Birth Control

[captaincatholic]

OK, Ill play along.

Even if a woman is 100%, completely positive she is infertile at the time, the sex is “procreative”, meaning the sex act itself is “capable” or producing a child, even though in reality, it will never do so.

In the morning, a woman takes her pill, and she is 98% certain she is infertile. She has sex, which is capable of producing a child. This is not procreative, even though it can produce a child.

Procreative, by the worlds definition, defines that sex must be capable or reproducing, or capable of procreation. Now, if you want to sell the idea that the first one is procreative, than the second one absolutely, positively is.

The ONLY way it is different, is if you tack on all the further restrictions NOT present in the common definition, only present in the Church.

Can we agree to this?

The issue at hand is the added wrongdoing of artificial contraceptives, whether oral, chemical, or a barrier. That is wrong, no matter what the circumstances.

 

[captaincatholic]

If a cure for autoimmune disease is found then the issues I have with my temperature and CM will be fixed. I just feel lucky that I can use NFP part of the time, it is nice. We have no moral issues with barriers so spending tons of money on a specialist isn’t a priority for us right now. On a side note I’m already seeing an endo for my thyroid so I’ll be sure to ask her what she thinks of my case when I see her next.

I have hypothyroid problems and am a type I diabetic. I know the health complications that autoimmune diseases can wreak on a person, but I still don’t think it justifies barrier methods.

 

[captaincatholic]

I use it to decrease my chance of becoming pregnant, the same way a person would use NFP. I’m not seeking to sterilize myself or harm myself. NFP is anywhere from 99% effective down to 75% if not used perfectly, you know. It’s off topic, but I have medical problems that make pinning my fertile time difficult. I use the FAM method of NFP as I’m only sure of my cycle post ovulation, thus far. I don’t see any virtue in abstaining for 3/4 of the month.

I have had cycles where we needed to abstain more than 3/4 of the month. The virtue in it is the opportunity to offer up or sacrifice my own selfish desires for the pleasures of sex for my husband, my children, and anyone I would like to pray for. There is no such thing as wasted suffering, unless it is not offered. Look at Jesus and His sufferings. He didn;t NEED to do it for Hhimself, but for the rest of us. Thank God he did!

I have a friend who had a health problem that pregnancy would have killed her. She and her husband abstained judiciously for 2 years in order to protect her life, their children, their family, and their future. They eventually were cured and able to have more children, praise God.

If you are worried about your own accuracy with NFP, please, talk to someone! It is not that hard! PM me if you like.

 

[Gingersnaps4]

I have hypothyroid problems and am a type I diabetic. I know the health complications that autoimmune diseases can wreak on a person, but I still don’t think it justifies barrier methods.

You don’t think it’s justified because you think there is a distinguishing morality factor between barriers and NFP. My husband and I are not Roman Catholic we are Anglican Catholic. Our theology definitely is more Catholic than Protestant but the Roman birth control teaching is pretty out there in our opinion. Makes no sense.

 

[Em_in_FL]

I’m posting for no other reason than wanting to be the 1000th post…


Good night all!

 

[captaincatholic]

You don’t think it’s justified because you think there is a distinguishing morality factor between barriers and NFP. My husband and I are not Roman Catholic we are Anglican Catholic. Our theology definitely is more Catholic than Protestant but the Roman birth control teaching is pretty out there in our opinion. Makes no sense.

Here, I would take issue with your logic. What is right or wrong is objective, not a matter of personal opinion. Our level of personal guilt can be mitigated by other factors, but that does not change the fact that an act is morally wrong.

 

[captaincatholic]

Thank you all for helping me to prepare to present the Precepts of the Church to our parish RCIA class tomorrow. You have helped me to see other perspectives on living the Church’s laws pertaining to marriage.

Good night!

 

[Gingersnaps4]

Here, I would take issue with your logic. What is right or wrong is objective, not a matter of personal opinion. Our level of personal guilt can be mitigated by other factors, but that does not change the fact that an act is morally wrong.

