Christians Being Persecuted/discriminated Against In The Usa

[KnightofChrist]

However I do not think that a married couple who are trying to space out children (or wait to have any) for financial purposes are objectifying each other by using contraception.  The only examples people use are crazy ones. Porn....one night stands....other such things. Duh. yes. Objectification is happening. Neither party has any intention of doing anything but sex. I agree that this is objectification.

I strongly disagree. Contraception blocks off part of someone's humanity this reduces their humanity and since this is done for sexual gratification it objectifies both the man and woman.
 

However no one talks about the married couples who love each other...who want to plan a future together. I do not believe the use of contraception for family planning is inherently objectifying. If you believe that this scenario is still objectification, then you have to say that NFP is also objectification.

I do not have to say that, because it's wrong, you do not properly understand NFP. You have unfortunately adopted the NFP definition that anti-catholics use, and for that I am very sorry but the two are not the same. NFP does not block off or reduce part of someones humanity, contraception does. NFP times when sexual intercourse happens, and when it happens it does not block or separate anything within the marriage act.
 

The pill is contraception. The pill is a common use name that refers to the combination pill of estrogen and progesterone. But if you want to separate the terms, then you are helping make my point. The pill is not inherently bad; it does not inherently cause objectification to occur. 

Ok, now we are getting somewhere. Contraception is an indifferent tool that can be used for good and evil, I agree. Just like guns!

I agree it is a tool because how something is used can change what something is. Again the example of a baseball bat if used to hit a baseball it is a baseball bat, if used to murder someone it is a murder weapon. Pseudoephedrine, unless I have it mistaken with something else, can be used as a medicine or it can be used to make meth. Where we disagree is intention, you give more to intention than the action, which doesn't seem at all important only the intent.
 



 

So you are saying that the pill is a tool that has many uses. One use is to help people with different health conditions and one is to prevent pregnancy. One is good and one is bad.

Yes.

 

But, the only problem is that NFP also prevents pregnancy. Is that bad? Or is it just bad when the pill does it?

That's not a problem because again you've got a erroneous understanding of NFP. I agree that people can abuse NFP, but it is not the same when used properly. NFP times when the couple will engage in the marriage act and when they will not engage in the marriage act. Again when the marriage act is preformed NFP does not block, separate or break anything within the marriage act. The couples who practice NFP are open to life during the marriage act and they in no way close off part of their bodies from their beloved. Couples who use contraception cannot correctly make the same claim when they engage in the marriage act with their beloved. They close off part of their body, they block part of their humanity for sexual pleasure and that is objectification. It is objectification because it reduces the humanity of both and it is done to gain sexual pleasure. Edited May 16, 2014 by KnightofChrist

[KnightofChrist]

The only way I can see people having a legitimate argument comparing NFP to contraception is if not having sex is contraception.

[Perigrina]

 

The pill is contraception. The pill is a common use name that refers to the combination pill of estrogen and progesterone. But if you want to separate the terms, then you are helping make my point. The pill is not inherently bad; it does not inherently cause objectification to occur. 

 

Ok, now we are getting somewhere. Contraception is an indifferent tool that can be used for good and evil, I agree. Just like guns!

 

So you are saying that the pill is a tool that has many uses. One use is to help people with different health conditions and one is to prevent pregnancy. One is good and one is bad. But, the only problem is that NFP also prevents pregnancy. Is that bad? Or is it just bad when the pill does it?

 

You need to be clearer with terminology.  You are using "pill" and "contraception" interchangeably and they are not.  Contraception means something that is used to prevent pregnancy.  The pill is a combination of hormones that can be used as contraception.  The Church teaches that contraception is intrinsically evil.  There are no circumstance under which contraception is good.  There are circumstances under which hormone pills can be good.

 

NFP is not contraception.  Avoiding pregnancy by abstaining from sex is not contraception.  In these cases, one is not using something to prevent pregnancy.  It is merely the natural function of the female body.  It is possible to use NFP with a contraceptive mentality.  That is bad.

[KnightofChrist]

You need to be clearer with terminology.  You are using "pill" and "contraception" interchangeably and they are not.  Contraception means something that is used to prevent pregnancy.  The pill is a combination of hormones that can be used as contraception.  The Church teaches that contraception is intrinsically evil.  There are no circumstance under which contraception is good.  There are circumstances under which hormone pills can be good.
 
NFP is not contraception.  Avoiding pregnancy by abstaining from sex is not contraception.  In these cases, one is not using something to prevent pregnancy.  It is merely the natural function of the female body.  It is possible to use NFP with a contraceptive mentality.  That is bad.

