Birth control and non-Catholics

[Princess18]

That "unitive aspect of the physical embrace’ --or whatever-- boils down to the absolute fear of preganncy that the vast majority of women have felt over the millenia as long as intercourse and pregnancy were found to be related.

The vast majority of women in the history of the world have experienced intercourse as rape; they had no control whatsoever over intercourse, with whom, when or why. Many were beaten or starved during pregnancy, died during childbirth or had horrendous complications–recto-vaginal fistulas, for example. Many had more children than they could possibly take care of or wanted. Many abandoned them or deliberately starved them. “Baby farms” into the early 20th c. and orphanages were common places to drop them off–most recently in Romania, where contraception and abortion were prohibited, and orphanages bulged with unwanted, irreversibly damaged children.

Why do you think women now outlive men? The major reason is that they now have control over their child-bearing. Frequent pregnancy and child-bearing has always been a major killer of women, now still continuing in Afghanistan.

So much for the power of the ‘unitive aspect of the physical embrace.’

Oh I get it now. You’re a feminist. Well, have fun controlling your icky, disgusting, oppressive body and thank you for sharing your impressive knowledge of how horrible it is/was to be a woman. Fortunately, most of the women posting on this thread don’t appear to have any issue with being female, nor do they harbor any anger at a history that they did not personally experience. They just like being mothers and trusting God. That’s their choice. You understand “choice”, don’t you? You should, it’s your justification for everything you’ve posted here.

Personally, I don’t really care if you’re a doctor or not. You’re here defending your point of view at a feverish pitch to a group that’s mostly comprised of stay-at-home wives and mothers who are happy with their lives (and their faith) and that’s just sad.

The OP started this thread to find out how many non-Catholics utilize NFP because they disagree with or don’t like other forms of birth control. She didn’t ask for a dissertation on how we’re deluded or repressed because we happily accept and respect the way our bodies work, yet you’re still here and still posting.

If it’s making you feel better to vent about a system you feel has wronged you, post away, but if you think you’re doing us any favors by showing us the light … well … nice try but no dice.

 

[BlestOne]

Source for your claims that the “vast majority of women” have experienced sex as rape over the centuries!!

And I would also like some facts to back up the claim that since women have had “reproductive control” that their lifespans have increased because by all the research I have read it was improvements in nutrition, medicine and sanitation that increased life expectancy but the gap between the life expectancy of men and women was being reduced by feminism… stress to work in a man’s job, stress over family issues were cited as reasons for the gap decreasing…

 

[Kaninchen]

Hey, I’m as guilty as anybody of following any available thread diversion but hasn’t this all gotten a bit far away from the op?

 

[Contarini]

But the main point is that no other religion, whether Protestant, Orthodox, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, or Islam issues edicts regarding the conduct of one’s personal life.

That is a truly hilarious claim. All traditional religions have rules governing how one behaves, including all sorts of details of one’s personal life. Christianity is actually unusual among religions in how few such rules there are. Jewish *halakha *governs how one eats, how one dresses, and yes, sexual behavior as well (are you familiar with the laws governing menstruation and the requirement of a mikveh before a woman can have intercourse?). Islamic law is similarly detailed. The rules are not the same as in Catholicism, but they exist.

Leaders might have opinions,but they aren’t binding. There is *no other pope-equivalent *in any other major religion, including Islam.

I agree that ,modern Catholicism is unusual in its ultra-centralized authority structure. However, it’s not quite true that there is no pope-equivalent–Shi’ite Islam comes close (you are quite right with regard to Sunni Islam), and the Dalai Lama also has a good deal of power (and until the Chinese invasion was a theocratic ruler). More to the point, these prohibitions were not made up by individual popes as private opinions. They are ancient traditions, and as I said above there are similar traditions in all religions. Catholicism is different in having a tightly organized structure whereby the Pope can clarify and reinforce traditional teaching. But he can also modify it on occasion, which in some ways makes Catholicism more liberal than less centralized religions. One of the reasons that ultraconservative versions of Sunni Islam have such power is that Sunni Islam is structured in a fairly egalitarian manner, so that “fundamentalists” are able to argue for their positions directly from the Qur’an and it is difficult for more moderate and scholarly leaders to refute and discredit them. The same is true in free-church Protestantism.

Even ultra-Orthodox Jews allow birth control and sterilization for medical reasons.

But not for other reasons–so much for their being “no edicts” governing personal life. As I said, the point is not that all religions have the *same *rules, but that they all have rules. Catholicism gets picked on because it’s big, centralized, extremely powerful historically, and present in large numbers throughout the Western world.

