NFP and Population Levels

[choose_to_love]

@Hoosier D #37: I am not following. Perhaps you could elaborate?

 

[strange_guy]

To be honest, I don’t personally know any person who thinks that using modern methods of birth control is a sin. That seens such an anachronic position of the catholic church.

 

[OraLabora]

Right now we have about 7 billion people on Earth, right? Suppose the entire world was Catholic, and followed NFP teachings and had a family of between 6 and 12 children. The median family size would be 9 children, or 4.5 per person currently living. In one generation, our planet’s population would go from 7 billion people to (7 x 4.5) 31.5 billion. Could we really support 31.5 billion people?

If this hypothetical rate of reproduction continued for two more generations, we would have 637 billion.

Faulty assumption. You are assuming that because people use NFP, they will automatically have large families. People use NFP to regulate family size to the available resources and their own physical and mental abilities.

The Church teaches that NFP is licit and not sinful for the regulation of family size for legitimate reasons. Properly used it can be an effective natural way of regulating family size.

In fact the biggest cause of overpopulation is a lack of education, in particular the education of women. If all women in the developing world learned how to use NFP properly to regulate their family size, I’d bet dollars to donuts the population explosion would slow down, not accelerate.

 

[Thinking10]

Faulty assumption. You are assuming that because people use NFP, they will automatically have large families. People use NFP to regulate family size to the available resources and their own physical and mental abilities.

The Church teaches that NFP is licit and not sinful for the regulation of family size for legitimate reasons. Properly used it can be an effective natural way of regulating family size.

In fact the biggest cause of overpopulation is a lack of education, in particular the education of women. If all women in the developing world learned how to use NFP properly to regulate their family size, I’d bet dollars to donuts the population explosion would slow down, not accelerate.

If you are using NFP no differently than birth control, and if it really works, what is the difference between NFP and birth control?

Is it right to regulate your family size or not? If NFP is used no differently than birth control, I really don’t see the difference between NFP and barriers or withdrawal. NFP doesn’t really sound natural. How much scientific development was necessary, how many inventions and studies had to be done to develop the system? How much planning and deliberation is necessary by each couple to use something that is supposed to just be natural, and given to us, rather than invented by us?

 

[mommamaree]

If you are using NFP no differently than birth control, and if it really works, what is the difference between NFP and birth control?

Is it right to regulate your family size or not? If NFP is used no differently than birth control, I really don’t see the difference between NFP and barriers or withdrawal. NFP doesn’t really sound natural. How much scientific development was necessary, how many inventions and studies had to be done to develop the system? How much planning and deliberation is necessary by each couple to use something that is supposed to just be natural, and given to us, rather than invented by us?

Ah, so you do have an agenda, which explains why your previous posts did not make sense.

You need to learn more about what NFP actually is, and not assume you understand what it is or how it is employed. It is wholly different from withdrawal and condoms, indeed from all forms of contraception.

 

[thewanderer]

Right now we have about 7 billion people on Earth, right? Suppose the entire world was Catholic, and followed NFP teachings and had a family of between 6 and 12 children. The median family size would be 9 children, or 4.5 per person currently living. In one generation, our planet’s population would go from 7 billion people to (7 x 4.5) 31.5 billion. Could we really support 31.5 billion people?

If this hypothetical rate of reproduction continued for two more generations, we would have 637 billion.

I think the real problem here is that you are linking being Catholic and following the Church’s teachings with respect to NFP to having between 6-12 children without adequate cause. You are assuming this based on an extrapolation from a few Catholics who follow NFP that you know personally.

I mean, yes, its pretty obvious, if every person found a mate and had 12 kids and continued to do this for multiple generations the earths population would explode. That fact isn’t being questioned by anybody here. But what is the point of pointing that out? One can only assume from your faulty attempt to connect Catholics who use NFP to always having 6-12 kids you are trying to make an argument against the Catholic Church’s teachings with respect to NFP. The problem, however, as I have said is you do not have a clear and logical link between Catholic teaching on NFP and always having 6-12 kids. So, if you were trying to argue against this teaching your argument fails. If you are trying to do something else I really don’t understand what in the world it is.

