contraception

[burnsspivey]

[quote name='aloha918' date='Apr 1 2005, 10:07 AM'] yeah i dont have a spouse...and my girlfriend and i try to live out a pure relationship......anywho.....masturbation is lying to yourself that you are having sex......it is derived strickly out of pleasure and no other person.....it is not a life giving action.......and that is sick....... [/quote]
At some point you will have a spouse (in theory) and thus, should she not reach orgasm from intercourse you are supposed to bring her to orgasm in another manner. Mutual masturbation is one such manner. If you find it sick I feel sorry for her.

[aloha918]

[quote name='burnsspivey' date='Apr 1 2005, 12:02 PM'] At some point you will have a spouse (in theory) and thus, should she not reach orgasm from intercourse you are supposed to bring her to orgasm in another manner. Mutual masturbation is one such manner. If you find it sick I feel sorry for her. [/quote]
a main reason that masturbation is wrong is becasue there is no chance of life........meaning that wheather you are with a person of not if there is ejaculation outside of place it is intended for it is wrong.....that is what the church believes.....which to me it makes a lot of sense

and stop talking about me, my future spouse, and the happiness that we will have...................

[burnsspivey]

[quote name='aloha918' date='Apr 1 2005, 01:53 PM'] a main reason that masturbation is wrong is becasue there is no chance of life........meaning that wheather you are with a person of not if there is ejaculation outside of place it is intended for it is wrong.....that is what the church believes.....which to me it makes a lot of sense

and stop talking about me, my future spouse, and the happiness that we will have................... [/quote]
I think you need to take a step back and re-read my comments. Not once did I say anything about ejaculation occurring outside of the vagina. Nor did I mention the happiness that you and your future spouse will have.

Also, three periods is sufficient for ellipses.

[Semalsia]

[quote name='Burnsspivey']There's a bit of a misunderstanding here. [/quote]

Right, Ok. Sorry about that then.


[quote name='Scardella']You can share your life with someone forever without getting married. People do it all the time.[/quote]

You mean friendship? So would a marriage without sex be the same as a friendship?

Kind of interesting, actually. I haven't thought about it this way. Good point too about the more persons. Well, I guess it might make marriage unnecessary. I'll have to think about that.


[quote name='Scardella']In your case it doesn't seem to provide many benefits.[/quote]

It gives the same benefits. In the eyes of the law spouses have more rights than simple friends. It's like family.

[aloha918]

[quote name='burnsspivey' date='Apr 1 2005, 03:18 PM'] I think you need to take a step back and re-read my comments. Not once did I say anything about ejaculation occurring outside of the vagina. Nor did I mention the happiness that you and your future spouse will have.

Also, three periods is sufficient for ellipses. [/quote]
ok you said "poor, poor, spuse".....and to me that implies that she would not be happy......and i think the entire purpose of mastubation is ejaculation outside of the vagina.....and you did speak about that.....

o and by the way.......................................................i dont really care about how many periods i use.......haha.....just messing with ya...........

[jmjtina]

[quote name='burnsspivey' date='Mar 28 2005, 02:53 PM'][url="http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=contraceptive"]Contraceptive[/url]
Main Entry: con·tra·cep·tion
Pronunciation: "kän-tr&-'sep-sh&n
Function: noun
Etymology: contra- + conception
[b]: deliberate prevention of conception or impregnation[/b]
- con·tra·cep·tive  /-'sep-tiv/ adjective or noun

Thus, any act that prevents conception is contraceptive.  Thus abstinence and NFP are contraceptive.[/quote]
Contra= against
conception = life

Several "contraceptives" are in fact abortifacients. That is, they cause early abortions. All oral contraceptives, Norplant, Depo-Provera, and IUDs cause abortions before a woman even knows she's pregnant. According to Dr. Bogomir Kuhar, in Infant Homicides Through Contraceptives, these forms of birth control take an estimated 8.1 to 12.75 million lives each year in the US alone. Contraceptives also cause abortions through their failures. All contraceptives fail, some quite often. Even surgical sterilization has a failure rate. Each "failure" results in a new human life, a new baby, an actual woman facing an unplanned and often unwanted pregnancy. These pregnancies are at risk for abortion.

