Nfp

[Paladin D]

[url="http://www.rho.org/html/cont-nfp.htm"]http://www.rho.org/html/cont-nfp.htm[/url]

I've been hearing it is, with just a couple differences. I'm currently in a debate about [b]oral sex[/b], and this was brought up... and I don't know much about NFP.

[Dave]

No, NFP and the rhythm method aren't the same thing. The latter used a calendar, which didn't take into account that a woman's fertility cycle isn't all THAT regular. NFP takes into account physical signs, such as a woman's basal temperature, the mucus around the cervical opening, and the way the opening to the cervix is. As such, it's much more reliable than the rhythm method.

[Livin_the_MASS]

If a man spills his seed in any other place than were God meant it to be it is sinful. You are taking away the chance for life. Read Christopher West's book
"The Good News about sex and marriage" It covers everything.

[vianney]

important to note as long as seed is spilled where it is suppose to be other things can be done to get it to that point. without getting to bad

[Livin_the_MASS]

[quote]important to note as long as seed is spilled where it is suppose to be other things can be done to get it to that point.  without getting to bad[/quote]

Agree!

[Brother Adam]

Not that I disagree with anything, but this thread is gettin' a little too graphic. Remember 8 year olds can surf this thread.

[Paladin D]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Mar 18 2004, 02:07 PM'] Not that I disagree with anything, but this thread is gettin' a little too graphic. Remember 8 year olds can surf this thread. [/quote]
8 year olds shouldn't be on the web alone.

[IcePrincessKRS]

[quote name='Dave' date='Mar 18 2004, 12:38 PM'] No, NFP and the rhythm method aren't the same thing.  The latter used a calendar, which didn't take into account that a woman's fertility cycle isn't all THAT regular.  NFP takes into account physical signs, such as a woman's basal temperature, the mucus around the cervical opening, and the way the opening to the cervix is.  As such, it's much more reliable than the rhythm method. [/quote]
On the topic of this thread... *ahem*..... Dave has it right on. the rhythm method pretty much says "On the 14th day XYZ happens, on the 22nd day ABC happens" etc (I just pulled the days out of thin air to demonstrate my point). Thats why its so unreliable, some women may be fertile from day 12-15 and others from day 17-20, etc. You can't just go by a calendar like that and expect it to be accurate. lol Thats what makes charting so important; I may be fertile during certain days in one month but I can't expect it to be exactly the same the next month.

[marielapin]

[quote name='Paladin D' date='Mar 18 2004, 01:34 PM'] [url="http://www.rho.org/html/cont-nfp.htm"]http://www.rho.org/html/cont-nfp.htm[/url]

I've been hearing it is, with just a couple differences.  I'm currently in a debate about [b]oral sex[/b], and this was brought up... and I don't know much about NFP. [/quote]
No NFP is not the rhythm method. I am constantly having to tell people that cause they all have it in their minds that Catholics can either use the rhythm method and become parents or contraception and become "responsible adults". GRRRR!

Sorry Paladin, you are excused since you are young enough not to know the difference. Ignorant older people annoy me - especially when they themselves are supposed to be Catholic!

Dave and Icey gave good descriptions of the difference. One is based on luck, the other is based on science. NFP is the latter one. It's that simple.

[marielapin]

By the way, that article is pretty bogus on its failure rates, because its pretty easy to determine whether or not your are fertile. And if you are trying to put off pregnancy, and you think you MIGHT be fertile, then don't have sex. It's that simple.

According to many studies performed around the world, if a woman is taught correctly the method, it is more than 99% effective.

To say NFP has a 2-30% failure rate due to operator error is like saying the pill or the patch has a 2-30% failure rate due to the fact that someone forgets to take their pill or put on their patch. There will always be chance-takers and the method cannot be blamed due to their ignorance or negligence.

Go here

[url="http://www.ccli.org/nfp/effect1.shtml"]http://www.ccli.org/nfp/effect1.shtml[/url]

For more info on effectiveness. I've already outlined some of the arguments above, but the details are more fleshed out in these articles and there are documented studies done which give a 99-100% success rate for NFP.

[Archangel]

There's NFP (and Catholic morality) info here: [url="http://www.thinkchastity.com/"]http://www.thinkchastity.com/[/url]

[Spiritual_Arsonist]

[quote name='Paladin D' date='Mar 18 2004, 02:08 PM'] 8 year olds shouldn't be on the web alone. [/quote]
You got it Paladin.

[Mateo el Feo]

Just a little side note: isn't it sad that in the pop-culture's contraception mentality, it is a "failure" to get pregnant, and a "success" to be barren?

Here's a little clip from St. Luke's gospel when Our Lord is carrying the Cross. I just think His statement is on the bull's-eye for all of us in 2004!

[quote](Luke 23:27-31)

"A large crowd of people followed Jesus, including many women who mourned and lamented him.  Jesus turned to them and said, "Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep instead for yourselves and for your children, for indeed, the days are coming when people will say, [b]'Blessed are the barren, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed.'[/b]

At that time people will say to the mountains, 'Fall upon us!' and to the hills, 'Cover us!' for if these things are done when the wood is green what will happen when it is dry?"[/quote]

Happily, I think most married Phatmassers look forward to the day they "fail" with their spouse.

God bless!

[phatcatholic]

also, for those who wish to learn more about nfp, i have a collection of articles on this topic in the [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=6081"][b][i]Morality and Ethics[/i] entry[/b][/url]

[dairygirl4u2c]

I know this is pretty graphic and I know my sources may be wrong, but I have had one seminarian say that all oral sex is *probably* immoral and one priest say that as long as it properly ends up in the woman, it is legitimate.