Okay to stop having kids?

[hecd2]

otm:

and Mother Theresa was very successful in teaching uneducated Hindus NFP. It doesn’t take the pill to make changes. It does take truth.

Well I’ve asked for credible references for the wonderful efficacy that is claimed here. Have you got them?

and you seem to have a very American/European view of what you think is poverty in other countries. Before you expound on exporting birth control, you might go and live among the people, and observe with an open mind. .

Well, I was born and raised in a third world country. Were you? Have you the slightest idea about how the poorest live in Latin America, in sub-Saharan Africa, in the Horn of Africa, in the Caribbean?

Alec
evolutionpages.com

 

[YinYangMom]

hecd2:

I’d be delighted to look into it. Can you give me a credible reference to the claim that people attempting to practise NFP in Calcutta had a failure rate of 0.01% - that is 1 pregnancy in 10,000 couples - using this technique. I run the risk of being accused of smugness when I say that this has the ring of an urban myth about it - and that I am extraordinarily sceptical about any claim that NFP in a poor urban third world population has a lower unexpected pregnancy rate than a a hormonal implant or a barrier method.

It would be wonderful if NFP in this situation was 99.99% efficacious as, it might surprise you, I think it is an excellent method for those who can manage it. But I am afraid that I think this is just too good to be true - look at the recent post from mevmom that delineates the difficulty of NFP working in a relationship where both partners are not committted to it.

Anyway, I want to look into the 0.01% claim so give me the references.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

Well that’s kinda bogus anyway…

Show me the effectiveness rates of using the pill inconsistently.

Show me the effectiveness rates of using an IUD with improper maintenance/care.

Show me the effectiveness rates of using a diaphragm with improper maintenance/care.

The thing is, anything not used according to instructions can result in not doing what it was expected to do.

Now, on the other hand…
NFP, used properly, prevents pregnancy 99.9% of the time.

But…used properly, the pill, the IUD (with spermicidals), the diaphragm (with spermicidals), do not prevent pregnancy at such high rates.

What they do, is reduce the number of **viable **pregnancies. The sperm and egg still connect more often than not, but statistics don’t show that, as the embryo is unable to plant itself properly or it is poisoned by the spermicide so that the child is killed.

Add to that, the risk of danger to the woman with an IUD who ends up pregnant.

Tell me again why that is considered the charitable approach to the situation?

 

[hecd2]

YinYangMom:

It’s called Truth.

Do you find it acceptable that men be allowed to demand and expect sex from women whenever they want?

No. Of course not. Why on earth do you think I would think that?

Your strawman doesn’t in the slightest support your contention that the Church is the ONLY body that cares for the dignity of women in the third world. That claim is simply silly.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

 

[YinYangMom]

hecd2:

Well, I was born and raised in a third world country. Were you? Have you the slightest idea about how the poorest live in Latin America, in sub-Saharan Africa, in the Horn of Africa, in the Caribbean?

Alec
evolutionpages.com

So why aren’t you more angry and resentful toward the people who allowed men to use women for their own pleasure?

Why aren’t you more saddened that those same people are not allowing the women of third world countries to fully understand their beauty and worth?

Contraception does nothing to change the underlying problem in third world countries’ sexual abuse of women in general. If you really want things to change there, focus energies on teaching them the Truth.

 

[hecd2]

YinYangMom:

NFP, used properly, prevents pregnancy 99.9% of the time.

But…used properly, the pill, the IUD (with spermicidals), the diaphragm (with spermicidals), do not prevent pregnancy at such high rates.

OK - - give me the references. Where is a credible reference that shows that NFP (used properly) is more reliable than condoms (used properly).

But to a large extent, this is a red herring. What we need to consider is a real world situation - if in the real world condoms or an IUD or an implant give a much higher efficacy than NFP then those are the figures we should be using. The problem with NFP is that it requires a sophisticated and committed COUPLE. If that you’ve got that, its the best there is - if you haven’t, it sucks.