Contraceptives can help destroy marriages. Only four years after contraceptives were first tested, researchers found that marriages in which contraceptives were used were twice as likely to end in divorce than marriages in which there was no contraceptive use. (Grant MD, Ellen Sexual Chemistry: Understanding Our Hormones, The Pill, and HRT. Mandarin Paperbacks, London, 1994.)

Contraceptives treat children like a disease. We take medicine or have surgery done to prevent them. When a couple does become pregnant in our modern culture, it may be seen as an occasion for condolences rather than congratulations. A pregnancy after a couple has one or two children may be treated as an unfortunate mistake. As Christians, we know that this attitude is wrong. The Bible tells us that children are a gift from God. They are His blessings. An abundance of children is an expression of God's special favor. What right do any of us have to refuse a gift from God? Instead of the world's attitude that children are bothersome nuisances that prevent us from enjoying our hard-earned wealth, we need to see each child as a marvelous assist to full human life. We believe that all children are good and beautiful. Although some pregnancies may occur under tragic circumstances, each child is an occasion for celebration.

These drugs and devices are abortifacients, capable of causing early and usually unknown abortions. The morally relevant point here is that "[i][b]it is objectively a grave sin to dare to risk murder"[/b][/i] (Declaration of Procured Abortion). If your action might kill a person, and you do it, you declare your willingness to kill a person (like shooting at what is behind the bush when you are uncertain whether it is a bear or a man).

The nature of the link between abortion and contraception needs to be accurately understood. The Pope writes, "Certainly, from the moral point of view contraception and abortion are specifically different evils: the former contradicts the full truth of the sexual act as the proper expression of conjugal love, while the latter destroys the life of a human being; the former is opposed to the virtue of chastity in marriage, the latter is opposed to the virtue of justice and directly violates the divine commandment "You shall not kill". But despite their differences of nature and moral gravity, contraception and abortion are often closely connected, as fruits of the same tree" (n. 13).

Hormonal contraceptives, besides being abortifacient, have horrific side effects for the women who use them. From high blood pressure to blood clots2, to heart attacks3, to migraine headaches, to menstrual problems after you quit taking the drug, hormonal contraceptives (the pill, Norplant, and Depo-Provera etc) can wreak havoc on a woman's body. It is no coincidence that the rise in breast cancer followed ten to fifteen years after hormonal contraceptives first became readily available4. It is also no coincidence that many women who have been on the pill for years and now want children, find they are now infertile5. Infertility has become a national epidemic, with couples spending hundreds of thousands of dollars trying desperately to conceive. Unethical doctors continue to become wealthy prescribing contraceptives and then treating the side effects.

[2Demulen (1993). Physicians Desk Reference, 2254
3Thorogood M, Mann J, Murphy M, Vessey M (1991). Is oral contraceptive use still associated with an increased riskof fatal myocardial infarcation? Report of a case control study. Br J Ob Gyn 98, 1245-1253
4'RCGP Breast Cancer and oral contraceptives: Findings in Royal College of General Practitioners' study.' BMJ 1981; 282:2089-93.
5Rowland, R. Living Laboratories. Lime Tree, London 1992.]

[quote]
[u][b][url="http://www.priestsforlife.org/articles/nfpdifferences.html"]Birth control and NFP: What's the Difference?[/url]?[/b][/u]

Tom and Jane have three children, and have determined that they cannot adequately provide for any more at the present time. They know that artificial means of birth control are morally wrong, and their priest recommended that they use NFP ( Natural Family Planning ). Yet they do not understand why NFP is OK if birth control is wrong. Don't they amount to the same thing?

Actually, they don't. NFP is very different form other methods of birth control. Here we will give some other reasons -- but first, a word about what NFP is not.

NFP does NOT refer to the so-called "calendar rhythm method", which was based on calendar calculations of a "normal" cycle. NFP, instead, based on direct observations of various signs that occur in a woman's body (changes in the cervix, cervical mucus, and temperature) which tell her when ovulation occurs. These observations are relatively easy to make, take only a few minutes, and work even for irregular cycles. NFP is internationally known and practical and is extremely effective. The medical principles on which NFP rests are being used by more and more doctors for a wide range of purposes.

Morally speaking, then, what is it that makes NFP acceptable while artificial birth control is wrong?

