Posted on 03/30/2002 7:53:37 PM PST by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
Artificial barriers are indeed, well, barriers to unity. Anything which prevents the complete giving of oneself to the other is a barrier.
The only thing that is being held back is sperm. Is that what makes it sin? Because there is no sperm deposited during the final act there is sin?
More or less. You are refuting the procreative aspect, which I hold to be necessary. You don't see it that way.
I am willing to disagree agreeably with you on this one.
I believe that's all we can do. I don't want to permanently antagonize you or anything. We have just amply demonstrated that, as I see it, Catholics insist upon both procreative and unitive aspects in each sexual act, while others would seem to find the procreative aspect optional, or optional at times anyway.
This is a true difference between us.
If you wish to have a further clarification go ahead, I will not respond.
SD
And what was it that he was referring to least you be so bold as to try and decieve as to the content of their 'traditions'? They taught such things as the washing of cups and hands before eating... Wow, damaging to the soul right... This is why he said to follow them. That is the difference in their tradition and yours. Yours can be damning to the soul - ie bowing to graven images to pray to other than God: something God wrote against with His own hand. Something God equated with hatred of Him expressed in the doing.
In effect, you're saying "if you bow to this image and pray, you shall not surely be punished.." Right in the spirit of the deciever. Quote me a pharisee tradition that even comes close.
Yeah, what you said.
Actually, wasn't Dr. Kopp's opposition to birth control made because the means were actually abortificiants? I wonder how he would weigh in on the condom/vasectomy options of birth control.
-Kevin
You know he's dying to jump in. Maybe if Becky is out riding her horse he could comment and then the moderator can remove his posts before she gets back. :-)
Uh, oh. What did I say?
Nothing. I was going to twist your words, but decided not to. Nevermind.
SD
Aw, come on Angelo, that logic does not work :) I do not know if there are many that believe that a woman taking her basal body temperature is part of the act of sex.
Haven't you noticed Becky has sorta dropped out of the discussion. You all are sharing way to much info:)
Becky
I believe it is consistent with resolutions 9-20 of the 1930 Lambeth Conference. It is important to remember that, while they express the views of the bishops of the Anglican churches, Lambeth resolutions are not canons.
I already said. Accidents happen. Sperm can survive. Eggs can come out early. The raw materials are there.
SD
How exactly are you "open to procreation" when you use a thermometer to ensure that your sperm never encounter an egg?
I know, its a gift. :)
BigMack
Or, in Boston, coitus in the end.
Sorry. I'll go stand in the corner now.
All? I've tried really hard (oh dear) to pointedly (oops) avoid any part of this conversation.
Not ensure, but less possible. I believe that a married couple can exhibit a modicum of self control in NFP. If not, then Irish twins may be the rule, rather than the exception :)
Don't worry about it, you haven't antagonized me one bit. I have enjoyed the discussion. You know when you start on something like this and keep at it for a while it is amazing the places where the conversation will take you.
This is a true difference between us.
You're right.
If you wish to have a further clarification go ahead, I will not respond.
Well I hope my questions haven't offended you on this subject.
-Kevin
A thermometer is not "natural" either. You are using a specific procedure to determine fertility times, and deliberately avoiding intercourse during those times. This is at least arguably artificial.
The thermometer is measuring a natural body characeteistic. It is not a physical barrier or diversion of sperm.
they are deliberatley holding back.
So is the person who refuses to have sex because the thermometer says today is a "fertile" day.
They are hlding back from having sex. They are not holding back while having sex. See the difference?
You seem to want to have it both ways. Part of the argument for NFP is that it is reportedly 95-99% effective. And yet you decry the use of artificial means of accomplishing the same end because they are not open to new life. Suppose condoms have a 90% effectiveness rate. One could argue that using condoms is more "open to new life" than using NFP, because the failure rate is higher.
If I admit that NFP is essentially, while "natural," essentially a product of a "contraceptive mentality" what does that get me?
An admission that some Catholics use a strange method to acheive the same ends. We are all sinenrs then. I can see that this is a quite logical conclusion.
If NFP is sinful, it doesn't make other methods right.
SD
Yep, we have narrowed another area down to its core irreconcileable difference. Interesting discussion, though. I think it might actually have been a new topic for us! ;o)
Let me ask a question this way - how may one be open to procreation?
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.