And, NFP does not address the issue of prophylaxis of AIDS/HIV/Hep B/Hep C.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

 

[YinYangMom]

hecd2:

Your strawman doesn’t in the slightest support your contention that the Church is the ONLY body that cares for the dignity of women in the third world. That claim is simply silly.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

Ok, what other body can you cite believes that:

woman completed creation

woman was God’s choice for His Incarnation

women are the equivalent to the Bride of Christ, the Church

women are to be revered

women are to be respected

women are to be protected

 

[YinYangMom]

hecd2:

The problem with NFP is that it requires a sophisticated and committed COUPLE. If that you’ve got that, its the best there is - if you haven’t, it sucks.

And, NFP does not address the issue of prophylaxis of AIDS/HIV/Hep B/Hep C.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

Well, hello?! That’s the point!! All couples are entitled and deserve to have committed relationships, relationships founded in love, respect, dignity for which proper use of NFP does not ‘suck’.

No one should have to settle for less. NO ONE.

NFP does address AIDS/HIV/Hep B/Hep C…if you have that, then you cannot in love have sexual relations. Period. To put the life of your mate below the desire to relief sexual tension is not love. It is lust, and lust is never proper - even in marriage.

If those with those conditions stopped having sex then the disease would not carry forward into the next generation. But no…men have a ‘right’ to indulge, infection his partner and any children she may bear. That’s love???

 

[socalcarmelite]

I have also heard about Mother’s Teresa’s work. I remember listening to t tape about this subject. I thought the failure rate was 1 in a 1000.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

YinYangMom:

But for the pharmaceutical companies, it’s not about the women, it’s about the money.

I don’t know about that for women from personal experience.

From personal experience I do know that for pharmaceutical companies that make drugs for mental illness, it is about the money. You would be amazed at the dichotomy. Not like the drug companies aren’t trying to make products that help people, but clearly it is only incidental to the project of making money.

In fact, the board members of the company have an obligation to look out for the financial interest of the stockholders, which is purely about money which is the ostensible reason the corporation even exists. If they cared about social issues and took financial losses as a result, they get voted out, unless the shareholders were uniquely committed to certain social causes, which in fact some are – but I doubt many large pharmaceutical companies are that way.

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

TPJCatholic:

steveereno,

Thank you for a very detailed and well thought-out response. I do appreciate it.

Wow, TPJ.

You really can get a thread going. Your most recent post to this thread was three days ago, and here the battle is not only still going on, but is still heated.

Maybe you got your questions answered, but it sure stirred up us argumenatitive types.

Alan

I think if you practice nfp, then you should never expect:
http://www.venfl.com/features/images/hunt-inquisition.jpg

 

[hecd2]

YinYangMom:

So why aren’t you more angry and resentful toward the people who allowed men to use women for their own pleasure?

Why aren’t you more saddened that those same people are not allowing the women of third world countries to fully understand their beauty and worth?

Contraception does nothing to change the underlying problem in third world countries’ sexual abuse of women in general. If you really want things to change there, focus energies on teaching them the Truth.

YYM, I am angry and resentful about any men who treat women as objects for their pleasure only, and do not cherish them. I couldn’t agree with you more that there is a persuasion/educational task to be done here. And by the way, by no means is that task limited to the Third World, but it is required everywhere, even into the rich professional Catholic community in the USA and Europe.

However, I also know that not all , perhaps not even most unfortunate pregnancies are a result of a man abusing a woman but are the result of two people, who love one another and whose lives are unimaginably difficult, taking solace and succour in one another’s arms. Who are we to deny that to them. It seems to me that JPII and his acolytes have vastly overestimated the evil inherent in artificial contraception and there is a terrible imblance of morality which proceeds from that theoretical but uncharitable theological position (do you realise how historically recent it is?). The Church holds that contraception is a terrible evil when the really terrible evil is abject poverty, the abuse of women and brutalisation of children and THAT is what we should be fighting

Alec
evolutionpages.com

 

[hecd2]

YinYangMom:

Well, hello?! That’s the point!! All couples are entitled and deserve to have committed relationships, relationships founded in love, respect, dignity for which proper use of NFP does not ‘suck’.

No one should have to settle for less. NO ONE.

Excellent - so you’ll arrange for that to happen miraculously for the millions of couples in the world who have the relationships that they have. And until that happens, as far as you are concerned, it’s OK for women to have their 12th pregnancy, for children to be abandoned on the streets of Rio de Janeiro, for the 40% HIV infection rate in some southern African states to rise to 50% and 60%. If they can’t get the idea about NFP and miraculously cure themselves of HIV, let the bastards die.

