Contraception???

[Monica child of God 1]

Condoms and cervical caps are true barrier methods and can be used without spermacide. Diaphrams are a combo of barrier and spermacide. The sponge is not really a barrier but more of a spermacide holder. I don't think spermacide is a more of a problem per se but it is not under the category of true barrier.

This is just information, not an endorsement. I hold the opinion that contraception shouldn't be used except in extreme cases and definitely not as a "default" position.

M.

 

[jckstraw72]

So it's unhealthy not to keep up with the Jones'? Odd...

So baby let's sell your diamond ring
Buy some boots and faded jeans and go away
This coat and tie is choking me
In your high socitey you cry all day
We've been so busy keepin' up with the Jones
Four car garage and we're still building on
Maby it's time we got back to the basics of love

 

[ThePilgrim]

It's better to have two well adjusted and properly taken care of children who grew up in a home where their parent's marriage wasn't constantly on the rocks (money is a huge factor in divorce), or in a home constantly full of stress because mom and dad are always trying to barely make ends meet. Than it is to have 10 kids who grew up lacking opportunity after opportunity just because you were phyiscal able to have them.

My parents have always worked very hard to provide for us, but we've never had a lot of things that a lot of other people have. Material things. Also, we're all on our own for paying for college.

And I can honestly say that, although money has always been tight, my parents' marriage has never been on the rocks. They've raised us with love and in the fear of God, but without buying us lots of things or paying for our college.

And I wouldn't trade it for the world.

To imply that a parent has to give their kids **things** on the same level that most families do in order to be a good parent is ludicrous.


A good parent is a loving one and a good marriage is one where both spouses fear God.

Grace and peace,
John

 

[choirfiend]

I don't know what barrier methods are. Is it safe to google?

It is so obvious that I'm a single, unmarried woman... lol :o

If you want to understand various methods from a source that I believe to be neutral and factual (they report on all kinds of pregnancy related things, both pro-life and pro-abortion options) go to http://www.epigee.org/

 

[127.0.0.1]

My parents have always worked very hard to provide for us, but we've never had a lot of things that a lot of other people have. Material things. Also, we're all on our own for paying for college.

And I can honestly say that, although money has always been tight, my parents' marriage has never been on the rocks. They've raised us with love and in the fear of God, but without buying us lots of things or paying for our college.

And I wouldn't trade it for the world.

To imply that a parent has to give their kids **things** on the same level that most families do in order to be a good parent is ludicrous.


A good parent is a loving one and a good marriage is one where both spouses fear God.

Grace and peace,
John

I think you're totally right about the materialistic aspect of it, **stuff** isn't what it's all about. But you see, some parents are called, "stoners".

 

[OnTheWay]

My parents have always worked very hard to provide for us, but we've never had a lot of things that a lot of other people have. Material things. Also, we're all on our own for paying for college.

And I can honestly say that, although money has always been tight, my parents' marriage has never been on the rocks. They've raised us with love and in the fear of God, but without buying us lots of things or paying for our college.

Like I've said before, when you can't provide things like education for your children you shouldn't be having more. Not talking a $50,000 sports car for the sweet 16 here, but sticking your kids out in a world that requires a college education without it is failing as a parent.

To imply that a parent has to give their kids **things** on the same level that most families do in order to be a good parent is ludicrous.

Not in the least, in fact if you don't provide certain things you go to jail. While others just reflect your sense of responsibility to your children, or lack of same.

A good parent is a loving one and a good marriage is one where both spouses fear God.

Love is great, doesn't provide children with opportunties.

 

[127.0.0.1]

Like I've said before, when you can't provide things like education for your children you shouldn't be having more. Not talking a $50,000 sports car for the sweet 16 here, but sticking your kids out in a world that requires a college education without it is failing as a parent.

Yeah, what he said. Read Thomas L. Friedman's, The World Is Flat. If you didn't care for a liberal arts degree before, you definitely want one after you read his book.

Not in the least, in fact if you don't provide certain things you go to jail.

Right on.


Peace!!

 

[ThePilgrim]

It's not the parents' responsibility to pay for their child's college education. To say that a parent who doesn't pay for their child's college education is a failure is silly. I would say, rather, that a parent who does as your suggesting and gives their children all the gadgets that the neighbors have and pays for their college education is teaching their children to be irresponsible.

A good parent should teach their children to be adults, not feel responsible for taking care of them into adulthood.

My parents never gave my brother or me a penny towards college and we both went to good schools and graduated with no student loans. One of my sisters that's in college now will probably graduate with debt.

