Exactly how is NFP (Natural Family Planning) NOT just another form of birth control?

[Odell]

Human nature is what it is. Contraception is as old as recorded history. It was used in the OT. Now you can take a position that it is evil if you desire, and I don’t quibble with your choice. However, abstinence is a failure.

I think the way it has been tought is what has failed us.

I prefer teaching chasity. You really should look into theology of the body as someone has noted maybe even start a thred on it.

If I knew what the church tought on sex and marriage before I got married I would have waited to have sex and I think if it is tougt to kids “theology of the body” those whom it is taougt to the failure rate would drop significant, teach chasity not abstinence

I don’t plan on my kids failing me on this for the teachings on theology of the body are beautiful

If I were to teach me kids about contraception I would already be expecting tem to fail. And yes they can and will remain chaste until marriage

Every study on abstinence shows that it accomplishes nothing but raise pregnancy rates and untilmately abortion rates.

Who even teaches this stuff anymore? My teacher in school said she taougt abstaining first but she only spent maybe two minutes on abstinence the rest was on how to have sex witout geting pregnant. How many people you know that have gotten pregnant on birth control? I wonder how many kids go out thinking its normal now its our nature now I don’t have to worry about geting pregnant now I have the means to do it.

That’s just what we need educate 12-14 year old kids that you can have sex without the risk of getting pregnant. Wonder what happens when the 12 year old gets pregnant?

Since we are supposed to be limiting abortions, abstinence would seem not the way to go about it. The church has argued itself into a box on this issue. I can appreciate the logic of their argument as it goes, however the reality of things is still that those who promote full sex education and availabilty to contraception account for a lowering of abortion rates and teen pregnancy much more effectively than abstitence which simply sends the numbers in the opposite direction. Sorry as I am that that is the case, it is. One must face the facts even if one desire to continue to argue that such behavior is wrong.

I think you are living in a BOX why are you even catholic?

Do you not understand that those who have sex witout even consider a baby are most often going to result to plan B. Have not abortiob rates gone up with the use of contraception?

Bottom line is what reduces abortions? I tend to opt for that which reduces abortions not increases them.

Come on I ask you harden not your heart

Also did you not no the pill is a abortificant? It causes you to abort the fetus

 

[newbetx]

Please refrain from speaking “for” me. you are mostly wrong, You are insulting.

Sorry. Won’t do it again.

 

[thomfra]

For those who have such disdain for the phrase “opennes to life,” let the record show that not only do faithful, NFP-practicing Catholics claim to be open to life – they prove it! What would you call having 3,4,5,6,7, or 8 children? Would you call that selfishness? Hypocritical? Being unopen to life? Hardly.

The spirit of NFP, in its pure form, is clearly and beautifully demonstrated by the fact that these couples are making the self-sacrificing choice of bringing as many souls into the world as their houses can hold.

SpiritMeadow criticized these couples for their willingness to sacrifice and “believes” that NFP causes great marital strain (although how a person can see into the private lives of thousands of strangers remains a mystery to me). Admittedly, sacrifice has reached the status of a four-letter word in secular America. It’s not only unpopular, but it’s seen as an indictment on everyone else’s lifestyle. However, as Catholics, we know that sacrifice is the way of the Cross. It is what unites us with Christ and conforms us to His image. It is what paves the road to eternity with God. The couples I know who practice NFP with pure motives are, in my estimation, some of the most admirable folks on the planet for their selflessness and willingness to submit themselves to the will of God. Let us not condemn them for their virtue.

People generally have kids for themselves. I include myself in that description. I have always wanted to have kids some day (I have two).

Nobody does it because they want to “help the world” by creating yet more mouths to feed and to further degrade the environment.

Anyway, having kids is not a sacrifice. It’s a privilege (for those of us who can afford them). For many in the poorer countries its a burden forced upon them, or because they haven’t learnt to think for themselves.

