NFP vs. Contraception VII

[corierobot]

even though I don't agree with the message, this is very cleverly written, lol.

[DFxmaslightguy]

"who worries about consequences?"

I laughes for around 10 minutes at this :D

[lesorciercalifornien]

People use the pill because it WORKS. Unlike Roman roulette which is a crapshoot.

[davidakadb]

@lesorciercalifornien actually, when properly done, nfp is very effective

[WABWAD]

I just love these videos! Everyone should see this one!

[TobiasMurphy]

@rtechie

Wow, so nice of you to read my mind and heart and judge what I really must have meant. Obviously anyone promoting virtue must be lying. What a disappointing view of the world.

NFP works extremely well. Given your comments, it seems clear that you confuse NFP with the rhythm method, which aren't remotely the same thing.

Also, calling my wife a liar is ridiculous. Honestly? I mean, you seriously think you can prove your case by calling your opponents liars with no proof? Pffft.

[TobiasMurphy]

@rtechie

The kids in my videos are mine and I thank God for them everyday.

They were conceived using NFP. :-)

As for priesthood, God didn't call me. Would have been ridiculous to do what He didn't want me to do. Same reason I don't use contraception, in fact.

Oh, and the Catholic Church isn't misogynistic. It is her love for women that requires her to insist that sex must be used in accord with the dignity of sex. NFP allows women to keep their dignity.  Contraception doesn't.

[rtechie]

@TobiasMurphy

[rtechie]

@TobiasMurphy

"God didn't call me" is a euphemism for "I thought better of it."

NFP doesn't work. Either you're not having sex regularly, you have large numbers of kids, or your wife is lying to you and secretly taking birth control.

If NFP actually worked then we wouldn't have seen the dramatic changes to the workplace we saw in the 1960s after the introduction of birth control. In nations where women do not have access to BC they are not in the workforce in large numbers.

[skamic88]

@TobiasMurphy Pray tell, how does "NFP allow women to keep their dignity," whereas contraception does not. Keep in mind that NFP is a form of contraception (an ineffective one, but contraception none the less). Moreover please explain how the church is not misogynistic!

contraception - "the deliberate prevention of conception or impregnation by any of various drugs, techniques, or devices; birth control" (Dictionary com Unabridged).

[TobiasMurphy]

@skamic88

Not to reinvent the wheel (and for lack of space), Google "Humanae Vitae" for a basic answer. For more depth, read Karol Wojtyla's "Love and Responsibility," which describes the difference between love and use. In short, however, contraception divides sexual pleasure from the context of family and personal sexuality. NFP doesn't.

Also, keep in mind that the Church has the right to define her terms, especially since she speaks all languages. She defines contraception differently.

[skamic88]

@TobiasMurphy You can't separate either; to do so is to nullify everyone's love. You are overgeneralizing contraception. Seeing as how NFP is a behavioral method of birth control (semantics aside), they are one in the same. NFP and all contraception strive for the same ends. No mater how the AMA or the Church defines it.

Riddle me this, if a married couple uses birth control after they have completed their family is that "use"? How about using NFP to avoid ever having children, is that "use"?

[TobiasMurphy]

@skamic88

They don't always have the same ends, but it's true that they sometimes can. Nevertheless, having the same ends doesn't give them the same moral value (which would be called teleologism, see Veritatis Splendor #71-83). Christopher West addresses that issue in the other response I gave you. To answer your questions: 1. Artificial birth control violates God's plan and is never permissible. 2. NFP permits avoiding children "indefinitely" IF for "serious reasons," see Humanae Vitae.

[TobiasMurphy]

@skamic88

I could never do the position of the Church justice in this little box or even in a few pages (my shortest paper on this topic is 7 pages), but I did some searching for you. Now I'm not a Christopher West groupie, but google "God, Sex, & Babies:

What the Church Really Teaches about Responsible Parenthood." As for misogyny, the Church teach that men and women, in their great dignity, are complementary. Regarding NFP, it is not the rhythm method and FAR more effective.

