to disfigure the sexual act, and not just from a procreative sense. It also affects the unitive component, since contracepted intercourse tends to focus on what pleasure one spouse can get from another.

Historically, Christians have always opposed contraception in the many forms it has appeared. And this goes as far back as when the Roman Empire still reigned.

 

[Befink]

No better way to broaden ones thinking than to respectfully discuss issues with those who disagree with you. *That said, I’d love to hear thoughts on the following:

I have to admit I struggle with this teaching as do a large number of Catholics (did someone quote 94%?).

We discuss progress from historical times as a bad thing when it’s been good with some negative side effects. *Historically, life expectancy was short, infant mortality was high, wars were common so the world struggled to maintain the small population it had despite high birth rates and no need for family planning. *Thanks to medical advances we have seen that birth rates of 2-3 children per household is enough to sustain the population. *Socially women were historically thought of as property from Biblical times until well into the last century (in many countries including Catholic countries, they still are). *Their role was to serve their husband and their family need. *A man didn’t care about family planning because he didn’t do the childcare work. *A man didn’t care if his wife was sexually satisfied because she would submit to him whenever he wanted it. *Marriage was more of a contract instead of rooted in romantic love. *Women didn’t care about family planning, sexual satisfaction, romantic love because, well, that’s what society told them to do and they didn’t know any better (is that cultural blindness?).

Today, things are better. *Partners in marriage expect love, romance, sexual satisfaction and mutual respect, all good things. (negative side-effect: higher divorce rate). *Family planning has become a huge concern these days for various good reasons representing social and medical progress. *Another good reason to promote family planning is that it took until the mid-1800s to get over a billion people in the world. *Now we are quickly at 7 billion and expected to reach 10 billion by the end of the century. *Much of the growth will continue to be among impoverished Catholics. *I know the church is not against family planning but they seem to be way too quiet about it for my taste, to the point of irresponsibility.

Supposedly we are to practice sex with respect for its goal of procreation but also as a regular practice in a healthy marriage. *A poll on this website with a large number of NPF supporters indicates that roughly half believe it improves sex life and the other half thinks it’s worse. *In our case, ‘worse’ is the obvious answer. *In the three times we have specifically established a sexual routine to get pregnant, it has felt like a burden. *When we are not trying to have children, we can be spontaneous and natural at any time (you’ve probably guessed by now we use birth control, just being honest). *Both of us enjoy sex a lot more so it supports a healthy marriage. *Again my struggle here is how to reconcile family planning with a healthy sexual relationship with my wife as well as a struggle to understand why the church says there is a difference between not having kids and not having kids while using birth control.

Another point is that I hope to teach my son as he grows up to abstain from sexual activity until marriage. *The reality is that he will be his own person and make his own mistakes. It therefore seems downright foolish to not teach him what condoms are and how to use them.

 

[Abu]

Befink #11
Another good reason to promote family planning is that it took until the mid-1800s to get over a billion people in the world. *Now we are quickly at 7 billion and expected to reach 10 billion by the end of the century.

This mirage is in denial of the fact that Europe is in a birth dearth and that world population is in “Demographic winter” which denotes the worldwide decline in birthrates, also referred to as a “birth-dearth,” and what it portends.

Demographer Philip Longman (author of The Empty Cradle: How Falling Birthrates Threaten World Prosperity) observes: “The ongoing global decline in human birthrates is the single most powerful force affecting the fate of nations and the future of society in the 21st century.” Worldwide, birthrates have been halved in the past 50 years. There are now 59 nations, with 44% of the world’s population, with below-replacement fertility.

“Sometime in this century, the world’s population will begin to decline. At a certain point, the decline will become rapid. We may even reach population free-fall in our lifetimes. For some countries, population decline is already a reality. Russia is losing three-quarters-of-a-million people a year. Its population (currently 145 million) is expected to fall by one-third by 2050.”
demographicwinter.com

…a struggle to understand why the church says there is a difference between not having kids and not having kids while using birth control.

You obviously haven’t read post #8, or are in denial of the natural moral law with which we are imbued by the Creator.

I hope to teach my son as he grows up to abstain from sexual activity until marriage. The reality is that he will be his own person and make his own mistakes. It therefore seems downright foolish to not teach him what condoms are and how to use them.

Such an attitude of dissent and denial of Christ when He gave Peter His full authority to teach infallibly on morals in His name is totally at variance with one self-proclaimed to be in RCIA. It really is downright foolish to teach grave sin.

