Contraception And Abortion

[mommas_boy]

[quote name='Slappo' post='1699595' date='Nov 11 2008, 03:13 PM']Never in any way can a Catholic in good conscience support the use of contraceptives, that includes giving proper instruction on how to use them for the sake of more then sheer knowledge. For instance, I've taught myself a lot about contraception, but not for the sake of it being a viable option, but to argue against it. No Catholic can teach contraception as a viable option, even as a back up option to abstinence.

If we were to do that, we might as well start teaching that pornography and masturbation is okay as a second option to complete chastity. After all, masturbation and pornography is safer then sex with contraception, so why not teach masturbation as back up plan #2 and contraception with sex as #3 and hey, if that fails lets teach abortion as a viable option #4 if 1-3 fail.

[b]You [i][u]cannot[/u][/i] have that mindset as a Catholic and remain in good standing with the Church.[/b]

NFP [b]cannot[/b] be taught as a means of contraceptive. Contraceptive literally means against conception, whereas NFP is not [b]meant[/b] to be against conception although many Catholics use it with this mindset, and to do so is immoral.

Why will abstinence programs seem to fail in our schools and not have high success rates? Because our teachers are teaching to abstain from sex while wearing V cut shirts that the kids can look down when she leans over her desk, because kids read sexually explicit books that include fornication etc as part of their literary classes, because our media promotes unchastity, because [b]nothing else in our country[/b] is teaching abstinence. An abstinence program has to be more then an hour long sex education class three times a week for a semester. An abstinence program has to be a mindset that goes across all of the country, and until our country is willing to truly strive for that, they will not be as successful as they should be.

A person stuck in a contraceptive mindset should not be taught that it is an okay second option to abstinence because in his mind abstinence isn't even an option. Rather the contraceptive mindset must be broken and he then must be taught the beauty of the body paired with abstinence education.[/quote]

Hi, Slappo.

I was told this approach by someone whom I trust, who attended Franciscan at Steubanville. I had asked him the question of what I am to do, as a public school teacher, if asked by an administrator to teach contraceptives. This is the answer that I got.

So, what I would ask you is for Church teaching, from a bishop or higher, in support of your opinion. I bow before the Magisterium, and so would recant my previous statement if you can show it to be contrary to Church teaching, from Church teaching itself.

Note, however, that I am not advocating the use of contraceptives. I am advocating that contraceptives be demonized and shown for what they truly are: a dangerous lie. I believe that by showing contraceptives to be dangerous, we encourage students to abstain, because we demonstrate that contraceptives are not truly an option, even from a secular standpoint.

Thank you for your help.

Kris

[hérisson]

[quote name='jkaands' post='1696455' date='Nov 7 2008, 07:24 AM']Birth control pills don't act as abortifacients when they are used to suppress ovulation. The so-called "Plan B' usage potentially is an abortifacient if there is an embryo. otherwise it is not.

Contraception is neither a sin nor an evil.[/quote]

1. Even if they are used to suppress ovultaion, that doesn't mean that they will always supress it: human errors as well as other elements may intervene in such a way that the pill won't have the desired effect ; in that case, it may still cause an abortion.

2. Contraception is an evil in so far as it seperates what God has united : love between husband and wife and the gift of life.
There are cases, however, where non-abortive contraceptives can be considred licit : for example that of a woman who knows of the danger of being raped. But in this case, sex is not an expression of love.

[Slappo]

[quote name='mommas_boy' post='1699610' date='Nov 11 2008, 01:46 PM']Hi, Slappo.

I was told this approach by someone whom I trust, who attended Franciscan at Steubanville. I had asked him the question of what I am to do, as a public school teacher, if asked by an administrator to teach contraceptives. This is the answer that I got.

So, what I would ask you is for Church teaching, from a bishop or higher, in support of your opinion. I bow before the Magisterium, and so would recant my previous statement if you can show it to be contrary to Church teaching, from Church teaching itself.

Note, however, that I am not advocating the use of contraceptives. I am advocating that contraceptives be demonized and shown for what they truly are: a dangerous lie. I believe that by showing contraceptives to be dangerous, we encourage students to abstain, because we demonstrate that contraceptives are not truly an option, even from a secular standpoint.

Thank you for your help.