 

[Thinking10]

Ah, so you do have an agenda, which explains why your previous posts did not make sense.

You need to learn more about what NFP actually is, and not assume you understand what it is or how it is employed. It is wholly different from withdrawal and condoms, indeed from all forms of contraception.

Direct comments to the message, not the speaker.

 

[Joe_5859]

To be honest, I don’t personally know any person who thinks that using modern methods of birth control is a sin. That seens such an anachronic position of the catholic church.

You need to get out and meet more Catholics. The vast majority of Catholics in the circles I run in are very much believers in and practitioners of Catholic teaching on the matter. Now, I know we’re not the majority by any stretch of the imagination, but we do exist.

 

[Thinking10]

I’ll rephrase the question. In light of the above scenario, where there is a limit to the number of people capable of being supported, should a couple suppress sexual frustrations caused by prolonged abstinence, have sex outside the permitted manner, or risk having more children, further dividing the already limited amount of available food, living space etc?

I am not saying that we are over populated now, but if population levels reached an unsupportable level as in a hypothetical scenario, are the only remaining moral options NFP and abstinence? I am not against NFP and abstinence, but I really don’t understand how they are always the only morally permissible things, even within marriage.

 

[davidv]

I’ll rephrase the question. In light of the above scenario, where there is a limit to the number of people capable of being supported, should a couple suppress sexual frustrations caused by prolonged abstinence, have sex outside the permitted manner, or risk having more children, further dividing the already limited amount of available food, living space etc?

I am not saying that we are over populated now, but if population levels reached an unsupportable level as in a hypothetical scenario, are the only remaining moral options NFP and abstinence? I am not against NFP and abstinence, but I really don’t understand how they are always the only morally permissible things, even within marriage.

If you truely don’t understand this, may I suggest that you study very carefully the Catechism section on Marriage. When you fully understand this, then begin the process again with the Theology of the Body.

 

[Thinking10]

If you truely don’t understand this, may I suggest that you study very carefully the Catechism section on Marriage. When you fully understand this, then begin the process again with the Theology of the Body.

I’m not lacking on knowledge of what the Church says. What I can’t understand is why the Church holds the position it does. The reason I have trouble with this teaching is that no matter what I read, I don’t see how the sexual activity of a married couple is immoral unless they plan to never have any children.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

The Church leaves the decision-making process to the couple, and says that only they have the ability to make the decision, and does not require any spiritual direction. I know that NFP is an issue for you, theologically speaking, but you still have to admit that the Church imposes no requirement for direction. Also, sometimes prayerful discernment is in-depth, and sometimes it is very simple and straightforward.

It depends by what you mean by spiritual direction. The teaching is not “whatever the couple decides” NFP involves grave reasons. Yes it is up to the couple, but there is a standard there, it is not arbitrary. (even though for most it is)

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I’ll rephrase the question. In light of the above scenario, where there is a limit to the number of people capable of being supported, should a couple suppress sexual frustrations caused by prolonged abstinence, have sex outside the permitted manner, or risk having more children, further dividing the already limited amount of available food, living space etc?

I am not saying that we are over populated now, but if population levels reached an unsupportable level as in a hypothetical scenario, are the only remaining moral options NFP and abstinence? I am not against NFP and abstinence, but I really don’t understand how they are always the only morally permissible things, even within marriage.

Rephrase all you want. Your premise has been shown false and now you wish to change the parameters. What is the “limit” you speak of?

 

[davidv]

I’m not lacking on knowledge of what the Church says. What I can’t understand is why the Church holds the position it does. The reason I have trouble with this teaching is that no matter what I read, I don’t see how the sexual activity of a married couple is immoral unless they plan to never have any children.

I didn’t ask you to know it, I suggested that you understand it. This begins with understanding who we are as humans, male and female. This leads to the understanding of what is the proper use of our sexuality.

