Contraception

[Dan the Man]

I don't know what most catholics believe because I'm not catholic, but I personally believe there's not even close to enough contraception in the world. Our world is already horribly overpopulated and for one couple to bring an asinine number of kids into it is incredibly selfish and irresponsible in my opinion. I'm having a vasectomy tomorrow which I'm sure is also looked down upon by some, but I personally don't want to be responsible for bringing another life into this messed up world.

I'm curious what catholics have to say about fertility drugs/artificial insemination and that sort of thing. Because it seems like many (not just catholics) who believe in having as many kids as God "wills them to", are also the first ones to go to fertility specialists when they cannot conceive. Which if contraception is wrong then shouldn't that be too? Because obviously if you cannot conceive naturally then God did not "will" you to have children.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

.

What a peculiar post, Jack! In it you succincly made CaliforniaJosiah's point. You said, "Contraception is being able to have sex without having children" Is not NFP a distinct means by which Catholic couples (as well as any other couples who practice it) are enabled to have sex without having children? If not, why is it call "Planning".

My point has been made repeatedly and powerfully BY CATHOLICS throughout this thread.... By Jack, the opening poster, others....

Since Jack is a smart guy and I'm sure is being honest, I am left POWERFULLY understanding the "double talk" label almost everyone I know (Catholic and otherwise) gives to this, and left scratching my head (good that I have thick and abundant hair). SOMEHOW, in modern Catholicism, contraceptive sex is not contraceptive sex. Okay - I think I have no choice but to accept that and that somehow that makes sense in modern Catholicism. Kind of like divorce isn't divorce and a lot of other oddities in modern Catholicism....

My brother-in-law, a cradle Catholic, said: "When the Church makes up its mind, let me know." ANYONE reading the Catholic posts in this thread can SURE understand that....


Amazing. Absolutely amazing....




.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

What a peculiar post, Jack! In it you succincly made CaliforniaJosiah's point. You said, "Contraception is being able to have sex without having children" Is not NFP a distinct means by which Catholic couples (as well as any other couples who practice it) are enabled to have sex without having children? If not, why is it call "Planning".

While still having sex. You left that out.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

.





My point has been made repeatedly and powerfully BY CATHOLICS throughout this thread.... By Jack, the opening poster, others....

Since Jack is a smart guy and I'm sure is being honest, I am left POWERFULLY understanding the "double talk" label almost everyone I know (Catholic and otherwise) gives to this, and left scratching my head (good that I have thick and abundant hair). SOMEHOW, in modern Catholicism, contraceptive sex is not contraceptive sex. Okay - I think I have no choice but to accept that and that somehow that makes sense in modern Catholicism. Kind of like divorce isn't divorce and a lot of other oddities in modern Catholicism....

My brother-in-law, a cradle Catholic, said: "When the Church makes up its mind, let me know." ANYONE reading the Catholic posts in this thread can SURE understand that....


Amazing. Absolutely amazing....




.

Contraceptive sex means sex is taking place. Chastity is to deny oneself and so no sex at all. Contraception is when you have sex and do something still to prevent the sperm from fertilizing the egg, while still having sex.

NFP does not use contraceptives to have sex and prevent conception. So, it is not contraceptive.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Contraceptive sex means sex is taking place. Contraception is when you have sex and do something still to prevent the sperm from fertilizing the egg, while still having sex.

I"m not sure about all that, but okay, for the sake of the discussion...


So, in Catholic Family Planning and Birth Control, is there sex or not? Is the couple "denying" each other by having a sexless marriage or not?
In employing the method, in practicing Catholic Family Planning and Birth Control, is something being employ, practiced?
Is both the means and end specifically, by design and intent, to prevent conception?

Chastity is to deny oneself and so no sex at all.

Okay. And you said that NFP is "chastity." Practicing "chastity." It's "no sex at all" you stress.
So, let's say a couple is practicing, employing, implementing, doing this Family Planning/Birth Control for the first 5 years of their marriage. Does that mean that there is "no sex at all" during that time?

While still having sex.

Is the practice of Catholic Birth Control chastity - no sex?
Or is it having sex - contraceptively?






.






