Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NFP and Contraception: What’s the Difference?
ce ^ | September 23, 2009 | Marshall Fightlin

Posted on 09/25/2009 1:19:31 PM PDT by NYer

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last
Marshall Fightlin is a husband, a father of two married daughters, and a grandfather of three grandchildren. He is a licensed psychologist and has been providing psychotherapy for over thirty years. He has given talks at state and national pro-life conventions, and has published articles on marriage, human sexuality and NFP in national and international journals. He teaches courses in psychology in a program for working adults at a local Catholic college. He conducts a telephone consult service at www.catholicpsychconsult.com.
1 posted on 09/25/2009 1:19:31 PM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Salvation; narses; SMEDLEYBUTLER; redhead; Notwithstanding; nickcarraway; Romulus; ...

In case you were wondering.


2 posted on 09/25/2009 1:20:07 PM PDT by NYer ( "One Who Prays Is Not Afraid; One Who Prays Is Never Alone"- Benedict XVI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

NFP is like saying, “Wow, those cookies look great. But sorry, I’m on a diet right now so I better not.”

Contraception is like saying “Wow, those cookies look great. Let me eat them all but then immediately go puke them all up.”

Contraception is sexual bulimia. You seek a natural pleasure, but you frustrate its natural effect.


3 posted on 09/25/2009 1:31:23 PM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

NFP requires self restraint. That’s is enough to condemn it in societies eyes. What people don’t understand about the Church and it’s understanding of human sexuality would fill the Grand Canyon.


4 posted on 09/25/2009 1:51:30 PM PDT by Jvette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYer

NFP is actually not supposed to be used as a preventative tool. It is actually supposed to be used for a married couple to learn when is the best time to CONCEIVE. Obviously, it will be used for contracepting as well, but that is not its intent. It also brings a couple closer together as they both take part in planning their families.

Another point about about contraceptives. The pill is not a contraceptive, but an abortifacient. The IUD is also an abortifacient. Many contraceptives are really abortifacients in the guise of birth control.


5 posted on 09/25/2009 2:18:32 PM PDT by murron (Proud Marine Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jvette
What people don’t understand about the Church and it’s understanding of human sexuality would fill the Grand Canyon.

Too sadly true!

6 posted on 09/25/2009 2:24:18 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Claud

It seems to me that using artificial sweeteners to make the cookies would be cheating in the same way. You eat fake food to gratify your tongue with sweetness without getting the nutrition (calories) that normally accompany the sensation. The natural effect of eating or drinking is that you are nourished.

Maybe that’s why studies suggest that those who drink diet soda tend to be more overweight than those who don’t. They unconsciously eat more to compensate for the missing calories.
http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20050613/drink-more-diet-soda-gain-more-weight


7 posted on 09/25/2009 2:25:27 PM PDT by edweena
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NYer
I'm sorry but someone HAS to say it.

YOU PEOPLE ARE CRAZY!!!


8 posted on 09/25/2009 2:29:34 PM PDT by BubbaBasher ("Liberty will not long survive the total extinction of morals" - Sam Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

NFP and Contraception: What’s the Difference?

About six or eight kids.

(sorry...couldn’t help myself....)


9 posted on 09/25/2009 2:31:48 PM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: murron
Depends entirely on the pill. "The pill" is not one pill, but hundreds of different formulations.

Some pills don't reliably prevent ovulation, but do prevent implantation of the fertilized egg in the uterine wall. That is arguably abortifacient because the egg has already been fertilized. The "mini-pill" or very low dosage pill falls into this category . . . which is why such pills (e.g. Yaz) are marketed not as birth control but for regulation of dysmenorrhea and menorraghia (pain and excessive bleeding during menstruation).

The older pills, especially the heavy hitters like Ortho-Novum and Ovulen 21, absolutely prevent ovulation if taken properly. The multi-phase pills like TriPhasil are not an absolute guarantee because they have to be taken faithfully at the same time every day.

Of course, if people can't follow directions all bets are off.

10 posted on 09/25/2009 2:34:40 PM PDT by AnAmericanMother (Ministrix of Ye Chasse, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BubbaBasher
OK, I'll bite:

Why is wanting to allow Nature to take her course "crazy"?

