The Case Against Contraception

[Mary_Gail_36]

Yeah this is a pretty good analogy for NFP!

I beg to differ. NFP is not going through great lengths. Really.

Fertility is cyclical. Most of the time a woman is infertile.

The observational part of NFP does not cause infertility. A nun could observe her cycle to observe health issues. It’s not a cumbersome part of life to know how the female body works.

NFP (to avoid) only works if one avoids sex on the fertile days.
That requires self control,
It requires communication between spouses,
It requires trust that sex is being avoided for serious reasons. Really, honestly, how many men are willing to abstain for trivial reasons? How easy is it to feel rejected if the reasons are trivial?

NFP only works because a couple is able to postpone intimacy with a spouse they love. Is that as easy as using a condom?

NFP can only be done on a monthly basis. If the couple is abstaining today to avoid a pregnancy, is there any guarantee what will happen the rest of the cycle?
Is there any possibility that the following month they might not have the strength or the desire to abstain?

I’m getting a bit tired of the foot stomping, “NO fair, NFP couples are still having sex, no fair!”

Married Catholics can renew their marital vows when they wish. It is good and holy to do so. If a couple cannot have a child at this time, they do not do what causes pregnancy.

Have sex when the wife is fertile. That is the only way to get pregnant.

 

[SteveGC]

Ummm really? I thought that was exactly the reason most people use NFP not talking about those who use it to conceive But no the intent of NFP is definately to have sex without getting pregnant.

Also you would be surprised on how many couples actually do have sex every day.

Although it is obviously morally permissible to have sex during infertile periods, it absolutely is NOT the purpose of NFP. NFP is first and foremost the morally permissible method to abstain from sex during periods of fertility, and it is only permissible when grave reasons exist to do so.

Some errant Catholics may try to use NFP like ABC, and use it primarily for sex without conception, but this is a sinful approach to it. Abstaining for grave reasons retains full and complete primacy. Because it is morally permissible to have sex during infertile periods does not reduce NFP to the level of the ABC culture.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Adding, with contraception:

I have a feeling that if it was me showing up instead of Debora, you’d be locking the doors.

Nah, I would not lock the door. Not sure if I’d be having a dinner party that night though.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

With the increased use of NFP in recent decades the Church has discovered that the informed practice of NFP actually builds virtue. In other words, couples who have used NFP become unselfish by using NFP properly. Thus, the Church has learned that if authentic virtue is weak or absent at the beginning, using NFP properly instills it! Love is a choice in one’s will to give oneself to another. But that choice is founded on the recognition of the dignity of the other as well as the dignity of oneself (who would give oneself to another if one thought the gift worthless?). Therefore, anything which leads to a greater appreciation of the dignity and value of human beings fosters love.

ewtn.com/expert/expertfaqframe.asp

 

[Calliso]

I beg to differ. NFP is not going through great lengths. Really.

Fertility is cyclical. Most of the time a woman is infertile.

The observational part of NFP does not cause infertility. A nun could observe her cycle to observe health issues. It’s not a cumbersome part of life to know how the female body works.

NFP (to avoid) only works if one avoids sex on the fertile days.
That requires self control,
It requires communication between spouses,
It requires trust that sex is being avoided for serious reasons. Really, honestly, how many men are willing to abstain for trivial reasons? How easy is it to feel rejected if the reasons are trivial?

NFP only works because a couple is able to postpone intimacy with a spouse they love. Is that as easy as using a condom?

NFP can only be done on a monthly basis. If the couple is abstaining today to avoid a pregnancy, is there any guarantee what will happen the rest of the cycle?
Is there any possibility that the following month they might not have the strength or the desire to abstain?

I’m getting a bit tired of the foot stomping, “NO fair, NFP couples are still having sex, no fair!”

Married Catholics can renew their marital vows when they wish. It is good and holy to do so. If a couple cannot have a child at this time, they do not do what causes pregnancy.

Have sex when the wife is fertile. That is the only way to get pregnant.

Well judging from some posts I have read here it does seem like some people do/have gone to great lengthes to make NFP work or try to make it work. I realize that they aren;t directly doing anything to the body but some are still going to great lengthes to find out when they are fertile so they can always avoid that time.

No I agree that NFP is certainly harder then contraception.