Kris[/quote]

If you aren't advocating contraceptives, then you aren't teaching them for the purpose of use, but only for the purpose of knowledge. There isn't any big problem in your statement except how you came across at first. Especially with the ABC's of Uganda's teachings. When teaching contraceptives at a public school one must try his best to teach in a theoretical manner one might say being cautious never to advocate or even suggest the use of contraceptives.

For a Catholic, it would be better that two people fornicate without contraception then with contraception (not that any sort of fornication is good, but to add contraception on top is to have two sins), so even, "Well if you don't abstain, use a condom" is not appropriate teaching. That is what you have to be cautious of.

[Barbarus]

I just read this from Gaudium et Spes, relevant to an earlier portion of the discussion:

"Parents should regard as their proper mission the task of transmitting human life and educating those to whom it has been transmitted. They should realize that they are thereby cooperators with the love of God the Creator, and are, so to speak, the interpreters of that love. Thus they will fulfil their task with human and Christian responsibility, and, with docile reverence toward God, will make decisions by common counsel and effort. Let them thoughtfully take into account both their own welfare and that of their children, those already born and those which the future may bring. For this accounting they need to reckon with both the material and the spiritual conditions of the times as well as of their state in life. Finally, they should consult the interests of the family group, of temporal society, and of the Church herself. The parents themselves and no one else should ultimately make this judgment in the sight of God. But in their manner of acting, spouses should be aware that they cannot proceed arbitrarily, but must always be governed according to a conscience dutifully conformed to the divine law itself, and should be submissive toward the Church's teaching office, which authentically interprets that law in the light of the Gospel. That divine law reveals and protects the integral meaning of conjugal love, and impels it toward a truly human fulfillment. Thus, trusting in divine Providence and refining the spirit of sacrifice,(12) married Christians glorify the Creator and strive toward fulfillment in Christ when with a generous human and Christian sense of responsibility they acquit themselves of the duty to procreate. Among the couples who fulfil their God-given task in this way, those merit special mention who with a gallant heart and with wise and common deliberation, undertake to bring up suitably even a relatively large family.(13)"

[mommas_boy]

[quote name='Slappo' post='1699736' date='Nov 11 2008, 07:32 PM']If you aren't advocating contraceptives, then you aren't teaching them for the purpose of use, but only for the purpose of knowledge. There isn't any big problem in your statement except how you came across at first. Especially with the ABC's of Uganda's teachings. When teaching contraceptives at a public school one must try his best to teach in a theoretical manner one might say being cautious never to advocate or even suggest the use of contraceptives.

For a Catholic, it would be better that two people fornicate without contraception then with contraception (not that any sort of fornication is good, but to add contraception on top is to have two sins), so even, "Well if you don't abstain, use a condom" is not appropriate teaching. That is what you have to be cautious of.[/quote]

Ok. After posting a second time, I sat and thought about it and came to about your same conclusion as presented here: that the problem lies in advocating contraceptive use, no matter how much one might discourage it.

The next issue lies in the fine line that is balancing teaching contraceptives as *theory*, and actively *advocating* them. I agree that my original post was actively advocating them, and I recant this position. Still, the task of this balancing as I put it is a very difficult one indeed, especially since I find that my students are very apt at *hearing* something different than what I am *saying*. Thus, I am concerned that even if I were to have in my mind that students are to study contraceptives in theory only, how do I insure that they do not interpret my teaching as advocacy? Further, what characteristics distinguish theory and advocacy? An administrator is going to care whether or not students understand proper use -- but this seems to be crossing the line between theory and advocacy by teaching them precisely how to sin.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I am concerned because during our professional development meeting yesterday, the topic came up that we would be holding a "health" day at school, and that only male teachers would be allowed to instruct male students. Therefore, the number of teachers eligible to present to the young men at my school is limited, and I feel that it is only a matter of time before I am asked. How am I to be in compliance with my work, but also not sin myself, nor encourage these young ones to sin as well?

[mortify]

Edit: nm

Edited November 12, 2008 by mortify

[Slappo]

[quote name='mommas_boy' post='1699771' date='Nov 11 2008, 05:25 PM']Ok. After posting a second time, I sat and thought about it and came to about your same conclusion as presented here: that the problem lies in advocating contraceptive use, no matter how much one might discourage it.

