contraception

[1ke]

cmgeo:

Thanks for responding

All I am saying is; Both NFP and CONTRACEPTIVES are meant for achieving the same ULTIMATE objective
and how can any one prove NFP is more “OPEN to LIFE”
than contraceptive while both are meant to prevent
pregnancy (or life)?
EITHER SAY U NEED TO TRY TO MAKE LIFE WITH EVERY
SEXUAL ACT or SAY U CAN HAVE PLANNED FAMILY
USING ANY NON ABORTIVE MEANS PROVIDED
THAT IT IS WITH IN MARRIAGE

Of course NFP and contraceptive have the same end. That is not at issue as the Church nowhere teaches it is immoral to space and plan a family or postpone a pregnancy. You seem to believe that because two things have the same end they are morally equivalent.

This is clearly not the case as is demonstrated by working as a means of providing money to your family versus robbing a bank to provide money for your family. Same end, different means.

Contraception and abstinence are two means of achieving the same end. One is morally permissable the other is not.

The church does not say a couple must have sex with any specific frequency. What it does say is that if you have sex you do not alter the act. Contraception alters the act. Abstinence is refraining from the act. NFP is merely a method of gathering information about the likelihood of conception on any given day. It is an alternative to complete abstinence.

 

[1ke]

Jabronie:

I’ve got one question to add. How do we define “open to life”? No birth control method is 100% effective, so technically intercourse with contraception is still open to life.

I define it the same way the Church does. An unaltered sex act.

 

[1ke]

cmgeo:

Is not sexual act between husband and wife an ultimate expression of love?

It is the renewal of the marriage covenant, and is a sacred sacramental act. Yes, it expresses love.

cmgeo:

If that is the case how can some one say
you need to abstain?

Because it (the sex act) is not the only expression of love nor should it be the central focus of the marriage

cmgeo:

I guess it also goes with the age.
If you are past 50s that may be alright (I believe a lot of people on this forum are)

I am not anywhere near 50, nor do I intend to discontinue relations with my husband when I reach 50.

cmgeo:

If some one who is young and already have kids
and have issues with periods and there fore can not opt for
NFP to plan for family want to express love, are u saying
you have to abstain? Is that not totally ridiculous?

An “Issue with periods” is not an impediment to NFP. NFP is a medical method of observing biomarkers that allows you to abstain something less than completely. No, it is not ridiculous. There are many times in people’s lives that abstaining may be necessary including separation of the spouses (for example, military men deployed), illness, injury, childbirth. What is ridiculous is that so much is made of sex as if you will die without it.

cmgeo:

How hypocritical is NFP any way? You are not achieving anything by NFP. To me it seems like making a statement as follows:
"I AM OPEN TO LIFE BUT I HAVE SEX ONLY AT THE TIME
THAT I AM 100% SURE THAT I WONT CONCEIVE…

This is like fooling the system

That is because you have it wrong. It has nothing to do with “openness to life”. It has everything to do with the integrity of each marital act. You may choose to have sex or not have sex. But if you choose to have sex, you are engaging in a sacramental act and you do not alter that act before, during, or after. You allow it to remain objectively procreative each time you engage in the sex act.

cmgeo:

IF THIS IS THE CASE WHERE IS OPENNESS TO LIFE TO BEGIN WITH?" This is as much of hypocrisy as Contraception

Again, you have the question entirely wrong. It is not about some vague “openness to life”. It is about each sex act and its intergrity.

cmgeo:

Any one here agrees?

(Mind you the church has changed its standard
several times on morality and doctrine)
There fore some where down the line i believe the
church will change it’s stand on this as well

The Church does not change doctrine. You are quite misinformed. The Church cannot change the deposit of faith, received from Christ. She can only conserve and teach it.

 

[stepahnie52706]

additionally… Does God’s Word tell us how to “properly” use our sexuallity? There are references against homosexuality, incest, and beastiality, all of which would be considered “improper use”. We are given counter examples, but are we given an example, a command, anything that tells us what the “proper” use is, aside from it occuring within the confines of marriage

 

[stepahnie52706]

I work with a woman that has downs syndrome. She receives a shot every month to prevent her from having a child with her husband, who also has downs syndrome. The couple cannot take care of themselves without assistance, let alone care for an infant and raise a child. Would the church consider this couple using birth control a sin?

 

[kaymart]

stepahnie52706:

I work with a woman that has downs syndrome. She receives a shot every month to prevent her from having a child with her husband, who also has downs syndrome. The couple cannot take care of themselves without assistance, let alone care for an infant and raise a child. Would the church consider this couple using birth control a sin?

In the case of this couple, I would suggest much counseling with their Priest. If they are able to hold a job, get married, I would believe (I’m only assuming I don’t know the couple) they are able to understand NFP, with help each month for example of checking off the calander days to abstain. If the have a life coach they can help them. I have a son with autism, (age 17) he personally is too developmentally delayed that I doubt Marriage would ever be an issue for him. But he was taught and understands Good touch-bad touch. And touching yourself and girls are a no-no. (mental age is only about 4-6) Don’t underestimate what a person can understand.