Also, college isn't "required" in this world. It is for certain professions, not all of which are for everyone. A woman who cuts hair for a living to support her kids or a man who works construction is no less dignified a person than someone with an office job. As long as the person is a pious Christian, the parents should be proud, no matter what profession they've chosen.

And love *does* provide children with opportunities. Love is infinitely more important than material things. I can say that, because I've actually seen real poverty, real loneliness, and real love and I know what they look like and what they mean in a person's life.

Armchair ethicist bother me, especially those who talk of adoption as morally superior to giving birth to children, and yet do neither themselves. Or those who talk about the horrors of poverty without going and being with those who are poor and seeing what their lives are like.

Grace and peace,
John

 

[heart of peace]

Like I've said before, when you can't provide things like education for your children you shouldn't be having more. Not talking a $50,000 sports car for the sweet 16 here

I agree with all that you said here. Chances are someone will mention that one's child can get loans but then the parent will be willingly allowing one's child to start off their adult life as slaves (as those in debt are enlsaved to their master, the debtors). This is not something I intend for my child and any other children God so graciously blesses me with. I can't tell you how difficult it has been for me since I have become an adult to really get on my own two feet because of my college debt. It has had long lasting effects in my life. I know that many kids are graduating college not only with college debt but also with credit card debt upwards of 20k's. I don't want to sic the creditors on my barely legal child.

Love is great, doesn't provide children with opportunties.

This reminds me of the verse in the Bible of how faith and no deeds is wrong.

James chapter 2 (NLT)
14 Dear brothers and sisters, what's the use of saying you have faith if you don't prove it by your actions? That kind of faith can't save anyone. 15 Suppose you see a brother or sister who needs food or clothing, 16 and you say, "Well, good-bye and God bless you; stay warm and eat well" - but then you don't give that person any food or clothing. What good does that do? 17 So you see, it isn't enough just to have faith. Faith that doesn't show itself by good deeds is no faith at all - it is dead and useless.

 

[127.0.0.1]

Also, college isn't "required" in this world. It is for certain professions, not all of which are for everyone. A woman who cuts hair for a living to support her kids or a man who works construction is no less dignified a person than someone with an office job.

College is necessary for a lot more than you seem to think. Construction workers now need college degrees in engineering to meet all those safety codes. I've heard of companies heiring illegals to do construction, but those are usually the projects that need to be done over again. As for the women who cuts hair, a degree in business advertising wouldn't hurt. After all, where are her customers going to come from? Thin air? An add in the paper might suffice, although I'm reluctant to say the hair dresser would be well off unless they charge a fortune or have a spouse that works. Besides, don't hairdressers need to go to barber school?



Peace !!

 

[choirfiend]

Like I've said before, when you can't provide things like education for your children you shouldn't be having more. Not talking a $50,000 sports car for the sweet 16 here, but sticking your kids out in a world that requires a college education without it is failing as a parent.




Not in the least, in fact if you don't provide certain things you go to jail. While others just reflect your sense of responsibility to your children, or lack of same.




Love is great, doesn't provide children with opportunties.

My father was the first and only one in his family to go to college. He put himself through it. His parents had two children, and in spite of the fact that this was over 30 years ago when college was "cheap," there was no money for him to go. He got through alright.

I have 3 siblings. All of us are paying or paid our way through college. We all went to a semi-state school, some of us earned scholarships, some of us lived at home part time, and most of us held employment, as well as drawing from life savings and bonds given by our grandparents. It was stressful, but it's not parents being deficient! I certainly don't feel as though my parents lacked something for not giving me college money (much.)

I know a family of 6 who lives on about 14K a year.
I know a family of 12 that lives on probably less.

Both families are happy, well-adjusted, loving, and neither seems to want for much.

This is a maddeningly erroneous point of view when it comes to what a child needs!!!

And I beg to differ that life needs a undergraduate degree now. There's actually a shortage of "blue collar" employees because everything thinks they need to get a 4 year degree--but you'd make a lot more money being a mechanic than a teacher.

 

[ThePilgrim]

So give a needy person clothing or food. Give an orphan a home by making him or her your child. Give of your time and your money to help cases of genuine need and poverty. Love those around you. If you do those things, you'll be following the Gospel and the meaning of the Apostle's words.

However, to say that those verses mean that a parent who doesn't get out their checkbook and write a check to pay for the cost of college for their adult children is a failure is to pervert the meaning of the Scriptures.

