Contraception reconsiderd?

[Abu]

Eternal One #16
Abu, I am not claiming it is more moral. If people are going to mess up, why mess up all the way when that poor choice can at least be minimized?

Wasn’t it JPII who said that prostitutes using condoms was a step in the right direction, because it shows they are showing some type of concern for their clients? Isnt that point somewhere along the same lines as what the OP is trying to make?

Wrong interpretation and wrong Pope even after the quote was given to you in #14. So once again:
No it is not “more moral”, but the idea may signify the possibility “in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality.” (**Benedict XVI. **See Jeff Miller at:
tinyurl.com/2774mor )

Phil Lawler:
Why didn’t he (the Pope) condemn the drive to accept recreational sex, and rely on condoms for safety? **Why didn’t he say something like this?:
This means that the sheer fixation on the condom implies a banalization of sexuality, which, after all, is precisely the dangerous source of the attitude of no longer seeing sexuality as the expression of love, but only a sort of drug that people administer to themselves.

The above paragraph, of course, is exactly what Pope Benedict did say—in the paragraph directly preceding the one that’s caused all the fuss. Find it on page 119 of Light of the World.**
catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?id=735

 

[JRKH]

The question is not about whether kids are going to have sex. Bar a small proportion who might get through to married life still a virgin, the majority of them are going to have sex. Short of locking them in the basement, you will not be able to prevent this happening. And they will have sex with or without contraception.

Actually the question IS about whether “kids” (or any unmarried people) are going to have sex!!!
When discussing this whole matter - and Church teaching on the subject - the two things cannot be separated.

So here is the point…If, as you say the majority (even Catholics) are going to have premarital sex then what is preventing them from using contraception?
Church teaching???
Why???
They are already disregarding Church teaching…

Peace
James

 

[CrossofChrist]

There would be a lot less accidents if everyone kept their cars in perfect working order and obeyed all the road rules. But we know that doesn’t happen.

Saying that you shouldn’t allow contraception because it encourages people to have sex is like saying that you can’t allow cars to be fitted with seat belts, anti skid brakes and air bags becuase it encourages bad driving.

Because people intentionally try to get in accidents…

I sure hope not.

OTOH, people are deliberately having sex.

The Church’s existence is bringing others to Christ. And therefore, the Church calls for a total transformation of every individual. So why should the Church say that some individuals aren’t worth the effort, and then encourage more sin? That’s essentially what’s being done if the Church were to say, “Well, 95% of you are hopeless, so here, we’ll help you sin some more!”

That’s unjust to all.

 

[987mk]

When I was married, I personally chose to use artificial contraception to assure I would not impregnate my wife.

When we wanted to get pregnant, I did not use any contraception and we had children.

Now that I’m single, I happen to have had a vasectomy. However, should I choose to engage in sexual relations with another, I will always use a condom, as I want to significantly lower any risk of contracting an STI.

Although admittedly, I’m not terribly interested in sexual relations at this point in my life.

 

[shelby_sun]

There would be a lot less accidents if everyone kept their cars in perfect working order and obeyed all the road rules. But we know that doesn’t happen.

Saying that you shouldn’t allow contraception because it encourages people to have sex is like saying that you can’t allow cars to be fitted with seat belts, anti skid brakes and air bags because it encourages bad driving.

I think that is a very good point. I agree the best was to avoid STDs and unwanted pregnancy. The birth control issue with me is with married couples. I have three children who I have put through Catholic school to because I felt it was the best way to teach them their faith on a daily basis. I simply could not afford to send more kids through Catholic school. NFP is birth control no matter how you want to spin it. You are trying to prevent pregnancy. Just Use medicine when I have a headache, I use medical means to prevent pregnancy. This way my husband and I cannot and be intimate and full connect, physical, mental, emotionally, and spiritually at a good time not planning it like it is going out to dinner.

Now sending your children to Catholic school is not required by the Church but those who don’t because they don’t want to make sacrifices seems worse to me than a married couple using another type of BC other than NFP. This is probably the number one reason people have left the Church or are not as devout as they once were.

