Contraception is just like bulemia!

  • Thread starter Thread starter manualman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

manualman

Guest
OK, I’m working on a conversational analogy to help my case when contraception comes up in secular conversation. Quotes from Humanae Vitae and the Theology of the Body are great in catholic circles, but its nice to have some analagous scenarios to help folks overcome the idea that it is a silly catholic neurosis.

My idea is comparing contraception to bulemia. Honestly, it may not really be may idea, I might have heard it somewhere long ago and now need to recreate the whole analogy now.

What is the goal of contraceptives? To allow the practitioner to enjoy the pleasures of sex without the naturally occuring outcome. What is the goal of bulemics when they binge/purge? To indulge in the pleasure of food without experiencing the natural outcome (weight gain when excessive).

Both attempt to seperate a natural process that involves pleasure from its outcome. Nobody denies that bulemia is an unhealthy condition, both physically and mentally. Nobody would think it a very good idea if science found a way to put a drain pipe on our stomachs to dump out excessive food we didn’t want adding to the gut size. It might mitigate the physical harm, but wouldn’t address the psychologically disordered nature of the act.

I think people can relate to this analogy and better understand our objection to the unhealthy severing of sex and its outcome. It’s certainly not a replacement for the argument that contraceptives are inherently sinful, but it’s nice to have multiple supporting positions.
 
The analogy between bulimia and contraception was used by John Kippley in his booklet, *Sex and the Marriage Covenant, *originally published under a different title in 1967.
 
40.png
manualman:
OK, I’m working on a conversational analogy to help my case when contraception comes up in secular conversation. Quotes from Humanae Vitae and the Theology of the Body are great in catholic circles, but its nice to have some analagous scenarios to help folks overcome the idea that it is a silly catholic neurosis.

I think people can relate to this analogy and better understand our objection to the unhealthy severing of sex and its outcome. It’s certainly not a replacement for the argument that contraceptives are inherently sinful, but it’s nice to have multiple supporting positions.
Click to expand...
Except that while bulemia is undoubtedly a disorder, contraception is not. So your analogy fails. Besides, even Catholics are “allowed” to try and avoid conception by practicing NFP.

If the idea of avoiding conception is fine, then the method applied is of no consequence. To say that contraception is artificial is nonsense. We all use artificial methods to improve on “natural” processes and no one considers them wrong. Have you ever avoided a hammer, just because it is an artificial extention of your fist?
 
40.png
Hitetlen:
Except that while bulemia is undoubtedly a disorder, contraception is not. So your analogy fails. Besides, even Catholics are “allowed” to try and avoid conception by practicing NFP.

If the idea of avoiding conception is fine, then the method applied is of no consequence. To say that contraception is artificial is nonsense. We all use artificial methods to improve on “natural” processes and no one considers them wrong. Have you ever avoided a hammer, just because it is an artificial extention of your fist?
Click to expand...
I’ll post here what I just posted in another thread:
NFP can be used illicitly, in that case it is considered the same as artificial forms of birth control. The couple must prayerfully consider every month what God is calling them to do, not whether they think it’s the right time to have children. NFP does not exclude God’s will from the equation, ABC does.
 
manualman said:
My idea is comparing contraception to bulemia. Honestly, it may not really be may idea, I might have heard it somewhere long ago and now need to recreate the whole analogy now.
Click to expand...
Dr. Janet Smith in her talk titled “Contraception: Why Not?” would agree with you:
People say Natural Family Planning is like dieting. We have this phenomenon now of bulimia. People eat and they throw up. That’s a bit like contraception. You want the pleasure but you don’t want the consequences. You engage in the act and you violate the act. Whereas Natural Family Planning is a lot like dieting but a lot better. When you diet, you can’t eat the chocolate cake; you have carrots and celery. Sex during the infertile time apparently is a lot better than carrots and celery. The options are better. There’s a pinch in it. It’s difficult, but it’s not impossible and it does great things for marriage.
Click to expand...
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/sexuality/se0002.html
Click to expand...
 
Hey, I like your way of thinking.

There are a couple of problems though. First off, the idea of putting the tube in the stomach to dump out excess food…In an all serious, not exaggerating manner, I have known girls who suggested that someone invent this, and I do know even more who would be the first in line to get one. Not saying this is healthy but yes, there are people that do desire this.

A less extreme example than the body pump might be diet pills. Unnaturally increasing your metabolism to ridiculous levels, also increasing blood pressure, heart rate, etc. to lose a bit of weight? Or even more extreme are the few that can somehow obtain insulin and use that to manipulate body fat, which is quite dangerous.

I guess you could compare the psychological disorder of body-dismorphia to some sort of sex-obsessive disorder, but that would be quite a stretch.
 
40.png
RCCDefender:
I’ll post here what I just posted in another thread:
NFP can be used illicitly, in that case it is considered the same as artificial forms of birth control. The couple must prayerfully consider every month what God is calling them to do, not whether they think it’s the right time to have children. NFP does not exclude God’s will from the equation, ABC does.
Click to expand...
You mean that God is not powerful enough to allow the sperm to cross a thin filament of rubber (for example), but is powerful enough to allow a possible fertilization even if the ovaries and the uterus are missing (as asserted by some posters!)? You really should not try to have your cake and eat it, too.
 