*scratches head*

In Christ,
John

 

[Akathist]

So, let me get this right, my mother who was married to my father, in the military making the lowest grade pay should not have had me because they didn't have money?

I should never have been born? She should have used birth control?

Is that what you all are saying?

How many of you would exist if it was the rule that parents should be able to pay for things like sky rocketing college education before they can have children?

God forbid that someone reads this and doesn't speak first to their Priest about this issue before making a decision.

The Church is 100% right on this matter.

 

[ThePilgrim]

Okay, if you want, let's compare real world experience in such matters.

Firstly, to say that construction workers need 4 year degrees in engineering to meet all the codes is simply silly. Engineers don't do construction work. They may supervise it or help in the planning, but they're certainly not the ones getting their hands dirty and doing the work itself.

How do I know? I spent a year working as a Russian-English interpreter for a refugee resettlement agency, finding **legal** employment for **legal** refugees. I went with them on countless job interviews for all sorts of different professions and helped them to find real jobs with which they could support their families. Many of the refugees were highly educated back in the Soviet Union. Many weren't. It made very little difference for many of the jobs, especially in construction. Those kind of jobs didn't require extensive education, but they did require a willingness to work hard. And those who got the jobs and worked hard did well for themselves and for their families. It's good, honest, dignified work.

I also helped them find jobs as hairdressers, among other things. Yes, for those jobs, they want you to have gone through a training program, but they certainly don't expect or want a four-year degree.

So tell me... What's your real world experience with these kind of jobs? Or what real, practical knowledge do you have about poverty? Did you read a book about it once?

In Christ,
John

 

[ThePilgrim]

Exactly! A lot of this is just silly! If we look back a generation or two, most of our moms and dads or our grandparents didn't have high paying careers when they got married or started families. What they did have was a good work ethic and a dedication to their marriage and their families that made them raise their children, not in affluence, but in love.

We, as a country, don't really understand poverty. We understand material possessions. As a result, we've forgotten what family is really about and what love means.

Grace and peace,
John

 

[Philothei]

Exactly! A lot of this is just silly! If we look back a generation or two, most of our moms and dads or our grandparents didn't have high paying careers when they got married or started families. What they did have was a good work ethic and a dedication to their marriage and their families that made them raise their children, not in affluence, but in love.

We, as a country, don't really understand poverty. We understand material possessions. As a result, we've forgotten what family is really about and what love means.

Grace and peace,
John

Guys I agree with you all 100% one problem though that I see in comparison to our parents generation... was that the family was 'set' solid... today you think that family value has to do with the size of a family though .. I think people are much hesitant to have 'big families" due to divorce rate or the fear of divorce... Generally the instability of relationships and of abuse in the families... I know as a priest's wife I have witnessed many problems like these. I agree though that money is one consideration ....but I suspect not chosing the right person, or afraide that you might divorce might be another... That is where faith needs to come in.... and unfortunately some are short....

 

[choirfiend]

An Excerpt from The Singing House
By: May Morgan Potter

Fred ate [his breakfast] dutifully and then slipped down from his chair.

‘Now can I go over to Jimmy’s, mother?’ he asked.

‘But Fred,’ I [said], ‘you were over there yesterday and the day before. Why not have Jimmy come here today?’

‘Oh, he wouldn’t want to.’ Fred’s lip quivered in spite of his six years of manhood. ‘Please, mother.’

‘Why do you like Jimmy’s house better than ours, son?’ I pursued. It came to me suddenly that Fred and all his companions were always wanting to go to Jimmy’s house.

‘Why,’ he explained hesitantly, ‘it’s cause—it’s cause Jimmy’s house is a singing house.’

‘A singing house?’ I questioned. ‘Now what do you mean by that?’

‘Well,’ Fred was finding it hard to explain, ‘Jimmy’s mother hums when she sews; and Annie-in-the-kitchen, she sings when she cuts out cookies; and Jimmy’s daddy always whistles when he comes home.’ Fred stopped a moment and added, ‘Their curtains are rolled clear up and there’s flowers in the windows. All the boys like Jimmy’s house, mother.’

‘You may go, son,’ I said quickly. I wanted him out of the way so I could think.

I looked around my house. Everyone told me how lovely it was. There were oriental rugs. We were paying for them on installments. . . . We were paying for the overstuffed furniture and the car that way, also. Perhaps that was why Fred’s daddy didn’t whistle when he came in the house. . . .

I . . . went over to Jimmy’s house, even if it was ten o’clock and Saturday morning. It came to me that Mrs. Burton would not mind being interrupted in the middle of the morning. She never seemed to be in a hurry. She met me at the door with a towel around her head.

