Lube

[maryjk]

Is it wrong to use anything that you honestly believe is an artificial contraceptive for the purpose of artificial contraception, even though it really isn’t, but only because you were following misinformation? Sure it is. It is the intention that harms the act, and the marital relationship.

Having said that: Some spermicides are combined with lubricants, and spermicides are artificial birth control, but lubricants aren’t birth control, per se.

Catholics may not seek out things that will interfere with the procreative nature of the marital act, but they don’t need to live their lives so that they avoid anything that could even possibly lower their fertility, let alone change things like artificial measures of sperm mobility that may not have any effect on pregnancy rates at all.

Good grief, you may as well worry that NFP lowers your “attitude of fertility”, harms your chance of conceiving by altering the hormones in your brain that in turn govern the health of your gonads, and therefore is artificially contraceptive in nature. There is a point where this kind of worry is not only scrupulous, but nonsensical.

 

[Bookcat]

There is a point where this kind of worry is not only scrupulous, but nonsensical.

Such though is not the case in this question.

But no need to worry here either --rather one looks further into the moral aspects of the question (the realities involved etc).

And in this case happily there are non-problematic alternatives readily available.

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

There is a point where this kind of worry is not only scrupulous, but nonsensical.

And this is a serious consideration on these threads. As someone who copes day in and day out with a diagnosed anxiety disorder, I am here to testify that threads like this can lead to a perfect storm of scrupulosity. At some point you have to conclude you’re doing you’re level best to live the Faith as the Church intends and let it go.

 

[Bookcat]

There is a point where this kind of worry is not only scrupulous, but nonsensical.

Such though is not the case in this question.

Tis a legit question given the facts involved.

But no need to worry here either --rather one looks further into the moral aspects of the question (the realities involved etc).

And in this case there are non-problematic alternatives readily available.

 

[johnnyjones]

Lubricants if anything aid in conception. They are not being used with the intent to prevent conception. That should be clear and simple to explain away the paranoia about non spermicidal lubricants.

 

[Bookcat]

Lubricants if anything aid in conception. They are not being used with the intent to prevent conception. That should be clear and simple to explain away the paranoia about non spermicidal lubricants.

If there was paranoia --then such could be dismissed as such…

But there is not.

So --no.

It is a legit question.

As has been noted – various ones have been shown that they can hinder conception via their effects on the sperm (impede mobility, damage them, kill them)

The ones that aid conception are for example the pre-seed.

 

[johnnyjones]

If there was paranoia --then such could be dismissed as such…

But there is not.

So --no.

It is a legit question.

As has been noted – various ones have been shown that they can hinder conception via their effects on the sperm (impede mobility, damage them, kill them)

The ones that aid conception are for example the pre-seed.

As one poster said the point is INTENT. If you are using a non spermacidal lubricant to aid in intercourse, to create life, I have not seen the church defying that. It is certainly a legit question. Can you show where the church is against something that aids in creating human life as long as consenting husbands and wives are involved.

 

[EasterJoy]

As one poster said the point is INTENT. If you are using a non spermacidal lubricant to aid in intercourse, to create life, I have not seen the church defying that. It is certainly a legit question. Can you show where the church is against something that aids in creating human life as long as consenting husbands and wives are involved.

Yes. Of course, if you know some lubricants have spermicide in them and some don’t, read the labels. Take reasonable steps to avoid using contraceptives you didn’t intend to use but could have known were there if you’d taken the trouble to rub two neurons together, of course. If there is nothing in there meant to be a spermicide, though, it’s just a lubricant. There is no moral imperative to agonize or overthink this.

 

[Bookcat]

As one poster said the point is INTENT. If you are using a non spermacidal lubricant to aid in intercourse, to create life, I have not seen the church defying that. It is certainly a legit question. Can you show where the church is against something that aids in creating human life as long as consenting husbands and wives are involved.

Well does this aid the conception of human persons? Well various studies have shown that many can have rather the other effect. Impeded mobility, damage sperm --even kill them (and indeed some can even have their effects be similar to contraceptive gels it seems from the one quote). And I believe one will find on the various products notices that they should not be used when attempting to conceive (though I have not verified such --not running to the drug store to read their labels).

Intent is not the only moral factor that is involved. An action can have a good intent or lack of evil intent --and still not be good.

The Magisterium of the Church does not often get into various moral matters (so not having something from the Church that directly says not to use something is not an argument in favor of its use) --many things are left for Catholic Moral Theologians and Christians to apply the various principles of Catholic Moral Theology in life.

Could various Catholic Moral Theologians discuss the matter? Sure. And I thknk it is a legit question --hence my posts.

Unfortunately it is not necessarily a widely known fact --and people mistakenly think that say “lubricant T” does not effect the sperm cause it says it is does not contain a “spermicide” (which means it is not marketed as a contraceptive). They honestly look no further. But that is not all there is to the store --as the various studies have shown.

I would say that especially since there are those that exist that are not harmful or deadly to sperm – that they would be the ones to choose to aid nature.

 

[bonvivantHermit]

The couple may want to look into the WHY the lubricant is needed. Maybe it’s psychological, or physical…

Sort of like impotence.

 

[johnnyjones]

Well does this aid the conception of human persons? Well various studies have shown that many can have rather the other effect. Impeded mobility, damage sperm --even kill them (and indeed some can even have their effects be similar to contraceptive gels it seems from the one quote). And I believe one will find on the various products notices that they should not be used when attempting to conceive (though I have not verified such --not running to the drug store to read their labels).

Intent is not the only moral factor that is involved. An action can have a good intent or lack of evil intent --and still not be good.

