? about sex

[dulcissima]

I can understand that and as I have said in the past using that exact context putting it up to god you shouldnt need to moniotr your own fertility, its up to God so why monitor…just be unitive and have trust and Faith.

That would be one option, but it is not our only option. If that is what your conscience calls you to do, then I would listen to your conscience, since it is not against the teachings of the Church. Other couples may decide that monitoring their fertility is what is morally correct for them. They could have serious medical or financial situations that would make abstaining during fertile times the responsible thing to do. It does not go against the teachings of the Church, so they would be free to follow their conscience.

 

[johntkd]

But if they’re in their right minds they want to.

OK, condoms and other forms of BC are right out. But I still don’t see how non-vaginal sex is wrong during times of fertility. Like I said, why can’t couples enjoy each other w/ out risking having 20 kids running around…

OH BOY I am gonna hide under the table on that one rofl

 

[HoBo30]

OH BOY I am gonna hide under the table on that one rofl

Just stating the obvious…

 

[Spirithound]

My husband and I had three children. I am no longer able to have children because my tubes were tied before I became Catholic, so there’s no reason for us to have sex except for pleasure.

You actually can become pregnant again. The mother of a friend of mine recently gave birth, years after she had her tubes tied.

 

[HoBo30]

OK, another one: I had a step-sister who had her tubes tied after her 2nd kid on doctor’s orders. The doctor told her that due to certain conditions in her womb (I don’t know all the specifics), another pregnancy would almost certainly result in a child w/ severe birth defects and would seriously threaten her life. Where does teaching fall on that one?

 

[dulcissima]

OK, another one: I had a step-sister who had her tubes tied after her 2nd kid on doctor’s orders. The doctor told her that due to certain conditions in her womb (I don’t know all the specifics), another pregnancy would almost certainly result in a child w/ severe birth defects and would seriously threaten her life. Where does teaching fall on that one?

There are members of this CAF forum who have been told that fetting pregnant again could be fatal. They are practicing NFP to avoid pregnancy. They are choosing to follow the teaching of the Church, which is that each and every act must be both unitive and open to life. Your sister may not have been aware of this.

 

[HoBo30]

There are members of this CAF forum who have been told that fetting pregnant again could be fatal. They are practicing NFP to avoid pregnancy. They are choosing to follow the teaching of the Church, which is that each and every act must be both unitive and open to life. Your sister may not have been aware of this.

She’s not Catholic.

Some background information: youngwomenshealth.org/summarychart.html
Scroll to the bottom to find the relevant information.

If my step-sister were to continue to make love to her husband and use NFP as a typical person does, she would still have a 1/4 chance of conceiving w/ lethal consequences. If she were to execute NFP perfectly, she still has about a 6% chance of killing herself.

Compare those numbers w/ having the tubes tied and her chances are less than 1% in all cases.

I think that mentioning the doctrine of justifiable abortion is worth mentioning: an abortion is permitted if and only if carrying to term will seriously threaten the life of the mother. So, in effect, she could be opening herself up to conceiving a child only to have to choose between her own life and the life of the child (which may not survive birth anyway and would be severely deformed if it did).

 

[dulcissima]

Your source doesn’t state the method of NFP – it could be referring to the rhythm method. That site is also intended for teenage girls, not married adults.

Take a look at these statistics:
ccli.org/nfp/basics/effectiveness-p02.php

I also would dispute that abortion is acceptable under any circumstance.

 

[HoBo30]

Your source doesn’t state the method of NFP – it could be referring to the rhythm method. That site is also intended for teenage girls, not married adults.

Take a look at these statistics:
ccli.org/nfp/basics/effectiveness-p02.php

I also would dispute that abortion is acceptable under any circumstance.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_family_planning

Click on the links for all 3 forms of NFP

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tubal_ligation

NFP has a perfect use rate of anywhere between 1-9% and typical use rate of 25% while the ligation has a constant rate of .5%…

I was unaware that a young lady’s anatomy was any different than a married woman’s…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_aspects_of_abortion#Sanctity_of_human_life

I’d go grab the Catechism, but I’m lazy. Lets just conclude that removal of the womb w/ the fetus in it in such a situation would be acceptable.

 

[Scout]

You actually can become pregnant again. The mother of a friend of mine recently gave birth, years after she had her tubes tied.

The ends of the tubes have been cut and burned-off. I’m not going to get pregnant again. I don’t want to get pregnant again. That was the purpose of having my tubes tied.

Scout :tiphat:

 

[Scout]

But if they’re in their right minds they want to.

OK, condoms and other forms of BC are right out. But I still don’t see how non-vaginal sex is wrong during times of fertility. Like I said, why can’t couples enjoy each other w/ out risking having 20 kids running around…

For me, this is exactly the point. I’m never going to be pregnant again, so there is no time that I am “fertile” because there’s no possible way that the sperm is going to attach itself to the egg. However, this doesn’t bother me. I am intimate with my husband just for the sake of being intimate.

Scout :tiphat:

 

[1ke]

OK, another one: I had a step-sister who had her tubes tied after her 2nd kid on doctor’s orders. The doctor told her that due to certain conditions in her womb (I don’t know all the specifics), another pregnancy would almost certainly result in a child w/ severe birth defects and would seriously threaten her life. Where does teaching fall on that one?