‘Oh, come in. I have just finished [cleaning] the living room. No indeed, you are not interrupting. I’ll just take off this headdress and be right in.’

While I waited, I looked around. The rugs were almost threadbare; the curtains . . . tied back; the furniture, old and scarred. . . . A table with a bright cover held a number of late magazines. In the window were hanging baskets of ivy . . . , while a bird warbled from his cage hanging in the sun. Homey, that was the effect.

The kitchen door was open and I saw Jerry, the baby, sitting on the clean linoleum, watching Annie as she pinched together the edges of an apple pie. She was singing. . . .

Mrs. Burton came in smiling. ‘Well,’ she asked, ‘what is it? For I know you came for something; you are such a busy woman.’

‘Yes,’ I said abruptly, ‘I came to see what a singing house is like.’

Mrs. Burton looked puzzled. ‘Why, what do you mean?’

‘Fred says he loves to come here because you have a singing house. I begin to see what he means.’

‘What a wonderful compliment!’ Mrs. Burton’s face flushed. ‘But of course my house doesn’t compare with yours. Everyone says you have the loveliest house in town.’

‘But it isn’t a singing house,’ I objected. . . . ‘Tell me how you came to have one.’

‘Well,’ smiled Mrs. Burton, ‘if you really want to know. You see, John doesn’t make much. I don’t think he ever will. He isn’t the type. We have to cut somewhere, and we decided on noon-essentials. . . . There are books, magazines, and music. . . . These are things the children can keep inside. They can’t be touched by fire or [financial problems] so we decided they were essentials. Of course good wholesome food is another essential. . . . The children’s clothes are very simple. . . . But when all these things are paid for, there doesn’t seem to be much left for rugs and furniture. . . . We don’t go into debt if we can avoid it. . . . [however] We are happy’, she concluded.

‘I see,’ I said thoughtfully. I looked over at Jerry and Fred in the corner. They had manufactured a train out of match boxes and were loading it with wheat. They were scattering it a good deal, but wheat is clean and wholesome.

I went home. My oriental rugs looked faded. I snapped my curtains to the top of the windows, but the light was subdued as it came through the silken draperies. . . . [My house] was not a singing house. I determined to make it sing.

 

[Xpycoctomos]

You're right, I don't really know what a women goes through when she's pregnant. But my understanding is that, for some it's really hard (mood swings, painful birth) and for others, it goes with maybe only a very minimal amount of complications.
I've heard of women giving near painless natural births and I once read a story about a women who wound up pregnant whic wasn't too fun for her because she was on a perscription drug to lower her high cholesteral (and from what I understand, pregancy raises your cholestral level). So no, I don't know allot about what women go through with pregnancy and being a guy, the best I can do is speculate.

That's not what I was saying. I was saying that their reaction to the Pill offers no indication as to how they will handle pregnancy.

From what I understand, that is only speculative. But I'm trying to keep an open mind. If bio-identical hormones are used, I rather doubt that they could cause an abortion - still keeping an open mind though. But if you really want to get into chances then let me say this:
Do not drink coffee, orange juice, grapefruit juice, or any form of absorbic acid, or induce lactation if you are pregnant or may become pregnant.

I would agree with you if you were doing those things in order to NOT have kids. If your wife were drinking high amounts of caffeine because she heard that it might disallow implantion or might induce a spontaneous abortion that would be wrong... very wrong.

However, most people do so becuase they like Coke and the purpose of the caffiene is not to prevent pregnancy.

The purpose of the pill is to prevent pregnancy. It's purpose is to affect how the womb and other related organs function and therefore how the procreative process occurs. (Coke, coffee, is not used for that) For many of them, the intended purpose of them is to prevent an egg from coming out. It does so by tricking your body into thinking it is pregnant (to soem degree). However, sometimes it fails and the egg is released. In such case, conception can occur, however the womb (because the body is being tricked) is not offering an ideal environment for implantation, and so the fertalized egg is expelled and the human life is thus ended.

None of them that I am aware of (and my wife looked into all of the possibilities for contraception that she was offered) never have abortive effects except for the barrier method and NFP. I am not presenting to you some kind of "It's possible, although it's never been really proven" situation here. "It's possible, although for some it's not likely, and it has and does actually happen".

So, if you suggest to your wife that she load up on the Caffeine so as to create a hostile environment for a fertalized egg... then you should probably confess that. But, I don't know if anyone has ever done that.