.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I"m not sure about all that, but okay, for the sake of the discussion...


So, in Catholic Family Planning and Birth Control, is there sex or not? Is the couple "denying" each other by having a sexless marriage or not?
In employing the method, in practicing Catholic Family Planning and Birth Control, is something being employ, practiced?
Is both the means and end specifically, by design and intent, to prevent contraception?

Yes, contraception is to be prevented because it is evil.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I don't know what most catholics believe because I'm not catholic, but I personally believe there's not even close to enough contraception in the world. Our world is already horribly overpopulated and for one couple to bring an asinine number of kids into it is incredibly selfish and irresponsible in my opinion. I'm having a vasectomy tomorrow which I'm sure is also looked down upon by some, but I personally don't want to be responsible for bringing another life into this messed up world.

I'm curious what catholics have to say about fertility drugs/artificial insemination and that sort of thing. Because it seems like many (not just catholics) who believe in having as many kids as God "wills them to", are also the first ones to go to fertility specialists when they cannot conceive. Which if contraception is wrong then shouldn't that be too? Because obviously if you cannot conceive naturally then God did not "will" you to have children.

In the USA we are seeing a population decline when the economy and society need a population increase to stimulate things. There seems to be a fallacy that is popular that we are over crowded and that false. I know that the USA is not over crowded and needs more children to keep society going.

As to Catholics and their doctrine, all forms of contraception are evil.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

As to Catholics and their doctrine, all forms of contraception are evil.

Except for it's own.
No religious organization in the world (Christian or otherwise) promotes contraception more than the RCC; even holding classes in it at the parish center, even mandating couples to take it. Read the Catholic posts in this thread. It's undeniable. Simply undeniable.





.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Except for it's own.
No religious organization in the world (Christian or otherwise) promotes contraception more than the RCC; even holding classes in it at the parish center, even mandating couples to take it. Read the Catholic posts in this thread. It's undeniable. Simply undeniable.





.

I agree that the RCC holds classes on contraception because so many people do not know what contraception is. Contraception is not chastity, which the RCC teaches within NFP. Contraception is an evil that is selfish and can kill a child at conception and is gravely evil and totally against God's design. We know through out Christian history that contraception has always been evil and of the devil (Augustine is but one example). With 2,000 years I am sure demons can twist the words as they wish in making evil look good and so mislead many to hell. So, we can see why classes are important in this day and age where evils are taught as good and so the RCC teaching that contraception is evil is a good thing.

I am not sure why this is still an issue.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

I am not sure why this is still an issue.

I don't either. You (and all but one other Catholic) here has already confirmed our point - repeatedly, boldly, firmly and undeniably.


But for SOME reason, in modern Catholicism, contraceptive sex is not contraceptive sex. You are a smart, informed man of integrity (not games) so I DO conclude that you see no "issue" there - you don't. But about 95% of the Catholics known to me (including the ones here) do. And virtually 100% of non Catholics do. Thus the "double talk" issue that has consumed this thread almost from the start. As 2 posters noted, "You guys need to huddle and come up with one position." As my cradle Catholic brother-in-law (who took the NFP class, as mandated by the parish) stated, "when the Church makes up it's mind -let me know."

It IS amazing. Truly puzzling. I have a high and profound respect for Catholic theology and theologians - but there are times when it causes all (but a TINY percentage of docilic Catholics) to just scratch their heads and say "WHAT?" "Contraceptive sex is pious and good - we'll teach you how to do it, but contraceptive sex is EVIL" is just one of those.


I have nothing to say beyond what YOU yourself have posted. More than once. Just read the Catholic posts in this thread (don't need to read mine - the Catholics made my point better than I have). Just amazing.






.

 

[patricius79]

g. Because it seems like many (not just catholics) who believe in having as many kids as God "wills them to", are also the first ones to go to fertility specialists when they cannot conceive. Which if contraception is wrong then shouldn't that be too? .

I don't see how that follows.

the Catholic position is that both God and men have free will. God freely chose to create us and didn't have to.

couples likewise can choose if they want to marry and when to have sex and when not to and thus excercise free will and thus decide how many children they want to have.

but they must choose a moral means and always be open to God's will. the meaning of the sexual act implies fundamental openness to procreation. they chose to get married. and they chose to have sex.

am I making sense to you?