 

[mark_a]

I know an atheist who says they dont like the Catholic Church because they are against contraceptives. she knows that abortion is wrong but not contraceptives. How can i help explain why contraceptives are wrong. I am working on Evangelizing her but this is a big issue.

God bless

God bless you!! That is one tough row to hoe even with non-Catholics Christians, much more so with an atheist.

 

[Warrior1979]

Now that we’ve introduced the concept of cultural blindness, we can talk about how our culture has adopted a blindness about the true nature of what contraception really IS. Prior to about 80 years ago or so, it was culturally considered basic common sense that marriage, sex and babies were inseperably related topics if civilization was to endure. Any dope could see that only with intact families having kids would there be a next generation to care for the current one when they got old and to pass the torch to.

Any dope still sees that.

But somewhere around the 1930’s, the idea got started that marriage and sex could be divorced from babies with no consequences occurring, making life so much easier and cheaper for families.

Attempts to avoid children have been around for all time. It’s just become more commonplace simply because contraceptives are more reliable and easier to get than 80 years ago.

Massive numbers of single parent families where kids get little car time from their mother and often no contact at all with the father.

Having no contact with the father is nothing new. When families had 15 children, the father was working three jobs to support the family. There is one family that shows up at one of the adoption parties we go to that has a dozen children. I never met the father, and never will…all he does is work, seven days a week.

Birth rates in EVERY nation where contraceptives are readily available and culturally acceptable are far below replacement rate.

Replacement rate is simply an artificial goal that some people have set up. Populations will increase and decrease due to various events.

It’s easy and common for people to notice societal problems and to theorize about causation. It’s a lot harder to recognize the problem early and predict what will happen if the problem is not corrected. This prediction is exactly what happened in catholic teaching on contraception during these time periods in the documents Casti Connubi and Humanae Vitae, available online.

I believe it is easy to predict such things. People focus on things like contraception, abortion, etc. If people focus on the nature of man instead, it is fairly easy to predict, at least in a general sense, what will happen given a particular set of circumstances.

 

[Warrior1979]

This mirage is in denial of the fact that Europe is in a birth dearth and that world population is in “Demographic winter” which denotes the worldwide decline in birthrates, also referred to as a “birth-dearth,” and what it portends.

Demographer Philip Longman (author of The Empty Cradle: How Falling Birthrates Threaten World Prosperity) observes: “The ongoing global decline in human birthrates is the single most powerful force affecting the fate of nations and the future of society in the 21st century.” Worldwide, birthrates have been halved in the past 50 years. There are now 59 nations, with 44% of the world’s population, with below-replacement fertility.

“Sometime in this century, the world’s population will begin to decline. At a certain point, the decline will become rapid. We may even reach population free-fall in our lifetimes. For some countries, population decline is already a reality. Russia is losing three-quarters-of-a-million people a year. Its population (currently 145 million) is expected to fall by one-third by 2050.”
demographicwinter.com

This is an artificial argument with an artificial goal. The issue has been, and continues to be, that the economy is set up like a Ponzi scheme. Every increasing members are absolutely essential when one has a Ponzi scheme.

If people live a sustainable lifestyle, well within their means, ever increasing population is not necessary. Such populations exist, and have existed, for tens of thousands of years.

Most stunning, Catholics continue to utterly, absolutely, and obstinately reject the Irish example, where the population declined “precipitously” for a century, yet they survived. According to examples on this forum, the Irish should have been throwing old people out of their windows.

Such an attitude of dissent and denial of Christ

Insecure in your views, aren’t you???

 

[manualman]

…

1. I have to admit I struggle with this teaching as do a large number of Catholics (did someone quote 94%?).

2…*A man didn’t care about family planning because he didn’t do the childcare work. *A man didn’t care if his wife was sexually satisfied because she would submit to him whenever he wanted it. *Marriage was more of a contract instead of rooted in romantic love. *Women didn’t care about family planning, sexual satisfaction, romantic love because, well, that’s what society told them to do and they didn’t know any better (is that cultural blindness?).

1. Today, things are better. *Partners in marriage expect love, romance, sexual satisfaction and mutual respect, all good things. (negative side-effect: higher divorce rate). *

4…Now we are quickly at 7 billion and expected to reach 10 billion by the end of the century. *Much of the growth will continue to be among impoverished Catholics. *I know the church is not against family planning but they seem to be way too quiet about it for my taste, to the point of irresponsibility.

