F
fix
Guest
Yes, even a former US Surgeon General claimed such things should be taught in “sex education” classes. There are few boundaries left. Pretty much anything that can be done is accepted as should be done.
- Status
S
setter
Guest
As a Catholic you would like to see contraception more widely practiced and promoted than it already is? I suppose that you hold the same rationale for the “prevention” of AIDS?
A
apricot_yogurt
Guest
Contraception is not foolproof. At my booking in with the midwife, she will ask me what contraception I was using when I got pregnant. DUH? None surely? But I guess that is one way of measuring contraceptive failures.
A large percentage of women presenting for an abortion were using contraception which failed for one reason or another.
I personally know of at least three children who were concieved while their mother was on the pill. Guess what? For one reason or another it didn’t work. That is just among my imediate friends. Multiply that by all the pill-using women, and we perhaps don’t have the wonder pill that it is meant to be.
Abortion is a necessary back-up to our child-free-every- child -a- wanted -child -artificial -contraception utopia.
A large percentage of women presenting for an abortion were using contraception which failed for one reason or another.
I personally know of at least three children who were concieved while their mother was on the pill. Guess what? For one reason or another it didn’t work. That is just among my imediate friends. Multiply that by all the pill-using women, and we perhaps don’t have the wonder pill that it is meant to be.
Abortion is a necessary back-up to our child-free-every- child -a- wanted -child -artificial -contraception utopia.
M
MilesXpisti
Guest
You realize, of course, that your previous statement is tantamount to heresy, yes? You publicly denounce the teaching of the Holy Catholic Church with regards to artificial contraception, as defined in 2370 of the Catechism
There is no moral justification for it consistent with the Christian faith, not even the supposed prevention of intentional abortions or arresting the spread of HIV in the third world. Moreover, the inclusion of the clause “as a means”, that is by virtue of its nature regardless of the desired result, double effect does not apply in this instance. Therefore, its use cannot be morally justifiable in accordance with CCC 1753:
T
Texas_Roofer
Guest
I really do not know much about AIDS. The Church has the ability to “Loose” I am sure you already know that. I would like to see the Church use it.
T
Texas_Roofer
Guest
Careful there, you are on to a few things 1) People failures as not taking medicine regularly, staying on cycle (pills to days) etc, are common causes of failures. That is why it is difficult to get accurate statistics see if the pill was 100% affective but the people fail to properly use it correctly 5% of the time. You see a 5% system failure rate. 2) The statement concern “large percentages” of woman on contraception having abortions is extremely suspect, The math just makes it practically impossible, certainly you have some who used the contraceptive incorrectly, others who lied to save face (it is not her fault, the contraceptive failed), and quite possibly a few that actually did use contraception and became pregnant anyway. The church can change the rule ( just as it did on evolution), and I hope it will.
T
Texas_Roofer
Guest
That maybe your opinion but it is not mine, as per the other posts the Church controls the catechism not the other way around. You used the word “denounce” not I, the Church has authority to “loose” and may do that at anytime.
btw “as a means” is why so many of us question the base under NFP. (not the teaching, just the base) It is also a part of why I believe most NFP practices are illicit. I believe they twist the actually teaching to cover the illicit behavior but is an opinion not a church teaching
Though I do thank you for your concern and accept the concern as sincere
good night everybody
M
MilesXpisti
Guest
The Church cannot “loose”, as you say, anything that would contradict the ordinary magisterium that has been taught consistently throughout the history of the Church. Contraception is not a new thing, and was in use long before the Father elected to send His Son to redeem man. But throught the whole of its history, the Church has taught the evil of contraception. NFP is not illicit because it avails itself of natural periods of infertility for the marital act coupled with chastity in times of fertility. The Church, in her infallible wisdom, has deemed this licit because it preserves the perfect union of the marital act, the complete give and take between man and woman, when they engage in the conjugal act. How does this differ from ABC you may ask? It lay in both the physical and mental dimensions of the act, degraded by the barrier, material or chemical, preventing the only true and moral expression of sex: the complete act open inexorably to life.
