When people think of birth control as "protection" - reframing the paradigm

[FrenzyJen]

Don’t forget; “Selfie” is in there now too. The all-mighty dictionary!!

 

[gardenswithkids]

This is exactly what my wife and I have concluded. We’ve recently started going to church again and wanted to give Catholicism another decent try but this is one of the teachings that still doesn’t make sense. The term “open to life” started to become pretty redundant since that was the mane “argument” anyone could offer us. On a psychological level my wife just concluded these people had some sort of unresolved impregnation fetish. Haha but we’re still open to being convinced and although the chances of that happening look pretty slim.

I’m off topic, but since you chimed in on this thread, I want to welcome you back to the Catholic Church. :tiphat: I’m glad you and your wife decided to give Catholicism another try.

 

[holyrood]

And if you are not called to marriage, but for whatever reason sexual relations is unavoidable…say, constant expected rape…is that still a sin? Is using contraception when you are known to have ectopic pregnancy not a protection, and is that still a sin?

no I wasn’t, but unfortunately this situation can and does happen. by a relative, a friend…and the victim is too scared or embarrassed to tell someone, but brave enough to obtain birth control or forced to.

In that case, shouldn’t we be talking about protecting women from rapists?

It seems a leap, even a twisting of logic, to ‘protect’ someone from an as yet non-existent child, but not from an actual rapist.

And if the rapist is forcing his victim to get birth control, then what/ who is really being protected is the rapist. I can guarantee he’s more worried about his crime being found out and his name ruined, than about a baby or any impact a baby has on his victim.

 

[HoneyBea]

I’m new to this forum and it is really frustrating me that I can’t “like” other peoples posts lol. That being said, I am enjoying and benefiting from this forum far more than Facebook : )

 

[gardenswithkids]

Since some have used the “financial ruin” argument for contraception here on this thread…

A new book by Jonathan Last addresses the potential economic trouble cause by declining birthrates–“What to Expect When No One’s Expecting; America’s Coming Demographic Disaster.” It is written from an economic perspective. amazon.com/What-Expect-When-Ones-Expecting/dp/1594036411/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1383055513&sr=8-1&keywords=what+to+expect+when+no+one%27s+expecting

There was a time when people had children to provide for themselves (the parents) in their old age. America’s Social Security system relies on that principle on a larger scale. Our retirees don’t have to rely on their own children but depend collectively on the generation that comes after them, and that generation relies on the next generation, and so on. When the population doesn’t replace itself, that creates serious potential problem for a country’s future.

A recent article from brings up the economic side to social issues too. lifesitenews.com/news/marriage-and-abortion-are-economic-issues Regarding Social Security it says

This picture is changing dramatically, for the worse. And this is the root of our problem.
In 1945, there were about 42 working Americans paying payroll taxes for every retiree receiving Social Security benefits. By 1960, the ratio was about 5-to-1. Today it is about 3-to-1.
Americans are living longer but having fewer children.

Contraception and family size are social issues that impact our economic future. Babies grow into adults, and their parents get old. How much longer will our culture be able to afford* not* having babies?

 

[3DOCTORS]

This is exactly what my wife and I have concluded. We’ve recently started going to church again and wanted to give Catholicism another decent try but this is one of the teachings that still doesn’t make sense. The term “open to life” started to become pretty redundant since that was the mane “argument” anyone could offer us. On a psychological level my wife just concluded these people had some sort of unresolved impregnation fetish. Haha but we’re still open to being convinced and although the chances of that happening look pretty slim.

If I may be so bold - I would advise not to get hung up on the phrase “open to life,” even though it is said a lot, and it is widely used to indicate the Church’s teaching. Still, iby itself, it functions as a summary phrase of that teaching. If you dig deeper into the intention behind it you will find that it means surrendering control completely and unreservedly to God over your fertility rather than using pills and devices to control that fertility.

And that is one of the reasons why artificial birth control is not morally right. It may seem like hair-splitting to you, but if you practice NFP the way it’s meant to be practiced you are in a cooperative dialogue with God and each other about when to use the natural, built-in aspects of human fertility to attempt to conceive a child or to make a sacrifice of abstinence if you discern that is the thing to do.