Oh I donlt care about NFP couples having sex I donlt think there is anything wrong with NFP but at the same time I donlt think all contraceptives are wrong either. I just think the Churches position would probably be more consistant without the whole NFP thing which still seems like twisting the rules to me. Besides judging from some posts here it seems that some NFP using couples are having very little to no sex so even if it did bother me I wouldn;t have much to complain about!

Yes having sex when the wife is fertile is the only way to become pregnant. NFP purposely tries to avoid this time while still allowing the couple to have sex for uniative/pleasure purposes only. Contraception just seeks to block the fertility but the intent is the same. I guess that is what I think some of us are getting at. Both are ways to avoid pregnancy but still have sex. *and once again I donlt have a problem with that I just have a problem telling the real difference between NFP and some other contraceptives.

 

[alfred14]

Is there any possibility that the following month they might not have the strength or the desire to abstain?

thats about as bad as saying while the couple have enough strength or the desire to put on a condom.

 

[alfred14]

I just think the Churches position would probably be more consistant without the whole NFP thing which still seems like twisting the rules to me. .

And this is why we must understand the the churches position is created by humans who make errors. we as its followers should question it and ask for explanations and try to understand its resoning. the disceples questioned jesus many times and sat and picked at his brain for many hours. they wanted to learn and understand everything he had to say. i feel that this is the same way with any religous teaching. we should listen and try to understand why it is the church has these positions, but we must understand that the church is human and is not like Jesus. we must know there there is the posibility that they make mistakes.

personally if you look at the Bible verses that have been used to back the churches side we shouldnt have NFP or contraception. the church wanted to please humans sexuall neads and alloud for NFP. why i dont know.

 

[Nate13]

you are assuming they arent ready to accept a kid. many people are ready to accept but would like to delay. they are ready for kids but arent in a rush. they will still be over joyed with the knowledge that they created a new life. infact they will be just as excited as someone using NFP, assuming there both christians.

Your making assumptions. What I was implying was that the couple wasn’t willing to accept the fertility that goes with sex at that time. You assumed I meant a child.

 

[Nate13]

Originally Posted by Debora123 View Post
Ok, how about this:

Going through great lengths to figure out exactly when I will not be around, and purposely scheduling parties ONLY when you KNOW I’ll be gone.

… This way, even if I HAD the key and could get in if I wanted to, I wouldn’t, because I wouldn’t be around to begin with.

…And you knew that and purposely planned it that way.

Yeah this is a pretty good analogy for NFP!

Did you see my response? This post isn’t right because the whole point of NFP is that at least once a month you are having a conversation not just with your spouse but with God to figure out what he wants for us. Therefore if Debora is outside the door and wants in she is let in and welcomed. The only reason she wouldn’t be let in is because we talked it over beforehand and decided with her not to throw a party that day. Lets say Debora is a Queen, and we can’t just throw any old party for her. Its a very demanding task to provide a party worthy of her. If we can’t throw the kind of party worth of her, doesn’t it only make sense to talk to her and agree to do it another day?

 

[Nate13]

And this is why we must understand the the churches position is created by humans who make errors. we as its followers should question it and ask for explanations and try to understand its resoning. the disceples questioned jesus many times and sat and picked at his brain for many hours. they wanted to learn and understand everything he had to say. i feel that this is the same way with any religous teaching. we should listen and try to understand why it is the church has these positions, but we must understand that the church is human and is not like Jesus. we must know there there is the posibility that they make mistakes.

personally if you look at the Bible verses that have been used to back the churches side we shouldnt have NFP or contraception. the church wanted to please humans sexuall neads and alloud for NFP. why i dont know.

Alfred who do you listen to find the Truth? I’d assume your reply would be the Holy Spirit correct? But who does the Holy Spirit use to provide the Truth to you? The Holy Spirit uses you and your mental functions to show you the Truth. Your relying on your human faculties as well to hear and understand the Truth. Why is it so hard for you to see that what you accuse us of doing you do yourself? The Pope has the Holy Spirit just as much if not more than you do as well as the fact that he is a successor of Peter who was given the keys of authority by Jesus. Jesus was given all authority from his Father, and Jesus in turn gave that authority to his apostles, but in particular Peter who was to be the Shepard of his flock. It is no mere man who has this authority though. He also directly gave them the gift of the Holy Spirit to guide them in what seemed an impossible task for a “mere human”. Infallibility was seen before when he sent the 70 out to preach and told them that anyone who heard them speak heard Jesus speaking, and anyone who rejected what they said, rejected Jesus.

