R
rpp
Guest
It is always dangerous to use secular definitions for theological and moral terms and practices.Contraception - Intentional prevention of conception or impregnation through the use of various devices, agents, drugs, sexual practices, or surgical procedures.
Look, the Church says it is acceptable in within limits. You are not bound to practice it, however, you cannot call it immoral.
From the Catechism.
I reject the secular definitions you used and prefer the Catholic ones instead. They clearly are not in keeping with Catholic Teaching. And, to answer the question which is the thread title, neither are you on this topic.2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self- observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. 158 These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible” is intrinsically evil: 159
Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality… The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality. 160
But then, you already knew that.