 

[987mk]

NFP is birth control no matter how you want to spin it. .

How refreshing to hear the truth.

 

[JRKH]

Originally Posted by shelby sun

I think that Shelby HAS hit on an interesting point and one the I think very often gets lost in these conversations.
“Birth control” and “contraception” can be two entirely different things as one prayerfully considers these matters.

Contraception intends to prevent conception - but needs to stop there. That is, it should not interfere should conception occur.
“Birth control” may involve contraceptive aspects but it does not stop there.
Example…A condom is a form of contraception but NOT birth control. It does not and cannot interfere with a conception should it occur. Some of the various pills etc do not stop at preventing contraception but also act as abortificants (sp?).

This may seem like a subtle distinction to some…but I think it is an important one that needs to be brought out more.

Of course this does not change the Church’s teaching…but…

Peace
James

 

[Bob_Crowley]

Abu, I am not claiming it is more moral. If people are going to mess up, why mess up all the way when that poor choice can at least be minimized?

Wasn’t it JPII who said that prostitutes using condoms was a step in the right direction, because it shows they are showing some type of concern for their clients? Isnt that point somewhere along the same lines as what the OP is trying to make?

I’ve been through this argument before. I personally think the contraceptive pill was God’s gift,given at the very time population pressures were becoming a very real problem in some parts of the world.

There’s a graph at this link showing world population growth.

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Population_curve.svg/350px-Population_curve.svg.png

In 1960 the world population was just over 3 billion. That’s also when the FDA approved the pill, which had been undergoing clinical trials for some years.

If you look at the graph, it’s right where the upswing really starts to take off. Not only that, we’d reached a point in our technical development where it could be done.

If you don’t agree with it, then what’s your answer to unrestrained growth in the human population, along with all the demands that is going to make on resources?

 

[Cimachol]

I have three children who I have put through Catholic school to because I felt it was the best way to teach them their faith on a daily basis. I simply could not afford to send more kids through Catholic school. NFP is birth control no matter how you want to spin it. You are trying to prevent pregnancy. Just Use medicine when I have a headache, I use medical means to prevent pregnancy. This way my husband and I cannot and be intimate and full connect, physical, mental, emotionally, and spiritually at a good time not planning it like it is going out to dinner.

One of the differences between NFP and contraception is that NFP does not corrupt the act of sexual intercourse. Couples using NFP, when engaging in sexual intercourse, perform the act in a completely natural way without taking any steps to render the act infertile. During times of fertility, the refrain from the act – they don’t just artificially separate the act from its inherent traits.

Taking birth-control pills is not the same as taking medicine for a headache, because fertility is not a problem to be cured, and there is no inherent sacredness to having a headache that is corrupted by taking aspirin.

As for teaching our children the faith on a daily basis, I believe the first step is to live it ourselves. We do that in part by obeying the teachings of our Church.

 

[YoungTradCath]

You say:

I do wonder if it sometimes doesn’t do some good. For example, contraception does stop selfish, irresponsible, immature people from producing children. This is my main point.

Let me put it in a clearer way. Murdering a bad person prevents him from beating his wife, but murdering him is still wrong, even if it does produce the good of preventing him from beating his wife. You don’t fix that problem by murdering the man, you fix the problem by getting the woman away from him. Now, of course there are myriad labyrinthine technicalities that could be involved here, like, “What if the woman hits him in the head with a frying pan when he is beating her so she can get away and she accidentally kills him,” but suffice it to say, that’s not murder, but self defense. Anyway, you get what I mean.

 

[987mk]

One of the differences between NFP and contraception is that NFP does not corrupt the act of sexual intercourse. Couples using NFP, when engaging in sexual intercourse, perform the act in a completely natural way without taking any steps to render the act infertile. During times of fertility, the refrain from the act – they don’t just artificially separate the act from its inherent traits.