 

[gardenswithkids]

I recognize that there would be no problem or few if all people simply followed Catholic doctrine. But that is not the case, and it never has been, and it seems it never ever will be. Most people are not Catholic…

I wrote about following Catholic moral teachings. (Doctrine incorporates more.) The Church’s moral teachings include such teachings as reserving sexual intercourse for marriage. Almost every major religion throughout the world agrees with the Catholic Church about reserving sexual intimacy for marriage and numerous other aspects of sexual morality beyond the scope of this thread topic. The religions that disagree currently with numerous aspect of the Church’s moral teachings usually agreed in the past on many.

…Most people are not prepared to treat sex as something done by the calendar in some rote fashion…

You have a point there. The Church does not require married couples to use NFP. The Church teaches couples may use it if they have serious/grave/just reasons to avoid pregnancy and childbirth, but doesn’t require anyone to use NFP.

Is this how you see God?

I see God as the Triune God, just as the Creed tells us. These titles for God stand out to me as related to this discussion: Father, Son, Creator, Redeemer, Lord and Giver of Life. The mystery of the Trinity has a family relationship. God gives and brings forth life; He creates and saves us. You didn’t ask about how I see the Church, but I’ll tell you because it also relates to this discussion: I see the Church as Bride (of Christ) and Mother.

I see God as loving, faithful, forgiving, merciful and just. He gives us a free will to choose right from wrong. Before we can make a free choice, we need to know right from wrong.

…I know it allows some folks to believe that they are the top of the heap in terms of being “good”…

It’s hard to continue a reasonable discussion with you when you repeatedly throw in rude comments such as that.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

You haven’t the slightest idea of how NFP works or you wouldn’t have made such a ridiculous ignorant statement.

Oh, please spare me. And please stop rolling your eyes. It’s uncharitible. Can’t you simply say you disagree? Just another way to slapping adhominem attacks. NFP is a calendar based constraceptive method. You avoid sex when you are fertile and have it when you are not. I’m sure that sometimes this doesn’t destroy sponteneity but certainly it does in others. As I said, I don’t have a single thing to say against NFP for anyone who wants to use it. I do not understand the continued nastiness.

 

[LJN21]

Oh, please spare me. And please stop rolling your eyes. It’s uncharitible. Can’t you simply say you disagree? Just another way to slapping adhominem attacks. NFP is a calendar based constraceptive method. You avoid sex when you are fertile and have it when you are not. I’m sure that sometimes this doesn’t destroy sponteneity but certainly it does in others. As I said, I don’t have a single thing to say against NFP for anyone who wants to use it. I do not understand the continued nastiness.

Statement in bold is completely incorrect, probably not a good idea to correct people on something you admit to not ever being interested enough to look in too.

The underlined part of that particular post is probably why you keep getting not so nice sounding replies. Charity works both ways.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

My parents graduated from high school in 1950. Things were a lot different then regarding premarital sex, unwed mothers, abortions, STD’s, divorce, sex education in the schools (which didn’t exist BTW). Even you would have to agree with this.

Ask your parents or aunts or uncles how many girls in their high school were unwed mothers or how many people in the family were divorced

You disagree with everything the Catholic Church stands for, yet come on this forum and call yourself a Catholic. I hope some day you do decide to take the challenge (someone else made on this thread) and really try to understand Catholic teachings. It would do you a world of good.

I was born in 1950. I had sex education in high school and my girl scout troup went to PPH for sex education as well. Our mothers were required to attend. There were unwed mothers, then we not allowed to attend school, they were sent to relatives or a home to await the birth of their children. I believe that STD’s were common during the 50’s and 60’s certainly. I certainly learned of them in the mid 60’s in my sex education classes.

There were not a lot of divorces, but there were many patently unhappy marriages around to be sure. Women had few alternatives then and no good way to take care of their children with good paying jobs. Divorce was certainly not unheard of by any means.