1. *In the three times we have specifically established a sexual routine to get pregnant, it has felt like a burden. *When we are not trying to have children, we can be spontaneous and natural at any time (you’ve probably guessed by now we use birth control, just being honest). *Both of us enjoy sex a lot more so it supports a healthy marriage. *Again my struggle here is how to reconcile family planning with a healthy sexual relationship with my wife as well as a struggle to understand why the church says there is a difference between not having kids and not having kids while using birth control.
2. Another point is that I hope to teach my son as he grows up to abstain from sexual activity until marriage. *The reality is that he will be his own person and make his own mistakes. It therefore seems downright foolish to not teach him what condoms are and how to use them.

1. I’ve heard more like 98%. So? Probably 99.9% have told lies, should we change that teaching too? Just because living up to high standards is hard is no reason to change them.
2. Thank you for making my point. Contraception has resulted in a redefinition of marriage AWAY from self sacrificing love that is fundamentally ordered towards creating, nurturing and providing for new life and changed into into an inward focus on the feelings each person has. THIS is why so few marriages work out anymore. Once the infatuation fades, the committment goes too. As to your characterization of past eras, I think you may have taken one too many women’s studies classes in college. There have been and always will be abusive relationships. But the standard of a christian marriage is the sacrifice of one’s self for the sake of the beloved, and that goal is harmed, not helped by “rooting” marriage in mere romantic. Romance is nice, but it is a garnish. Self sacrificing committment is the meat. (or soy if you’re a veggie!)
3. Non-sequitor. Advances in civilization that have made it possible for people to breakfree of abusive relationships came about due to the christian concepts of charity and justice, not rubbers. sheesh.
4. Common and dangerous non-sequitor! Few people realize that LONG before the invention of the pill or even latex, second generation urban industrialized families were having 2-3 kids, not 7-8. As the world becomes increasingly developed and urbanized, populations would have stabilized by themselves. Turns out people generally DO know where babies come from and ARE capable, like nearly every other animal species on earth, of determining their fertile times. There are exceptions and hard cases, but on a population level, developed and stable urban areas naturally have little to no population growth. But since the adoption of the contraceptive culture, EVERY developed and politically stable urban area on earth has a negative long term population growth rate. Think about what that means as third world nations are able to stabilize and develop. Check out the Population Research Institute for the little known reality of long term global population trends.
5. The stress and pressure a couple undergo when having fertility problems and trying to conceive do not reflect anything like what the practice of NFP for avoidance is like. It’s as spontaneous as your current life, except that both know which days are off limits and those days make you remember that sex, marriage and babies ARE inter-related topics. That keeps you rooted in the real meaning of marriage. (Plus you never run out of supplies, never have drug side effects and its free)
6. I see this approach as well intentioned, but a disaster in the making. Will you keep a stock of clean needles in the house for him as well? How about letting him know that if he joins a gang you’ll buy him a kevlar vest? Might I humbly suggest instead, that you teach him how sex creates and enhances a lasting bond between a man and wife and that spreading that gift around only dilutes and weakens its ability to provide that marriage bond later in life. This education can and (IMO) should include a discussion of how our culture pretends this deep meaning of sex doesn’t exist and that it further pretends that the risk of STD is the only reason to be chaste, then proceeds to promise that a microscopically thin tube of latex will make promiscuity “safe.” Tell him how this is a false promise in that it only provides SOME measure of protection against the LEAST important danger of promiscuity and that it is commonly bungled in practice, leading to pregnancy and STD transmission. After all, that’s the truth and the truth is always the thing to tell.

Thanks for the honesty, hope I’m not too blunt!

 

[Befink]

Thanks for the replies, a lot of good thoughts. I think I’ll focus on a few select points which come down to my personal situation.

Ethical: many people make the point that it’s a sin to separate procreation from the intimate act. If contraceptive use is a sin then why is it not a sin to avoid sex at times when pregnancy would result. Either way the goal is NOT to get pregnant. I obviously know the catechism but it’s usually supported with a common sense answer which I’m not seeing in this case. Funny question: can you use a condom during an infertile time of the month?

Practical: in order to be used effectively, natural methods must be used with confidence. It’s one thing if the logic says probability of pregnancy is low. A healthy sex life is not achieved if both partners can’t emotionally embrace it. According to the statistics I’m finding, NFP is 1-9% effective in a year when used properly (much worse if not used properly). I’m guessing the wide range is because some women have more reliable cycles than others. My wife’s is not that reliable so I have a hard time seeing this make sense for us.

Realistic parenting: reason I want my son to know about condoms is not to encourage him to sin. In fact raising awareness in him helps have the conversation about what is a sexual sin and why. That’s my best chance of him using good judgement when he’s on his own. In college I knew several people who grew up in conservative sheltered households. When they got to college and they got a sniff of freedom from all the rules they didn’t know how to handle it. The results where very dramatic: sex, drunkenness, more sex, poor academic results, drugs, and some abortions. These kids had loving parents but I’m quite certain they didn’t tell their parents any of this, probably ever. Why, because they didn’t want to deal with their parents dishing out the guilt.

