Catholic mum answers, "isn't NFP just Catholic birth control?"

[Jaaanosik]

That’s the comparison you want to draw? Ignore the argument itself and throw your hopes at a cheap shot? You mentioned “orifices”, I was correcting you, showing that nothing was ‘unnatural’ about how the temperature is taken.

How is it natural to stick the thermometer to mouth, vagina, or anus when you are not sick?
Even when I am sick I stick it under my arm.
The NFP does not recommend to use the thermometer under an arm. Why?

 

[Avocadomom]

How is it natural to stick the thermometer to mouth, vagina, or anus when you are not sick?
Even when I am sick I stick it under my arm.
The NFP does not recommend to use the thermometer under an arm. Why?

Because it’s inaccurate. If you’re taking your temperature that way for any reason, you’re not getting the most accurate reading. NFP requires a precise value. If you just want to know whether you have a fever or not, under the arm is fine. If you need to know exactly what your body temperature is, it’s not good enough.

 

[Jaaanosik]

Because NFP simply takes advantage of your natural periods of infertility, and contraception lets you have sex when you are fertile but circumvent the possibility of pregnancy. You are simply making a choice not to have sex on certain days of the month, vs. making a choice to change the nature of sex between spouses.

Is your argument that other forms of birth control should be permissible, or that no regulation of pregnancies should be permissible?

In order for NFP to work a couple has to do and** is allowed to do** unnatural things.
On what merit another couple** is not allowed to do** unnatural things for other type of non-abortive birth control?

 

[Avocadomom]

In order for NFP to work a couple has to do and** is allowed to do** unnatural things.
On what merit another couple** is not allowed to do** unnatural things for other type of non-abortive birth control?

NFP isn’t okay because it’s “natural.” That’s just part of the name.

It’s okay because it does not alter the act of intercourse between spouses. NPF is just information.

 

[ahs]

In order for NFP to work a couple has to do and** is allowed to do** unnatural things.
On what merit another couple** is not allowed to do** unnatural things for other type of non-abortive birth control?

Contraception isn’t wrong because of it’s unnatural-ness. It’s wrong because it actively seeks to remove the procreative nature from an act which is taking place. Why are you hung up on “natural” vs. “unnatural”? Natural contraception would be wrong also (withdrawal, eating plants with properties that cause contraceptive or abortifcient effects, etc…).

If a healthy person would be measuring temperature daily without a reason then it’s an indication of a possible mental issue.

I disagree, but that doesn’t really matter because it’s not really what we are discussing. You are resorting to logical fallacy again (strawman, and possibly a non-sequitur depending on where you are going with this).

I don’t have a problem with doing unnatural things for a good end. Taking blood samples, x-rays, … all kind of unnatural things are justified because of a good end.
Having said the moral theology says that the end does not justify the means.

Who defines “good end”. I think that a couple who is not ready to get pregnant for a time, adn therefore abstains from sex suring their fertile period, is achieving a “good end” [avoiding conception when they cannot support a child] using moral means [self-control].

Do you know a difference between mutilation and amputation?

You are using logical fallacy again. Please stop doing that.

As I said I don’t have an issue with doing the unnatural things for a good end but I have an issue with double standard. If the unnatural stuff is justified for NFP then why it’s not justified for other non-abortive birth controls?

It’s not justified for contraception because contraception seeks to remove the procreative nature from an act which it taking place. We are not allowed to try to remove the procreative nature from an act that we choose to engage in.

 

[Jaaanosik]

Because it’s inaccurate. If you’re taking your temperature that way for any reason, you’re not getting the most accurate reading. NFP requires a precise value. If you just want to know whether you have a fever or not, under the arm is fine. If you need to know exactly what your body temperature is, it’s not good enough.

I know that but my point is that it’s not natural to go to extremes daily in order to take the measurement when a person is not sick.
Therefore the question if the fertility is a diseases?

 

[His_helpmeet]

Not all forms of NFP require using a thermometer. The Billings method, for example, uses just natural sensations. No other testing required.

 

[Avocadomom]

I know that but my point is that it’s not natural to go to extremes daily in order to take the measurement when a person is not sick.
Therefore the question if the fertility is a diseases?

I don’t think taking your temperature, which takes up all of 20 seconds of your day, is going to extremes. Seems like that’s your opinion.

 

[PennyinCanada]

I know that but my point is that it’s not natural to go to extremes daily in order to take the measurement when a person is not sick.
Therefore the question if the fertility is a diseases?

Why would you say taking a temp daily is an extreme? Taking a temp in your mouth is not orafices. I think you are purposely using ‘extreme’ language to make your point have more merit. It isn’t working.

We can gather information to make an informed decision.

If you are going to continue to say that NFP is artificial birth control, you better give up both artificial birth control AND NFP to follow your conscience. That’s the logical conclusion. Is that the direction you intend to go?

 

[Jaaanosik]

I don’t think taking your temperature, which takes up all of 20 seconds of your day, is going to extremes. Seems like that’s your opinion.

I am talking about the difference between arm and the other places.