Edwin

 

[1234]

I’ll repeat again, as you have clearly not read anything I’ve posted. This has to do with checking the mucous (or the sensations of wetness/dryness) that is found at the vulva–after it exits the vagina. YOU ARE MISTAKEN that any woman has to palpatate her vulva to check for fertility. It’s sad that a medical doc is so misinformed and has not idea about physiology…

The gist of my comments is that NFP practices not only extensively involve the physiology of reproduction such as daily basal temps, but also involve a great deal of involvement with the genitalia–vulvar secretions, cervical mucus, wiggling the cervix for flexibility, etc. etc.

Re my ‘ignorance’ of these practices and my medical license,

–these approaches were not taught in my medical school or in any medical school I have heard of;

–no OB-GYN I know is familiar with any of these practices;

–no articles about them are published in any of the juried medical journals that I read;

–I have never known personally anyone who practices them.

 

[1234]

Source for your claims that the “vast majority of women” have experienced sex as rape over the centuries!!

A common knowledge of history, accessible to any educated person.

Women were bought and sold routinely. To "marry’ a woman was to buy a sex slave. When one country ran over another, the first thing done was to rape all the women, kill the men, sell the women and children into slavery. The reason why women weren’t married off any earlier than , say, 14, was to wait until her first menstrual period, so it would be known if she was fertile. In privileged circles, girls were married early, sometimes at birth, but the wedding was not consummated until she had menstruated. She never had a say in any of this. Women have lived in fear of rape and impregnation since the beginning of time.

Contraception gave women control over their bodies for the first time in history.

What planet do you come from?

 

[mercygate]

I’m a protestant. I don’t believe it is ever ok to use any form of BC that messes with the way your body works (unless that is needed for another medical reason) or could even possibly work as an abortificant. That effectively removes most BC options right from the start. Then I have a latex allergy so that removes another chunk from the list I would consider acceptable.

Birth Control pills, IUD etc mess with how your body works when you are not even sick. To me this is no different than taking meds you don’t need for any other reason… they fall right in line with recreational drugs IMO.

I don’t need to “fix” my body so it cant be pregnant. It works fine as is, thanks. I am much less resistant to methods that don’t alter your system… barrier methods for example.

ALL methods of contraception “mess with the way your body works.”

 

[mercygate]

LOL. I know what you meant, but you look like you’re apologizing for being licensed in 4 states.

I echo the sentiment. You don’t sound much like a doctor to me.

No doctor I know would post medical opinions on a religion forum about a BC method she knows nothing about.

Real doctors go crazy when their patients visit web sites and then debate diagnoses with their doctors, as if a reading a web site is equivalent to a degree in medicine and years of experience.

And here you are, doing just that.

You sound much more like a patient than a doctor.

Also, it seems unethical and unprofessional for one doctor to tell another doctor’s patient that the treatment plan they’ve come up with together is no good, when that opinion hasn’t been requested, isn’t in a clinical setting, and is based on info gathered from a web site.

Most of us stopped playing doctor when we reached kindergarten.

Doctors I know do not have time for this sort of sport. But give 1234 a little credit, she said she was NOT Ob-Gyn.

 

[mercygate]

Yes, my kids are very PC and it’s tiresome, even if I agree with them.

The best ways to prevent abortion is thru sex education and free or virtually free contraception. this has been proven time and time again, most recently with teh failure of Bush’s ‘abstinence only’ programs–which produced unintended pregnanciesin the same incidence as in the general population, ie. the program failed.

Scandinavia is the best example and they have the best statistics. People take in sex ed with their mother’s milk and have widely available contraception, all forms. There is wide acceptance of illegitimacy, maternity and paternity leave and free or low cost high quality day care. Result: few abortions. More babies. Higher birth rate than Italy and Spain, those 'Catholic" countries. Big recent article in the New York Times Sunday Magazine on the decline in birth rate in Europe targeted especially Italy. Why is the birth rate so low? It’s not contraception, nor abortion. It’s that the society does not support the family. High cost of housing, few jobs. Everyone stays at home 'til they’re forty. Then they marry, have one child. No day care. Mom supposed to stay at home full-time. Grandparents too old to help out. Low income as both parents have to work to survive. Result: one child at most. Countries who support the family like Scandinavia have higher birth rates. Many in these countries don’t bother to marry, but are stable family units–I don’t know if this alters the statistics.

Immigrants from Eastern Europe and Russia don’t use contraception as it wasn’t available back home, was expensive or unreliable-condoms broke. No housing. No jobs–why they emigrated. So they aborted.

