Open to Life mean

[MercyMia]

I disagree, not being with your spouse because you are afraid of pregnancy is just as much an abortive notion as contraception except it’s worse because then both spouses wind up being frustrated in many cases and are pushed apart. Is that what it’s suppose to lead too? No of course not, each spouse is suppose to devote that time to God… but I would be interested to see how often that actually happens outside of our CA family here.

When you fully love your spouse as a person, a whole person, it becomes a lot easier to see them as more than a means to your own sexual ends and thus getting “pushed apart” isn’t so much of a problem. Remember, sexuality is a gift from God so we should all be devoting time to God in regards to our sexuality even in good times.

What do you think the abortion rate is for Christians couples (who don’t believe in abortion but do in contraception)? Considering that’s the majority of Christians when you take into account Protestants… I would wagers they are the same.

I know of couples who were “Christians” who justified having an abortion because they didn’t want to put a financial strain on the kids they already had. A couple using NFP would never have that issue because they accept life even before the marital act. I highly doubt there are couples who go through all the trouble of working out NFP only to abort a child if they get pregnant. Compare this to a couple that uses the pill, condoms, and whatever else all because they do not want to have a baby - they never consider the possibility of failure rate and never want kids. Every plan they have in life is contingent on there never being a baby. What if there is an ooops. Here, I will even recyle your own words: “…except it’s worse because then both spouses wind up being frustrated in many cases and are pushed apart.” What if the husband claims that the idea of having a baby makes him feel frustrated and pushed apart from his wife? Should she then get rid of the baby? IF the couple’s comfort is #1, isn’t the abortion justified here?

In all actuality many of the women who died from abortions previous to it being legal were ones who didn’t use contraception - more because of money and superstition though than refusal.

You are telling me that a woman and her husband who purposely used NFP because of the moral implications would go on the have an abortion if she got pregnant. Really?
BTW the so-called back ally coat hanger abortions were highly exaggerated and used as a propaganda piece by abortion activists. Far more women have died from legal abortions in the United States than ever died from botched illegal ones.

As a Protestant most of my life I know many couples who have used contraception on and off their entire life (or been sterilized), been married just as long, and many times longer, than some of the Catholics I know and are very happy and fulfilled. I know of no one who believed it cheapened the union until I started studying the teaching of the Church… If you told any of them, both the devout (ministers) and non they would laugh at the notion… and considering the Divorce rate for Catholics is the same as Protestants we wouldn’t have much of a leg to stand on statistically.

I]Most Catholics have abandoned the Church teaching on contraceptive. Listen, the proof is in the pudding, abortion rates and divorce rates are at an all-time high. Sex has become objectified and rendered apart from what God intended it to be. ]

It’s not a shared mindset. The abortion mindset is a belief that life doesn’t being at conception. That’s completely different than trying to prevent conception. I know I know some people link them together because the responsibility of the marriage bed has been taken out of the equation. I don’t buy it though… the responsibility is still there even if you use contraception, just like it is if you are using NFP.
*
You are simplifying it - the abortion mindset does not stop at the idea of life not beginning at conception. No, the abortion mindset it “MY plans are more important than a human life and I am in control of how and when I will get pregnant so much so that I will end a life to preserve that.” Contraceptive also separates what our body is doing from what God’s intended purpose us. When we get into that mindset a baby is NOT the natural consequence of sex, we really get disillusioned and see a baby as an uninvited intruder into the equation. This is contraceptive mentality. *]

Just my 2 cents…

Joe

 

[Bluegoat]

Being Open to Life mean…being open to the possibility, however remote, that God will used any martital act to create a child. Is this statement correct?

If so, then NFP should not be used if one has seriously grave reasons for not having a child, but perhaps only if having a child would be an inconvenience but you are willing to live with the possible consequences. I suppose this would also be called a grave reason, but it seems as though there is a different levels of gravity.

This is really hard to wrap my mind around. It seems so easy to separate the unitive from the procreative, but you really can’t ever do that. Even with contraceptives, you always have some degree of chance. Check out this chart from Wikipedia that describes the typical pregnancy rate for contraceptives.

womenshealth.about.com/cs/birthcontro1/a/pregratebcmeth.htm

What bugs me is that contraceptives should be required to post the typical contraceptive birth rate as opposed to the perfect use scores. That would be must more honest.

I don’t know, but it seems clear to me that unless you intentionally sterilize yourself by tieing your tubes, or having a vasectomy, there is always a possibility that God will step in and decide to give you this precious gift of life. What a lie contraceptives are…

God bless,
Ut

I think that in some ways you are quite correct. As much as people would like to say that the Church’s teaching is perfectly clear, how people actually incorporate that teaching into their lives has a subjective element - how it affects them psychologically and how they think about it in a way that makes it meaningful to them.

Yes, a couple can have sex with no intent to concieve - with the intention of not conceiving. And that can be perfectly ok - the act can still retain it’s objective nature. BUT - in many circumstances, there is no perfect surety that conception will not (or will) take place. That’s also part of the nature of the act. And so a real question is - what is the appropriate response to that? Well, we can’t undertake any act without accepting its nature - that would obviously be impossible.

In some cases, couples may indeed decide that abstinence, real long-term abstinence, may be the best choice for them. And there is nothing in Catholic teaching that says that choice is always wrong.

 

[Rico_S]

MercyMia:

You are simplifying it - the abortion mindset does not stop at the idea of life not beginning at conception. No, the abortion mindset it “MY plans are more important than a human life and I am in control of how and when I will get pregnant so much so that I will end a life to preserve that.” Contraceptive also separates what our body is doing from what God’s intended purpose us. When we get into that mindset a baby is NOT the natural consequence of sex, we really get disillusioned and see a baby as an uninvited intruder into the equation. This is contraceptive mentality

Exactly how do you know these “mentalities?” How does the contraceptive user see a baby as an uninvited intruder where as someone who uses NFP to avoid sees it as a blessing? You do realize the intent is the same, it is simply the manner in which the intent is accomplished that is different.