Poll on contraception

  • Thread starter Thread starter gcshapero
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Arwing said:
40.png
Pup7:
That’s why if taken correctly the Pill has an amazingly high success rate.

It essentially makes the ovaries dormant. Release of an egg occurs when women don’t take it like they should.
Click to expand...
Does “taking it correctly” in this instance refer to proper treatment of whatever condition being discussed here? And would it be necessary, for treatment, to take them in this way?

Because if one takes the pills in a specific way so as to avoid ovulation, even if it is done to prevent death (in this case prevent fertilized eggs from failing to implant, or whatever), that is committing a contraceptive act-- an intrinsic evil which, even if done for a good intention, cannot be permitted. That would be the same as using contraception to avoid having high risk pregnancies.

Note that I am going by the way the Church uses the term contraception; I am aware that one could apply it to other things but those are not necessarily condemned and so not really pertinent here.
Click to expand...
The comment addressed a statement and a question posed by someone else, and was a statement on why OCPs are effective. It had nothing to do with anything related to the Church.
 
You went into I think three subjects – so I don’t know which one to address first; the use of the pill outside of contraception, contraception without a contraceptive, and the role of NFP; whether it is intrinsically a contraceptive method or can be abused as such.
 
gcshapero said:
This is not how NFP is taught and does not equal a contraceptive. This is like calling a salpingectomy an abortion. NFP is also taught to be practiced in specific circumstances and is also used to know when to conceive.

I did mentioned before that NFP CAN be used as a contraceptive is abused, but this goes against the Church’s teaching of it. The Church is very direct on the immorality of contraception.
Click to expand...
A salpingectomy is removal of a Fallopian tube. It’s nowhere near an abortion. I wouldn’t say that’s a great analogy.
 
That’s my point – they are incredibly different. Both tend to result in the death of the child so they may produce a similar result, but they aren’t the same at all. I’m with you, Pup7.
 
There are many reasons for salpingectomies that have nothing to do with an ectopic. It’s not a procedure reserved for that purpose. I’m with you as well, but that’s more of what I meant.
 
It is not anywhere near an elective abortion.

It is an emergency surgery, a life saving procedure in the event of a ectopic pregnancy, and the result is the termination of a pregnancy by a doctor, but the pregnancy is non-viable and potentially life threatening to the mother.
 
This subject is a complex one, biologically and theologically. Too often, I see trite claims about what contraception is, and how it works, that are based upon inaccurate, exaggerated, or outright false assumptions.

My post is to point out the logical inconsistency I’ve seen in this thread with regard to arguments about intent, what constitutes contraception, and the acceptance of NFP.

The important thing to note, is the built-in infertile phase that NFP users take advantage of is the very same loophole that the creator of the Pill, Dr. Rock, sought to exploit. It is why he earnestly believed it would be accepted by the CC - because it does NOT interfere with the act. Sex is still sex, man finishes inside woman, etc. It merely happens during a woman’s (extended) infertile phase - just. like. NFP.
 
Last edited:
The fecundity of marriage
…
2368 A particular aspect of this responsibility concerns the regulation of procreation. For just reasons, spouses may wish to space the births of their children. It is their duty to make certain that their desire is not motivated by selfishness but is in conformity with the generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood. Moreover, they should conform their behavior to the objective criteria of morality:

When it is a question of harmonizing married love with the responsible transmission of life, the morality of the behavior does not depend on sincere intention and evaluation of motives alone; but it must be determined by objective criteria, criteria drawn from the nature of the person and his acts criteria that respect the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love; this is possible only if the virtue of married chastity is practiced with sincerity of heart.156
2369 "By safeguarding both these essential aspects, the unitive and the procreative, the conjugal act preserves in its fullness the sense of true mutual love and its orientation toward man’s exalted vocation to parenthood."157

2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality.158 These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible” is intrinsically evil:159

Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.160
Click to expand...
Contraception is an act not a substance.
NFP is not contraception.
 
Last edited:
What! I was just looking at the polls and it is shocking to see that some actually voted that contraception is always acceptable.
That’s sad. :cry:
 
NFP is an act - a series of acts, calculations, observations, and most especially, motivated by the intent to prevent birth.
 
To us. Not to them. You can’t judge them for that belief.
 
Last edited:
I know you are a nurse. I was not trying to argue with you! If you took that the wrong way, I apologize.
 
I don’t think I’d say it’s fine – it is still recognized as a grave sin regardless of who is participating in it.
 
The false period was actually added because the original Pill stopped a period altogether, and during testing women stated they worried as to whether they were pregnant or not. So the week of placebos was added to create bleeding. There’s actually no clinical indication for a period when on OCPs or any other form of birth control.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top