Birth Control

  • Thread starter Thread starter kdragonfly
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rico_S said:
I don’t think you need to down play this. If one believes that the Church teaches objective truth…there is good reason to stand up and say “this is the truth…any other version is a lie!”

Of course, it will be very difficult to convince someone who disagrees by simply saying…"b/c God says so!"
Click to expand...
I agree with your first sentence entirely… but the second one is what I was shooting for. 😉
Rico_S said:
Yes, the procreative aspect of the marital union is good. And indeed the unitive aspect of the marital union is good. But that doesn’t explain why both aspects must be present in order for sex to be good and right (beyond your basic assertion that it is b/c God said so).
Click to expand...
Back to Humanae Vitae:
Union and Procreation
Click to expand...
  1. This particular doctrine, often expounded by the magisterium of the Church, is based on the inseparable connection, established by God, which man on his own initiative may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage act.
Click to expand...
The reason is that the fundamental nature of the marriage act, while uniting husband and wife in the closest intimacy, also renders them capable of generating new life—and this as a result of laws written into the actual nature of man and of woman.** And if each of these essential qualities, the unitive and the procreative, is preserved, the use of marriage fully retains its sense of true mutual love and its ordination to the supreme responsibility of parenthood to which man is called. We believe that our contemporaries are particularly capable of seeing that this teaching is in harmony with human reason.**
Click to expand...
 
KostyaJMJ said:
Oh well better luck next time I suppose. I guess the most you can do now is try to warn others before it’s too late for them too.

For me it is mostly about obedience. The only thing that I see is that if you were to abandon the teaching on contraception you would have to abandon a great deal of traditional sexual ethics. If sex can be about something other than procreation then there is no reason that premarital sex, mutual masturbation, and all manner of buggery shouldn’t be allowed as long as it’s between consenting partners.
Click to expand...
I personally believe that sexual relations outside of marriage should NOT be allowed, because sex is more than just about procreation. I mean seriously…I have fertility issues, so does that mean I should have never gotten married?

I don’t see the need to warn people:shrug: My issue is I have a spouse who’s unwilling to learn, and before I was married our pre-marriage preparation did not do a very good job at explaining these things to me. We were shown a video on why we should not use ABC, and then the couples leading the retreat talked a bit about it, and that was that. Everything that I know now, seriously, I learned by coming to CAF. :rolleyes:
 
spunjalebi said:
I don’t see the need to warn people:shrug: My issue is I have a spouse who’s unwilling to learn, and before I was married our pre-marriage preparation did not do a very good job at explaining these things to me. We were shown a video on why we should not use ABC, and then the couples leading the retreat talked a bit about it, and that was that. Everything that I know now, seriously, I learned by coming to CAF. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yes the premarital counseling in many places is scandalously inadequate. There should be something like a Scared Straight!! type program for people considering marriage in the Church. It would be much better if people had a good understanding of what they are getting themselves into instead of having it sprung on them years later. I am sure many people get the feeling, hey I didn’t sign up for this…
 
Gingersnaps4 said:
The Lord does know I wish my problems could be fixed, it can be miserable.
Click to expand...
You have my sincerest prayers. 😦
spunjalebi said:
and before I was married our pre-marriage preparation did not do a very good job at explaining these things to me. We were shown a video on why we should not use ABC, and then the couples leading the retreat talked a bit about it, and that was that. Everything that I know now, seriously, I learned by coming to CAF. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
SAD, isn’t it? I can’t say my parish is much better. 😦
Wish I had a fix-all solution… 😊
 
Em, do I hear a certain hyphenated poster being gently called to parish/diocesan marriage prep teaching team?
 
Em_in_FL said:
NFP is an alternative to *abstinence *- like you said - it allows married couples to be fully united and bond through intimacy, even when there are serious/grave underlying issues that make having a baby a challenge. This bond is supposed to help them get PAST those issues, united together - so that the need for NFP goes away entirely!
Click to expand...
If you use that argument, then ABC such as condoms is the same thing as NFP. I’m not saying they are the same thing, I’m saying if the argument above is used then they are the same thing.
 
noclevername said:
If you use that argument, then ABC such as condoms is the same thing as NFP. I’m not saying they are the same thing, I’m saying if the argument above is used then they are the same thing.
Click to expand...
Condoms would be putting an artificial barrier between the husband and wife’s union. NFP would still require the couples cooperation of when exactly they could come together to strengthen their bond. They may have the same end result as you say, but one is a natural ordered solution, the other is unnatural.

Just because something has the same end result, doesn’t necessarily mean that they are equally good.
 
spunjalebi said:
Wouldn’t abstaining also be an artificial barrier?
Click to expand...
Artificial? No. It’s quite natural to not have marital relations 365 days of the year. I don’t know many that do that.