Sterilization and Contraception are always gravely immoral.

A person with a just reason to postpone a pregnancy may abstain from sexual relations.

If they choose, they can monitor their fertility and abstain periodically.

 

[1ke]

Where is the idea that a couple should be able to enjoy each other w/ out having 20 kids running around in all of this?

The purpose of sex is procreation and unity of spouses. Pleasure is a by-product not it’s purpose.

If one has a just reason to postpone a pregnancy, the church taches that you can do so. There has never been a church teaching that one must have any specific number of children.

However, your attitude is very anti-child and shows the influence of the secular culture, not the teaching of the church regarding the blessing of children.

I encourage you to read the Catechism sections on marriage and on the sixth commandment in their entirity, plus the source documents from which they have taken some of the quotations, such as Casti Connubi and Humanae Vitae. Both are available online.

Having 20 kids running around isn’t good for anybody; the kids, the parents, or the state that will subsidizing the food stamps…

Again, this is a secular thought process not a Catholic one. It’s very sad.

 

[1ke]

But if they’re in their right minds they want to.

OK, condoms and other forms of BC are right out. But I still don’t see how non-vaginal sex is wrong during times of fertility. Like I said, why can’t couples enjoy each other w/ out risking having 20 kids running around…

As has already been stated, any sex act between spouses must be both unitive **and **procreative. Therefore, any time the couple chooses to engage in sexual activity it must include an unaltered (not contracepted) completed vaginal intercourse-- else it is masterbation and a derivative form of contraception.

 

[1ke]

She’s not Catholic.

Contraception is also against the natural law. It’s a law given by God for everyone. Unfortunately, many have abandoned God’s law.

If my step-sister were to continue to make love to her husband and use NFP as a typical person does, she would still have a 1/4 chance of conceiving w/ lethal consequences.

No, she would not. The method charts found on this website and many others puts calendar rhythm (failure rate 25%) and natural family planning in the same category, which skews the chart outrageously.

No one here advocates calendar rhythm.

Compare those numbers w/ having the tubes tied and her chances are less than 1% in all cases.

Effectiveness rates for NFP are equivalent. However, effectiveness is not really relevant at all. You can NEVER do an immoral act. So, even if NFP did not exist these sterilization procedures and contraception would not be choices. They are intriniscally immoral-- i.e. always wrong.

A person in such a cases might be called to continence.

I think that mentioning the doctrine of justifiable abortion is worth mentioning: an abortion is permitted if and only if carrying to term will seriously threaten the life of the mother.

HoBo, you are so confused.

There is no doctrine of justifiable abortion. The Church teaches tha abortion is always wrong.

So, in effect, she could be opening herself up to conceiving a child only to have to choose between her own life and the life of the child (which may not survive birth anyway and would be severely deformed if it did).

If she were to become pregnant (which people have found to happen after a tubal), she could not choose to kill her child. That is always gravely immoral.

 

[1ke]

Lets just conclude that removal of the womb w/ the fetus in it in such a situation would be acceptable.

No, let’s not.

 

[astegallrnc]

The ends of the tubes have been cut and burned-off. I’m not going to get pregnant again. I don’t want to get pregnant again. That was the purpose of having my tubes tied.

I do have a friend who conceived after a the procedure you described. It was an ectopic. So this method of tubal ligation isn’t 100% though the chance of pregnancy is small.

 

[1ke]

The ends of the tubes have been cut and burned-off. I’m not going to get pregnant again. I don’t want to get pregnant again. That was the purpose of having my tubes tied.

Scout :tiphat:

Scout,

You made it sound before, when you stated that you had your tubal “before becoming Catholic”, that you had contrition for this act.

However, you now sound as if you have no contrition for the act.

I may then have to revise my assessment regarding the unity and procreative aspects as you described it before b/c you quite possibly still have a contraceptive mentality via your continued satisfaction in your tubal.

I use the terms “may” and “possibly” because that may just be the way your posts are coming across and not your actual interior state. I hope that is the case.

 

[Scout]

Scout,

You made it sound before, when you stated that you had your tubal “before becoming Catholic”, that you had contrition for this act.

However, you now sound as if you have no contrition for the act.

I may then have to revise my assessment regarding the unity and procreative aspects as you described it before b/c you are quite possibly still contracepting via your continued satisfaction in your tubal.

I’m not sure I understand you correctly. I did have my tubes tied before I became Catholic. I do not believe it was a mortal sin, because I was unaware of the teachings of the Church at the time. If I was Catholic at the time, I would not have chosen to have my tubes tied. However, since it is done, I will say that I have no qualms about uniting with my husband knowing that I will not get pregnant. I enjoy the intimacy with my husband and do not believe it is a sin to do so.

Scout :tiphat:

 

[1ke]

I’m not sure I understand you correctly. I did have my tubes tied before I became Catholic. I do not believe it was a mortal sin, because I was unaware of the teachings of the Church at the time. If I was Catholic at the time, I would not have chosen to have my tubes tied. However, since it is done, I will say that I have no qualms about uniting with my husband knowing that I will not get pregnant. I enjoy the intimacy with my husband and do not believe it is a sin to do so.

Scout :tiphat:

Thank you for clarifying. As I suspected, the posts were a little misleading.