On 98% of Catholic women using contraception

[Deus_lo_vult]

This stat is fatally flawed.

The “98 percent” number comes from a survey conducted by the Guttmacher Institute [Planned Parenthood]- the question asked was whether women ages 18-45 had EVER used contraceptives. So the stat means that 98% of Catholic women, by the age of 45, state that they have used some form of contraception on at least one occasion. This did not even attempt to make a distinction between one use, occasional use, or frequent use. It did not attempt to make a distinction between what someone may have done at one time in her life and what she does now, with what she has come to know and understand now. And it did not attempt to distinguish between what a woman may have done at least one time and what she believes is right or appropriate to try to live up to. It is not a useful number to quote but it is showing up all over the place recently.

As I said in another thread, this stat does not account for the religious dimensions of a moral objection that is intrinsically religious. This is what happens when people who aren’t religious try to collect statistical information on people who ARE religious.

Maybe 98 percent of Catholic women HAVE USED contraception, but that says nothing about what percentage of Catholic women are regular users of contraception. Per that same logic, maybe 98% of Americans have eaten jelly beans at some point in our lives but that doesn’t mean all of us eat jelly beans everyday, or even that we like jelly beans.

A more pertinent question of the debate is what percentage of Catholics regularly use contraceptives and/or abortafacients, and also what percentage use birth control pills to regulate their menstrual cycles? Proponents of the Obamacare mandate are using this statistic to make a broad generalization about Catholic women but this number is illegitimate because it raises more questions than it answers.

1. What percentage of Catholic women have used contraceptives only once or at one time in their lives and completely repented of them?
2. What percentage of Catholic women use contraception occasionally?
3. What percentage of Catholic women use birth control medication for therapeutic, non-contraceptive use?

Why did I write this thread?

Not to be too presumptious, I’m aware that I’m a newcomer to these forums but I’ve been an orthodox Catholic my whole life. I’d like to give us all a homework assignment. I want us all to write to emails to such media sources as newspaper websites, like the New York Times or the Washington Post, as well as to television news programs that the “98 percent” stat is completely methodologically unsound and flawed.

It’s a bogus stat that needs to thrown out.

Write to CNN, NBC, MSNBC, and lastly to Fox News. Let them know that it’s bad reporting!

 

[Katholish]

ummm… the statistic is even more misleading than you suggest. I read through the methodology section of the study, and they state quite clearly, that the survey only covers sexually active women between 15 and 44. It specifically excludes women who are pregnant, postpartum, or trying to become pregnant, covering only women it classifies as “at risk for unintended pregnancy”. This criteria alone essentially excludes every Catholic woman actually living according to the Church’s teaching.

 

[cjmclark]

Unfortunately as a trial member I’m not allowed to vote on this.

However, as I think someone stated on the other thread far more eloquently than I will here, the statistic (no matter its numerical value) is completely meaningless. The Church declares that use of contraceptives to inhibit the natural act of impregnation is wrong. Opinion (no matter how popular) contrary to that teaching does not make it invalid. Let me see if I can find the quote…

Here we go!

Is someone arguing that because 98% of Catholic women (supposedly) have use ABC at come point during their lives, the Catholic Church should not oppose ABC?

That’s like saying that because 100% of Catholic women have sinned at some point during their lives, the Catholic Church should not oppose sin.

Particularly well-put, I think.

 

[Deus_lo_vult]

Yeah, that IS pretty good, haha. I could NOT have said it better myself, as far as resisting the mounting call to approve contraception is concerned…

But as far as the stat, I don’t want to let people get away were perpetuating a lie.

I can’t vote on my own poll EITHER, haha. I’m a trial member too. Let me emphatically say that I WILL be writing to some of these media outlets, however.

 

[saraih]

The media do not care. 98% is a good number, and even if the true number was 30% it would just be a means to say 30% of us are awful hypocrites who shouldn’t allow our Bishops to speak on the subject.

In fact the whole thing is an excuse to say a lot of us are awful hypocrites who shouldn’t allow our Bishops to speak on the subject, and when they do they can be resoundingly mocked.

 

[Hokomai]

A reality check from someone who has no emotional tie to the Church’s position: this poll is well-conducted by a partisan organisation. It can prehaps be challenged on this basis, bit it seems to me not on the methodology itself.

Even if you discount the stats by say a thirds you still have a massive rejection in practice of the Church’s teaching, among both Church-going and non-Church-going Catholics.

The organisation is not saying that the Church should change its teaching. It is saying, on excellent statistical grounds, that politicians are safe to ignore what bishops say, given what Catholics do. I cannot fault this logic.