1 ) NFP does not separate sex from responsibility. The act of intercourse has a twofold meaning: sharing of love and giving of life. Married persons who perform this act must accept both sides of the coin. While not every marital act will result in a child, it must nevertheless be open to the possibility of life. The act will be "open" to life as long as the spouses do nothing to "close" it. Here's the difference between artificial birth control and NFP. In the first case, one does something (takes a pill, uses a condom, etc.) to deliberately "close" the life-giving power of sexual intercourse. In NFP, however, no such step is taken. The spouses do not act against their fertility. They do not reject the link between the two meanings of sex (love and life). They simply follow the natural patterns of the body's fertility and infertility -- patterns placed there by God Himself. In the fertile days of a woman's cycle, if there are serious reasons to avoid pregnancy, the couple respectfully steps back from the act of intercourse. In using birth control devices, however, they attack the meaning of the act -- they do the action of intercourse and then undo part of it. In NFP, instead, they simply choose at times not to do the action in the first place.

2) NFP is not just a "method" based on physiology. Rather, NFP is based on VIRTUE. It is based on sexual self-control, which is necessary for a healthy marriage. There are times in any marriage when spouses have to put aside their desire for sex because of sickness, fatigue, travel, or other reasons. In a healthy marriage, love is shown in many ways, and not all these ways of showing love are physical. In fact, to refrain from sex when necessary is itself an act of love. Why? Because in effect the spouses then say to each other, "I did not marry you just for sexual pleasure. I married you because I love you. You are a person, not an object. When I have sex with you, it is because I freely choose to show you my love, not because I need to satisfy an urge." Using NFP requires abstinence from intercourse during the fertile days if a pregnancy has to be avoided. This actually can strengthen the couple's sexual life. When the spouses know that they can abstain for good reasons, they also come to trust each other more, and avoid the risk of treating each other primarily as objects of sexual pleasure rather than persons. Artificial birth control, on the other hand, gives free reign to the temptation to make pleasure the dominant element, rather than virtue. It encourages couples to think that sexual self-control is not necessary. It can encourage them to become slaves to pleasure.

3) NFP puts the responsibility for family planning squarely on the shoulders of both partners, because it requires communication and cooperation. Both spouses need to know when the fertile days of the woman's cycle have arrived, and then decide together what to do (depending on whether they are trying to avoid or achieve pregnancy). To think that such communication and cooperation make the sexual act less pleasurable (because less spontaneous) is simply not true. To know with certainty what stage of the cycle one is in can increase the pleasure and spontaneity of the act, since the spouses can ignore worries about contraceptive failure or side-effects of the pill. Artificial birth control, besides introducing these worries, also puts the "contraceptive burden" on the shoulders of ONE, not both, spouses. It makes it possible for a spouse to cut off the fertility of the act, even without the consent of the other spouse. It can introduce division into the marriage.

4) NFP is not just a means of avoiding pregnancy, as artificial contraception is. Rather, it can also be used to ACHIEVE pregnancy since it pinpoints ovulation. It is a wholly positive approach to the sexual life of the spouses. It is clean, inexpensive, morally acceptable, and reliable.

As with anything good, NFP can be misused, if a couple has the wrong motives. Married couples are called by God to cooperate generously in bringing forth and educating new life. For a couple to decide that "we don't want children at this time", there need to be serious, objective reasons (health, finances, etc.). If the reasons are not objective but selfish, then the couple cannot justify the avoidance of pregnancy just because they are using NFP to do it. In this case they are not practicing "family planning", but "family avoidance"!

There are differences between NFP and artificial birth control, but let these suffice for now. As Pope John Paul II has explained, the difference really rests on a person's answers to some very basic questions like, "What is marriage?" What is sex? What is the human body? What is love?" Artificial contraception distorts the meaning of all these things. It sees the body and its sexual faculties as something to be "used", and it fails to acknowledge God's place in love and marriage. NFP, instead, is a practice of virtue, resting upon self-control, inner freedom, respect, trust, communication, and reverence to God's plan for love and marriage. It enriches both love and marriage. Every couple owes it to themselves to learn more about it!

--Fr. Frank Pavone

To obtain written material about NFP, write to: The Couple-to-Couple League, P.O. Box 111184, Cincinnati, OH 45211, ( 513 ) - 661 - 7612.[/quote]


Pax Christi.