The Magisterium of the Church does not often get into various moral matters (so not having something from the Church that directly says not to use something is not an argument in favor of its use) --many things are left for Catholic Moral Theologians and Christians to apply the various principles of Catholic Moral Theology in life.

Could various Catholic Moral Theologians discuss the matter? Sure. And I thknk it is a legit question --hence my posts.

Unfortunately it is not necessarily a widely known fact --and people mistakenly think that say “lubricant T” does not effect the sperm cause it says it is does not contain a “spermicide” (which means it is not marketed as a contraceptive). They honestly look no further. But that is not all there is to the store --as the various studies have shown.

I would say that especially since there are those that exist that are not harmful or deadly to sperm – that they would be the ones to choose to aid nature.

I would say non spermicidal lube does aid in the conception of a human. If intercourse does not take place due to pain or other human conditions, you don’t get babies.

If a product is stating “no spermicide” and has spermicide, it is against the law and should be reported. As far as the “studies” I would imagine they would contain the variables such as the amount of lubricant, how it is applied, the brand etc.

I would agree it does seem like any formulated gel would slow down sperm if poured all over the semen but this is a stretch. Please post any of the studies if you have them.

 

[Bookcat]

I would say non spermicidal lube does aid in the conception of a human. If intercourse does not take place due to pain or other human conditions, you don’t get babies.

If a product is stating “no spermicide” and has spermicide, it is against the law and should be reported. As far as the “studies” I would imagine they would contain the variables such as the amount of lubricant, how it is applied, the brand etc.

I would agree it does seem like any formulated gel would slow down sperm if poured all over the semen but this is a stretch. Please post any of the studies if you have them.

Yes in that sense --but then the other factors work against it.

Again–there ARE lubricants that do not cause these problems.

This is a known problem with many lubricants --our Catholic Doctor who was trained at the Paul VI institute first informed us of this reality as part of general information.

So I imagine one can contact the Paul VI institute which would know about them as well.

 

[maryjk]

The couple may want to look into the WHY the lubricant is needed. Maybe it’s psychological, or physical…

Sort of like impotence.

What difference does it make?

 

[EasterJoy]

Unintentitional contraception, not recycling the recyclable, failing to choose the organic alternative you didn’t know about and the humane and the biodegradable possibilities that you could have researched and…

Yes, concern yourself with what is right, but don’t drive yourself crazy that you can’t know everything. You can’t get everything perfect.

“Eat anything sold in the market, without raising questions on grounds of conscience, for “the earth and its fullness are the Lord’s.” If an unbeliever invites you and you want to go, eat whatever is placed before you, without raising questions on grounds of conscience. But if someone says to you, “This was offered in sacrifice,” do not eat it on account of the one who called attention to it and on account of conscience; I mean not your own conscience, but the other’s. For why should my freedom be determined by someone else’s conscience? If I partake thankfully, why am I reviled for that over which I give thanks? So whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do everything for the glory of God.” 1 Cor. 10:25-31

Do your best, and having done that, dare to be at peace.

 

[THP]

Well does this aid the conception of human persons? Well various studies have shown that many can have rather the other effect. Impeded mobility, damage sperm --even kill them (and indeed some can even have their effects be similar to contraceptive gels it seems from the one quote). And I believe one will find on the various products notices that they should not be used when attempting to conceive (though I have not verified such --not running to the drug store to read their labels).

Are you arguing that these products are contraceptives? Show me any shred of evidence that they impair fertility. Just because in-vitro studies show biologic plausibility doesn’t necessarily mean that will be the result in living systems. Sure, in a couple that is having difficulty conceiving because the man has a low total motile sperm count it would be prudent to not use them. You are essentially saying that vaginal lubricants that are not designed as spermicides are intrinsically evil because they are the equivalent to a contraceptive and you are not going to convince anyone of that argument.

 

[Bookcat]

Are you arguing that these products are contraceptives? Show me any shred of evidence that they impair fertility. Just because in-vitro studies show biologic plausibility doesn’t necessarily mean that will be the result in living systems. Sure, in a couple that is having difficulty conceiving because the man has a low total motile sperm count it would be prudent to not use them. You are essentially saying that vaginal lubricants that are not designed as spermicides are intrinsically evil because they are the equivalent to a contraceptive and you are not going to convince anyone of that argument.

You are putting words in my post

I refer you to past posts as to what I am saying. Too many to repeat

 

[bonvivantHermit]

What difference does it make?

When our bodies do not function as intended, I would think that we first try to fix them.
If we can’t, then we get a crutch, pain relief…and lubricant I suppose.

I would guess in some cases the need for lubricant is b/c of some sexual dysfunction- neglectful lover, frigidity, fear etc.

 

[THP]

You are putting words in my post

I refer you to past posts as to what I am saying. Too many to repeat

Great! If they are not contraceptives then we don’t have to worry about it. For those couples without infertility you may resume your daily scheduled activities.

 

[maryjk]

When our bodies do not function as intended, I would think that we first try to fix them.
If we can’t, then we get a crutch, pain relief…and lubricant I suppose.

I would guess in some cases the need for lubricant is b/c of some sexual dysfunction- neglectful lover, frigidity, fear etc.

That would be a guess.

According to my doctor, who may just be guessing but has a degree behind her guess, the most common cause of the need for lubricant is menopause. Which is perfectly natural.

 

[Bookcat]

Great! If they are not contraceptives then we don’t have to worry about it. For those couples without infertility you may resume your daily scheduled activities.

Read my posts …as to what I said.