The next issue lies in the fine line that is balancing teaching contraceptives as *theory*, and actively *advocating* them. I agree that my original post was actively advocating them, and I recant this position. Still, the task of this balancing as I put it is a very difficult one indeed, especially since I find that my students are very apt at *hearing* something different than what I am *saying*. Thus, I am concerned that even if I were to have in my mind that students are to study contraceptives in theory only, how do I insure that they do not interpret my teaching as advocacy? Further, what characteristics distinguish theory and advocacy? An administrator is going to care whether or not students understand proper use -- but this seems to be crossing the line between theory and advocacy by teaching them precisely how to sin.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I am concerned because during our professional development meeting yesterday, the topic came up that we would be holding a "health" day at school, and that only male teachers would be allowed to instruct male students. Therefore, the number of teachers eligible to present to the young men at my school is limited, and I feel that it is only a matter of time before I am asked. How am I to be in compliance with my work, but also not sin myself, nor encourage these young ones to sin as well?[/quote]


That's really tough... it REALLY is a fine line. Morally you could possibly get away with knowing that a condom in itself is not intrinsically evil, neither is properly wearing one, the evil is in the act of contracepting (which can only be done through vaginal sexual intercourse). The same goes true with birth control. It is not an intrinsically evil act to take birth control pills, even regularly with proper use of them according to medicine, but to do so while having intercourse then becomes contracepting which is intrinsically evil.

I would say, know that teaching the proper way to use a contraceptive device is different then teaching the proper way of contracepting (although some might argue that this is semantics, but morally it is a big difference). To the best of your ability teach on the device itself as opposed to the act. If you are knowingly and in good conscience purposefully, to the best of your ability, not advocating the use of contraceptives, your students choice to use them even being guided by your proper instruction is not your fault.

You can't morally teach them lies about contraception with the intention of getting the devices to fail either, that and you might get fired for it. You could try talking to your superior and opt out of it saying that you don't believe the use of contraceptives to be moral and ask them to not use you to teach them if at all possible.

That's the best advice I could give . You might try seeing if a priest around you knows good moral theology and can guide you through it. Call your pastor on the phone and see if he can help or at least recommend someone else who could.

[Fr. Bruno]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1696495' date='Nov 7 2008, 07:45 AM']I went to 37 funerals for young men under the age of 30. That can change your perspective pretty fast. I do believe that the church is right, that contraception is a sin. That's what I believe, that's what I teach, that is how I have lived my life. My faith just became weak when it came to my kids. I didn't want them to die for making a mistake that priests hear everyday in confession.[/quote]

It is, however, a serious mistake to believe that the use of condoms will keep them from getting the virus. Just as the promotion of contraception increases the number of undesired pregnancies, the uses of condoms increases moral misbehavior, which is, in most cases the reason for getting contaminated. Once people are enslaved to this kind of misbehavior, soon or late, accidents happen : sometimes, people forget it, other times, they don't use it well, or simply end up being fed up with that artificial kind of stuff. And that's how many "experienced" and "well informed" condom users get contaminated...
It doesn't make much sense to say " the Church is right " and at the same time teach people not to listen to her. In other words : young people should not learn about condom use, but about the true meaning of love and chastity, which implies renouncement and self-control.
John Paul II said it over and over again...

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Fr. Bruno' post='1700210' date='Nov 12 2008, 12:53 PM']It is, however, a serious mistake to believe that the use of condoms will keep them from getting the virus. Just as the promotion of contraception increases the number of undesired pregnancies, the uses of condoms increases moral misbehavior, which is, in most cases the reason for getting contaminated. Once people are enslaved to this kind of misbehavior, soon or late, accidents happen : sometimes, people forget it, other times, they don't use it well, or simply end up being fed up with that artificial kind of stuff. And that's how many "experienced" and "well informed" condom users get contaminated...
It doesn't make much sense to say " the Church is right " and at the same time teach people not to listen to her. In other words : young people should not learn about condom use, but about the true meaning of love and chastity, which implies renouncement and self-control.
John Paul II said it over and over again...[/quote]

I do agree with you. My situation was slightly different than other Catholic parents because these boys were foster children. I had legal limitations on what I was allowed to teach them. I often overstepped those. The oldest boy had visitations with his father, who is a practicing homosexual into S&M. I had to have many discussions with him about things that were over his head (and often mine as well) when he returned from a visit. I was eventually allowed to do religious instruction with him and he was received into the church at 17.