 

[SteveGC]

*and once again I donlt have a problem with that I just have a problem telling the real difference between NFP and some other contraceptives.

the problem in telling the difference can be found in a common nuance which you included here in your premise, as follows.

Both are ways to avoid pregnancy but still have sex.

The bolded part is the subtle difference, yet it is critical to understand why it is different. The Church does not teach that NFP is a way to have sex without conceiving. She teaches that it is a morally permissible (if grave reasons exist) way to abstain from sex during fertile periods. That’s it. End of story. When you add in, “but still have sex”, it departs from the spirit of the teaching. It’s inferring that there exists some validity in primarily seeking unitive sex without procreative outcomes, when the real teaching is that it is seeking procreative and unitive sex at all times, unless for grave reasons through prudent and prayerful discernment, sex should be avoided during fertile periods.

It’s a subtle, but important, difference. The ABC culture fits nicely into your statement, and hence, users of ABC typically possess that mentality, even if their intentions are not entirely selfish. But it is a misrepresentation of NFP and Church teaching to suggest that the mentalities are the same.

 

[alfred14]

Alfred who do you listen to find the Truth? I’d assume your reply would be the Holy Spirit correct? .

yes but i only go by what is in the bible. im not saying that its a bad thing having a Pope i think its good. it is good to have some one you can see to look towards. what im trying to say is that yall should lookinto these things and see what the bible says. if nothing is in there use your refrences, like the pope, your priest and the elders. then also understand that the world has changed alot. women are equall to males now. this makes allot that happened during bible times not thinkable now. so what else has changed from the old testament to now?

 

[SteveGC]

the church wanted to please humans sexuall neads and alloud for NFP. why i dont know.

Where do you get this stuff? You make it difficult to assume that one can have a reasonable discussion with you when you concoct things out of thin air.

The Church has no inclination to “please humans sexual needs”. Sexual pleasure is not an end for which we need a means. And the Church most certainly did not allow NFP for the purpose of placating us.

Let’s get it straight, folks. NFP is not for sex without babies…it is for prudent and prayerful abstinence when babies are most probable, if and only if grave reasons exist.

You want to twist it to mean sex without babies, go ahead. It will not change the fact that that is what defines the ABC culture. NFP has nothing to do with that.

 

[SteveGC]

yes but i only go by what is in the bible. im not saying that its a bad thing having a Pope i think its good. it is good to have some one you can see to look towards. what im trying to say is that yall should lookinto these things and see what the bible says. if nothing is in there use your refrences, like the pope, your priest and the elders. then also understand that the world has changed alot. women are equall to males now. this makes allot that happened during bible times not thinkable now. so what else has changed from the old testament to now?

where’d your bible come from, alfred? how do you know it contains that which God has written and wants you to know? Because it says so? Or did perhaps a group of people on earth tell us that that is what it is? Think about it.

 

[Warrior1979]

The case that NFP is not contraception is not opinion but a fact.

Actually, in the real world, NFP used to avoid having children is contraception. However, the Church apparently has their own definition that is not the same as the commonly used version, hence the ubiquitous confusion.

If you want to argue strictly in the Catholic sense, it is not contraception, but it is most certainly birth control, since that Catholic Church has stated that.

I noticed you didn’t remark on what the Priests for Life had to say about the issue.

Believe it or not, my day is 24 hours just like every else’s (well, technically 23 hours, 59 minutes, and 47 seconds ) I’m being bombarded with hour-long contraceptive-mentality videos, cartoons about overpopulation, etc., and simply don’t have the time to chase down every single reference on the planet. I know full well what the Church’s argument on the matter is, and unless the Priests for Life have a contrary position to that of the Church, I really don’t need to see the same exact thing from another source.

Lastly if you believe NFP is a form of contraception then you believe all sex that is done when the wife is not ovulating is contraception which is just ridiculous.