Another significant reason is the unnatural, manmade abortifacient potential of certain birth control methods. Using these with full knowledge and consent, awareness of the abortifacient potential, is objectively sinful.

 

[beatrice_smith]

Protection. :nunchuk:

The term makes me laugh at the irony when it’s applied to contraception. Husbands should protect their wives, mothers should protect their children. Instead we have a whole industry telling women that we need to be protected* from* our husbands and potential children.

I am tattooing this to my FOREHEAD. Okay, not really, but, seriously, this is so good.

 

[agoodsinner]

no the dictionary does not replace God. I’m insulted you would think that was my meaning. All I meant was that protection is not an inaccurate word. And to limit the definition of it to harm is no longer applicable.

 

[Usige]

no the dictionary does not replace God. I’m insulted you would think that was my meaning. All I meant was that protection is not an inaccurate word. And to limit the definition of it to harm is no longer applicable.

Some dictionaries also list marriage as including homosexual unions so should we as Catholics accept that as a valid use of the word? Older definitions of person might have excluded persons of color. Neither are correct, but simple record a given culture’s misuse of words.

In the end everything appears to come down to fear. The question is why people fear something like pregnancy or the outcome of pregnancy (children and cost of child rearing)? Why are kids scary to use your phrase? I simply cannot fathom how someone could be afraid of a child that weighs 1/10 of an adults weight.

Perhaps it is not fear of children, but rather fear of having to put someone else’s need before their own. In that case it’s not fear, but flat out selfishness. It would seem to align with a motto of “me, myself and I before all else.” That certainly seems to align with the example of Christ.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Some dictionaries also list marriage as including homosexual unions so should we as Catholics accept that as a valid use of the word? Older definitions of person might have excluded persons of color. Neither are correct, but simple record a given culture’s misuse of words.

In the end everything appears to come down to fear. The question is why people fear something like pregnancy or the outcome of pregnancy (children and cost of child rearing)? Why are kids scary to use your phrase? I simply cannot fathom how someone could be afraid of a child that weighs 1/10 of an adults weight.

Perhaps it is not fear of children, but rather fear of having to put someone else’s need before their own. In that case it’s not fear, but flat out selfishness. It would seem to align with a motto of “me, myself and I before all else.” That certainly seems to align with the example of Christ.

Do you feel the same about couples who put off children with NFP? Or is it only people who use contraception whose lives and circumstances that you’re better qualified to determine than they are?

 

[Usige]

Do you feel the same about couples who put off children with NFP? Or is it only people who use contraception whose lives and circumstances that you’re better qualified to determine than they are?

I have never heard anyone who uses NFP refer to it as “protection”. We are speaking here to the mentality of why one needs to protect themselves from pregnancy. Are there reasons to delay or not have children? Certainly. But there are huge mental leaps between choosing not to have children and protecting oneself from having children. One is based on (assumedly) reasoned thought, where as “protection” is from a place of fear.

I am simply tryjng to understand where the fear comes from. I am still waiting for someone to answer how a potential child is the direct cause of homelessness or financial ruin.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

I have never heard anyone who uses NFP refer to it as “protection”. We are speaking here to the mentality of why one needs to protect themselves from pregnancy. Are there reasons to delay or not have children? Certainly. But there are huge mental leaps between choosing not to have children and protecting oneself from having children. One is based on (assumedly) reasoned thought, where as “protection” is from a place of fear.

I am simply tryjng to understand where the fear comes from. I am still waiting for someone to answer how a potential child is the direct cause of homelessness or financial ruin.

Sorry, but I grew up in a family where the lights weren’t always on. There was one Christmas break where all I ate was the food my mom could steal from her job in a gas station kitchen.

I saw my mom struggle, I saw her cry. She was always worried, and I didn’t understand why. She is an amazing and strong woman. I love my mom very much. But I want more for my family and my kids. Yes, I do fear raising my kids the way I was raised. What loving parent wouldn’t?

If you don’t think NFP is used out of fear then you should spend some time browsing these boards.