Secondly, Holy Mother Church does not give us a blanket permission to use NFP. Only in instances of just reason, such as financial support for a prospective child or concerns of health for mother, child or both, can a couple licity employ NFP.
It is in this, that God and His Church makes the distinction.
M
Ma.Eugenia
Guest
Hi again everyone!
I’m finding your replies really interesting. Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.
Regarding what Texas Roofer said:
Women who get pregnant despite their contraceptives see their baby as a “mistake”. This kind of thinking can foster the thinking of abortion as the solution .
Also, I could see that contraceptives gives people false assurance that they will not get pregnant or get STD. It promotes promiscuity especially for unmarried couples because of the belief that there will be no consequence to show for it.
The percentage of success is between 98-99 percent for some (example : the condom) and perhaps, the 1 -2 % failure rate may be due to misuse, defects in the product, accidents, etc… still, it exists. For example out of 100,000 successes, there is a possibility of 1,000-2,000 failures. That to me is no assurance at all.
I’m finding your replies really interesting. Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.
Regarding what Texas Roofer said:
The Catholic Church does not teach that life begins at implantation, rather, **it teaches that the start of life (therefore, has a soul) occurs when the sperm and the egg meet (conception) **which occurs usually in the distal end of the fallopian tube. It takes a few days for the fertilized ovum to travel to the uterus to be implanted. During this time, the uterus is supposed to be preparing for this implantation by thickening its walls. As you said here:
Then doesn’t this promote an environment inhospitable to the fertilized ovum, thereby making it more likely to be expelled rather than retained and implanted?
The way I see it, if we aren’t sure that it can will kill life yet knowing there is a possibility that it will—and then we still go ahead and do it… isn’t that like holding a gun, knowing that it has live and blank bullets and fire the gun at a person, saying, we weren’t sure it will kill anyway?—then say “Ooops…” if it does kill?
I disagree that contraception is the solution to abortion mentality. I see it more as the starting point of why there is such a mentality.
Women who get pregnant despite their contraceptives see their baby as a “mistake”. This kind of thinking can foster the thinking of abortion as the solution .
Also, I could see that contraceptives gives people false assurance that they will not get pregnant or get STD. It promotes promiscuity especially for unmarried couples because of the belief that there will be no consequence to show for it.
The percentage of success is between 98-99 percent for some (example : the condom) and perhaps, the 1 -2 % failure rate may be due to misuse, defects in the product, accidents, etc… still, it exists. For example out of 100,000 successes, there is a possibility of 1,000-2,000 failures. That to me is no assurance at all.
T
Texas_Roofer
Guest
Hi Ma. Eugenia
I am not sure reading your post if you want to discuss these issues or not.
I hope that helps
I am not sure reading your post if you want to discuss these issues or not.
um, I said I reject the implant definition. My understanding is the Church teaches it does not know when life begins or when souls are infused. The church thus teaches the whole process should be treated as life protection. If that is not accurate I am sure someone will correct it
“inhospitable” and “expel” I am not sure these are accurate. Would that mean that a woman with a naturally thin membrane is naturally evil? I think not, a thinner membrane is not an emotional state.
This is my favorite part. This argument is based in false reason which is a failure to understand reality. Every human I know (and most likely yourself) participate in continuous practices which are far more likely to kill us and lead to evil. However we select a few practices as this one and waive it as a banner. Did you know a mother has a far greater chance of creating the death of her child through driving, encouraging water activities, or storing cleaning products in her house than this issue, yet removing cleaning products or discontinuing driving will not be considered as banner waiving ideas.
You certainly are entitled to your opinion, however if you look at the evidence it is contrary. In countries where all forms of education are available which includes contraception, there is considerable less abortion. There simply is no need for it. There are less pregnancies, thus even an unplanned pregnancy is not stressful. Human life there is actually chariest much higher than in the opposite countries. However in all fairness the education of people affect many things not just pregnancies.