I am sickened by your claims about what I believe. I am more in line with mainstream Catholicism than you are for sure. I do not have any argument about what you believe, but you and others want us to leave you alone as some tiny little church of “true” Catholics. You are the minority, not us. I find your claim that I don’t know Catholic teaching quite insulting. but then I’m rather used to that kind of thing here. I know Catholic teaching exceedingly well, and your attempt to be insulting is noted. Nice charitible post.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Would you please clarify, who is insisting on a means of behaviour?

Do you find that members of this forum are advocating Catholicism be forced (or even pushed) on anyone?

To insist that the only moral behavior is that stated by Catholic dogma is highly insulting to the rest of the non-Catholic world. No one is forcing anyone to be Catholic and certainly this kind of speech does not entice very many to it sadly. But yes, there are some here who advocate for a Catholic theocracy in the US.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

That’s a strange choice of words SpiritMeadow. Are you horrified by people who use NFP? Or, are you horrified that it is a minority?

I am in no ways horrified by anyone who uses NFP. I meant horrific in the sense of overwhelming. 98% of all US citizens favor contraception. The 2% who find it sinful is a “horrifically” small number.

BTW…as far as premarital sex, promiscuity, etc - Yes, they have occurred throughout history. All sin has occurred throughout history, so I won’t even bother to make a list. We are supposed to do our best to avoid sin, repent, confess and live our lives as close to God as we can.

Indeed we are. We are to discern as best we can what it means to do God’s will and make every effort to do so. No one would quarrel with that I would hope.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

I think the way it has been tought is what has failed us.

I prefer teaching chasity. You really should look into theology of the body as someone has noted maybe even start a thred on it.

If you are referring to JPII Theology of the Body, I have read it and cite if often for many wonderful statements.

If I were to teach me kids about contraception I would already be expecting tem to fail. And yes they can and will remain chaste until marriage

If you see it that way, by all means teach your children as you wish.You will not however in the end control what they choose to do.

Who even teaches this stuff anymore? My teacher in school said she taougt abstaining first but she only spent maybe two minutes on abstinence the rest was on how to have sex witout geting pregnant. How many people you know that have gotten pregnant on birth control? I wonder how many kids go out thinking its normal now its our nature now I don’t have to worry about geting pregnant now I have the means to do it.

comprehensive sex education is not taught as a “means to avoid pregnancy.” For your information abstinence only funds from the federal govt are predicated on the fact the state can teach NO other means of sex education. 22 states have so far opted out of the program and 2 more are going to. They know abstinence only teaching is a failure.

I think you are living in a BOX why are you even catholic?

You have no right to ask me this question. How dare you be so insulting and uncharitible.

Do you not understand that those who have sex witout even consider a baby are most often going to result to plan B. Have not abortiob rates gone up with the use of contraception?

Again, you are mistaken. Studies show that the availability of comprehensive sex education and contraceptives results in a reduction in teen pregnancy, STD’s and abortion.

Also did you not no the pill is a abortificant? It causes you to abort the fetus

No reputable medical doctor would agree with your statement. This is a common fallacy of the anti-contraception crowd. It is substantiated by no science whatsoever.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

It’s hard to continue a reasonable discussion with you when you repeatedly throw in rude comments such as that.

I made no reference to you whatsoever. I said some folks act like by using NFP they are somehow better than others in terms of goodness. You had no reason to take offense. You have been most kind in your comments to me.

 

[LJN21]

Again, you are mistaken. Studies show that the availability of comprehensive sex education and contraceptives results in a reduction in teen pregnancy, STD’s and abortion.

Show me ONE comprehensive long term of consistent Abstinences only Sex Ed in multiple demographics.

No reputable medical doctor would agree with your statement. This is a common fallacy of the anti-contraception crowd. It is substantiated by no science whatsoever.

I guess these doctors aren’t reputable guys better say away form them.

Or these doctors

Couple more bad Doctors.

This Doctor must just been delusional or something.

 

[rlg94086]

I am in no ways horrified by anyone who uses NFP. I meant horrific in the sense of overwhelming. 98% of all US citizens favor contraception. The 2% who find it sinful is a “horrifically” small number.

Indeed we are. We are to discern as best we can what it means to do God’s will and make every effort to do so. No one would quarrel with that I would hope.