 

[agoodsinner]

I think you are getting caught up on the word’s definition. And yes the dictionary would list homosexual unions under marriage because in some states it is a Legal Marriage. The Church does not tell you that the only definition of marriage is a union performed by the Church, rather that under it’s own definition you are not married unless by the Church. Otherwise it wouldn’t recognize legal marriage certificates. And a definition applies to all recognized uses of a word. Not one groups opinion of it. I get the feeling you are not willing to move past your emotions on the subject to truly listen to the answers offered. You don’t have to agree with them to understand them. Just like you can understand that some people are mean but you don’t agree with being mean.

 

[gardenswithkids]

Sorry, but I grew up in a family where the lights weren’t always on. There was one Christmas break where all I ate was the food my mom could steal from her job in a gas station kitchen.

I saw my mom struggle, I saw her cry. She was always worried, and I didn’t understand why. She is an amazing and strong woman. I love my mom very much. But I want more for my family and my kids. Yes, I do fear raising my kids the way I was raised. What loving parent wouldn’t?

Wow. Now we know more of where you are coming from in your fears of poverty and homelessness.

May I ask–and I hope this doesn’t sound judgmental-- where was your father?

Maybe your dad was around, but I ask because single-motherhood leaves a large number of children growing up in poverty. Ironically the number of singles mothers has increased as contraception use has gone up. Contraception creates the fall impression that we can engage in sexual activity without getting pregnant, yet a large number of women get pregnant every year while using contraception. All methods have “failure” rates and even a success rate of 99% still means that with “perfect use” 1% of women using that method become pregnant. Across the population, that adds up to a lot of unplanned pregnancies! The increase of sexual activity outside of marriage (along with the break up of marriages) has left many children fatherless.

Here in America, the economic gap between children raised in homes with fathers is vastly different from those raised without fathers. Men who are responsible husbands and fathers do a lot more to protect us from poverty than contraception.

 

[OurLadyPray4US]

I see contraception as “not giving yourself fully”, “withholding something from your spouse”, and as a perversion of the marital act. It just robs the marital act of its sanctity and beauty, it converts the marital act into a poor and perverted imitation of the real thing.

I say, it’s better to refrain from the marital act altogether, than to blaspheme it, fake it, and pervert it through contraception.

 

[David011]

I see contraception as “not giving yourself fully”, “withholding something from your spouse”, and as a perversion of the marital act. It just robs the marital act of its sanctity and beauty, it converts the marital act into a poor and perverted imitation of the real thing.

I say, it’s better to refrain from the marital act altogether, than to blaspheme it, fake it, and pervert it through contraception.

Because wanting to be intimate with the woman I love, and chose to be with for the rest of my life is a perverted, blasphemous, and fake thing to do if we decide to skip making a baby? Again I’m really not seeing the difference in “withholding one’s self” when we intentionally avoid a woman’s fertile times and contraception. What’s being withheld? Obviously the woman’s fertility.

 

[David011]

If I may be so bold - I would advise not to get hung up on the phrase “open to life,” even though it is said a lot, and it is widely used to indicate the Church’s teaching. Still, iby itself, it functions as a summary phrase of that teaching. If you dig deeper into the intention behind it you will find that it means surrendering control completely and unreservedly to God over your fertility rather than using pills and devices to control that fertility.

And that is one of the reasons why artificial birth control is not morally right. It may seem like hair-splitting to you, but if you practice NFP the way it’s meant to be practiced you are in a cooperative dialogue with God and each other about when to use the natural, built-in aspects of human fertility to attempt to conceive a child or to make a sacrifice of abstinence if you discern that is the thing to do.

Another significant reason is the unnatural, manmade abortifacient potential of certain birth control methods. Using these with full knowledge and consent, awareness of the abortifacient potential, is objectively sinful.

When we were getting the answers to our questions about birth control and all of the reasons why its so “evil” many people and priests said just what you said. It was about having more faith in God and trusting him with our fertility. Which led to the question “what if we need to postpone future children?” Thats when NFP was introduced. Before trying NFP people shouted at us “NFP IS JUST AS EFFECTIVE AS BIRTH CONTROL IF NOT MORE!!!” I’m sorry but if we were to give our fertility COMPLETELY and UNRESERVEDLY to God, we would just have sex whenever we pleased regardless of what phase the woman is in during her cycle.