This may be part of your opinion however I do not agree with it. Proper education can not by definition give “false assurance” or change “consequences” You may be thinking of a bias “pro” something campaign
In general, again there is a scope problem here. I’ll change it to 100,000 continually practicing couple as this greatly raises the accuracy. And we well say 1,500 pregnancies over 10 years(ok ?). See one of the many unrecognized facts is societies well educated on these issues have so many less children that these pregnancies do not strain the society or parents. Actually another recently recognized consequence is the birth rate drops so dramatic that the country is prone to mass culture change from immigration of under educated societies.
I hope that helps
S
setter
Guest
The Church does not have the ability to “loose” in matters of morality as is much the Church does not have the ability to “loose” aspects of natural moral law.
F
fix
Guest
The problem is our consciences are below the truth, not above it. Meaning truth is superior to our conscience. We do not get to invent right and wrong. The act of contraception is always evil. The use of cleaning products are not always evil. We know this because we inform our consciences by assenting to the truth as taught to us by our Lord through His Church which is the final authority in these matters.
L
Leeta
Guest
Dear ma,
<ccli.org> The Couple to Couple League for Natural Family Planning has very accurate information on the contraceptive methods and sterilization. Also has medical information about related topics of childbirth, etc. and NFP.
I often have counseled friends and strangers about this and not compromised the Church’s teaching. A nurse can also do it and even more effectively than I.
The way the medical establishment “informs” women is very biased and misleading about contraception. The biggest myth is that contraception =no pregnancy. I I always had that impression.
First, rightly and accurately inform them that all methods of contraception and sterilization fail and that sooner or later they will become pregnant.
Secondly, inform the women about how harmful the contraceptives are to their own body, to that of their unborn child and to their marriage. Read them the list of side effects from the birth control pill. They used to be listed in the package insert on an 8 and a half inch sheet of paper, BOTH sides in VERY fine print. If that isn’t scary, I don’t know what is. They reduced the number listed in the newer packages because it obviously looks bad. (So much for ‘informing’ women! Women are guinea pigs to many physicians and better that they be sick or dead, rather than pregnant and healthy.)
Also, ask them if they would crumble up a birth control pill or the morning after pill and mix with the soil of their vegetable garden and then let their family eat the vegetables grown from that contaminated soil.
The morning after pill is equivalent to taking a whole package of birth control pills on one day! And the birth control pill has so many side effects that it fills the fromt and back of a regular sheet of paper in fine print! Now is that safe for women?
Tell them about the natural voids in condoms which are many times larger than the AIDS virus. (Journal of Rubber Chemistry, 1992).
Tell them what the Church teaches about the grave sin of contraception, if they are Catholic.
And especially tell them about ecological breastfeeding as a natural method of spacing babies and which is so good for the baby and lifesaving when their are poor hygiene conditions.
Again, the above website will have information on all this and more, with scientific references.
Have journal references and studies for everything you say and your instructor can’t fault you.
Catholics can give the best and most informed advice concerning family planning. Unlike the secularists, they have the mother’s health and eternal well-being in mind. Catholics should tell the truth and not lie about contraceptives like secular nurses and doctors do. It would be discrimination of the most blatant to say that being Catholic must exclude one from the health care profession.
<ccli.org> The Couple to Couple League for Natural Family Planning has very accurate information on the contraceptive methods and sterilization. Also has medical information about related topics of childbirth, etc. and NFP.
I often have counseled friends and strangers about this and not compromised the Church’s teaching. A nurse can also do it and even more effectively than I.
The way the medical establishment “informs” women is very biased and misleading about contraception. The biggest myth is that contraception =no pregnancy. I I always had that impression.
First, rightly and accurately inform them that all methods of contraception and sterilization fail and that sooner or later they will become pregnant.