Xpy

 

[Xpycoctomos]

College is necessary for a lot more than you seem to think. Construction workers now need college degrees in engineering to meet all those safety codes. I've heard of companies heiring illegals to do construction, but those are usually the projects that need to be done over again. As for the women who cuts hair, a degree in business advertising wouldn't hurt. After all, where are her customers going to come from? Thin air? An add in the paper might suffice, although I'm reluctant to say the hair dresser would be well off unless they charge a fortune or have a spouse that works. Besides, don't hairdressers need to go to barber school?



Peace !!

My parents didn't give me any money for college. I'm sill paying my college off to this day.

I don't think it's wrong for parents to pay for part or all of one's education. That's up to them. And, hey, more power to that person. But it is not necessary for parents to pay for it. If a person really wants to go... they can go. They just have to work hard for it (either now or later... I chose hte later approach lol).

No one ever said life was to be easy or that college is a right. You have to work for it. That teaches us a lot more spiritually than otherwise.

 

[heart of peace]

So give a needy person clothing or food. Give an orphan a home by making him or her your child. Give of your time and your money to help cases of genuine need and poverty. Love those around you. If you do those things, you'll be following the Gospel and the meaning of the Apostle's words.

However, to say that those verses mean that a parent who doesn't get out their checkbook and write a check to pay for the cost of college for their adult children is a failure is to pervert the meaning of the Scriptures.

*scratches head*

In Christ,
John

Hi John,
I can see why you would feel that way. We just see this differently.

God says how he feeds the birds of the air and they never have to worry about where their next meal will come from and then He continues to say how much more our father in heaven loves us. This implies that one's father will do more for His children than what He does for those that are not His children.

A person who goes to feed the homeless, clothe the naked but is unable to care for their children in a way where their child would not be enslaved to the enemy is a parent whose faith I would question. Is it for show?

But I digress, I don't understand why this entire conversation is being boiled down whether one can pay for college for their children or not. The point is being lost somehow for details. Can we try to redirect back to the original point?

So, let me get this right, my mother who was married to my father, in the military making the lowest grade pay should not have had me because they didn't have money?

I should never have been born? She should have used birth control?

Is that what you all are saying?

Akathist, you seem to have a very tender and loving spirit. It is quite refreshing actually. There is a certain pureness to it that I believe God must look upon with happiness. I only pray to be more like you in that regard.

The reason why I say this is that I think you are reading into these comments. Noone is saying a person who is in existence should not be here. The point is if one is not in a position to provide for their children (and I am not talking about vacations and inground pools here) then that is not a horrible reason to consider spacing children apart or limiting the amount of children a family brings into this world.

By all means, ALL life is precious. ALL life is a blessing. ALL life is meant to be here, and that includes you, that includes me, that includes all of us at CF and those in the entire world. It is a logical fallacy to say that argument A equals argument B. Limiting children, spacing children for economia reasons is NOT the same as saying the life that is here is a mistake. I hope that I explained it clearly.

How many of you would exist if it was the rule that parents should be able to pay for things like sky rocketing college education before they can have children?

This is just one of the issues that have arisen in this thread and it began because I said that I believe I should pay for my child's education. I think it is sad that the conversation has become centered on this point and now I almost regret making my statement. Planning for college is very very easy. It only requires setting up a 529 account and deposting a small amount monthly while my child is still young. I don't see how a parent cannot plan for such expected expenditures and also blue collar work requires trade schools as well. High school diploma does not cut it these days.

And while we are on the subject of education, how many times have we heard how bad the public schooling is in the states. Private schooling requires money and so then that would mean a choice between have as many kids as possible and sending them to schools that will indoctrinate them in humanism and a world that does not need God or have 3-4 kids and providing them an education that teaches them the Truth. In your opinion, which set of children will be more equipped to withstand the evils of the world and stay committed to their path to theosis and God willing affect the salvation of others in a more positive way?

God forbid that someone reads this and doesn't speak first to their Priest about this issue before making a decision.

I agree and my prayers are that no one would EVER believe that they do not need to consult their SF based on what they read in an internet message forum. This applies to all topics, even those that the majority agrees on.

No one ever said life was to be easy or that college is a right. You have to work for it. That teaches us a lot more spiritually than otherwise.

Just because you don't think college is a right is your opinion. DId you realize that college is free in Europe? There are other ways to teach one's child fiscal responsiblity and about spirituality without having to put them in a position of enslavement.

I respect your opinion and I would hope that you could do the same for me.

Forgive me for my straightforwardness.