 

[bbbbbbb]

While still having sex. You left that out.

And?? NFP allows Catholics to have abundant amounts of sex without the worry of conceiving. The purpose of contraception is exactly as you stated it, as is the purpose of NFP. CaliforniaJosiah is spot on with his assessment IMO.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Contraceptive sex means sex is taking place. Chastity is to deny oneself and so no sex at all. Contraception is when you have sex and do something still to prevent the sperm from fertilizing the egg, while still having sex.

NFP does not use contraceptives to have sex and prevent conception. So, it is not contraceptive.

NFP does its level best to ensure there is no egg for the sperm to fertilize. The only thing more certain to achieve this purpose is surgery. Thus, the pious Catholic can have sex with the probability of avoiding conception.

 

[Thekla]

And?? NFP allows Catholics to have abundant amounts of sex without the worry of conceiving. The purpose of contraception is exactly as you stated it, as is the purpose of NFP. CaliforniaJosiah is spot on with his assessment IMO.

I must have missed it: where in the quoted teachings is a quantitative modifier used ?

 

[JacktheCatholic]

And?? NFP allows Catholics to have abundant amounts of sex without the worry of conceiving. The purpose of contraception is exactly as you stated it, as is the purpose of NFP. CaliforniaJosiah is spot on with his assessment IMO.

It is absurd to say that having sex with no prevention is contraception. To support such an absurd claim defies reason since contraception is to use prevention for sex. It is a contradiction.

 

[patricius79]

And?? NFP allows Catholics to have abundant amounts of sex without the worry of conceiving. .

while practicing the self-discipline of abstaining for several days each month in order to avoid conception for a serious reason, such as a serious mental health issue

the idea that this is morallly equivalent to having sex while on an abortifacient pill ("the Pill) or using a device to avoid conception begs the question

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I must have missed it: where in the quoted teachings is a quantitative modifier used ?

It is not there. It is disheartening to think someone would intentionally try to deceive so we have to try and understand. But I see no good reason for it.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

.

"also to be excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means."

​

​

Is there an action? SURE! It's why a METHOD must be taught (they have classes for this), things must be IMPLEMENTED, DONE, PERFORMED, PRACTICED. Yes, it's before the night(s) when the egg is likely to be present, but the definition specifically states it may be before.

Is the specific intent to prevent procreation? SURE! Poster after poster here has stated that sex may be redirected to when she is likely to be infertile, why? Because then she is likely not to conceive. The intent, goal, design, purpose is to counter conception.

It is both the means and the end. It is singular, specific. To permit sex without conception. Contraceptive sex.




.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

it is not intrinsically wrong for a married person to try to avoid pregnancy

​

Okay.

But anything done, practice, implemented, employed - before, during or after - that is so one to purposely avoids pregnancy is "evil."

Got it.





.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

.



[/INDENT] Is there an action? SURE! It's why a METHOD must be taught (they have classes for this), things must be IMPLEMENTED, DONE, PERFORMED, PRACTICED. Yes, it's before the night(s) when the egg is likely to be present, but the definition specifically states it may be before.

Is the specific intent to prevent procreation? SURE! Poster after poster here has stated that sex may be redirected to when she is likely to be infertile, why? Because then she is likely not to conceive. The intent, goal, design, purpose is to counter conception.

It is both the means and the end. It is singular, specific. To permit sex without conception. Contraceptive sex.




.

This makes no sense to me, it seems illogical. It is like you are telling me that NFP prevents conception during sex.

Contraception is what you do to prevent conception with sex.

NFP does not use anything to prevent conception with sex, it is open to life.

NFP and Contraception are contradictory.

Again, saying not having sex is contraceptive is absurd, to say the least. It is a gross contradiction. So, it is puzzling that anyone would choose to continue arguing for such a fallacy.

Everyone that uses contraceptives knows they are for use when having sex. Does it not seem absurd that we would call it contraceptive when there is not going to be sex? I knew this well before I was Christian, I really knew it. So, why is this so confusing?