Is lust the only reason people contracept?

[rayne89]

renee1258:

What amazes me is how many contraceptive couples really don’t have sex that often.

I agree. In my close circle of girlfriends -all married (none Catholic except myself) all contracept in one way or another from commnets made I’d say I -who use NFP(-so that cuts out about 2 weeks) have it most frequently.
In fact recently while having brunch with them they all cornered me in the kitchen to ask me why I had such a great sex life. It’s not like I discuss the intimate details of what goes on in the bedroom. I think they noticed my silence when the rest would complain about theirs.
At first I was speechless and somewhat embarressed (I’ve know these women since we were all 12) when I regained my voice I told them I attributed to NFP, which is the honest truth -and gave a few reason why.

The idea that artificial birth control leads to sexual freedom is a rediculous myth unless it means freedom from meaningful sexual intimacy.

 

[cynic]

felra:

I can see how your understanding and conclusions are so distorted if you read and cite anti-Catholic sources as reflecting authoritative Catholic teaching. I hope that you are not representative of our estranged Protestant brethen in criticizing the [Catholic] Church for what they mistakenly believe what the Church teaches.

The only “disconnection” that has taken place is your unplugging God from you distorted logic. Hint: God is the One who gave women natural cycles of fertility. Bye the way, the authentic teaching of the Church is that the marital embrace be open to the transmission of new life along with the unifying effect. Maybe you should go directly to the source document and not rely on non-Catholic sources to tell you what to believe. See the Papal encyclical *Humanae Vitae. *

yay now I’m an anti!

What you and Blindsheep have said is all very nice, and in theory easy to agree with.

But I’ll put it as simply as I can, Humanae Vitae states that every marital act needs to be OPEN TO LIFE. Those having relations outside of the fertile times are NOT open to life. And if they are KNOWINGLY having relations during this time then they are not open to life in intent aswell. This is also ‘having your cake and eating it too’.
**

 

[renee1258]

God didn’t have to make us sexual beings. In Heaven there is no sex. He could just make us and plop us on the earth as he wished. But he didn’t.

Now understanding how the female body works is the key to your issue with being open to life. I guess I would look at what happens when a woman breastfeeds a baby for an extended period of time. Her ovulation stops, if she is breastfeeding on demand and the baby is receiving no other foods or solids except breast milk. NFP has defined the rules in greater detail.

The female body knows that it has a young child to care for so the body supresses its fertility naturally for extened amount of time. But as we know family planning has more to do about caring for a small infant, and there are factors a couple through proper decision making have to decide to add more to their family that have more to do with economic then purely biological.

Prior to formula and jobs markets/techhnology putting women outside the home for work, NFP probably wasn’t that needed because woman extended breastfeeing past the age of 2 years of age with many children.

As a side note I mentioned how the Pill supresses one natural ability seek out strong and weaker males.

There have been some interesting studies on even when a woman goes into puberty. Women who have no father in their home go through puberty at a much earlier age. Since their bodies desire a male to protect and their bodies react by finding a mate. GIrls who have fathers in their homes, have puberty at a later age. The father in the home actually supresses the onset of ovulation and puberty, hence the girl has no need to find someone to protect them.

There is a biological component to the understanding that girls with strong stable fathers don’t need to sleep around looking for love.

Even though we talk about the procreative and unitative communication through sex, sex is about attraction and seeking out protective males. Cotnraception especially ones that alter female hormones can greatly harm woman in multiple ways.

 

[felra]

cynic:

yay now I’m an anti!

What you and Blindsheep have said is all very nice, and in theory easy to agree with.

But I’ll put it as simply as I can, Humanae Vitae states that every marital act needs to be OPEN TO LIFE. Those having relations outside of the fertile times are NOT open to life. And if they are KNOWINGLY having relations during this time then they are not open to life in intent aswell. This is also ‘having your cake and eating it too’.

As thoughtful and obedient Catholics, we believe that the Church has the final say on matters of faith and morals, not our personal opinions.

Here is what the Church authoritatively teaches:

“A particular aspect of this responsibility [fecundity] concerns the regulation of births. ‘When it is a question of harmonizing married love with the responsible transmission of life, the morality of the behavior does not depend on sincere intention and the evaluation of motives alone; but it must be determined by objective criteria, criteria drawn from the nature of the person and his acts, criteria that respect the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love; this is possible only if the virtue of married chastity is practiced with sincerity of heart.’ Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality.” (2368, 2370). Source: Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Those having marital intercourse during periods of natural infertility are open to the transmission of life, i.e., not putting any artificial blocks to the transmission of life. A greater understanding of Natural Law is very helpful to understand and thoughtfully accept this teaching (along with reading the entirety of pertinant Church documents).