[burnsspivey]

[quote name='aloha918' date='Apr 2 2005, 12:53 PM'] ok you said "poor, poor, spuse".....and to me that implies that she would not be happy......and i think the entire purpose of mastubation is ejaculation outside of the vagina.....and you did speak about that.....

o and by the way.......................................................i dont really care about how many periods i use.......haha.....just messing with ya........... [/quote]
You do know that women don't usually ejaculate, right?

[burnsspivey]

[quote name='jmjtina' date='Apr 3 2005, 01:21 PM'] Contra= against
conception = life

Several "contraceptives" are in fact abortifacients. That is, they cause early abortions. All oral contraceptives, Norplant, Depo-Provera, and IUDs cause abortions before a woman even knows she's pregnant. According to Dr. Bogomir Kuhar, in Infant Homicides Through Contraceptives, these forms of birth control take an estimated 8.1 to 12.75 million lives each year in the US alone. Contraceptives also cause abortions through their failures. All contraceptives fail, some quite often. Even surgical sterilization has a failure rate. Each "failure" results in a new human life, a new baby, an actual woman facing an unplanned and often unwanted pregnancy. These pregnancies are at risk for abortion.

Contraceptives can help destroy marriages. Only four years after contraceptives were first tested, researchers found that marriages in which contraceptives were used were twice as likely to end in divorce than marriages in which there was no contraceptive use. (Grant MD, Ellen Sexual Chemistry: Understanding Our Hormones, The Pill, and HRT. Mandarin Paperbacks, London, 1994.)

Contraceptives treat children like a disease. We take medicine or have surgery done to prevent them. When a couple does become pregnant in our modern culture, it may be seen as an occasion for condolences rather than congratulations. A pregnancy after a couple has one or two children may be treated as an unfortunate mistake. As Christians, we know that this attitude is wrong. The Bible tells us that children are a gift from God. They are His blessings. An abundance of children is an expression of God's special favor. What right do any of us have to refuse a gift from God? Instead of the world's attitude that children are bothersome nuisances that prevent us from enjoying our hard-earned wealth, we need to see each child as a marvelous assist to full human life. We believe that all children are good and beautiful. Although some pregnancies may occur under tragic circumstances, each child is an occasion for celebration.

These drugs and devices are abortifacients, capable of causing early and usually unknown abortions. The morally relevant point here is that "[i][b]it is objectively a grave sin to dare to risk murder"[/b][/i] (Declaration of Procured Abortion). If your action might kill a person, and you do it, you declare your willingness to kill a person (like shooting at what is behind the bush when you are uncertain whether it is a bear or a man). 

The nature of the link between abortion and contraception needs to be accurately understood. The Pope writes, "Certainly, from the moral point of view contraception and abortion are specifically different evils: the former contradicts the full truth of the sexual act as the proper expression of conjugal love, while the latter destroys the life of a human being; the former is opposed to the virtue of chastity in marriage, the latter is opposed to the virtue of justice and directly violates the divine commandment "You shall not kill". But despite their differences of nature and moral gravity, contraception and abortion are often closely connected, as fruits of the same tree" (n. 13).

Hormonal contraceptives, besides being abortifacient, have horrific side effects for the women who use them. From high blood pressure to blood clots2, to heart attacks3, to migraine headaches, to menstrual problems after you quit taking the drug, hormonal contraceptives (the pill, Norplant, and Depo-Provera etc) can wreak havoc on a woman's body. It is no coincidence that the rise in breast cancer followed ten to fifteen years after hormonal contraceptives first became readily available4. It is also no coincidence that many women who have been on the pill for years and now want children, find they are now infertile5. Infertility has become a national epidemic, with couples spending hundreds of thousands of dollars trying desperately to conceive. Unethical doctors continue to become wealthy prescribing contraceptives and then treating the side effects.

[2Demulen (1993). Physicians Desk Reference, 2254
3Thorogood M, Mann J, Murphy M, Vessey M (1991). Is oral contraceptive use still associated with an increased riskof fatal myocardial infarcation? Report of a case control study. Br J Ob Gyn 98, 1245-1253
4'RCGP Breast Cancer and oral contraceptives: Findings in Royal College of General Practitioners' study.' BMJ 1981; 282:2089-93.
5Rowland, R. Living Laboratories. Lime Tree, London 1992.]