We are called to love our spouses. If there would be a grave reason to avoid conception then loving our spouse would mean prayerfully deciding to abstain during the fertile time. That seems perfectly natural to me.

Eating is natural, but if we are ill with a gastro bug, then we naturally would abstain from food to allow our body time to heal.

I’m not able to see how a mutual decision for abstinence would be artificial.
 
spunjalebi said:
Wouldn’t abstaining also be an artificial barrier?
Click to expand...
I agree, if I wanted to get married and not have sex, I would marry a gay man. 😛

Plus, going over my NFP charts, I might have one safe day that doesn’t involve a huge mess. Where do the NFP pushers think that ONE DAY is enough?! Geez, they must have no libido. When I brought it up to my NFP teachers, they just brushed me off. Way to make want to practice NFP. Planned Parenthood pays more attention their clients.

I still don’t see how limiting sex helps a marriage, or how talking about mucus helps romance. I don’t even want to think about it, much less talk to my fiance about it. IMO, it would be like someone talking about their bathroom habits. I don’t need to know about that. And my fiance doesn’t need to know about cervical mucus, it should NEVER cross his mind.
 
CountrySinger said:
I agree, if I wanted to get married and not have sex, I would marry a gay man. 😛

Plus, going over my NFP charts, I might have one safe day that doesn’t involve a huge mess. Where do the NFP pushers think that ONE DAY is enough?! Geez, they must have no libido. When I brought it up to my NFP teachers, they just brushed me off. Way to make want to practice NFP. Planned Parenthood pays more attention their clients.

I still don’t see how limiting sex helps a marriage, or how talking about mucus helps romance. I don’t even want to think about it, much less talk to my fiance about it. IMO, it would be like someone talking about their bathroom habits. I don’t need to know about that. And my fiance doesn’t need to know about cervical mucus, it should NEVER cross his mind.
Click to expand...
Countrysinger, you are 100 perecent correct on everything, word-for-word.

I’m a bachelor, so I don’t have a dog in the fight, but I find it deeply sad and patheritc how people seem to tell married couples-gleefully-that they can’t be intimate. It almost seems like people go out of their way to find reasons for them not to share their bodies! What is wrong with these people?
 
CountrySinger said:
I agree, if I wanted to get married and not have sex, I would marry a gay man. 😛

Plus, going over my NFP charts, I might have one safe day that doesn’t involve a huge mess. Where do the NFP pushers think that ONE DAY is enough?! Geez, they must have no libido. When I brought it up to my NFP teachers, they just brushed me off. Way to make want to practice NFP. Planned Parenthood pays more attention their clients.

I still don’t see how limiting sex helps a marriage, or how talking about mucus helps romance. I don’t even want to think about it, much less talk to my fiance about it. IMO, it would be like someone talking about their bathroom habits. I don’t need to know about that. And my fiance doesn’t need to know about cervical mucus, it should NEVER cross his mind.
Click to expand...
These are the words of someone who made their decision about NFP before learning about it.
 
Rascalking said:
That is not fair. Unless you can read her mind don’t say that about her.
Click to expand...
Thank you. 🙂 If people could read my mind it would be: “Coffee, fiance, wedding dress, coffee, kittens, fiance, wedding in less than four months, should I leave the Church?, my head hurts, I need sleep, fiance”.
 
Rascalking said:
That is not fair. Unless you can read her mind don’t say that about her.
Click to expand...
Your only reason for saying that is you agree with her. NFP is just as reliable as ABC, if you look at the statistics. It requires effort on both parties and requires more thought that taking a daily abortifacient pill
 
Rascalking said:
Countrysinger, you are 100 perecent correct on everything, word-for-word.

I’m a bachelor, so I don’t have a dog in the fight, but I find it deeply sad and patheritc how people seem to tell married couples-gleefully-that they can’t be intimate. It almost seems like people go out of their way to find reasons for them not to share their bodies! What is wrong with these people?
Click to expand...
As a married person, a couple can be intimate as often as they want. They need to accept any children that come along because of that intimacy.

The Church teaches that if a couple has serious resons, they can abstain.

Women are fertile just a few days a months. Truthfully having just one free day a month is not logical.

There is something wrong with the method being learned for that person. Maybe try another method, or see a doctor to see why the signals are so odd.
 
StTommyMore said:
Your only reason for saying that is you agree with her. NFP is just as reliable as ABC, if you look at the statistics. It requires effort on both parties and requires more thought that taking a daily abortifacient pill
Click to expand...
Um-“My only reason for saying that”? You can’t read my mind either. But apparently, since you can, share those powers with the rest of the world.

Ironically, I didn’t really say my opinion about ABC and NFP. But since you seem to know about me-why don’t you tell me my opinions about it?

I defended her because I thought your comment about her was incorrect. Period.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top