Brazil and Mexico legalized abortion to decrease the deaths of women from illegal abortion–often women with small children at home. If they made contraception cheap or free and widely available, there would be less abortion.

This is the ironic result of Humanae Vitae-- forbid contraception and you have thrown gasoline on the fires of abortion.

Humanae vitae did nothing whatever to change Catholic teaching on contraception.

 

[Jennifer_J]

The gist of my comments is that NFP practices not only extensively involve the physiology of reproduction such as daily basal temps, but also involve a great deal of involvement with the genitalia–vulvar secretions, cervical mucus, wiggling the cervix for flexibility, etc. etc.

Re my ‘ignorance’ of these practices and my medical license,

–these approaches were not taught in my medical school or in any medical school I have heard of;

–no OB-GYN I know is familiar with any of these practices;

–no articles about them are published in any of the juried medical journals that I read;

–I have never known personally anyone who practices them.

So knowledge of the body is bad, hmmmm. don’t think so…

Just because YOU are not familiar with any Doc or medical program who know anything about NFP makes no difference, because they DO exist–many Catholic hospitals offer teachers and doctors that are trained in NFP. However, I admit that this is a topic that could be better covered. As I said before, our local university has a section on NFP for our nursing program…

I know of at least 1 NFP only ob/gyn in Ann Arbor ( I delivered my daughter with him).
I know of at least 2 NFP only general practice docs in MN (The Doc I go to, plus the dh of a friend of mine)
I know that Dr Hilgers, of the Pope Paul IV Institute, is involved in Physician training of the Creighton Model, which he and others developed: naprotechnology.com/

If you go to omsoul.com you can find NFP only docs around the country (USA and CANADA).

So there you go, you know about some Doctors who are NFP only

NFP MEDICAL REFERENCES:
creightonmodel.com/references.htm

As an NFP user I can tell you it takes me about 3 min total each day to take observations and record them. I’m not preoccupied with my body, my “genitalia” (the horror! ) or my cycle. I simply observe and record and interpret. (btw, the vulva doesn’t secrete anything )

God bless

 

[Jennifer_J]

A common knowledge of history, accessible to any educated person.

Women were bought and sold routinely. To "marry’ a woman was to buy a sex slave. When one country ran over another, the first thing done was to rape all the women, kill the men, sell the women and children into slavery. The reason why women weren’t married off any earlier than , say, 14, was to wait until her first menstrual period, so it would be known if she was fertile. In privileged circles, girls were married early, sometimes at birth, but the wedding was not consummated until she had menstruated. She never had a say in any of this. Women have lived in fear of rape and impregnation since the beginning of time.

Contraception gave women control over their bodies for the first time in history.

What planet do you come from?

Not very charitable today, huh?

Contraception disengaged women from their bodies. It allowed women to be MORE subjugated by MEN because now MEN could enjoy their women with NO FEAR of pregnancy or responsiblity. It’s totally a step backward…contraception hasn’t stopped rape, it hasn’t made men responsible for their actions, it hasn’t made women more powerful.

I think your view of history is a bit skewed, but thank you for your insults up there. I have a Bachelor degree in Music education. My dh is a biology professor–you know Ph.D…I admit, history is not my forte, however; from the knowledge I do have, not all women through all time have had such an existance. Additionally, being a Man was no picnic throughout history, huh? We each have our crosses. I do not feel put upon because I am a woman.

 

[jmcrae]

All that temperature taking, and preoccupation with genitalia, no less, palpating the vulva, wiggling the cervix, testing the cervical mucus …

I’ve been observing my cycles using the Billings method for most of my life - all I do is notice what comes out when I’m using the bathroom, and note the relevant information on a chart using colour coded dots. It’s not invasive, or even particularly “scientific,” although it’s accurate enough for my purposes.

Contraception gave women control over their bodies for the first time in history.

NFP gives me the information I need to be in control of my body, without messing up its chemical balance.

 

[Syele]

ALL methods of contraception “mess with the way your body works.”

No they all mess with the way sex works. Condoms, as one example, do not change anyones body. They interfere with sex (an action). If I were to take the pill, IUD, etc though, it will alter the actual process that my body goes through each month regardless of if I were to have sex or not.

My objection is to any alteration to physical properties of my body when not medically necessary, sexually related or not. Just as I would not consider wearing pants a physical alteration of legs, condoms do not make alterations to peoples bodies, they cover them.

 

[Swan]

Not very charitable today, huh?