The younger boy I was not allowed to do any such instruction with. His father and step mother despise Catholics. He was being influenced on visits by an older step-brother who had already pressured 3 different girls into having abortions. Both boys were chemical exposure babies, and their particular learning/personality issues also made a difference in the types of behaviors I was trying to deal with.

I just did the best I could under the situation. I know I made lots of mistakes, and just hope that the Lord will forgive me for them.

[Fr. Bruno]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1700262' date='Nov 12 2008, 10:36 PM']I do agree with you. My situation was slightly different than other Catholic parents because these boys were foster children. I had legal limitations on what I was allowed to teach them. I often overstepped those. The oldest boy had visitations with his father, who is a practicing homosexual into S&M. I had to have many discussions with him about things that were over his head (and often mine as well) when he returned from a visit. I was eventually allowed to do religious instruction with him and he was received into the church at 17.

The younger boy I was not allowed to do any such instruction with. His father and step mother despise Catholics. He was being influenced on visits by an older step-brother who had already pressured 3 different girls into having abortions. Both boys were chemical exposure babies, and their particular learning/personality issues also made a difference in the types of behaviors I was trying to deal with.

I just did the best I could under the situation. I know I made lots of mistakes, and just hope that the Lord will forgive me for them.[/quote]

I'm sure he will... or better : he already has !

[Slappo]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1700262' date='Nov 12 2008, 01:36 PM']I know I made lots of mistakes, and just hope that the Lord will forgive me for them.[/quote]

I confession!

That's such a sad and tough situation Catherine . Sorry you had to deal with it, foster parents need mucho prayers, especially Catholic foster parents trying to teach strong morals.

[prose]

[quote name='jkaands' post='1696455' date='Nov 6 2008, 11:24 PM']Birth control pills don't act as abortifacients when they are used to suppress ovulation. The so-called "Plan B' usage potentially is an abortifacient if there is an embryo. otherwise it is not.

Contraception is neither a sin nor an evil.[/quote]

Yes, birth control pills DO act as abortifacients. They act in 3 ways to "prevent" pregnancy:

1. They prevent ovulation most of the time.

IN CASE THAT FAILS:

2. BC pills change the woman's fertile mucus pattern to make it more difficult for sperm to reach the egg.

IN CASE THAT FAILS:

3. The provide an unsuitable environment in the uterus for a fertilized egg to implant.

The pill does cause spontaneous abortions, and anyone who tells you otherwise is mistaken or lying.

Edited November 13, 2008 by prose

[CatherineM]

[quote name='prose' post='1700640' date='Nov 13 2008, 12:30 PM']Yes, birth control pills DO act as abortifacients. They act in 3 ways to "prevent" pregnancy:

1. They prevent ovulation most of the time.

IN CASE THAT FAILS:

2. BC pills change the woman's fertile mucus pattern to make it more difficult for sperm to reach the egg.

IN CASE THAT FAILS:

3. The provide an unsuitable environment in the uterus for a fertilized egg to implant.

The pill does cause spontaneous abortions, and anyone who tells you otherwise is mistaken or lying.[/quote]

My Catholic, Sophomore college roommate was on the pill, and had a spontaneous abortion. She didn't know that it was a possibility until it happened to her. She was shaken up for a long time.

[Barbarus]

[quote name='prose' post='1700640' date='Nov 13 2008, 01:30 PM']Yes, birth control pills DO act as abortifacients. They act in 3 ways to "prevent" pregnancy:

1. They prevent ovulation most of the time.

IN CASE THAT FAILS:

2. BC pills change the woman's fertile mucus pattern to make it more difficult for sperm to reach the egg.

IN CASE THAT FAILS:

3. The provide an unsuitable environment in the uterus for a fertilized egg to implant.

The pill does cause spontaneous abortions, and anyone who tells you otherwise is mistaken or lying.[/quote]
Yes, this is totally true.

The pill [i]could[/i] perfectly prevent ovulation, but the estrogen level necessary for that kills women. Like, for example, the 20 women that died in the first clinical trials of the pill.

[Fidei Defensor]

.

Edited November 15, 2008 by fidei defensor