 

[Abu]

Befink #17
According to the statistics I’m finding, NFP is 1-9% effective in a year when used properly (much worse if not used properly). I’m guessing the wide range is because some women have more reliable cycles than others. My wife’s is not that reliable so I have a hard time seeing this make sense for us.

Apart from trashing the natural law and failing to have any counter to Fr Torraco, as well as the clear cut infallible teaching against contraception in *Casti Connubii *and Humanae Vitae, even the stats flaunted are atrocious.

Natural Birth Regulation is very effective when used sensibly. NFP families, whether Couple to Couple or Billings followers, report an astonishingly low divorce rate — one informal study puts it at 1.3 percent, as compared with about 50 percent in society at large. Natural Birth Regulation is natural, avoids the devastating effects of the “pill”, encourages self control and respect for the dignity of human life, and is of the order of 99% effective among the uneducated. Mercedes Wilson claims an effectiveness rate of 99 percent among “the poorest of the poor” in Guatemala. “There’s no excuse anymore to pretend that only those with strong religious convictions can follow natural family planning,” she writes.

Wilson’s Family of the Americas Foundation now teaches NFP in more than 100 countries, including China.
EWTN News Story 10-July-2003 – Catholic World News Brief
“Unlike the rhythm method, the Billings method does not depend on a stable menstrual cycle. Numerous independent trials have confirmed the 99 percent success rate of the Billings Method, including a recent study following thousands of women for more than a year. If any further proof is needed, the method has been regularly used up to date by over 2,686,400 fertile couples in China for avoiding pregnancy with an overall success rate of approximately 99 percent.”

BTW, apart from the moral depravity of contraception, practiced when the infallible teaching is known, dissent is condemned, is totally illicit.

 

[Warrior1979]

Natural Birth Regulation is very effective when used sensibly. NFP families, whether Couple to Couple or Billings followers, report an astonishingly low divorce rate — one informal study puts it at 1.3 percent, as compared with about 50 percent in society at large.

Did you know:

• An astonishingly high number of those that received Holy Orders believe in Jesus Christ?
• An astonishingly high number of atheists don’t believe that Christ is the Savior?
• An astonishingly high number of people get wet when they jump into the ocean?
• An astonishingly high number of McDonald’s restaurants serve burgers?
• An astonishingly high number of the Sentinelese are familiar with island living?

Sorry, but it’s called lying with statistics. Presupposition is involved in the selection of the data sample. The underlying characteristics of those practicing NFP are what causes the low divorce rate, not NFP itself.

I only mention this because people that put forth such statistics simply discredit themselves and their causes. While I don’t necessarily concur on everything the Church teaches, I don’t believe that mocking the Church with these ridiculous, prepicked stats is proper.

 

[tskrobacz]

Apart from trashing the natural law and failing to have any counter to Fr Torraco, as well as the clear cut infallible teaching against contraception in *Casti Connubii *and Humanae Vitae, even the stats flaunted are atrocious.

Natural Birth Regulation is very effective when used sensibly. NFP families, whether Couple to Couple or Billings followers, report an astonishingly low divorce rate — one informal study puts it at 1.3 percent, as compared with about 50 percent in society at large. Natural Birth Regulation is natural, avoids the devastating effects of the “pill”, encourages self control and respect for the dignity of human life, and is of the order of 99% effective among the uneducated. Mercedes Wilson claims an effectiveness rate of 99 percent among “the poorest of the poor” in Guatemala. “There’s no excuse anymore to pretend that only those with strong religious convictions can follow natural family planning,” she writes.

Wilson’s Family of the Americas Foundation now teaches NFP in more than 100 countries, including China.
EWTN News Story 10-July-2003 – Catholic World News Brief
“Unlike the rhythm method, the Billings method does not depend on a stable menstrual cycle. Numerous independent trials have confirmed the 99 percent success rate of the Billings Method, including a recent study following thousands of women for more than a year. If any further proof is needed, the method has been regularly used up to date by over 2,686,400 fertile couples in China for avoiding pregnancy with an overall success rate of approximately 99 percent.”

BTW, apart from the moral depravity of contraception, practiced when the infallible teaching is known, dissent is condemned, is totally illicit.

Agreed…and to further make the point, the church’s teachings are not final because they are infallible, they are instead infallible because they are final… as in the highest authority available in human form.