NFP does address AIDS/HIV/Hep B/Hep C…if you have that, then you cannot in love have sexual relations. Period. To put the life of your mate below the desire to relief sexual tension is not love. It is lust, and lust is never proper - even in marriage.

Nonsense - who are you to say to some poor person who is infected with HIV that they can never again in love have sexual relations, when there is a way in which they can safely do so. Why are people so willing to create moral rules for others that do not affect themselves.? Why are we so self-righteous?

Alec
evolutionpages.com

 

[AlanFromWichita]

hecd2:

However, I also know that not all , perhaps not even most unfortunate pregnancies are a result of a man abusing a woman but are the result of two people, who love one another and whose lives are unimaginably difficult, taking solace and succour in one another’s arms.

I’ll feed this through my Personal Disgronifier and see what comes out:
Most of the time "unfortunate" pregnancies do not result from a man abusing a woman.
More often there are two miserable depressed people who have the hots for each other, and discover that if they play the “Creation” game suddenly life seems great for at least a moment.

Now for the commentary you got this far to see:

I’m guessing that’s “abusing” in the context of acting in a way contrary to her own will, and not as in “abusing” her in the Catholic context that premarital relations are inherently abusive to the body.

They find “succour” in each others; embrace until they figured out the woman is pregnant, then all of a sudden the poetry goes away.

Who are we to deny that to them.

If they’re my kids, I’ll deny that to them. Other than that I don’t have a lot of control over other people’s sex lives, especially when they aren’t listening with their “upper” brains.

The Church holds that contraception is a terrible evil when the really terrible evil is abject poverty, the abuse of women and brutalisation of children and THAT is what we should be fighting

Many of us have our “pet peeves” that we wish the Church would concentrate more on.

For example, I wish they’d get their wonderful knowledge of mystical theology out of the monestaries and out here where everyone can access it, the way Vatican II declared.

I wrote an email to the Holy Father about it, asking him to please feed those of us who hunger for transformational teachings to compliment our doctrinal theology.

He didn’t respond yet, and I’m not holding my breath for that matter until he does, but at least I can’t be accused of simply arguing over stuff and not trying to change it.

Why don’t you send the Holy Father your greetings, and see if you can humbly ask him to consider a particular evil that you would like to see more emphasis on. I suggest for best effect you don’t tell him the evils he is fighting now aren’t important; just make the importance of your own known – after you start by greeting him and welcoming him, etc.

I say “Greetings” because on his web site where he gives out his email address, the subject field gets prepopulated “Greetings”

Alan

 

[cherirose]

I’ve been reading the messages on this thread and recognize that both sides have good points, though I personally accept the teachings of the Church. I just have to comment that though poverty and abuse are horrible evils and should be fought, it isn’t right to fight it with something that is inherently immoral, such as contraception. It is like fighting poverty by playing Robin Hood, stealing from the rich to help the poor, which I don’t think any Christian I know would condone. You can’t fight evil with another evil, which is the nature–though, perhaps, not the intention–of contraception. If you don’t believe in the evil of contraception or understand why NFP is not the same thing, then I urge you to study the issue more because the reasons and theology behind it are sound. Believe me, if I didn’t recognize contraception as truly immoral, I would not hesitate to use it, as much as I love the children I have. It is difficult to remain faithful sometimes, that is for sure, and my attitude in using NFP is probably not what it should be.

 

[hecd2]

cherirose:

I’ve been reading the messages on this thread and recognize that both sides have good points, though I personally accept the teachings of the Church. I just have to comment that though poverty and abuse are horrible evils and should be fought, it isn’t right to fight it with something that is inherently immoral, such as contraception. It is like fighting poverty by playing Robin Hood, stealing from the rich to help the poor, which I don’t think any Christian I know would condone. You can’t fight evil with another evil, which is the nature–though, perhaps, not the intention–of contraception. If you don’t believe in the evil of contraception or understand why NFP is not the same thing, then I urge you to study the issue more because the reasons and theology behind it are sound. Believe me, if I didn’t recognize contraception as truly immoral, I would not hesitate to use it, as much as I love the children I have. It is difficult to remain faithful sometimes, that is for sure, and my attitude in using NFP is probably not what it should be.