Contraception disengaged women from their bodies. It allowed women to be MORE subjugated by MEN because now MEN could enjoy their women with NO FEAR of pregnancy or responsiblity. It’s totally a step backward…contraception hasn’t stopped rape, it hasn’t made men responsible for their actions, it hasn’t made women more powerful.

I think your view of history is a bit skewed, but thank you for your insults up there. I have a Bachelor degree in Music education. My dh is a biology professor–you know Ph.D…I admit, history is not my forte, however; from the knowledge I do have, not all women through all time have had such an existance. Additionally, being a Man was no picnic throughout history, huh? We each have our crosses. I do not feel put upon because I am a woman.

I disagree with your contention about birth control making women more subjective to men. Before ABC men still had sex with women regardless of the pregnancy issue - men were/are free to walk away while the woman is the one who must carry the child. With the advent of ABC women are now free to participate in sex without the fear of finding themselves pregnant and alone - IMO, it frees women to enjoy sex the way men always have since men have never had to worry about becoming pregnant. Speaking soley for myself, had I not been able to get reliable birth control I might never have had sex at all - married or not (guess I’d never have gotten married). It just wouldn’t be worth the risk to me.

I do actually have a degree in history and it is sadly true that in many cases women were routinely raped as a matter of course by invading armies. It still happens today in many African countries and I believe it was also common during the Bosnian conflict of the 1990s. I’m not saying this always happened, only that it did occur enough to be a genuine issue for women. It highlights the fact that women have often found themselves defacto slaves simply because they were pregnant or had children to care for that they had not chosen to conceive. As a woman, I have a real problem with that - and the suggestion that the women involved should just buck up and deal with it.

 

[Syele]

Rape being a genuine issue for women doesn’t make ABC a good idea. Good grief, Women should not have to suffer from chemicals ravaging us all the time just in case some man decides to ravage us too. Feminists should know better than to advocate women screwing with our reproductive systems so we don’t have to worry about being pregnant if we are raped. I’m offended at the very idea!

 

[Jennifer_J]

I disagree with your contention about birth control making women more subjective to men. Before ABC men still had sex with women regardless of the pregnancy issue - men were/are free to walk away while the woman is the one who must carry the child. With the advent of ABC women are now free to participate in sex without the fear of finding themselves pregnant and alone - IMO, it frees women to enjoy sex the way men always have since men have never had to worry about becoming pregnant. Speaking soley for myself, had I not been able to get reliable birth control I might never have had sex at all - married or not (guess I’d never have gotten married). It just wouldn’t be worth the risk to me.

I do actually have a degree in history and it is sadly true that in many cases women were routinely raped as a matter of course by invading armies. It still happens today in many African countries and I believe it was also common during the Bosnian conflict of the 1990s. I’m not saying this always happened, only that it did occur enough to be a genuine issue for women. It highlights the fact that women have often found themselves defacto slaves simply because they were pregnant or had children to care for that they had not chosen to conceive. As a woman, I have a real problem with that - and the suggestion that the women involved should just buck up and deal with it.

I’m just curious, has the fact the SOME men
1.still have all the sex they want, esp with ABC,
2. still get women pregnant, because short of total abstinence SEX=babies
3. Some men still don’t take responsiblity, because after all WE USED CONTRACEPTION–it’s all her fault…
Changed because ABC is being used? I don’t think so. Contraception hasn’t helped women on this count at all. It hasn’t stopped rape, it hasn’t stopped all pregnancies, it hasn’t "liberated’ women at all.

I agree with the poster that spoke of chemially ravaging our bodies so that men can then ravage us is a horrible thought.

 

[mercygate]

No they all mess with the way sex works. Condoms, as one example, do not change anyones body. They interfere with sex (an action). If I were to take the pill, IUD, etc though, it will alter the actual process that my body goes through each month regardless of if I were to have sex or not.

My objection is to any alteration to physical properties of my body when not medically necessary, sexually related or not. Just as I would not consider wearing pants a physical alteration of legs, condoms do not make alterations to peoples bodies, they cover them.

Well, for me, my body plays a BIG role in “sex.” Contraception certainly “messes with that.”

 

[Syele]

Well, for me, my body plays a BIG role in “sex.” Contraception certainly “messes with that.”

Well I agree it does mess with that, but I see that as two separate issues.

 

[mercygate]

Well I agree it does mess with that, but I see that as two separate issues.

That’s because you are not looking at it through a Catholic lens. No harm; no foul. Goes with the territory.

 

[Syele]

That’s because you are not looking at it through a Catholic lens. No harm; no foul. Goes with the territory.

True, but then this thread was titled “Birth control and non-Catholics”