 

I was under the impression that "the pill" could be used in some cases as a form of medicine. Am I mistaken?

[Perigrina]

I was under the impression that "the pill" could be used in some cases as a form of medicine. Am I mistaken?

 

That is my understanding.  But when hormone pills are used as medicine they are not contraception. 

[Maggyie]

Crosscut, chemotherapy to treat cancer results in sterility.

Having a vasectomy or the Fallopian tubes tied results in sterility.

In one case, the sterility is an undesired side effect of treating a disease the only way we know how.

In the other case, the sterility is the desired end.

You're smarter than this.

Edited May 16, 2014 by Maggie

[CrossCuT]

Crosscut, chemotherapy to treat cancer results in sterility.

Having a vasectomy or the Fallopian tubes tied results in sterility.

In one case, the sterility is an undesired side effect of treating a disease the only way we know how.

In the other case, the sterility is the desired end.

You're smarter than this.

 

Im still more interested in the objectification portion of the debate that no one has yet been able to explain.

 

But I feel very content in my thoughts surrounding this issue. I do believe that contraception can be bad...just like a gun can be bad when used to kill someone. However i do not believe it inherently renders the user as an object. I think the intention of the person does that.

[Perigrina]

Im still more interested in the objectification portion of the debate that no one has yet been able to explain.

 

But I feel very content in my thoughts surrounding this issue. I do believe that contraception can be bad...just like a gun can be bad when used to kill someone. However i do not believe it inherently renders the user as an object. I think the intention of the person does that.

 

The objectification portion of the debate is something that you are free to disagree with.  However, you are directly contradicting Church teaching if you deny that contraception is intrinsically evil.

 

Here is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says on the subject:

 

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

 

The Church teaches that contraception is objectively evil, regardless of the subjective state of those using it.  Their motives, no matter how good, can not make it into a moral act.  As Catholics, we have an obligation to accept this.  The argument about objectification is an attempt to explain why Church teaching is correct.  We may reject it if it does not make sense to us.  The reason given in Church teaching is that contraception separates the unitive and procreative aspects of marriage.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Perigrina

[Credo in Deum]

[Perigrina]

Wait! What? Are we supposed to stay on topic here?  Why didn't anyone tell me? :hehe2:

[CrossCuT]

The objectification portion of the debate is something that you are free to disagree with.  However, you are directly contradicting Church teaching if you deny that contraception is intrinsically evil.

 

Here is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says on the subject:

 

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

 

The Church teaches that contraception is objectively evil, regardless of the subjective state of those using it.  Their motives, no matter how good, can not make it into a moral act.  As Catholics, we have an obligation to accept this.  The argument about objectification is an attempt to explain why Church teaching is correct.  We may reject it if it does not make sense to us.  The reason given in Church teaching is that contraception separates the unitive and procreative aspects of marriage.

 

I dont see how any of that cant be applied to contraception. I understand the weight of things in the CCC, however it still doesnt really explain WHY. It says obscure things like "It is their duty to make certain that their desire is not motivated by selfishness" or "the conjugal act preserves in its fullness the sense of true mutual love and its orientation toward man's exalted vocation to parenthood"

 

I still dont believe you can say "Those people are having selfish sex" or "Those people are having objectifying sex" just because they are using contraception. The ONLY place where I can get on the band wagon for intrinsically evil in regards to contraception is the case of possibly abortion...in that the egg does not implant on the uterine wall due to insufficient thickness of the endometrium. I have read a lot about this topic in order to come to a better conclusion on the topic, but even there the probability is low.

 

And you all can say Im a horrid Catholic who is going to burn in hell or whatever, but I am being as honest as i can with my feelings. Im not TRYING to be argumentative. In my heart of  hearts, this is how I feel; I feel content. NFP fails a lot of women as well. Its a very very difficult path to go down for women who have any type of cycle irregularity or a condition that makes it difficult. These women suffer enormously and the church has no consolation or answers for them. 

[Lilllabettt]

Lets say I shoot someone with a gun. I don't mean for them to die.
Does my not "meaning" for them to die change the fact that they are dead?
Does my not "meaning" for them to die change the fact that I'm a killer?
The consequences a person intends can affect their culpability. Maybe I'm not guilty of the sin of murder. But I'm a killer. What I did killed someone, regardless of what I intended.