Thank you cherirose - that’s nicely balanced. I have studied the issue. I disagree with you about the inherent evil of contraception. Now what? You say contraception is inherently evil - I say it’s at least orders of magnitudes less evil than than the evils it addresses. Now what? 1. You can agree with me. 2. We can agree to disagree where you accept that I’ve conscientiously studied the subject and come to a different conclusion from you. 3. You can say that I simply don’t understand the issues at all and so my position is naive. 4. Or in the extreme, you can accuse me of wanting to make money from this and being an evil bastard. I think you are wavering bewteen 2. and 3. Well the point is, I am not naive, I have read endlessly about this subject and I have come to a conscientious conclusion. I think I am a 2. Don’t you?

Alec
evolutionpages.com

 

[hecd2]

AlanFromWichita:

I’ll feed this through my Personal Disgronifier and see what comes out:
Most of the time "unfortunate" pregnancies do not result from a man abusing a woman.
More often there are two miserable depressed people who have the hots for each other, and discover that if they play the “Creation” game suddenly life seems great for at least a moment.

Alan

I thought better of you than this.

Alec

 

[YinYangMom]

AlanFromWichita:

I don’t know about that for women from personal experience.

From personal experience I do know that for pharmaceutical companies that make drugs for mental illness, it is about the money. You would be amazed at the dichotomy. Not like the drug companies aren’t trying to make products that help people, but clearly it is only incidental to the project of making money.

In fact, the board members of the company have an obligation to look out for the financial interest of the stockholders, which is purely about money which is the ostensible reason the corporation even exists. If they cared about social issues and took financial losses as a result, they get voted out, unless the shareholders were uniquely committed to certain social causes, which in fact some are – but I doubt many large pharmaceutical companies are that way.

Alan

And yet the catechism calls on business people to be stewards over the assets, paying good wages, while making a profit…but the goal of business, under Catholicism is not to make a whole heck of a lot of money for a few stockholders at the expense of caring for the environment and workers responsibly. There must be balance, and right now, worldwide, there are few socially responsible corporations operating as stewards.
But that’s a side issue, really off the topic of this thread…
I digress

 

[YinYangMom]

hecd2:

However, I also know that not all , perhaps not even most unfortunate pregnancies are a result of a man abusing a woman but are the result of two people, who love one another and whose lives are unimaginably difficult, taking solace and succour in one another’s arms. Who are we to deny that to them.

…

the really terrible evil is abject poverty, the abuse of women and brutalisation of children and THAT is what we should be fighting

Alec
evolutionpages.com

Now we’re getting somewhere…

The couple in poverty, in poor health, in overburdened social circumstances can find solace in each other’s arms during non-fertile times. That’s the beauty of NFP. The Church is not denying them solace at all.

If you’re *that *overburdened with stress, anxiety, saddness…be honest, solace for that can come from an embrace, a touch, a hug. Who honestly feels like having sex when there are 8 children starving under one roof and at least one of the adults is exhausted (3 guesses which one)? Men, who through no fault of their own, have rabid sex drives, but they don’t have to scratch the itch every single time - especially when the wife is worn out physically from multiple births and poor nutrition. No, the man in those situations is not seeking solace, they’re horny and they believe the women are there to satisfy the urges. The Church finds such selfishness intolerable and is doing what it can to get the word out that it has to stop.

You and I agree completely on the other part of your post. Contraception does not fight against abject poverty, the abuse of women and brutalisation of children…it perpetuates the cycle of abuse.

Look beyond the immediate situation…imagine a time when the message finally gets across…men learn to control their urges…men live each moment of their days seeing to it the wives are cared for and tended to, preserving her emotional and physical well being so that she will be ready and willing to receive his gift of himself to her should the man so desire to offer himself to her.

When sexual relations are conducted in the proper frame of mind/spirit both parties are able to be responsible for the number of births the couple is open to receive. There may still be a ‘surprise’ or two over a number of years per couple, but you certainly won’t have the unchecked birth after birth after birth situation you have now.

Because there are better spaced births between a couple, the stress levels lower, the health conditions are not exhausted as much for the parents and the children.