 

[fix]

cynic:

yay now I’m an anti!

What you and Blindsheep have said is all very nice, and in theory easy to agree with.

But I’ll put it as simply as I can, Humanae Vitae states that every marital act needs to be OPEN TO LIFE. Those having relations outside of the fertile times are NOT open to life. And if they are KNOWINGLY having relations during this time then they are not open to life in intent aswell. This is also ‘having your cake and eating it too’.

As Felra pointed out God gave us a cycle of fertility. There is a reason for that. Contraception is an invetion to thwart a properly functioning body, the opposite of the purpose of medicine.

 

[rayne89]

cynic:

yay now I’m an anti!

What you and Blindsheep have said is all very nice, and in theory easy to agree with.

But I’ll put it as simply as I can, Humanae Vitae states that every marital act needs to be OPEN TO LIFE. Those having relations outside of the fertile times are NOT open to life. And if they are KNOWINGLY having relations during this time then they are not open to life in intent aswell. This is also ‘having your cake and eating it too’.

If a person uses NFP with a contraceptive metality one falls into sin. I use NFP because another pregnancy would be deadly to me because I am near heart failure, not for selfish reasons. I am not using any barrier to prevent pregnancy, I’m simply not having sex when I believe I am fertile. It is not always easy -but I would like to be alive alive to raise our daughter, at least as long as possible.

 

[cynic]

felra:

Those having marital intercourse during periods of natural infertility are open to the transmission of life, i.e., not putting any artificial blocks to the transmission of life.

only open in theory, in reality life will never be conceived if NFP is used effectively, and that fact means the procreative aspect no longer exists. That’s how I interpret “open to life” anyway. So to me NFP seems like a compromise with rather than a strict adherence to the catholic churches ideals for marital sex.

 

[coralewisjr]

misericordie:

One of the results of sin, especially this type of sin, is frustration, sadness, GUILT and SHAME. The devil promises some fleeing plesures, only to decieve us, he does not want our hapiness but sadness. Not to say what those sins do to our reputations!!! Especially the poor woman. It’s no surprise that your “boyfriend” was depressed=sin=depression.

Yes, I realized that after reflecting on it for a few months. It was very hard for me to let go of the guilt (even after I went to Confession) because he’s really a good guy and at the end, we were just using each other. I need to remember to pray for him more often.

 

[BlindSheep]

cynic:

only open in theory, in reality life will never be conceived if NFP is used effectively, and that fact means the procreative aspect no longer exists. That’s how I interpret “open to life” anyway. So to me NFP seems like a compromise with rather than a strict adherence to the catholic churches ideals for marital sex.

You interpret “open to life” as excluding NFP - but clearly the Church doesn’t interpret its own teaching that way. Whose interpretation is valid?

 

[coralewisjr]

cynic:

only open in theory, in reality life will never be conceived if NFP is used effectively, and that fact means the procreative aspect no longer exists. That’s how I interpret “open to life” anyway. So to me NFP seems like a compromise with rather than a strict adherence to the catholic churches ideals for marital sex.

Married couples can use NFP to conceive or to avoid conception.

 

[Steve_Andersen]

cynic:

only open in theory, in reality life will never be conceived if NFP is used effectively, and that fact means the procreative aspect no longer exists. That’s how I interpret “open to life” anyway. So to me NFP seems like a compromise with rather than a strict adherence to the catholic churches ideals for marital sex.

It does seem that they want it both ways

but this whole discussion specualting about the motives of others seems kinda strange
like some of the other “reproductive” posts around here it seems almost prurient

Why should we care if it is “only about lust” for some other person ? (clearly it’s not IMHO but that is neither here nor there)

shouldn’t we worry about our own motivations first?

 

[Rob_s_Wife]

My goodness everything is smooth sailing when I wander away and when I return to see how things are going it’s a brawl!
So, of course, I’m going to jump right into the fray!