[CrossCuT]

 

 

 

Wait! What? Are we supposed to stay on topic here?  Why didn't anyone tell me? :hehe2:

 

 

Yeah sorry lol! I think I totally derailed this thread a while ago. IM INNOCENT 

[Credo in Deum]

Yeah sorry lol! I think I totally derailed this thread a while ago. IM INNOCENT 

 

You could say you came in like a...

  ;)

[CrossCuT]

You could say you came in like a...

   ;)

 

If I did it would be wayyyyyyyy prettier than that. And there would be rainbows everywhere.

[Perigrina]

I dont see how any of that cant be applied to contraception. I understand the weight of things in the CCC, however it still doesnt really explain WHY. It says obscure things like "It is their duty to make certain that their desire is not motivated by selfishness" or "the conjugal act preserves in its fullness the sense of true mutual love and its orientation toward man's exalted vocation to parenthood"

 

I still dont believe you can say "Those people are having selfish sex" or "Those people are having objectifying sex" just because they are using contraception. The ONLY place where I can get on the band wagon for intrinsically evil in regards to contraception is the case of possibly abortion...in that the egg does not implant on the uterine wall due to insufficient thickness of the endometrium. I have read a lot about this topic in order to come to a better conclusion on the topic, but even there the probability is low.

 

And you all can say Im a horrid Catholic who is going to burn in hell or whatever, but I am being as honest as i can with my feelings. Im not TRYING to be argumentative. In my heart of  hearts, this is how I feel; I feel content. NFP fails a lot of women as well. Its a very very difficult path to go down for women who have any type of cycle irregularity or a condition that makes it difficult. These women suffer enormously and the church has no consolation or answers for them. 

 

You do not have to understand Church teaching.  You do have an obligation to accept and obey it.  It is not my job to judge you if you do not, but I encourage you to internally explore why you identify yourself as a Catholic if you are not willing to take on the Church's basic obligations.  How is it honest to call yourself Catholic while basing your beliefs on your feelings rather than Church teaching?

 

The reason the Church gives for contraception being intrinsically evil is that it separates the unitive and procreative aspects of the marriage act.  It is an attack on the nature of the sex act as intended by God.  Understanding this requires a grounding in a philosophical framework that few people have been taught.  Few of us have the philosophical assumptions needed to easily follow the reasoning behind this teaching.

 

I used NFP for decades and was even an instructor and presenter of it and yet I did not clearly understand the philosophy behind it.  However, I was able, through experience, to see that Church teaching on this is right.  The difficulties of NFP are accompanied by insight and empowerment that make the difficulties well worth it.  In fact, it was my experience with NFP that was a major factor in moving me from the liberal form of Catholicism that influenced my initial formation to become a person who greatly valued orthodoxy.  I figured if the Church was right on this subject, one which engendered so much disagreement and opposition, she was probably right about everything.
 

Edited May 19, 2014 by Perigrina

[CrossCuT]

You do not have to understand Church teaching.  You do have an obligation to accept and obey it.  It is not my job to judge you if you do not, but I encourage you to internally explore why you identify yourself as a Catholic if you are not willing to take on the Church's basic obligations.  How is it honest to call yourself Catholic while basing your beliefs on your feelings rather than Church teaching?

 

The reason the Church gives for contraception being intrinsically evil is that it separates the unitive and procreative aspects of the marriage act.  It is an attack on the nature of the sex act as intended by God.  Understanding this requires a grounding in a philosophical framework that few people have been taught.  Few of us have the philosophical assumptions needed to easily follow the reasoning behind this teaching.

 

I used NFP for decades and was even an instructor and presenter of it and yet I did not clearly understand the philosophy behind it.  However, I was able, through experience, to see that Church teaching on this is right.  The difficulties of NFP are accompanied by insight and empowerment that make the difficulties well worth it.  In fact, it was my experience with NFP that was a major factor in moving me from the liberal form of Catholicism that influenced my initial formation to become a person who greatly valued orthodoxy.  I figured if the Church was right on this subject, one which engendered so much disagreement and opposition, she was probably right about everything.
 

 

I know that for many Catholics these days are so willing to write someone off. Ive been accused of having poor faith, not having any faith, and being a bad Catholic...Ive even been asked why I even bother to go to church. As if my views on contraception render me unable to appreciate and love my faith in all its vast reaching beauty and meaning. I find that a very deep fault in  people...something they need to think about. You dont have to agree with me, but I think people need to reconsider their motives behind trying to alienate one another. This is something I believe our current Papa is trying to address as well. This deep rooted judgment and hatred that Catholics harbor against their fellow man when there is a disagreement. I find it very unfortunate.

 

I do understand the philosophy behind NFP, I used to be someone who ran around spewing its greatness and passing judgment on people who used contraceptives. I looked at them as stupid mongrels who were too dumb to understand how to use NFP. I thought their relationships were less meaningful because of it. I thought all this crap. And I realized how wrong I was to think that.

 

I actively practice tracking my fertility via NFP. Its a great tool for education etc. In fact its something I wish they taught in school; like, really taught. Not just mentioned it in passing. I wish it was a part of the sex ed in public schools. Its something every girl has a right to know. However I do not believe that contraception inherently makes someone closed to life. I believe that trait resides in the persons intentions.

[Perigrina]

I know that for many Catholics these days are so willing to write someone off. Ive been accused of having poor faith, not having any faith, and being a bad Catholic...Ive even been asked why I even bother to go to church. As if my views on contraception render me unable to appreciate and love my faith in all its vast reaching beauty and meaning. I find that a very deep fault in  people...something they need to think about. You dont have to agree with me, but I think people need to reconsider their motives behind trying to alienate one another. This is something I believe our current Papa is trying to address as well. This deep rooted judgment and hatred that Catholics harbor against their fellow man when there is a disagreement. I find it very unfortunate.

 

I do understand the philosophy behind NFP, I used to be someone who ran around spewing its greatness and passing judgment on people who used contraceptives. I looked at them as stupid mongrels who were too dumb to understand how to use NFP. I thought their relationships were less meaningful because of it. I thought all this croutons. And I realized how wrong I was to think that.

 

I actively practice tracking my fertility via NFP. Its a great tool for education etc. In fact its something I wish they taught in school; like, really taught. Not just mentioned it in passing. I wish it was a part of the sex ed in public schools. Its something every girl has a right to know. However I do not believe that contraception inherently makes someone closed to life. I believe that trait resides in the persons intentions.

 

If a Catholic denies clear Catholic teaching, there is an inherent contradiction that others respond to.  Ideally, they should not do this in an alienating way, but I find the negativity understandable.  Believing that Catholic teaching is true is not optional for Catholics.  Nevertheless, it is unfortunate that you have experienced people's reactions to your heterodoxy as being hateful and judgmental.

 

We do not have a right to judge people's hearts or spiritual state.  However, we do have a right and sometimes even a duty to judge behaviour and ideas.  Your are expressing ideas that contradict Church teaching.  Church teaching is true; therefore your ideas are false.  It is not judgmental for people to say this. 

 

It would be wrong to judge the spiritual state of people who disobey Church teaching on marriage.  But it is not judgmental to say that this teaching is true and Catholics have an obligation to accept and obey it.
 

[CrossCuT]

Bleh, I had this huge post typed up but I delete it. It was getting too personal to post publicly for my taste, but if you wanna PM me Perigrina id be happy to talk more about it. :)

[Anastasia13]

Bleh, I had this huge post typed up but I delete it. It was getting too personal to post publicly for my taste, but if you wanna PM me Perigrina id be happy to talk more about it. :)

 

That's part of why I left this thread. Nice to know I will never be able to marry anyone unless he has a lot of money for extra medical treatment for us.

 

At it's best, NFP can have a 1 in 150 or so success rate and at it's worst, it can have a 1 in 55 chance of success in preventing pregnancy.

 

Even if the pill is used for other purposes, it is still an external addition to the body that prevents pregnancy. It also has a 1% or so chance of a side affect of abortion-something don't understand why it is not best to avoid in a marriage.

 

Lillabett, "Oh my gosh, I killed me friend!" is different from "I don't care about you as anything but target practice." Both are killers, but only the latter dehumanizes the victim.

 

I suspect pleasure is still a part of the time that couple attempts to conceive (married couples are welcome to tell me I am wrong, but hey, sex is supposed to be unative as well as procreative too, right?), so I think it is wrong to blanketly state that all use of contraception is objectification because it could seek to avoid the "oh my gosh, now I have to kill my baby because of my own medical condition (or kill myself trying to carry the child)" kind of situation.

 

You are welcome to say you don't believe anyone should use any thing for contraception purposes because it intentionally cuts off an opportunity for life and I can respect that (not sure about that being 100% a moral necessity, but I can respect it), but saying that it is automatically objectification is offensive, especially to those who wish they could have that life as well as marriage (and don't just marry for sex), and still not a clearly presented logic.