Since my wife is a physician we found NFP to be very effective for a few years and we used it to perfectly plan our second child. The only difference between that and the birth control we were using before was the convenience levels between the two. She found it tedious with all the charts, but basically once she was done with her personal challenge of getting NFP to work for her we switched back to birth control we really don’t see the church’s view about its so called immorality. There are lots of things that are manmade and unnatural, why the big focus on what people use in the bedroom?

 

[agoodsinner]

Out of curiosity and my bad memory, does the bible say anything about pregnancy prevention, or just the Church? obviously understanding they didn’t have the same methods as we do now.

 

[3DOCTORS]

When we were getting the answers to our questions about birth control and all of the reasons why its so “evil” many people and priests said just what you said. It was about having more faith in God and trusting him with our fertility. Which led to the question “what if we need to postpone future children?” Thats when NFP was introduced. Before trying NFP people shouted at us “NFP IS JUST AS EFFECTIVE AS BIRTH CONTROL IF NOT MORE!!!” **I’m sorry but if we were to give our fertility COMPLETELY and UNRESERVEDLY to God, we would just have sex whenever we pleased regardless of what phase the woman is in during her cycle.
**

On a thread I posted some months ago I dealt with the very thing you point out - forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=777538 Instructors of NFP in Catholic premarital counseling shouldn’t be comparing it to birth control in the same way; it isn’t about controlling fertility as much as about responding to the fertility that’s already there in the way God made us. I can see how it could seem like a fine line but I’m not sure why you are so worked up about it, especially considering the rest of your post . . .

Since my wife is a physician we found NFP to be very effective for a few years and we used it to perfectly plan our second child. The only difference between that and the birth control we were using before was the convenience levels between the two. She found it tedious with all the charts, but basically once she was done with her personal challenge of getting NFP to work for her **we switched back to birth control we really don’t see the church’s view about its so called immorality. **

I suggest that you study and talk to some couples for whom NFP has not only made it easier to work together as a couple around the wife’s fertile cycles, but also in the communication between the spouses, strengthened the marriage. A lot of things in life are convenient but if the Church teaches that something is immoral we must avoid that thing - even if it’s inconvenient, or we don’t totally understand at the moment, or even if we disagree with it.

It’s good that you have had experience using NFP - why not step out in faith and give it another shot?

There are lots of things that are manmade and unnatural, why the big focus on what people use in the bedroom?

Because the capability of spouses to cooperate with God in the bringing of another soul into the world is a big deal, not the location where that takes place, e.g. bedroom. Yes, many things we do as human beings are “manmade and unnatural” if you want to use that argument. Each case must be decided on its moral points which differ depending on what the action is, where it intersects with Catholic moral teaching, and several other factors.

For instance, your wife is a doctor - well, the argument could be made that medical care is manmade and that it’s unnatural for a doctor to use medicines or procedures to cure human illness if you want to carry it that far. But what’s the context of Church teaching that the question fits into? Answer: Mercy. It’s a corporal work of mercy to assist the sick rather than just doing nothing and allowing them to die.

It’s about studying the Church’s moral teachings in context and being willing to let them permeate your mind, heart, and will. And to understand deep down how they apply to any given issue including NFP vs. contraception. That’s something no one else can do for you; only you must decide whether the eternal risk of not obeying the Church is a gamble you’re willing to take - and on a more positive note, whether there might be rewards you can’t fathom until you take that leap of faith.

 

[HoneyBea]

How is that the teachings on birth control makes such beautiful perfect sense to me and not to others who presumably are much stronger in their faith? I have run into all these questions and arguments with other catholic friends. They are all great questions and arguments, but it frustrates me that they can’t grasp the importance of rejecting contraception. The explanation is laid out and explained making perfect sense, everything else is just your own mind trying to justify that you really would rather do it your way. At the core of the entire contraception teachings- when you strip it down- it’s about not doing it your way, but Gods way. I don’t know how to dumb it down anymore than this. It just seems like a choice has to be made and everything else is one trying to reason their way into their own will. I can see how it can be scary, but the truth is freedom is what is gained not lost.