There would be much fewer multiple partners per adult if they held to God’s design by treating every man and woman with dignity and respect. Both would be free to say NO to unwanted advances, and the no would be honored. Thus, lower transmission of STDs, and that means fewer children being born with the effects of those STDs.

You wouldn’t need the condoms, the IUDs the diaphragms if people would just respect and honor each other.

The Church guards and professes Truth, even when it isn’t popular, because She knows all the other evils you mention are the fruits of Satan’s work - the one which says each person can do what they want, when they want because it feels good, and leave the consequences to others to take care of.

 

[YinYangMom]

hecd2:

Excellent - so you’ll arrange for that to happen miraculously for the millions of couples in the world who have the relationships that they have.

We didn’t get into this problem overnight. Nor will we get out of it. Yes, it will take time. Contraception does nothing to remedy the situation, it only perpetuates it.

Just because it can’t be fixed overnight doesn’t mean we are to disregard the Truth in the teachings and stop spreading the Good News. No, if only more people would help spread the message we could reach that miraculous time much sooner.

And until that happens, as far as you are concerned, it’s OK for women to have their 12th pregnancy, for children to be abandoned on the streets of Rio de Janeiro, for the 40% HIV infection rate in some southern African states to rise to 50% and 60%.

Well it’s certainly ok for women to have all of their pregnancies for that is the gift of life. It’s never ok to leave the children abandoned. How does contraception help the abandoned children? The teaching of the Church extends to all people to care for those who are abandoned, it extends to leaders of government to distribute resources to those most in need.

If they can’t get the idea about NFP and miraculously cure themselves of HIV, let the bastards die.

You lost me there. Who’s dying? Who’s miraculously cured of HIV? and if they’re cured of HIV how does getting the idea about NFP affect whom?

Nonsense - who are you to say to some poor person who is infected with HIV that they can never again in love have sexual relations, when there is a way in which they can safely do so.

First of all, if you love somebody enough to want to give yourself completely to them, why on earth would you want to risk even .001% giving them a terminal disease???

Second, condom use doesn’t provide 100% safety for the other party. Claiming it makes sex safe for infected people is a lie to perpetuate the belief that sexual urges are meant to be satisfied always, no matter what the consequences.

Why are people so willing to create moral rules for others that do not affect themselves.? Why are we so self-righteous?

We aren’t creating the moral rules. Not you, not I, not the Church. God made the rules when He created us. He has revealed the same teaching on sex over, and over, and over again throughout the ages. The Catholic Church has preserved His teaching and continues to help people find peace and happiness in God design for them.

Don’t blame God for how difficult it is to stay on the right path, that’s Satan’s doing…and those who egg us on to take th easier path by going against God’s teaching are being manipulated by the master. Satan is so good at twisting the truth and all the evils you address are proof of just how good he is at it.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

 

[AlanFromWichita]

hecd2:

I thought better of you than this.

Alec

Oh? How could I have done better?

I thought I fairly summarized your points, less a little of the poetic language. I haven’t really been following the thread because it’s so tedious.

The only reason I posted is I thought you were making a lustful encounter by two people who were miserable (ok, in your words “unimaginably difficult”) and they got together for a quickie and you’re like making it out like it’s some big wonderful thing with all them pretty words.

I was just trying to see if I could translate it into language more universally understood by the populace on this thread. Have I distorted the actual facts of your statement in any way, or just what is it you think I’ve done short of my best?

Lately a lot of people have been telling me I’m “uncharitable” so maybe that’s it. Maybe I should do the opposite of what I’m tempted to do. I’ll see if I can de-disgronify what I wrote above:
Most of the time "unfortunate" pregnancies do not result from a man abusing a woman.
More often there are two lonely people, forging a path through this cold universe that happens to find them together. After a while they realize that neither had ever found someone who could understand pain quite the way they could themselves. They frolicked around in a garden, completely innocent, and fell fast asleep. When the birds began to sing, they awoke to a morning mist, they discovered each other anew, and nature took its course. To the sound of the woods Waking Up, they made love in such a way that never of them had been so fulfilled. For a minute they forgot All Their Cares and were in sheer heaven. Ah, if only it could stay this way forever.

Then the girl came up pregnant and they sought an abortion.

Is that an improvement?

Alan