Originally posted by GraceSaves:
There is a big difference in NFP and contraception. Contraception is anti-procreative. It is taking a foreign element into the act of sexual love with the willing and complete attempt at blocking the procreative element of sex, while still keeping the pleasure of sex.
And so are the other weeks of the month (the non fertile period). With NFP you are just keeping the pleasure without the payoff (child). Ah, but you say the chance is still there. See the link to carson's site at the bottom.
So, artificial contraception denies the act of procreation from sexual intercourse and promotes sexual intercourse without the need of procreation.
And? Are you going to take the stance that God only says "have sex for kids"?
Natural Family Planning, on the other hand, is not anti-procreative. Firstly, in attempt to avoid pregnancy (not full proof, of course, but neither are artificial contraceptives), couples abtain from sexual intercourse during the fertile period.
Abstinance is good. I practice it, and will continue to do so until I'm happily married. Temporarly abstinance inside marriage helps create deeper respect for spouces and shows how important and what a blessing sex is to the marriage.
Now, I know why you consider it a contraceptive because sex outside the fertile period is of course allowed, and there is "no chance" of procreation if there is no egg.
Sarah thought the same thing, when she was barren and in her later years, but was blessed with a son.
So, what we have here is a big difference. Contraceptives are human intervention against procreation, which is why we have sex in the first place (to be fruitful and multiply). Natural Family Planning's only contraceptive is abstinence, and for the rest of the month, we leave it in the hands of God.
And yes, contraceptives were viewed as evil by nearly all churches until this last century.
Don't tell me that when we get to college and they tell us our R.A.s have condoms if we need them...that this is something good in the eyes of God. Contraceptives promote extra-marital sex, because it reduces the risk of danger and makes it more approachable.
Sex is sacred. Sex is about love, respect, and the openness to bear children, which are God's gift to married couples.
Frankly, I'm willing to leave it in God's hands than my own.
Well, it appears that you make so many logical mistakes I don't have enough time to point them out, but I will try for some.
1. Just because contraceptions can be used for extra-marital affairs doesn't mean they are bad.
By this logic:
Alcholol = BAD (for many reasons, but it also lowers ones inhibitions)
Cars = BAD (you know, makes it easier to get to and from these extra-marital affairs)
Nice soft beds = BAD (makes all of us want to grab our condoms and make sweet passionate love to our nonmarried partners)
2. If NFP is not 100% effective, and condoms are not 100% effective, they do the same thing. But, and I will use a fellow catholics website here to show you something, if NFP is MORE effective than condoms (at preventing conception), you would actually be BETTER OF to use condoms. Don't like this do you?
http://boerne.com/carson/catholic/familyplan.html
So, if NFP is better than condoms (for instance), one of your arguments goes out the window. Now we are left with:
1. Foreign device
2. Sex for pleasure == bad
If 1, there is no biblical evidence for this...and by this logic, we should have no foreign device for any natural process (think toilet paper).
If 2. You see, there is nothing that says sex for pleasure is bad (of course we are talking in marriage here..and all over the place). But if you want to say that, go ahead. I am sure no bible believing person will even acknowledge such a reply.
In Christ,
jason