Contraception was uniformly condemned by ALL Christian denominations until 1930, when the Anglicans (why are they always at the bottom of stuff like this) decided it was o.k. 'in certain circumstances' and that opened the floodgates.

There are a lot of couples in their 50s who look around and wish they hadn't contracepted all their kids out of existence while they were in their fertile years . . . there's a T-shirt: "OMG! I forgot to have kids!"

11 posted on 09/25/2009 2:38:34 PM PDT by AnAmericanMother (Ministrix of Ye Chasse, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

What’s wrong with six or eight kids? It’s very generous all the way around.


12 posted on 09/25/2009 2:48:51 PM PDT by Desdemona (True Christianity requires open hearts and open minds - not blind hatred.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BubbaBasher
OK, I'll bite:

Why is wanting to allow Nature to take her course "crazy"?

Contraception was uniformly condemned by ALL Christian denominations until 1930, when the Anglicans (why are they always at the bottom of stuff like this) decided it was o.k. 'in certain circumstances' and that opened the floodgates.

There are a lot of couples in their 50s who look around and wish they hadn't contracepted all their kids out of existence while they were in their fertile years . . . there's a T-shirt: "OMG! I forgot to have kids!"

13 posted on 09/25/2009 2:57:03 PM PDT by AnAmericanMother (Ministrix of Ye Chasse, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BubbaBasher

NFP is a remarkably reliable way to achieve/avoid pregnancy without the use of chemicals or barriers during intercourse. Furthermore, NFP puts you so in tune with your body that you can identify problems very quickly. Name me a birth control pill that can do that.

I have 4 kids. I used NFP to both achieve (successfully within months) and avoid. In time my daughters will be carefully taught this method.

If I agree that your chosen method of pregnancy avoidance is reliable, can you not agree that mine is as well?


14 posted on 09/25/2009 3:42:34 PM PDT by melissa_in_ga (God Bless Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: murron
it will be used for contracepting as well

This is a pet peeve of mine. NFP is in no way, shape or form contraception and can never be used as contraception. NFP does not act against conception, ever, whether it is used to postpone pregnancy or not. That's part of the beauty of NFP, it doesn't keep the body from acting naturally, because if you don't have sex, it is natural to not get pregnant.

Now, NFP could be properly referred to as birth control, because it does allow for both birth and self-control. But it ain't contraception.....

15 posted on 09/25/2009 3:51:43 PM PDT by mockingbyrd (Sarah speaks for me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: melissa_in_ga
My mom said she and my dad used the Rhythm Method (NFP) and she STILL had five kids!

I agree that abortifacients are morally wrong, but God has allowed science in that area. Condoms, though not 100% effective, are not abortifacient nor contain harmful chemicals. I don't see what is morally wrong there. I fully agree that sexual intimacy should be between a husband and wife only, God gave this as a gift and the “marriage bed is undefiled” in his sight. It is not only for reproduction.

16 posted on 09/25/2009 7:43:40 PM PDT by boatbums (Not everything faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed unless it is faced.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Desdemona

I think the problem is that women who are capable of conceiving eight kids are capable of conceiving sixteen kids. I know the Church has to be against contraception, but I don’t think God would care if a woman who’s already had six or eight kids used nonabortiofacient birth control.


17 posted on 09/26/2009 5:13:02 AM PDT by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: boatbums
The old "rhythm method" a/k/a "Ecclesiastical Roulette" is not the same as NFP.

You can look it up.

18 posted on 09/26/2009 1:09:18 PM PDT by AnAmericanMother (Ministrix of Ye Chasse, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: NYer; RichInOC; Prince of Space; JoeFromSidney; TNMountainMan; alphadog; infool7; Heart-Rest; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

19 posted on 12/14/2013 5:36:17 AM PST by narses (... unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BubbaBasher

If all Christians unanimously taught that contraception was sinful till about 80 years ago (easily proven), and since then all Christians caved on this issue except the Catholic Church which held strong to the teachings of the Apostles and the Early Church (again easily proven), I wouldn’t say Catholics are crazy so much as everyone else is either deceived or apostate. At least from a Christian moral perspective.


20 posted on 12/14/2013 11:22:53 AM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson