contraception

[myduwigd]

Contraception is such a heated topic. Ive talked it over with my Protestant friends and some Catholics and could never really agree on anything. Scott Hahn said in his book "Rome Sweet Home" that he wouldnt use it because it defied God by taking the matter into one's own hands.

[Aloysius]

both 1 and 3 are okay, but Natural Family Planning by definition is NOT contraception. contraception is anything that prevents conception within the sexual act. NFP is just a married couple planning out when to have sex (well, that's very simplified. i'm no expert. lol). Anyway, basially, NFP is not contracpetion. NFP if done with malicious intent could create a contraceptive marriage (whcih would be wrong) but other than that it is not contraceptive.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Mar 21 2005, 03:11 PM'] both 1 and 3 are okay, but Natural Family Planning by definition is NOT contraception. contraception is anything that prevents conception within the sexual act. NFP is just a married couple planning out when to have sex (well, that's very simplified. i'm no expert. lol). Anyway, basially, NFP is not contracpetion. NFP if done with malicious intent could create a contraceptive marriage (whcih would be wrong) but other than that it is not contraceptive. [/quote]
I agree, both 1 and 3; and yes, NFP properly used is not a form of contraception.

[musturde]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='Mar 21 2005, 06:00 PM'] I agree, both 1 and 3; and yes, NFP properly used is not a form of contraception. [/quote]
How would you use NFP to a degree when it becomes contraceptive marriage? Would you have to be open to kids if you do it?

[yiannii]

I remember seeing a book about the conversion of a Protestant couple who were brought to the Catholic Church by her stance on contraception.... anyone know of this book? I'm not sure but I think it was published by Ignatius Press.

[Socrates]

While this is obvioulsy not a popular teaching, the Catholic Church firmly teaches that contraception of any kind is mortally sinful. NFP is not contraception and the Church has approved it as morally licit.

[Ash Wednesday]

I've read that NFP, while it is very effective and people worry that it is "Catholic Birth Control", tends to actually foster generosity with regards to having kids. That's what the EWTN experts say anyway. I am not going to be married for a couple more years or so but that reminds me I probably should start thinking about learning it soon...

[Aloysius]

when used without legitimate reasons it turns a marriage into a contraceptive marriage. when there are legitimate reasons involved and NFP to avoid kids was not the first option (we should all rather hope that we would be well enough off to be able to receive as many children as possible).

a Catholic couple gets married, and they know they will be unable to afford to have a lot of kids. NFP in this case is not going to lend itself towards a contraceptive marriage.

a Catholic couple gets married, and they want
-to have at least one boy and one girl in their family and then they'll stop having kids through NFP.
or
- to spend some years together alone first without children so you can bond (not because of need, they just want to) [FYI, if you want to do THIS idea, just make an extended engagement because as soon as you start with the sex you better have already bonded enough to be close]

These such things lend themselves towards a contraceptive marriage taking control over how many kids God is going to give you. By using NFP you are still not participating in contracptive sex, but the marriage as a whole as become somewhat contraceptive (the MARRIAGE is opposed to conception)

Legitimate reasons to make you resort to NFP (always IF possible it would be preferable not to have to worry yourself with such things but let God decide how many kids you get) would be financial, medical, umm... I'm sure there are others I'm forgetting... but there has to be some sort of reason you resorted to NFP

[MagiDragon]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Mar 22 2005, 12:12 AM'] [FYI, if you want to do THIS idea, just make an extended engagement because as soon as you start with the sex you better have already bonded enough to be close] [/quote]
Al! You Rock!

[Melchisedec]

Contraceptives are a very good thing. Sex for pleasure is not wrong at all. If you want to make love with your significant other and still not want to have to worry about getting pregnant than its the way to go.

[aloha918]

what is the purpose of sex?

......pro creation and unity of the spouses

contraception gets rid of both

so really it gets rid of the entire purpose to have sex

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='aloha918' date='Mar 22 2005, 10:14 AM'] what is the purpose of sex?

......pro creation and unity of the spouses

contraception gets rid of both

so really it gets rid of the entire purpose to have sex [/quote]
The purpose of eating is to sustain the body. Yet we like to eat foods that taste good and please our taste bud. We derive pleasure from eating. Ssomething that is meant for the simple purpose of sustaining the body. We dont need to be satisfied with the taste of a food to have it sustain our body. Sex is no different. It is meant to create humans, yet much pleasure can be derived from it. Its alot like desert. I prolly wont get much nutritional value from eating a desert, I mainly eat desert for the pleasing taste. Sex for pleasure is not wrong and its actually very wonderful. Maybe contraceptives prevents you from unifying with your loved one, but not for me and many millions of people around the world.

[Paphnutius]

Personal opinion:

"Worried about getting pregnant."

Man what a statement that we view some life as a burden and troublesome...

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='Paphnutius' date='Mar 22 2005, 10:27 AM'] Personal opinion:

"Worried about getting pregnant."

Man what a statement that we view some life as a burden and troublesome... [/quote]
Well I dont know what your financial situation is. But some people have enough money just to support each other, much less a child. I dont want to bring a baby into this world unless I know I can care for it financially . Yet, I dont see why in the meantime I cannot have sex with my wife.

[Paphnutius]

That is very responsible and commendable, but if it alters your view of the creation of life I think it has gone too far. Simply because there is a way to remove a "consequence" from having sex, does not mean that people should have free reign. When the world starts removing effects from their causes it turns things upside down. Like I said, personal opinion.

[burnsspivey]

[quote name='aloha918' date='Mar 22 2005, 10:14 AM'] what is the purpose of sex?

......pro creation and unity of the spouses

contraception gets rid of both

so really it gets rid of the entire purpose to have sex [/quote]
Just a note: the word procreate means beget offspring. There is no word "pro create" -- and if there were it would require a hyphen.

That said, contraception in no way reduces the "unity" of partners. Perhaps an argument could be made that prophilactics can reduce the actual physical contact, but that's not saying much as to the "unity".

Additionally, my catholic friend has told me repeatedly that within marriage, sex is supposed to bring pleasure. A man has a duty to please his wife just as a woman has a duty to please her husband. So, yes, sex can be about procreation and "unity" but it is also about pleasure. Thus, contraceptives do not remove the entire purpose of sex.

[Paphnutius]

Another quick and perhaps random thought:

Some people (Catholics included?) view the use of contraceptives saying something along the lines, "I am holding something back from you." There is not a unity of self-giving when someone holds back his or herslef by the use of a contraceptive. The man or woman is not giving freely and totally when the use a barrier between them. It is not so much a physival thing...

You are right, the man and wife have a duty to each other through the marital (sp?) act, part of which is plesaure.

Just a thought on why contraceptives may offend against unity...

[burnsspivey]

[quote name='Paphnutius' date='Mar 22 2005, 10:54 AM'] Another quick and perhaps random thought:

Some people (Catholics included?) view the use of contraceptives saying something along the lines, "I am holding something back from you." There is not a unity of self-giving when someone holds back his or herslef by the use of a contraceptive. The man or woman is not giving freely and totally when the use a barrier between them. It is not so much a physival thing...

You are right, the man and wife have a duty to each other through the marital (sp?) act, part of which is plesaure.

Just a thought on why contraceptives may offend against unity... [/quote]
On the contrary, I feel that I can give of myself more freely when I know that there is no risk (okay, almost no risk) of concieving. When there is (more) risk I always feel that I'm holding back, because it's always in the back of my mind.

[Paphnutius]

To that I would only reply, why do you feel that giving life to a new thing restrains you from giving yourself freely? I can understand not being able to financially support the child and what not, but God always supports those in need in the way that they need it. Ok, granted one has to have faith to begin with. That seems to be where we differ, on our views of the sacredness of life. Some people view it as a consequence of sex and would rather not support life that they do not have to. Some view it as a sacred gift the comes from the marital act. It all comes down to how much you value life that is not your own. Or so I think.

As I said, a view held by some. I can understand why you think it holds you back, you think that supporting life that may come from your actions a possible burden? I hope I am not overstating your stance.

[Jake Huether]

Luke 23:


[quote]“Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep for yourselves and for your children. 29For the time will come when you will say, ‘[b]Blessed are the barren women, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed![/b]’"[/quote]