40.png
Hitetlen:
You mean that God is not powerful enough to allow the sperm to cross a thin filament of rubber (for example), but is powerful enough to allow a possible fertilization even if the ovaries and the uterus are missing (as asserted by some posters!)? You really should not try to have your cake and eat it, too.
Click to expand...
Who is saying that God would allow fertilization if you’ve taken your ovaries and uterus out? I must have missed something. :confused:
 
How about chewing gum? Is that analogous to contraception? The person wants the pleasure of taste and texture without having to consume and digest the food.

There are relatively few bulemics, but almost everyone has chewed gum.

Also, bulemia can cause serious health conditions that are not found with condoms.
 
40.png
Hitetlen:
You mean that God is not powerful enough to allow the sperm to cross a thin filament of rubber (for example), but is powerful enough to allow a possible fertilization even if the ovaries and the uterus are missing (as asserted by some posters!)? You really should not try to have your cake and eat it, too.
Click to expand...
Yes, God can step in and create new life even when a couple is deliberately frustrating the process. That’s not the point. The point is that those couples are deliberately shutting off their fertility and effectively shutting out God.

A couple who uses NFP to delay pregnancy is not altering their fertility in any way. They are using information from a woman’s body signs in order to plan the family that God wants them to have. The focus is on God, not avoiding fertility.
 
40.png
Aquarius:
How about chewing gum? Is that analogous to contraception? The person wants the pleasure of taste and texture without having to consume and digest the food.

There are relatively few bulemics, but almost everyone has chewed gum.

Also, bulemia can cause serious health conditions that are not found with condoms.
Click to expand...
I believe that you have your analogies reversed:

Chewing gun (almost everyone has chewed gum) is analogous to venial sin – left untreated (unrepentant) it is disruptive (cavities) but not fatal to the soul.

Bulemia (a serious and can be life threatening disorder) is analogous to mortal sin (ABC) – left untreated (unrepentant) it has a fatal (physical death) prognosis to the life of a soul.
 
40.png
ElizabethAnne:
Yes, God can step in and create new life even when a couple is deliberately frustrating the process. That’s not the point. The point is that those couples are deliberately shutting off their fertility and effectively shutting out God.

A couple who uses NFP to delay pregnancy is not altering their fertility in any way. They are using information from a woman’s body signs in order to plan the family that God wants them to have. The focus is on God, not avoiding fertility.
Click to expand...
If God wants in, how can he be shut out?
 
40.png
setter:
I believe that you have your analogies reversed:

Chewing gun (almost everyone has chewed gum) is analogous to venial sin – left untreated (unrepentant) it is disruptive (cavities) but not fatal to the soul.

Bulemia (a serious and can be life threatening disorder) is analogous to mortal sin (ABC) – left untreated (unrepentant) it has a fatal (physical death) prognosis to the life of a soul.
Click to expand...
Here’s what the original,post said about bulemia:
“To indulge in the pleasure of food without experiencing the natural outcome (weight gain when excessive).”

That sounds an awful lot like chewing gum. Thwarting nature again with a disordered habit.
 
40.png
Hitetlen:
Except that while bulemia is undoubtedly a disorder, contraception is not. So your analogy fails. Besides, even Catholics are “allowed” to try and avoid conception by practicing NFP.

If the idea of avoiding conception is fine, then the method applied is of no consequence. …
Click to expand...
While the idea of losing weight is okay, it doesn’t mean that all ways to loss weight are acceptable. Intentionally throwing up after a meal is not okay. But people can follow a weight loss diet if there is a just reason for weight loss. If there is not a just reason to diet, such as an 80 pound girl with anorexia, then dieting is wrong in that circumstance, but that doesn’t mean weight loss dieting is inheritantly wrong.

Likewise, avoiding a pregnacy is not inheritantly wrong; it depends on the circumstance. People are allowed to use NFP to avoid pregnancy if there is a just reason. But just as those who want to loose weight should not eat whatever-they-want, whenever-they-want and purge, those who need to avoid pregnancy should not use contraception.
 
Gardens wrote:

“Likewise, avoiding a pregnacy is not inheritantly wrong; it depends on the circumstance. People are allowed to use NFP to avoid pregnancy if there is a just reason.”

And this is the foundation upon which the Church will eventually OK ABC.
 
manualman said:
).

Both attempt to seperate a natural process that involves pleasure from its outcome. \QUOTE]

the difference is that bulemia is a psychological/health problem but contraception is a moral problem (according to your own beliefs). Proper digestion of food is neccessary for the body to survive, to directly harm your own body points to a pschological condition.

also I can’t believe that chewing gum is considered a sin, seriously?
Click to expand...
 
40.png
Aquarius:
How about chewing gum? Is that analogous to contraception? The person wants the pleasure of taste and texture without having to consume and digest the food.
Click to expand...
No. I don’t think that analogy works. Sometimes we chew gum because we want fresh, minty breath. I think gum is more analogous to foreplay–it gets the juices flowing. And cynic–this is an anology–chewing gum isn’t a sin (unless you stole the gum:) )
 
40.png
Aquarius:
Gardens wrote:

“Likewise, avoiding a pregnacy is not inheritantly wrong; it depends on the circumstance. People are allowed to use NFP to avoid pregnancy if there is a just reason.”

And this is the foundation upon which the Church will eventually OK ABC.
Click to expand...
No, that’s the foundation upon which the Anglican Church approved contraception for married couples with serious reasons back in the 1930’s.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top