 

[Avocadomom]

I am talking about the difference between arm and the other places.

You think taking an oral temperature is “extreme” but an under arm temperature is not?

 

[fpt]

For Catholicism, the use of the Natural family planning is not the contraception: the sin of contraception is not constituted.

The voluntary and direct contraception cannot be via the use of the N.F.P. The fact of saying the contrary is not in link with the catholic morality. If you are not on this page, you need to improve your knowledge in Catholic moral theology.

The simple fact of saying that the use of N.F.P., with all the natural methods, is the sin of contraception is totally false. A doctrinal position, going to this way, is a lie: not more and not less.

 

[Jaaanosik]

Contraception isn’t wrong because of it’s unnatural-ness. It’s wrong because it actively seeks to remove the procreative nature from an act which is taking place. Why are you hung up on “natural” vs. “unnatural”? Natural contraception would be wrong also (withdrawal, eating plants with properties that cause contraceptive or abortifcient effects, etc…).

I disagree, but that doesn’t really matter because it’s not really what we are discussing. You are resorting to logical fallacy again (strawman, and possibly a non-sequitur depending on where you are going with this).

Who defines “good end”. I think that a couple who is not ready to get pregnant for a time, adn therefore abstains from sex suring their fertile period, is achieving a “good end” [avoiding conception when they cannot support a child] using moral means [self-control].

You are using logical fallacy again. Please stop doing that.

It’s not justified for contraception because contraception seeks to remove the procreative nature from an act which it taking place. We are not allowed to try to remove the procreative nature from an act that we choose to engage in.

There is the Natural Law behind what is natural and what is not natural.
The Natural Law is based on the human nature - the capability to reason to find out what is good and what is not good.
The Natural Law is driven by God’s intelligent design. We study, think, reason how our body works what it was designed for.
Mouth, vagina, anus where not designed for a thermometer.

 

[Avocadomom]

There is the Natural Law behind what is natural and what is not natural.
The Natural Law is based on the human nature - the capability to reason to find out what is good and what is not good.
The Natural Law is driven by God’s intelligent design. We study, think, reason how our body works what it was designed for.
Mouth, vagina, anus where not designed for a thermometer.

I think you are just trying to get a rise out of people, because your argument is seriously ridiculous. Peace!

 

[fpt]

There is the Natural Law behind what is natural and what is not natural.
The Natural Law is based on the human nature - the capability to reason to find out what is good and what is not good.
The Natural Law is driven by God’s intelligent design. We study, think, reason how our body works what it was designed for.
Mouth, vagina, anus where not designed for a thermometer.

Is it immoral to use the Mouth, the vagina, the anus or under the arm for using thermometer in order to know the temperature of the body? If your answer is yes, we do not have the same religion.

 

[fpt]

In the marriage what is the role and the function of:

Mouth, lips of mouth, the tongue, the hands, the fingers, the arms, the intimate top parts, the intimate below parts, the back, the hair…etc.

The issue of the telos!!! The teleology, a great discipline!!!

 

[The_Bucket]

Mouth, vagina, anus where not designed for a thermometer.

So I gather you abstain from using all modern medicine, yes? After all, the stomach was designed to digest food, not deliver medication to one’s body.

 

[Jaaanosik]

You think taking an oral temperature is “extreme” but an under arm temperature is not?

Let me repeat:

• in general taking temperature is not natural; we do it only when there is an indication that there is something wrong with the body
• under an arm is good enough most of the time
• the other places seems to be more extreme compared to the arm; if by accident an old mercury thermometer would break in a mouth it would do more damage to body than if it happened under an arm; if by accident the thermometer has some germs on it then it can do more damage in a mouth than under an arm.

What is wrong with a body in order to measure temperature daily?

 

[fpt]

There is the Natural Law behind what is natural and what is not natural.
The Natural Law is based on the human nature - the capability to reason to find out what is good and what is not good.
The Natural Law is driven by God’s intelligent design. We study, think, reason how our body works what it was designed for.
Mouth, vagina, anus where not designed for a thermometer.

**
Are you as some orthodox persons who thinks that the fact of studying the body, in the sexual way, is the PORNEA. Are you serious?**

 

[Avocadomom]

Let me repeat:

• in general taking temperature is not natural; we do it only when there is an indication that there is something wrong with the body
• under an arm is good enough most of the time
• the other places seems to be more extreme compared to the arm; if by accident an old mercury thermometer would break in a mouth it would do more damage to body than if it happened under an arm; if by accident the thermometer has some germs on it then it can do more damage in a mouth than under an arm.

What is wrong with a body in order to measure temperature daily?

Nothing is wrong, the person is just trying to glean additional information about their body.
I take my blood pressure several times a week. I am not sick, I’m just keeping track of things. I weigh myself every week. I’m not trying to lose or gain weight, I just like to know what’s up with my weight. If I am up a couple of pounds, the information helps me make healthier choices until I am back down to my ideal weight.

Taking a temp under the arm is never good enough for small children. It is good enough to detect a fever, but once it is established that there is a fever, a more accurate method needs to be employed.