I stated my opinion on this a zillion times. If one is using NFP in the first place, they are intentionally avoiding children by limiting sexual activity to the infertile period, with full knowledge and intent of doing so. This is entirely different than having randomly having sex with no knowledge of the infertile period. Any Catholic can do the latter; the former can only be done for just reason…if you agree with the Church’s position, that is.

 

[Warrior1979]

Nah, I would not lock the door. Not sure if I’d be having a dinner party that night though.

Not to brag, but I happen to be an excellent cook.

 

[white_sheep]

The Church says no, that’s all the case I need.

 

[SteveGC]

If one is using NFP in the first place, they are intentionally avoiding children by limiting sexual activity to the infertile period, with full knowledge and intent of doing so. This is entirely different than having randomly having sex with no knowledge of the infertile period. Any Catholic can do the latter; the former can only be done for just reason…if you agree with the Church’s position, that is.

Again, we see the nuance (bolded), very subtle but critical.

NFP is not avoiding children “by limiting sexual activity to the infertile period”. It is avoiding children “by abstaining during fertile periods”. The former is an unfair attempt to link it to the ABC culture by suggesting that an incidental reality of following NFP (sex occurring only during infertile periods) suddenly becomes it’s primary purpose.

Some argue that this focus on nuance is a distraction intended to downplay the similarity, but I think the contrast is critical. Again, NFP…sex without babies is not the goal. No babies for a specific time period due to grave reasons IS the goal. ABC? The primary goal is sex without babies. Most do not see how the nuance is relevant until you ponder it thoroughly. The primacy of intent is the first distinction to absorb. The second is methodology and providence. Both combine to clearly show why NFP is conditionally moral, and ABC is intrinsically evil.

 

[Nate13]

yes but i only go by what is in the bible. im not saying that its a bad thing having a Pope i think its good. it is good to have some one you can see to look towards. what im trying to say is that yall should lookinto these things and see what the bible says. if nothing is in there use your refrences, like the pope, your priest and the elders. then also understand that the world has changed alot. women are equall to males now. this makes allot that happened during bible times not thinkable now. so what else has changed from the old testament to now?

Alfred the Bible has a lot to say about how men should treat women in the New Testament and if you look closely in the Old Testament, God never told the Israelite’s to treat women the way they did. All of the laws that Moses established after he came down from Mount Sinai with the 10 commandments were consolations to the people because they were too weak and couldn’t get it through their heads that they needed to ask God for help. God commanded animal sacrifices of cows, goats, and sheep not because this pleased him but because the Israelites kept trying to worship those animals. He made them sacrifice them so they would get the point that he was the only God they were supposed to worship. God’s law never changed, his people back then were just too weak to see the whole Truth and try to follow it. So God said alright lets work on teaching you guys to stand up before we try to get you to run.

God tells you everything you need to know about the male-female relationship when he says in Genesis that “the two become one flesh” as well as the fact that he created us in his image and likeness.

 

[louis91766]

I beg to differ. NFP is not going through great lengths. Really.

Fertility is cyclical. Most of the time a woman is infertile.

The observational part of NFP does not cause infertility. A nun could observe her cycle to observe health issues. It’s not a cumbersome part of life to know how the female body works.

NFP (to avoid) only works if one avoids sex on the fertile days.
That requires self control,
It requires communication between spouses,
It requires trust that sex is being avoided for serious reasons. Really, honestly, how many men are willing to abstain for trivial reasons? How easy is it to feel rejected if the reasons are trivial?

NFP only works because a couple is able to postpone intimacy with a spouse they love. Is that as easy as using a condom?

NFP can only be done on a monthly basis. If the couple is abstaining today to avoid a pregnancy, is there any guarantee what will happen the rest of the cycle?
Is there any possibility that the following month they might not have the strength or the desire to abstain?

I’m getting a bit tired of the foot stomping, “NO fair, NFP couples are still having sex, no fair!”

Married Catholics can renew their marital vows when they wish. It is good and holy to do so. If a couple cannot have a child at this time, they do not do what causes pregnancy.

Have sex when the wife is fertile. That is the only way to get pregnant.

But doesn’t NFP involve the use of artificial, man made instruments such as thermometers, calculators for the cycle, calendars? Is it effective without these artificial man made instruments?