Pax Christi. [/quote]
Actually:

[quote]Main Entry: con·cep·tion
Pronunciation: k&n-'sep-sh&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English concepcioun, from Old French conception, from Latin conception-, conceptio, from concipere
[b]1 a (1) : the process of becoming pregnant involving fertilization or implantation or both[/b] (2) : EMBRYO, FETUS b : BEGINNING <joy had the like conception in our eyes -- Shakespeare>
2 a : the capacity, function, or process of forming or understanding ideas or abstractions or their symbols b : a general idea : CONCEPT c : a complex product of abstract or reflective thinking d : the sum of a person's ideas and beliefs concerning something
3 : the originating of something in the mind
synonym see IDEA
- con·cep·tion·al  /-shn&l, -sh&-n&l/ adjective
- con·cep·tive  /-'sep-tiv/ adjective [/quote]

And, in addition to that error, you have made no argument against what I said.

Edited April 4, 2005 by burnsspivey

[aloha918]

[quote name='burnsspivey' date='Apr 4 2005, 02:52 PM'] You do know that women don't usually ejaculate, right? [/quote]
nope i had no idea (please notice sarcasm)

[burnsspivey]

[quote name='aloha918' date='Apr 4 2005, 02:56 PM'] nope i had no idea (please notice sarcasm) [/quote]
Well, you seem to be assuming that masturbation = ejaculation, so I thought I had better check.

[Kilroy the Ninja]

While I realize this thread is in the debate phorum, there are younger ones lurking here. Let's keep this [i]cleaner[/i] please.

Thank you and God Bless.

[jmjtina]

[quote name='burnsspivey' date='Apr 4 2005, 01:56 PM'] Actually:



And, in addition to that error, you have made no argument against what I said. [/quote]


conception=life. Hello?! getting pregnant, etc. sperm and egg.....Didn't know I had to spell it out for ya.

if I made no case to you, then you didn't read. What you have a problem with, please point it out. Or is this just your own opinions?

there IS a difference b/t contraception and NFP.....or did you just not read that either?

Edited April 5, 2005 by jmjtina

[Totus_Tuus]

Beautifully spoken!!! You hit the high points and l like the perspective that you are speaking from. I agree that sex is a unitive act between a husband, wife, and the Father, just like marriage. In addition to creating a deeply emotional and spiritually unity, sex is for procreation. If you look both of these can only be done through the Father. IF you look up to create, it means to make something from nothing. Which no human can do. We can only create with the tools that the Father gives us, for example our bodies, which are scared and to be treated and loved as so. As you mentioned pleasure should just be a side-effect of sex. That sex must recognized as the only act that can bring/create a human soul into the world and as a scared and perfect act between a man and woman engaged in the sancitity of marriage.

Contrapception brings all that God has created between the man and woman to its knees, defiling our most unique and scared possesions, our bodies. It builds walls between to people and perverts what is truly holy. Once again something that the secular world raises up and accepts in our society of mediocrity, only causes havoc in our families, relationships and souls.

Hopefully, through reading this people will realize their intrinsic value and the unconditional love of the Father. Save yourself for the one, God has saved for you!

God Bless...Forever YOURS!!!

[burnsspivey]

[quote name='jmjtina' date='Apr 4 2005, 11:58 PM'] conception=life. Hello?! getting pregnant, etc. sperm and egg.....Didn't know I had to spell it out for ya. [/quote]
I pointed out how that particular definition was in error. You have yet to correct that error, thus you have not offered a valid argument.

[quote]if I made no case to you, then you didn't read. What you have a problem with, please point it out.  Or is this just your own opinions? [/quote]

You made no case -- you quoted someone else's work, most of which has no bearing on this discussion. We're not just talking about contraceptives that are also abortifacients -- we're talking about condoms, etc., too. Thus, your quoted text has no bearing here.

You tried to use an erroneous definition and I pointed out your error. Without that error you have no argument.

[quote]there IS a difference b/t contraception and NFP.....or did you just not read that either?[/quote]

I read what was posted. You are using a definition of contraception that is in contrast with the actual definition.

[Brother Adam]

'definition' as is language in the eye of the beholder. If you choose to include NFP as a 'contraceptive' then you have made up your own definition of contraception.

NFP does not prevent in any artifical way the conception of a human being through the act of intercourse. all artifical contraceptives do. Check out humane vitae.