Secondly, inform the women about how harmful the contraceptives are to their own body, to that of their unborn child and to their marriage. Read them the list of side effects from the birth control pill. They used to be listed in the package insert on an 8 and a half inch sheet of paper, BOTH sides in VERY fine print. If that isn’t scary, I don’t know what is. They reduced the number listed in the newer packages because it obviously looks bad. (So much for ‘informing’ women! Women are guinea pigs to many physicians and better that they be sick or dead, rather than pregnant and healthy.)
Also, ask them if they would crumble up a birth control pill or the morning after pill and mix with the soil of their vegetable garden and then let their family eat the vegetables grown from that contaminated soil.
The morning after pill is equivalent to taking a whole package of birth control pills on one day! And the birth control pill has so many side effects that it fills the fromt and back of a regular sheet of paper in fine print! Now is that safe for women?
Tell them about the natural voids in condoms which are many times larger than the AIDS virus. (Journal of Rubber Chemistry, 1992).
Tell them what the Church teaches about the grave sin of contraception, if they are Catholic.
And especially tell them about ecological breastfeeding as a natural method of spacing babies and which is so good for the baby and lifesaving when their are poor hygiene conditions.
Again, the above website will have information on all this and more, with scientific references.
Have journal references and studies for everything you say and your instructor can’t fault you.
Catholics can give the best and most informed advice concerning family planning. Unlike the secularists, they have the mother’s health and eternal well-being in mind. Catholics should tell the truth and not lie about contraceptives like secular nurses and doctors do. It would be discrimination of the most blatant to say that being Catholic must exclude one from the health care profession.
L
Leeta
Guest
Texas Roofer, you are woefully misinformed about the number of abortions in contries where contraception is widespread.
In many jurisdictions the number of abortion is not recorded. in those where it it is, it shows that where contraception becomes accepted, the number of abortions increases.
This is so because contraceptives and sterilizations fail. Read the fine print and look at all the disclaimers. Talk to women. You will always encounter someone who became pregnant on the Pill or with an IUD or with a condom or was sterilized or whose husband was sterilized.
Abstinence is the only 100 % guarantee as far as not getting pregnant.
When one contracepts, one believes the lies one is told by health care providers that one won’t get pregnant. So when one does end up pregnant, one tends not to accept the baby and many times then the woman has an abortion. Look at the statistics from the Alan Guttmacher Institute who is an affiliate of Planned Parenthood. Under ‘reasons for abortion’, there is a category of failed birth control.
Why do you think that after givng a woman an abortion, the abortionists put the girl on the low dose pill? Because the abortionists know that the woman will become pregnant while on the pill and then have to come back for another abortion. Former abortionists have revealed this strategy. They understand that contraception doesn’t prevent pregnancy all the time. They want customers and they have a constant stream of them with their contraception promotion.
Planned Parenthood makes money hand over fist from the sale of contraceptives.
In many jurisdictions the number of abortion is not recorded. in those where it it is, it shows that where contraception becomes accepted, the number of abortions increases.
This is so because contraceptives and sterilizations fail. Read the fine print and look at all the disclaimers. Talk to women. You will always encounter someone who became pregnant on the Pill or with an IUD or with a condom or was sterilized or whose husband was sterilized.
Abstinence is the only 100 % guarantee as far as not getting pregnant.
When one contracepts, one believes the lies one is told by health care providers that one won’t get pregnant. So when one does end up pregnant, one tends not to accept the baby and many times then the woman has an abortion. Look at the statistics from the Alan Guttmacher Institute who is an affiliate of Planned Parenthood. Under ‘reasons for abortion’, there is a category of failed birth control.
Why do you think that after givng a woman an abortion, the abortionists put the girl on the low dose pill? Because the abortionists know that the woman will become pregnant while on the pill and then have to come back for another abortion. Former abortionists have revealed this strategy. They understand that contraception doesn’t prevent pregnancy all the time. They want customers and they have a constant stream of them with their contraception promotion.
Planned Parenthood makes money hand over fist from the sale of contraceptives.
T
Texas_Roofer
Guest
Edited from other:
Exactly, truth is truth, spacing of children for grave reason is not conception, it is contraception. We can change the name but not the truth.