 

[mommamaree]

Direct comments to the message, not the speaker.

Do you say this because you believe I was engaging in the ad hominem fallacy? I am sorry if you felt attacked, and that certainly was not my intention. You denied any agenda, yet then you revealed your agenda, which appears to be to refute the Church’s teaching on married sexuality and family planning. Please show me where I am wrong if I have misunderstood your purpose here.

I did direct my comments to the message with the second paragraph of my post. You have demonstrated a basic misunderstanding of what NFP is and how it is employed in the recent threads you have posted in regarding this topic. This is why I advise research in this case.

Furthermore, I have invited you multiple times in this thread, to clarify your points and explain your meanings and you have ignored every one of my posts until now. Why is that?

 

[Rau]

What is the basis for assuming that families would consist of 6 to 12 children? Is this even true of the current Catholic population?

This appears to be a baseless projection.

I know only one single family with more than 6 kids! I would think that very large families are in most cases sought by the parents or reflect unawareness of (licit) means to regulate births.

 

[thewanderer]

I’ll rephrase the question. In light of the above scenario, where there is a limit to the number of people capable of being supported, should a couple suppress sexual frustrations caused by prolonged abstinence, have sex outside the permitted manner, or risk having more children, further dividing the already limited amount of available food, living space etc?

I am not saying that we are over populated now, but if population levels reached an unsupportable level as in a hypothetical scenario, are the only remaining moral options NFP and abstinence? I am not against NFP and abstinence, but I really don’t understand how they are always the only morally permissible things, even within marriage.

Is it correct, then, to say that you could rephrase your question to simply be why isn’t artificial contraceptive a moral option?

 

[ffg]

I am not against NFP and abstinence, but I really don’t understand how they are always the only morally permissible things, even within marriage.

If A + B = C is natural (moral), and I choose to make A+B = D by slightly changing A or B for my convenience.

I have created chaos, as C is not D.

Now let’s draw this to reality - do most marriages end in death these days? They should - ‘until death do us part’, no?

Could there be something going on in this world that might clue us in to chaos in marriage? Perhaps our selfishness and acts stemming from them?

How do we rectify? Perhaps we try getting back to what is natural (moral).

 

[Thinking10]

If A + B = C is natural (moral), and I choose to make A+B = D by slightly changing A or B for my convenience.

I have created chaos, as C is not D.

Now let’s draw this to reality - do most marriages end in death these days? They should - ‘until death do us part’, no?

Could there be something going on in this world that might clue us in to chaos in marriage? Perhaps our selfishness and acts stemming from them?

How do we rectify? Perhaps we try getting back to what is natural (moral).

NFP doesn’t really sound natural. How much scientific development was necessary before the system could be developed to the point is at today? How many inventions had to be invented and studies had to be done to understand the human body well enough to develop the system? How much planning and deliberation is necessary by each couple to use something that is supposed to just be natural, and given to us, rather than invented by us?

 

[thewanderer]

If you are using NFP no differently than birth control, and if it really works, what is the difference between NFP and birth control?

Is it right to regulate your family size or not? If NFP is used no differently than birth control, I really don’t see the difference between NFP and barriers or withdrawal. NFP doesn’t really sound natural. How much scientific development was necessary, how many inventions and studies had to be done to develop the system? How much planning and deliberation is necessary by each couple to use something that is supposed to just be natural, and given to us, rather than invented by us?

It sounds to me as though you are confused about the Church’s teaching on NFP partly because of a misunderstanding. There is nothing wrong with using our God-given intelligence to develop new methods to help us live our lives. As you point out so well NFP has been carefully researched and developed just as much as, say, condoms. The fact that we developed these things rather than just finding them sitting around in the wild has no bearing on their morality at all. I am not sure what has led you to mistakenly believe that that is the criterion for morality. Whatever it was, please rest assured that how much work humans put into developing a thing has no bearing on its morality.