Here’s what I thought the interesting bit was:

Religion and contraceptive use among all women
Most sexually active women who do not want to become
pregnant—whether unmarried, currently married or previously
married—practice contraception. The large majority
use highly effective methods. This is true for women of all
religious denominations, including Catholics, despite the
Church’s formal opposition to contraceptive methods other
than natural family planning.
■ Among all women who have had sex, 99% have
ever used a contraceptive method other than natural
family planning. This figure is virtually the same,
98%, among sexually experienced Catholic women.
■ The overwhelming majority of sexually active
women of all denominations who do not want to
become pregnant are using a contraceptive method
(Figure 3, page 6). Moreover, 69% are using highly
effective methods: sterilization (33%), the pill or
another hormonal method (31%), or the IUD (5%).
Guttmacher Institute 5
Religion and contraceptive use among
married women
While Catholic and Evangelical women are slightly more
likely than Mainline Protestants to be married, patterns
of contraceptive use do not differ by religious affiliation
among married women. Similarly, proportions of married
women who are pregnant or desiring pregnancy do not
differ by religious affiliation.
■ About half of women who identify as Catholic
(47%) or Evangelical Protestant (48%) are married,
a higher proportion than is found among Mainline
Protestant women (41%).
■ Only 3% of married Catholic women who do not
want to become pregnant rely on natural family
planning; 72% use highly effective methods, including
40% who rely on sterilization.
■ Reliance on highly effective methods is also common
among Mainline Protestant (76%) and Evangelical
(78%) married women.
■ At any given point in time, 14% of married women
are pregnant, postpartum or trying to get pregnant,
and there are no variations by religious affiliation.
■ Only 2% of Catholic women rely on natural family
planning; even among Catholic women who attend
church once a month or more, only 2% rely on this
method (not shown). Sixty-eight percent of Catholic
women use highly effective methods: sterilization
(32%, including 24% using female sterilization,) the
pill or another hormonal method (31%) and the IUD
(5%).
■ Protestant women are more likely than Catholics
to use highly effective contraceptive methods, with
73% of Mainline Protestants and 74% of Evangelicals
currently using sterilization, hormonal methods
or IUDs.*
■ More than four in 10 Evangelicals rely on male or
female sterilization, a figure that is higher than
among the other religious groups.
■ Attendance at religious services and importance of
religion to daily life are largely unrelated to use of
highly effective contraceptive methods.
■ On average, 11% of women at risk for unintended
pregnancy are not using contraceptives, and levels
of nonuse do not differ by religious affiliations, frequency
of attendance or importance of religion.

 

[saraih]

The organisation is not saying that the Church should change its teaching. It is saying, on excellent statistical grounds, that politicians are safe to ignore what bishops say, given what Catholics do. I cannot fault this logic.

Well, this depends on how Catholics vote in practice. Do we vote based on what we do, or what we believe we ought to do? I do not know the answer to this, hopefully someone will have the statistics to hand.

 

[Hokomai]

The organisation is not saying that the Church should change its teaching. It is saying, on excellent statistical grounds, that politicians are safe to ignore what bishops say, given what Catholics do. I cannot fault this logic.

Well, this depends on how Catholics vote in practice. Do we vote based on what we do, or what we believe we ought to do? I do not know the answer to this, hopefully someone will have the statistics to hand.

This is easy to test. Has any politician in the US in recent years ever thought it worthwhile campaigning on the adoption of Catholic beliefs on contraception (i.e. banning it)? [Yes this is the Catholic belief. Google Ireland and contraception]. Thought not.

 

[iloveangels]

These numbers came from a famous chain of abortion clinics that usually have their franchises in the poor part of town. I think this famous abortion clinic mega-business can’t be trusted for one second. This data is bogus.

Have you ever wondered why these clinics are usually in the poor part of town?

 

[MorningSong51]

I’m glad to see this thread. When I saw the stats on this figure it was not categorizing the purpose of using contraceptives. We use reports (at least businesses do…) to target certain issues that may have to be addressed or readdressed. Sometimes, these reports have to be vocal and seen in another light. This should not be to our embarrassment but to learn from it and go on to teach about women’s health issue within our own religion or even deliver through teaching, another option. Again, if the stats are higher (for example) within a particular age group - find out why? This is only to our own benefit - on where we need to address church teaching and to what age group.

 

[cjmclark]

This is easy to test. Has any politician in the US in recent years ever thought it worthwhile campaigning on the adoption of Catholic beliefs on contraception (i.e. banning it)? [Yes this is the Catholic belief. Google Ireland and contraception]. Thought not.

Well, pretty much every Republican now, since the current administration squared off with the USCCB on the issue.

 

[Deus_lo_vult]

A reality check from someone who has no emotional tie to the Church’s position: this poll is well-conducted by a partisan organisation. It can prehaps be challenged on this basis, bit it seems to me not on the methodology itself.

Even if you discount the stats by say a thirds you still have a massive rejection in practice of the Church’s teaching, among both Church-going and non-Church-going Catholics.

The organisation is not saying that the Church should change its teaching. It is saying, on excellent statistical grounds, that politicians are safe to ignore what bishops say, given what Catholics do. I cannot fault this logic.

I can fault it.

1. The study is deliberately deceitful and misleading, insofar as “98 percent” of Catholic women supposedly use contraception on a sexually recreational basis. Lies should not go unanswered. Whatever the percentage may be, it is not the percentage (98 percent) that is currently stated. I’m not afraid of the percentage however large it is…I’m in the business of knowing and spreading FACTUAL information, regardless of how inconvenient I may find it to be.