 

[stepahnie52706]

kaymart,
thank you for your reply. The woman that i work with is at a mentally 8 years old. She has trouble distinguishing right from wrong (ex: she has attempted to steal quarters in order to wash her laundry when she knows she receives a stipend to take care of such home activities) I work at Dairy Queen with her. She comes in for 2 hours, 3 days a week. She cleans our tables and takes the trays to the customers. Her husband, who is at aslightly lower mental age, works the same job at Taco Bell, but only 1 day a week. I’m not quite sure that they would be able to understand NFP. And if they were, I’m not sure that they would be able to “follow the rule” to abstain on those certain days, as we have to constantly remind her of what she is and isnt allowed to do at work (she’s been working there for longer than i have, which i’ve been there for 5 years). Also, even when she knows she is not allowed to do something, she tries to either sneak it (for example sneaking ice-cream, which she is not allowed to have b/c of her weight) or trick us (for example, she is supposed to leave work every day at 1:30. if one of the managers are not there she will tell us “the boss said i could stay late” or “my dad told me to work late”…she has tried this trick innumerable times). Therefore, i think that even if they were told to abstain on certain days, they would not adhear to the “rule”

 

[kaymart]

stepahnie52706:

kaymart,
thank you for your reply. The woman that i work with is at a mentally 8 years old. She has trouble distinguishing right from wrong (ex: she has attempted to steal quarters in order to wash her laundry when she knows she receives a stipend to take care of such home activities) I work at Dairy Queen with her. She comes in for 2 hours, 3 days a week. She cleans our tables and takes the trays to the customers. Her husband, who is at aslightly lower mental age, works the same job at Taco Bell, but only 1 day a week. I’m not quite sure that they would be able to understand NFP. And if they were, I’m not sure that they would be able to “follow the rule” to abstain on those certain days, as we have to constantly remind her of what she is and isnt allowed to do at work (she’s been working there for longer than i have, which i’ve been there for 5 years). Also, even when she knows she is not allowed to do something, she tries to either sneak it (for example sneaking ice-cream, which she is not allowed to have b/c of her weight) or trick us (for example, she is supposed to leave work every day at 1:30. if one of the managers are not there she will tell us “the boss said i could stay late” or “my dad told me to work late”…she has tried this trick innumerable times). Therefore, i think that even if they were told to abstain on certain days, they would not adhear to the “rule”

Thanks for the backround I can understand more. More so then the issue of Birth Control is the fact of why their Parents and/or guardian allowed Marriage, I am about to become my sons Guardian when he turns 18 in April, if they don’t have a parent, a guardian could be appointed. If their mental age is this young they should have never been allowed to marry, I know they can, but as the mother of a handicap young man I do not believe this is in the best interest of the couple, and their possible future children. You say she has a mental age of 8, would we allow an 8 year old girl get married even if she wanted to? I know the “Civil Liberties people” and the “PC police” would jump on this but just like them I have the right to my own opinion

 

[Jabronie]

1ke:

Of course NFP and contraceptive have the same end. That is not at issue as the Church nowhere teaches it is immoral to space and plan a family or postpone a pregnancy. You seem to believe that because two things have the same end they are morally equivalent.

This is clearly not the case as is demonstrated by working as a means of providing money to your family versus robbing a bank to provide money for your family. Same end, different means.

Contraception and abstinence are two means of achieving the same end. One is morally permissable the other is not.

The church does not say a couple must have sex with any specific frequency. What it does say is that if you have sex you do not alter the act. Contraception alters the act. Abstinence is refraining from the act. NFP is merely a method of gathering information about the likelihood of conception on any given day. It is an alternative to complete abstinence.

Wow! You stated this with perfection. To put NFP in simple terms, the couple just doesn’t have sexual relations when pregancy is most likely to occur. They wait until pregnacy is pretty much impossible. Therefore nothing is modified. I never thought about it that way before. :clapping:

 

[kaymart]

1ke:

Of course NFP and contraceptive have the same end. That is not at issue as the Church nowhere teaches it is immoral to space and plan a family or postpone a pregnancy. You seem to believe that because two things have the same end they are morally equivalent.

This is clearly not the case as is demonstrated by working as a means of providing money to your family versus robbing a bank to provide money for your family. Same end, different means.

Contraception and abstinence are two means of achieving the same end. One is morally permissable the other is not.

The church does not say a couple must have sex with any specific frequency. What it does say is that if you have sex you do not alter the act. Contraception alters the act. Abstinence is refraining from the act. NFP is merely a method of gathering information about the likelihood of conception on any given day. It is an alternative to complete abstinence.

I know some else said it before, but I like to add—Very well writen,you put it into words and examples that everyone can understand.