S
setter
Guest
Simply mislabelling the responsible “regulation of births” by faithful Catholic couples practicing NFP as contraception does not change the truth of *conjugal fidelity *and the fecundity of marriage (see CCC paragraphs 2364 - 2372).
You need to educate yourself before asserting such blatant distortions that contradict the truth that “Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other” (CCC 2370).
M
Ma.Eugenia
Guest
Hello Texas Roofer! 
Regarding what you wrote here:
In effect, what I am saying is that there is another action of these pills besides contraception. That is, **it has the potential action to abort a fertilized ovum (a life), **which to me goes against the commandment, “Thou shalt not kill.”.
As a nursing student, I do not want to be the one who will recommend a method that I know goes against many of my Church’s teachings.
Though, I do understand that in moral dilemmas, like this one, the best I can do is to present the truth about these methods, while keeping in mind that my actions should always be in accordance with my faith.
Pregnancy is not the only consequence of failure of some contraceptives.
To me, **safe sex **is a misnomer because even a single failure is proof that there is no assurance that the people who use them will not get pregnant or will be **safe **from disease by using artificial methods of contraception.
Regarding what you wrote here:
The Church has never digressed in its teaching that life begins at conception, so in my opinion, you are mistaken in thinking that the Church teaches that it does not know when life begins. The teaching that the ensoulment occurs when the human sperm and the ova unite to create a distinct, new individual is definitive and has never changed.
Texas Roofer, I was referring to what you wrote in the previous post regarding the effect of thinning the lining of the uterus by contraceptives.
Isn’t this proof that an inhospitable enviroment in the womb of a woman who takes contraceptive pills is created by the artificial thinning of membrane that makes it more likely that the fertilized ovum will not be implanted, thus destroying/killing/aborting/expelling it in the process?
In effect, what I am saying is that there is another action of these pills besides contraception. That is, **it has the potential action to abort a fertilized ovum (a life), **which to me goes against the commandment, “Thou shalt not kill.”.
As a nursing student, I do not want to be the one who will recommend a method that I know goes against many of my Church’s teachings.
Though, I do understand that in moral dilemmas, like this one, the best I can do is to present the truth about these methods, while keeping in mind that my actions should always be in accordance with my faith.
Texas Roofer, given that there is the possibility of failure, it can also be that we will have an unfortunate 1,500 condom-using people who can get STDs (like AIDS) over 10 years *(assumed time-frame) *for a population of 100,000.
Pregnancy is not the only consequence of failure of some contraceptives.
To me, **safe sex **is a misnomer because even a single failure is proof that there is no assurance that the people who use them will not get pregnant or will be **safe **from disease by using artificial methods of contraception.
M
Ma.Eugenia
Guest
Hi everyone!
I forgot to mention that I am very grateful for those who have answered/ are answering my post.
I am learning a lot from all of you.
God bless!
I forgot to mention that I am very grateful for those who have answered/ are answering my post.
I am learning a lot from all of you.
God bless!
T
Texas_Roofer
Guest
Setter you may have the best intention, I am sure you do. But this post only floats on the river of De’nile, even the Pope acknowledge the hair splitting, general speaking, and placed the “grave consequences” restriction on such use
The Church, Guarantor of True Human Values
[sect]18. It can be foreseen that this teaching will perhaps not be easily received by all: Too numerous are those voices-amplified by the modern means of propaganda-which are contrary to the voice of the Church. To tell the truth, the Church is not surprised to be made, like her divine founder, a “sign of contradiction,” (22) yet she does not because of this cease to proclaim with humble firmness the entire moral law, both natural and evangelical. -Humanae Vitae, PPXII ( and yes it is the same file copy)
F
fix
Guest
You may call an apple and orange, but it is still an apple. We cannot change the essence of something by calling it another name.
Contraception is altering the martial act intentionally to make it sterile. Engaging in the unaltered act, while not likely to conceive, is not frustrating the act. The difference is plain and glaring.
- Status