Quite the contrary. Endorsing sterile sex, justified only because it's pleasurable, between husband and wife is just the first step down the slippery slope toward endorsing any sexual act for any reason, no matter how trivial. You don't get homosexual activity on the "approved" list without first putting contraceptive heterosexual activity on the list.
Robert Runcie (fmr CofE Abp of Canterbury) admitted this a few years ago, BTW. It's not just my opinion.
Just as an aside, you can fit all of the homosexual priests who regularly preached or taught against contraception in between these two brackets --> []
And all the while, while condemning all other kinds of contraception, the Catholic church hypocritically endorses "Natural Family Planning".
Contraception is contraception. If *sterile sex* is what's wrong, it condemns NFP as well and the Catholic church is wrong for giving NFP its stamp of approval.
Endorsing "natural family planning", justified only because it is pleasurable and used to avoid conception - though a few may use it to ensure conception - would also be a step on that slippery slope. Isn't NFP also a "sterile sex" for that matter? But because it is a method endorsed by your church hierarchy, Catholics can rationalize it as okay and everyone else is wrong.
So sex just for the pleasure even between husband and wife, is the slippery slope towards immorality?
The Catholic church as a whole has some of the most twisted views on sex imaginable.