Let’s see here… I’ll start with some of cynic’s comments:

Can NFP have the same effect on the relatinship between the couple and God?? (i.e. reducing it to mere lust) I would have to say the answer is that yes, sometimes it can unfortunately. NFP, in its ideal use, should involve constant communication between the couple and prayer. Each time they are in the mood they should be asking “Am I willing to concieve tonight?” If the answer is no for any reason, they should then ask themselves, “Are my reasons based on truely grave issues, not just temporary material reasons or social pressure?” This should be an on-going discussion. It should never be a closed topic. And should they have relations, there should never be response other than gratitude. No anger at spouse for their desire. No anger over the lost job or money or whatever else. Some NFP users come mighty close to worshiping that chart - oh if only they had the CCC as memorized as the Art of Natural Family Planning! Those cases are wrong in their use of NFP because, at heart, they are not open to life.

 

[Steve_Andersen]

forgive me Mrs Rob, I don’t mean to be rude
BUT
do you really have that much going through your mind at a romantic monment?

 

[cynic]

Rob's Wife:

My goodness everything is smooth sailing when I wander away and when I return to see how things are going it’s a brawl!
So, of course, I’m going to jump right into the fray!

Let’s see here… I’ll start with some of cynic’s comments:

Can NFP have the same effect on the relatinship between the couple and God?? (i.e. reducing it to mere lust) I would have to say the answer is that yes, sometimes it can unfortunately. NFP, in its ideal use, should involve constant communication between the couple and prayer. Each time they are in the mood they should be asking “Am I willing to concieve tonight?” If the answer is no for any reason, they should then ask themselves, “Are my reasons based on truely grave issues, not just temporary material reasons or social pressure?” This should be an on-going discussion. It should never be a closed topic. And should they have relations, there should never be response other than gratitude. No anger at spouse for their desire. No anger over the lost job or money or whatever else. Some NFP users come mighty close to worshiping that chart - oh if only they had the CCC as memorized as the Art of Natural Family Planning! Those cases are wrong in their use of NFP because, at heart, they are not open to life.

while this wasn’t really what I was talking about, your saying that couples that don’t intend to conceive shouldn’t be having sex at all? What about during infertile times, or just after conception, or after menopause? This is what gets me, different versions of supposedly the same morality from different catholics. Someone else said this, when in the bedroom think about whether you want children, not about sex. But then another says that avoiding pregnancy is acceptable, its just the method that matters. I don’t get it.

 

[felra]

cynic:

only open in theory, in reality life will never be conceived if NFP is used effectively, and that fact means the procreative aspect no longer exists. That’s how I interpret “open to life” anyway. So to me NFP seems like a compromise with rather than a strict adherence to the catholic churches ideals for marital sex.

Quite often, depending on where someone stands in relationship to knowing, accepting and living out authoritative Church teaching, the “narrow way leading to life” will absolutely seem restrictive and legalistic and idealistic and impossible to do.

Matthew**, *Chapter 7: 13-14 “***Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the road broad that leads to destruction, and those who enter through it are many. How narrow the gate and constricted the road that leads to life. And those who find it are few.”

Matthew**, *Chapter 19:25-26 “***When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and said, “Who then can be saved?” Jesus looked at them and said, “For human beings this is impossible, but for God all things are possible.”

"We do not at all intend to hide the sometimes serious difficulties inherent in the life of Christian married persons; for them as for everyone else, "the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life.“But the hope of that life must illuminate their way, as with courage they strive to live with wisdom, justice and piety in this present time,knowing that the figure of this world passes away.” (Humanae Vitae).

 

[Rob_s_Wife]

cynic:

while this wasn’t really what I was talking about, your saying that couples that don’t intend to conceive shouldn’t be having sex at all? What about during infertile times, or just after conception, or after menopause? This is what gets me, different versions of supposedly the same morality from different catholics. Someone else said this, when in the bedroom think about whether you want children, not about sex. But then another says that avoiding pregnancy is acceptable, its just the method that matters. I don’t get it.

I understand your confusion - very frustrating I know. Keep in mind NFP IS used by FEM as birth control(a non-religious womens organization that has seen the light on the negatives to ABC.)