Fair enough. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[LJN21]

I made no reference to you whatsoever. I said some folks act like by using NFP they are somehow better than others in terms of goodness. You had no reason to take offense. You have been most kind in your comments to me.

No one has said that at all.

All that was said is contraception is immoral, as the Catholic Church teaches. NFP is NOT contraception.

Your the one that keeps tossing around “holier than thou” and questioning peoples charity.

 

[demol]

Also did you not no the pill is a abortificant? It causes you to abort the fetus

This is incorrect. The pill is not an abortifacient, it is a contraceptive.

 

[wanner47]

This is incorrect. The pill is not an abortifacient, it is a contraceptive.

No, you are incorrect.

This is text from the package insert of Ortho-Cyclen, a popular brand of contraceptive pill, as found on the FDA’s website (opens as a PDF):

Combination oral contraceptives act by suppression of gonadotropins. Although the primary mechanism of this action is inhibition of ovulation, other alterations include **changes ****in **the cervical mucus (which increase the difficulty of sperm entry into the uterus) and the endometrium (which reduce the likelihood of implantation).

Emphasis mine.

As you can see, a secondary mechanism of the pill is to “reduce the likelihood of implantation” in the event that conception *does *occur. That makes the Pill an abortifacent, because it could cause the death of an already-conceived baby if conception does indeed occur and the baby attempts to implant in the uterus.

 

[demol]

No, you are incorrect.

This is text from the package insert of Ortho-Cyclen, a popular brand of contraceptive pill, as found on the FDA’s website (opens as a PDF):

Emphasis mine.

As you can see, a secondary mechanism of the pill is to “reduce the likelihood of implantation” in the event that conception *does *occur. That makes the Pill an abortifacent, because it could cause the death of an already-conceived baby if conception does indeed occur and the baby attempts to implant in the uterus.

An abortifacient causes an abortion. The pill reduces the likelihood of implantation. There is a difference. This is all my opinion. Obviously it has not been proven either way. I’m assuming we aren’t discussing the morning after pill.

asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2006/PSCF9-06Sullivan.pdf

 

[LJN21]

An abortifacient causes an abortion. The pill reduces the likelihood of implantation. There is a difference. This is all my opinion. Obviously it has not been proven either way. I’m assuming we aren’t discussing the morning after pill.

asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2006/PSCF9-06Sullivan.pdf

No there is not, life begins at conception, not implantation. When the new life is not allowed to implant it is a early term abortion. Some doctors have taken it on themselves to redefine when life begins, I linked several articles with MANY Doctors who agree it is an abortifacient.

 

[wanner47]

An abortifacient causes an abortion. The pill reduces the likelihood of implantation. There is a difference. This is all my opinion. Obviously it has not been proven either way. I’m assuming we aren’t discussing the morning after pill.

asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2006/PSCF9-06Sullivan.pdf

Yes, it has been proven that life begins at conception. See here, for example. You can also go here or here if you’d prefer a non-Christian perspective.

Deliberately causing a hostile uterine environment so a baby can’t implant in the uterus = murder of a baby

Abortion = murder of a baby

The Pill is an abortifacent.

 

[adrift]

Oh, please spare me. And please stop rolling your eyes. It’s uncharitible. Can’t you simply say you disagree? Just another way to slapping adhominem attacks. NFP is a calendar based constraceptive method. You avoid sex when you are fertile and have it when you are not. I’m sure that sometimes this doesn’t destroy sponteneity but certainly it does in others. As I said, I don’t have a single thing to say against NFP for anyone who wants to use it. I do not understand the continued nastiness.

If you see rolling eyes as being uncharitable than complain to CA they are the ones who provide the icon. You are to ready to call everyone else uncharitable at the drop of a hat. Is that to put them off. My remark to you was not uncharitable. You make a statement that it is calendar based and you are wrong. The calendar based method was the one used in the 50’s. NFP charts the individuals cycle. As for why there is continued nastiness look in the mirror.