…but it’s only wrong because the RC church says it is. There’s nothing in scripture to back it up. Did you read the Romans 14 that was referenced earlier? That really spoke to me. Just b/c I think the idea of barriers being immoral yet NFP being moral is silly, doesn’t give me the right to condemn someone else’s belief that it is.

I have had cycles where we needed to abstain more than 3/4 of the month. The virtue in it is the opportunity to offer up or sacrifice my own selfish desires for the pleasures of sex for my husband, my children, and anyone I would like to pray for. There is no such thing as wasted suffering, unless it is not offered. Look at Jesus and His sufferings. He didn;t NEED to do it for Hhimself, but for the rest of us. Thank God he did!

I have a friend who had a health problem that pregnancy would have killed her. She and her husband abstained judiciously for 2 years in order to protect her life, their children, their family, and their future. They eventually were cured and able to have more children, praise God.

If you are worried about your own accuracy with NFP, please, talk to someone! It is not that hard! PM me if you like.

I already have several crosses and I don’t see any virtue in abstaining half or most of the time. Besides, it has to be consensual. My husband doesn’t have a NFP mindset. Of course if pregnancy needed to be gravely avoided it would be a different matter, he isn’t selfish.

 

[PassingThru]

The first example is procreative and unitive.
The second example is only procreative, not unitive. She is BLOCKING part of herself from her husband. They are not fully united. She is rendering (causing) herself to be infertile. They are still having procreative sex, yes, because the husband is completing inside the wife in a way that could produce children.

OK, good, we finally have a rational agreement.

By any standard definition of procreative OUTSIDE the Catholic Church, both ABC and NFP are covered, and are considered procreative.

Simple enough.

Anyone have a disagreement?

 

[Em_in_FL]

OK, good, we finally have a rational agreement.

By any standard definition of procreative OUTSIDE the Catholic Church, both ABC and NFP are covered, and are considered procreative.

Simple enough.

Anyone have a disagreement?

The Catholic Church doesn’t “own” the word procreative. It merely uses it to describe the morality of the act within Sacramental Marriage.

 

[captaincatholic]

…but it’s only wrong because the RC church says it is. There’s nothing in scripture to back it up. Did you read the Romans 14 that was referenced earlier? That really spoke to me. Just b/c I think the idea of barriers being immoral yet NFP being moral is silly, doesn’t give me the right to condemn someone else’s belief that it is.

I already have several crosses and I don’t see any virtue in abstaining half or most of the time. Besides, it has to be consensual. My husband doesn’t have a NFP mindset. Of course if pregnancy needed to be gravely avoided it would be a different matter, he isn’t selfish.

I was just checking this thread before I put the boys to bed. I wanted to clarify. Something is not right or wrong only because the RC teaches it. The Church is a helpful guide in finding objective right and wrong. It is basic ethics, natural law, or whatever other names people have called it by for thousands of years.

The taking of a llife, except in self defense or just war, is wrong.
Artificial contraceptives are wrong.
Sex outside or contrary to marriage is wrong.

The debate about Scripture being the only source of God’s revelation is another debate entirely, but the Bible does condemn Onanism (spilling seed, pulling out before ejaculation), so , in following the line of logic, why is putting semen into a latex tube any better than spilling it on the ground?

As to the right to condemn the beliefs of others, there are objective truths that we should strive to find, understand, and live by. This may include differnetiation between the beliefs of others that are in line with objective morality, and those that are not. Moral relativism or the idea that everyone must find their own truth are neither true, nor right.

 

[captaincatholic]

About a lack of unity with your husband on the issue of NFP vs ABC, that is difficult. Sometimes we are blinded by a variety of things. I am blest to have a husband who strives to outdo me in virtue, and encourages and supports me in living a good life, without trespassing morally in as much as he is able.

 

[PassingThru]

The Catholic Church doesn’t “own” the word procreative. It merely uses it to describe the morality of the act within Sacramental Marriage.

Man, are you always this difficult?

Its like you go out of your way.

I didnt say “own”. I put it as plainly as I possibly could. I am being as clear and accommodating to term, in order to facilitate a definition for Catholics, to help the conversation.

A simple ‘no’ would suffice.

Do you disagree?