---

**No, I’m not saying the only times couples should have sex is if it is to conceive. Neither should the goal of sex be to not conceive though. What I am saying is there is a difference between not having sex during a fertile time and being so controling about when you have sex it robs the marriage of all affections. A wife acts like her husband shouldn’t even kiss her because it could lead to getting pregnant would be an example. A husband that gets furious at his wife if she forgot to take a temp would be another. **

---

Think of NFP as more of an awareness than family planning. If I know that tonight it’s highly possible I would concieve and tonight I just didn’t think I was ready for that - I tell my hubby the possiblity and leave it at that. Maybe we’ll “risk” it; maybe we won’t. Either way though, we don’t withhold affection from each other and are okay with having another if that results.

---

**Personally, I wish the vatican would define “grave reasons”. For me, it would have to be a pretty extreme or unusual situation. That’s probably because I get my feathers ruffled by people who act like children are a blessing unless: they are born to poor parents, or are not born healthy, or the mother has hard pregnancies, or the house is too small, or they need both parents to work or or or or ----- According to many of the above excuses, not only should none of my parents and their siblings been born, neither should my husband or I, and neither shuld some of my own dear children. In my opinion these are just genreal issues - not grave reasons to avoid having a child. **

---

If a woman knew she was going to need cancer treatment for example - that’s a valid and grave reason to use NFP. If a woman doesn’t feel her house is big enough or she wants to stay home and can’t - those are not grave reasons to use NFP.

---

Not sure if I cleared these murky waters for you or not cynic??? But there you go - another perspective to ponder!

 

[fix]

Rob's Wife:

Personally, I wish the vatican would define “grave reasons”.

They do not have to. It is left up to the married couple. They are procreators with Christ. They need to decide using the virtue of prudence and through prayer. It is an awesome responsibility and one taken too lightly and dismissed by so many who embrace contraception.

 

[Rob_s_Wife]

Steve Andersen:

forgive me Mrs Rob, I don’t mean to be rude
BUT
do you really have that much going through your mind at a romantic monment?

Steve! You’re not rude and how funny! With 7 children under 11 years old - my mind never stops thinking on at least 3 or 4 different levels at a time!

Really though it’s not that big a process. When you’ve been with someone since puberty (like my hubby and I since age 16), you know within about 2 seconds what’s gong on in that mind of his and give a quick -
“Hey! Yeah, I love you lots too! You really want to do that right now?” or “I’m soo lucky to have you for my husband! You okay with me being puking sick for the next 5 months?”

to which he usually pauses for a whole half second before saying either, “So far they’re the best things we’ve ever done, so let’s go for it!” or we decide to do something else - like StarWars Monopoly or cards.:whacky:

Of course, there’s always the subtle way of letting reminding of my situation - going to bed almost fullly dressed!

 

[BlindSheep]

cynic:

while this wasn’t really what I was talking about, your saying that couples that don’t intend to conceive shouldn’t be having sex at all? What about during infertile times, or just after conception, or after menopause? This is what gets me, different versions of supposedly the same morality from different catholics. Someone else said this, when in the bedroom think about whether you want children, not about sex. But then another says that avoiding pregnancy is acceptable, its just the method that matters. I don’t get it.

I guess some of the confusion stems from the term “serious reasons” being ambiguous. I tend to see it as meaning the couple needs to be always open to God’s will in this - not just deciding “We don’t want any more kids, and that’s it”, but asking God “Do you want us to have another child now?” every time the woman is fertile, reevaluating their circumstances and being open to the prompting of the Holy Spirit. I think it’s a problem when people try to judge whether another couple is being obediant to God in this area - even the Church refrains from giving specific conditions but leaves it to the couple’s discernment. I believe if they are honest with themselves, and sincere in their desire to do God’s will, they won’t sin in their use of NFP, whether to concieve or not.

 

[BlessedBe13]

renee1258:

Women especially young woman are not suppose to have regular periods, our bodies are still developing and hormones fluctuating.

Understood.

There is nothing wrong with an irregular period, as long as it is between 24-35 days long.

That is also understood, however I sometimes it would be 1 month, other times 2 months, other times 3 months - once it was 2 weeks. It was always different so I couldn’t even establish any real pattern.

There have been new studies showing that women on the pill actually choose weaker men.

Weaker in what way, since I wouldn’t characterize the men I’ve been attracted to since being on the pill as “weak”?

BlessBe, I know you are not Catholic. But I know plenty of pagans that accept natural and organic methods embrace NFP.

That is true, and a possibility I may want to think about as it would definately save me money as my current health insurance from my school does not cover perscriptions of any kind.