Taking birth-control pills is not the same as taking medicine for a headache, because fertility is not a problem to be cured, and there is no inherent sacredness to having a headache that is corrupted by taking aspirin.

As for teaching our children the faith on a daily basis, I believe the first step is to live it ourselves. We do that in part by obeying the teachings of our Church.

If one practices NFP, one would rather not have a baby, but would begrudgingly accept pregnancy, should their efforts to AVOID pregnancy fail.

If one uses a condom, one would rather not have a baby, but would begrudgingly accept pregnancy, should their efforts to AVOID pregnancy fail.

There is absolutely no difference.

In both cases, the couple do not want to have a baby, but would accept it, should it occur.

 

[shelby_sun]

You say:

Let me put it in a clearer way. Murdering a bad person prevents him from beating his wife, but murdering him is still wrong, even if it does produce the good of preventing him from beating his wife. You don’t fix that problem by murdering the man, you fix the problem by getting the woman away from him. Now, of course there are myriad labyrinthine technicalities that could be involved here, like, “What if the woman hits him in the head with a frying pan when he is beating her so she can get away and she accidentally kills him,” but suffice it to say, that’s not murder, but self defense. Anyway, you get what I mean.

Well with that way of thinking God would have never allowed Jesus to be murdered on the cross to save our souls, right? It seems He allowed it for the better good of mankind, didn’t He?

 

[shelby_sun]

One of the differences between NFP and contraception is that NFP does not corrupt the act of sexual intercourse. Couples using NFP, when engaging in sexual intercourse, perform the act in a completely natural way without taking any steps to render the act infertile. During times of fertility, the refrain from the act – they don’t just artificially separate the act from its inherent traits.

Taking birth-control pills is not the same as taking medicine for a headache, because fertility is not a problem to be cured, and there is no inherent sacredness to having a headache that is corrupted by taking aspirin.

As for teaching our children the faith on a daily basis, I believe the first step is to live it ourselves. We do that in part by obeying the teachings of our Church.

You mean obeying like cults do or extremist do? You r argument is poor and makes me think you have never connected with a person as the way I described. Giving ourselves to our spouse in such a special way should not be hindered by something like the wrong time of month. I would bet it is the biggest “broken rule” of Catholics, even those who go to Church every Sunday.

 

[Abu]

Bob Crowley #4
The church’s ban on the pill and contraceptives hasn’t made one iota of difference to society’s use of the pill or any other contraceptive device.

To cite disregard for Christ and His teaching through His Church as though this is something new, fails to understand the devastating effects of Original Sin on mankind.

#28
If you don’t agree with it, then what’s your answer to unrestrained growth in the human population, along with all the demands that is going to make on resources?

The dissenters who feel that denying Christ when he gave His Church His full authority in teaching dogma and doctrine on faith and morals, makes them like gods, seem to mimic Satan himself. Such cafeteria Catholics try to remake Christ’s Church to their own image and likeness

Erhlich has been discredited eons ago. His fantasy and myopia deserve oblivion.

Even in 1998, we have the Declaration by the Pontifical Council for the Family issued in Rome on February 27, 1998: On Decrease of Fertility in the World, L’Osservatore Romano, p 6-7, April 22, 1998:
“For 30 years, the rate of growth of the world’s population has continued to decline at a regular and significant rate. At this point, following an impressive drop in their fertility, 51 countries in the world (out of 185) are no longer able to replace their population. To be precise, these 51 countries represent 44 per cent of the population of the world. In other words, the total fertility rate (TFR) in these countries, that is to say, the number of children born of each woman, is lower than 2.1. This is the minimum level of fertility needed for the replacement of the population in a country which has the optimum public health conditions.

“This situation is found to be the same on almost every continent. There is below-replacement-level fertility in America (the United States, Canada, Cuba, and most of the Caribbean islands), in Asia (Georgia, Thailand, China, Japan and South Korea), in Oceania (Australia) and in almost all the countries of Europe. On this continent, the effect of aging on population leads to depopulation, with the number of deaths surpassing the number of births. This negative balance is occurring in 13 countries already, including Estonia, Latvia, Germany, Belarus, Bulgaria, Hungary, Russia, Spain and Italy.”