If I’m wrong and the real number is 99.9%, I still want to know. But I’m NOT wrong. Whatever the accurate percentage is, it is substantially less than 98%. A common sense accounting of the methdological flaws I listed above will tell you that.

1. It is frequent users who would be beneficiaries of mandating religious organizations (or the insurance companies that service them, which are sometimes run by dioceses).That’s my point. So it’s quite important to know what portion of those respondents are actually behind this mandate by virtue of their frequent behavior.
2. Since Catholic clergy (who answer to Rome) actually administer Catholic hospitals, universities, and insurance companies, with a few exceptions, it actually matters a great deal what the Catholic episcopate has to say. Bishops have an important role in determining how diocesan assests are alocated.

The Catholic Church isn’t democratic, but neither is Truth. They are both rigid and inflexible because they are one-and-the-same. Vocal, rebellious, excommunicants, however loud they may be, do not control the allocation of charitable resources.

 

[Filii_Dei]

This is easy to test. Has any politician in the US in recent years ever thought it worthwhile campaigning on the adoption of Catholic beliefs on contraception (i.e. banning it)? [Yes this is the Catholic belief. Google Ireland and contraception]. Thought not.

Simply because no politician has had the courage to do so does not mean that it is an incorrect moral teaching. Since when have politicians been the judge of all that is good and holy in this world?

 

[Filii_Dei]

Veracity of the statistics aside, what difference does this make? Our faith is not a democracy, and laity do not determine Church teaching. Faith is there to give an objective guide to how we live our life, not to justify popular practices. If we cannot abide by moral teachings, then we have to make our account to God, not force God to conform to our laziness.

 

[Hokomai]

“98 percent” of Catholic women supposedly use contraception on a sexually recreational basis.

 

[Voting4Life]

Some of these statistics make absolutely no sense, its impossible for some of these numbers to be accurate. When you go to Mass, it looks like about a third of the women are over the child bearing years. And a small percent hadn’t reached puberty yet. These statistics come from pro-contraception supporters trying to justify their cause.

 

[Deus_lo_vult]

This is easy to test. Has any politician in the US in recent years ever thought it worthwhile campaigning on the adoption of Catholic beliefs on contraception (i.e. banning it)? [Yes this is the Catholic belief. Google Ireland and contraception]. Thought not.

1. I and other traditional Catholics don’t determine the roster of candidates on the ballot. If candidates aren’t courageous enough to assert their principles when it’s a question of votes, that’s hardly an issue of MINE. Where it concerns MY daily life, I live according to the values I uphold, and that’s all I can do.

I will emphatically proclaim that I believe that most forms of contraception without an alternative medical or health benefit (condoms, diaphragms, spermicides, IUTs etc) should be re-criminalized and birth control medications should be strictly prescribed on an exclusively therapeutic basis, not a recreational one.

If my so-called ‘catholic’ politician isn’t principled enough to stick to his guns, that’s not my problem; I know what it is to be afraid of running counter to the majority opinion, but as much as I sympathize, I don’t excuse it. I’ve weathered public riducule of my beliefs.

1. Is it any wonder that moral men and women don’t run for public office? Just look what happens to values candidates when the media sinks their teeth in.

What an uncharitable way to describe these women and
mothers’ efforts. use this sort of language and you will soon find out what having 99.999% opposition is like.

I beg your pardon? Perhaps you should finish this thought. What uncharitable language have I used?

 

[_Abyssinia]

A reality check from someone who has no emotional tie to the Church’s position: this poll is well-conducted by a partisan organisation. It can prehaps be challenged on this basis, bit it seems to me not on the methodology itself.

Even if you discount the stats by say a thirds you still have a massive rejection in practice of the Church’s teaching, among both Church-going and non-Church-going Catholics.

The organisation is not saying that the Church should change its teaching. It is saying, on excellent statistical grounds, that politicians are safe to ignore what bishops say, given what Catholics do. I cannot fault this logic.

Here’s what I thought the interesting bit was:

Guttmacher Institute (research arm of Planned Parenthood) has an interest in producing a figure such as the 98%, look at how recently that statistic has been used to try and make it seem okay that Churches and employers will have to pay for contraception, sterilization and aboritficants - Planned Parenthood wants all 3 of these promoted more, and they have a statistic to use to try and damp down any opposition which they probably know will come from the Catholic Church.

Would you trust a survey done by a pro life organization on Catholics contraception use and found only a minority use contraception, say 3%?

Cardinal-elect Dolon said on CBS: We’re not into polls. We’re into moral principles

 

[cjmclark]

What an uncharitable way to describe these women and mothers’ efforts. use this sort of language and you will soon find out what having 99.999% opposition is like.

What term would you use for non-procreational sex other than “recreational”? “Recreational sex” is a pretty common term in modern parlance.

 

[_Abyssinia]

There may be discrepancy caused by the way in which the data was gathered: this data is for women who have been sexually active in the three months prior to the survey and who are “at risk” (a technical term) of unintended pregnancy—i.e., not pregnant, postpartum, or trying to get pregnant.

vox-nova.com/2011/04/14/catholic-women-and-birth-control/