 

[stepahnie52706]

stepahnie52706:

Does God’s Word tell us how to “properly” use our sexuallity? There are references against homosexuality, incest, and beastiality, all of which would be considered “improper use”. We are given counter examples, but are we given an example, a command, anything that tells us what the “proper” use is, aside from it occuring within the confines of marriage

 

[Feanaro_s_Wife]

stepahnie52706:

I work with a woman that has downs syndrome. She receives a shot every month to prevent her from having a child with her husband, who also has downs syndrome. The couple cannot take care of themselves without assistance, let alone care for an infant and raise a child. Would the church consider this couple using birth control a sin?

Since no method of contraception is 100% effective, what will happen if they do conceive? Sadly I believe it will be a state funded abortion.

I agree that whoever thought that marriage was a good idea for them was seriously misguided.

Malia

 

[stepahnie52706]

they are not using a typical contraceptive. The medication that they have her on makes it virtually impossible for her to conceive. And regarding the issue of them marrying, they are both grown adults, in their early 40s. They have the same desires that we do regarding companionship. They found each other, or rather God led them to each other, for a reason. God created marriage as a visual, physical example of His love for us. Some mere medical condition should not be used as an excuse for two human beings not to be able to experience the joy and spiritual growth that can come from marriage.

And no one has yet to give me scripture that defines the “proper” use of our sexuality…

 

[Al_Masetti]

www.ccli.org

That’s the Couple-to-Couple League, which several other posters have mentioned.

On this Forum, there have been many relevant discussions. Do a search for various key words.

As birth control gets “easier”, the issues become “trickier”. This is an important topic to explore fully.

Sometimes Human Life International has good discussions on this also.

 

[1ke]

stepahnie52706:

additionally… Does God’s Word tell us how to “properly” use our sexuallity? There are references against homosexuality, incest, and beastiality, all of which would be considered “improper use”. We are given counter examples, but are we given an example, a command, anything that tells us what the “proper” use is, aside from it occuring within the confines of marriage

Stephanie, I don’t understand what your question is. Can you please explain what you are driving at?

Also, are you Catholic?

 

[stepahnie52706]

1ke:

To properly use the sexuality that God gave us, each sex act must be unitive and procreative. Therefore no action may be taken before, during, or after the sex act that purposely renders it infertile…

Does the Bible tell us how to properly use our sexuality? It gives us examples how not to use it (homosexuality, incest…), but does it tell us how we are to use it?

Also, does the Church use Genesis 1:28 in its teachings regarding birthcontrol?
"God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it…”

 

[kaymart]

stepahnie52706:

they are not using a typical contraceptive. The medication that they have her on makes it virtually impossible for her to conceive. And regarding the issue of them marrying, they are both grown adults, in their early 40s. They have the same desires that we do regarding companionship. They found each other, or rather God led them to each other, for a reason. God created marriage as a visual, physical example of His love for us. Some mere medical condition should not be used as an excuse for two human beings not to be able to experience the joy and spiritual growth that can come from marriage.

And no one has yet to give me scripture that defines the “proper” use of our sexuality…

Stepahine, I beg to differ, This is not a “medical” condition as you stated in your ealier post. This is a mental condition. These people as you described earlier are not able to understand simple instructions.You said mental age of 8. As I said myself earlier, I have a child (he’s 17, but is a child) in this situation, I do not believe it is in the best interest of the couple or their possible child they may concieve and as someone else stated earlier No form of BC is 100 percent be it NPF, Pills, that shot, her regular medications or even sterlization. What would happen then? make this “child like” woman have a baby or worse an Abortion??? Even if she gives the baby up for adoption (which would be the best choice) The trauma of birth would be horrible for her. I know I have a boy and will not have to worry about the pregnancy part, but I will with God’s help keep him and another girl like himself safe. I strongly against marriage for people who mental age is below 16.

 

[stepahnie52706]

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. To avoid any senseless arguing, lets get back to the original topic

 

[LittleDeb]

Yes there are hundreds of books on the topic. As the nature of your question sounds very much like my “Bible alone” future-sister in-law I will address the answers similarly to how she and I discuss this topic.

My first reference for you would be to go to www.scripturecatholic.com. There are many times in Scripture that contraception is addressed. How some people read these passages is what seems to be in debate.

A Catholic Christian reads Scripture based on 2000 years of history. A Bible Christian (or Sola Scriptura) person reads it based on their own opinions, and those opinions of their particular pastor. That those those opinions may differ with the Christian church down the street is of no consequence. These folks believe that The Holy Spirit has guided them down this path so they cannot be wrong.

If you are truly interested in learning more about the teaching please PM me and I will give you a list of articles and books as long as your arm for you to read. This teaching is the one that really kept me Catholic. All Christian churches before 1930 taught that contraception was a mortal sin. Only the Catholic Church has remained in this Truth.

 

[kaymart]

stepahnie52706:

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. To avoid any senseless arguing, lets get back to the original topic

I did not go off-topic you asked a question (about the mentality handicap, BC and marriage) after your original post and I answered it, sorry it was not the reponse you wanted to hear.