 

[Abu]

987mk #31
If one practices NFP, one would rather not have a baby, but would begrudgingly accept pregnancy, should their efforts to AVOID pregnancy fail.
If one uses a condom, one would rather not have a baby, but would begrudgingly accept pregnancy, should their efforts to AVOID pregnancy fail.
There is absolutely no difference.

Such are the musings of those who are irrational.

The difference between contraception and Natural Birth Regulation (NBR) are summarised brilliantly by the late Fr Torraco.

**Answer by Fr. Stephen F. Torraco on June 19, 2006 (EWTN): **
“If you want an objective reason as to why contraception is a serious evil and NFP is not only morally justifiable but also praiseworthy, that objective reason is this: with contraception, there is the deliberate rupture of the intimate link between the unitive and procreative meanings of the marital act. With NFP, there is no such rupture. Even in the case in which a couple, using NFP, resorts to the infertile period for marital relations so as to avoid pregnancy (assuming for the sake of argument, for serious reasons) there is no such objective rupture of that link precisely because there is nothing there to contracept. You need to understand that morality is not simply about results. It is also about our actions in and of themselves. The argument to which you refer (the results are the same with NFP and contraception) is purely utilitarian and does not take into consideration the entire human act. Furthermore, as I have pointed out several times, the condoning of contraception quite logically is also the condoning of genital activity with anyone or anything, as well as of in vitro fertilization and cloning. The Church’s teaching on contraception does not at all depend on faith. It is a clear and rational defense of the very essence of civilization.”

 

[_Abyssinia]

I’ve been through this argument before. I personally think the contraceptive pill was God’s gift,given at the very time population pressures were becoming a very real problem in some parts of the world.

There’s a graph at this link showing world population growth.

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Population_curve.svg/350px-Population_curve.svg.png

In 1960 the world population was just over 3 billion. That’s also when the FDA approved the pill, which had been undergoing clinical trials for some years.

If you look at the graph, it’s right where the upswing really starts to take off. Not only that, we’d reached a point in our technical development where it could be done.

If you don’t agree with it, then what’s your answer to unrestrained growth in the human population, along with all the demands that is going to make on resources?

What do you think about other forms of contraception other than the pill? Do they think they are God’s gift too?

There are those who are skeptical about the benefits and skeptical about resources for an increase in population and there are those that you could say are more optimistic about the resources for an increase in population growth of billions:

This article looks at other resources and population:

fee.org/the_freeman/detail/overpopulation-the-perennial-myth

These remarks regarding a population of 10 billion:

becker-posner-blog.com/2011/05/yes-the-earth-will-have-ample-resources-for-10-billion-people-becker.html

And 12 billion:

true-progress.com/the-earth-can-feed-clothe-and-house-12-billion-people-306.htm

 

[JohnR77]

If one practices NFP, one would rather not have a baby, but would begrudgingly accept pregnancy, should their efforts to AVOID pregnancy fail.

If one uses a condom, one would rather not have a baby, but would begrudgingly accept pregnancy, should their efforts to AVOID pregnancy fail.

There is absolutely no difference.

In both cases, the couple do not want to have a baby, but would accept it, should it occur.

Hypothetically, it is possible, and in some cases yes a person practicing artificial contraception (hereafter abbreviated as AC) does open their heart to accept a child that is conceived. However, the differences between that person, AC, and a person practicing NFP are profound. And therefore, the AC person is not as likely to acknowledge or welcome this new child.

The AC person acknowledges no link between Love and Life, between the sex act and the procreation of children and is actively trying to destroy or break that link.
The NFP person is constantly reminded of the link and does recognize it. By showing respect for this link that Mother Nature (God) has placed inherently within the sex act he is instilling within himself a respect for nature and for life

The AC person, in regards to satisfying his sexual pleasures, is exclusively focused on satisfying those desires.
The NFP person regularly tempers his own desires through self control for a greater good.

The AC person tends to believe that he is the master, ruler, and controller over his life and his actions. He is more likely to perceive himself as the sole determining agent of what he does the consequence of his actions. He is less likely to accept an outcome such as a pregnancy that he thought he was ruling out.
The NFP person is more likely to acknowledge and accept greater forces of Nature that are at work and therefore is more prepared to accept an outcome such as an unplanned pregnancy.

Besides this Natural analysis the person of faith also realizes the following :

The AC person has cut himself from God’s grace through serious sin. He is therefore less likely to die to his own slefish desires and welcome the new child that he has brought into the world.
The NFP person has not only remained in God’s grace, but also has grown is grace through sacrifice and self control. He is now stronger and more likely to acknowledge and welcome this new child.

Even the Supreme Court in USA has recognized the link between artificial contraception and the “need” for legalized abortion.

Read more about the links between Artificial Contraception and Abortion

defendingthebride.com/pr/contraception.html

.

 

[_Abyssinia]

I’ve been through this argument before. I personally think the contraceptive pill was God’s gift,given at the very time population pressures were becoming a very real problem in some parts of the world.

There’s a graph at this link showing world population growth.

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Population_curve.svg/350px-Population_curve.svg.png

In 1960 the world population was just over 3 billion. That’s also when the FDA approved the pill, which had been undergoing clinical trials for some years.

If you look at the graph, it’s right where the upswing really starts to take off. Not only that, we’d reached a point in our technical development where it could be done.

If you don’t agree with it, then what’s your answer to unrestrained growth in the human population, along with all the demands that is going to make on resources?

What do you think about other forms of contraception other than the pill? Do they think they are God’s gift too?

There are those who are skeptical about the benefits and skeptical about resources for an increase in population and there are those that you could say are more optimistic about the resources for an increase in population growth of billions:

This article looks at other resources and population and Dr Osterfeld, although not providing any names goes as far as to say:

Many experts believe that even with no advances in science or technology, we currently have the capacity to feed adequately, on a sustainable basis, 40 to 50 billion people, or about eight to ten times the current world population.

fee.org/the_freeman/detail/overpopulation-the-perennial-myth

These remarks regarding a population of 10 billion:

becker-posner-blog.com/2011/05/yes-the-earth-will-have-ample-resources-for-10-billion-people-becker.html

And 12 billion

true-progress.com/the-earth-can-feed-clothe-and-house-12-billion-people-306.htm

 

[JRKH]

The AC person acknowledges no link between Love and Life, between the sex act and the procreation of children and is actively trying to destroy or break that link.

I have to say that I find this comment to be rather insulting. There are any number of people (Catholic and non-Catholic) who are in loving relationships and raising children who either are or have used some form of AC.
To say that such people (as a group) “acknowledge no link…” is simply an unsupportable statement.

The AC person, in regards to satisfying his sexual pleasures, is exclusively focused on satisfying those desires.
The NFP person regularly tempers his own desires through self control for a greater good.

While I agree that the self control associated with NFP is a good thing, I disagree that the one using AC is “exclusively” focused on satisfying sexual desires…again, it is an unsupportable generalization.

The AC person tends to believe that he is the master, ruler, and controller over his life and his actions. He is more likely to perceive himself as the sole determining agent of what he does the consequence of his actions. He is less likely to accept an outcome such as a pregnancy that he thought he was ruling out.

Here we agree…BUT
If you believe in free will, then you too believe that you are the master, ruler, and controller over your life and your actions. It is by your own free will that you choose to be a follower of Christ in His Church.

Now - as a caveat - I must say that I am thinking largely of Christians (Catholic or not) here.

Peace
James

 

[987mk]

@johnr77

Your response is made up almost entirely of assumptions about people who use ABC.

The bottom line is that whether NFP or ABC, the end goal is to avoid pregnancy.

If you dress up a pig and slap lipstick on him, it’s still a pig.