[rtechie]

Birth control is often perscribed to teenage girls as a way to regulate menstruation and to reduce the cramps and associated discomfort. This is a "problem" and birth control is the solution.

Married women use birth control because they don't want large numbers of children. This is because they may want a career or to do other things than take care of babies. The Catholic Church doesn't care about this because it is avowedly misogynistic.

[TobiasMurphy]

I LOVE these videos. I'm wondering where these seminarians are from. I saw they had the Intercessors of the Lamb, who are in Omaha, but I was an Omaha seminarian and I don't recognize these guys.

[rtechie]

@TobiasMurphy

So those aren't your kids in your videos? I guess the priesthood didn't work for you. You probably wanted a real life instead.

I suspect these guys will make the same choice.

[ymsweet]

i don't understand why almost all of these videos have guys talking about contraception.

no matter what you believe contraception is the decision of a woman, and not all contraception is used for hook ups and meaningless sex.

[ushineon4me]

hes wearing a mike mangione shirt! cool! :)

[thomashamiltom]

youre music track is poor quality!

[discostooo]

You can't have a system that caters for every person in the world when there's so many variables in relationships.

That is why NFP and Contraceptives both are flawed and will never be 100% effective. The onus is on the individual and there decisions, simply providing contraceptives or NFP techniques lures people into a false sense of security that someone else has come up with a foolproof solution.

That is why this argument rages on, there's no one size fits all answer. Isn't that obvious?

[skamic88]

You're right, that is why there have been many advances in contraceptives over the years. American women have the the option of hormonal (pills, patches, rings, shots etc), barrier (condoms, sponges, spermicides etc ), and IUDs. Soon men will have even more options as science progresses. It seems almost foolish to rely solely on ineffective behavioral methods. Yes, some behavioral methods can work; however they require more "technology" and practices then "NFP."

[discostooo]

Well there are more choices with contraception, but you can't do one or the other. What i mean is, the perfect solution is probably to use your common sense beforehand. Everyone can gain from NFP and contraception if they use their heads. Although catholics appear to shut out one of their options completely, seems a bit foolish.

Oh wait, no its not, more babies = more catholics. Makes sense now.

[skamic88]

Well put!

[asdowney]

hey thanks!! just watched all the short films- good on you guys! AND very clever!! rep. Piopio St Mary's

God bless

[ZoeyK86]

Natural Family Planning RULES!

[ShawnaDavid2007]

I just watched all your videos, they're great! Keep up the good work and try not to get discouraged by the "haters". Oh and I just read about you in an article in the CCL magazine, that's how I heard about the videos.

[jedirhythm]

Your misperception of diabetes is equally as bad as someone going into a church and praying to Ganesh. I SWEAR I'm not just blowing hot air. You really do look incredibly stupid because of video number 7.

I like you. I wish you would change it for your own sake. Your entire NFP series utterly looses its credibility because of number VII. Straighten that out, man.

PX! God bless

[jedirhythm]

Hey. I like the NFP series. It's great. But no. VII is incredibly stupid. Not stupid like, "that's not very clever or funny" stupid, but stupid like, "you're too stupid to remember to breathe without somebody reminding you" stupid.

It makes perfect sense for the contraception to come up with a crappy excuse. But why didn't NFP call him on it?

skamic88: diabetics rarely go into "shock" (whatever the hell that is). perhaps after drinking 6 fantas withOUT insulin...

[skamic88]

Hypoglycemia (shock) results from unchecked diabetes and sugar levels.

[MAugustineP]

Hypoglycemia results from low blood sugar levels. Not "unchecked" sugar levels. Unchecked usually means too much. Too much blood sugar is referred to as HyPERglycemia.

[skamic88]

Sorry, replace the o with an e. My point stays the same though. I was correcting jedirhythm when he said "diabetics rarely go into "shock" (whatever the hell that is). "

thank you for the correction

[HammerofHeretics]

Diabetics go into shock when their INSULIN levels get too high. The fastest and safest way to treat diabetic shock is to get sugar into the diabetic IMMEDIATELY. When the blood sugar of a diabetic gets too high they go into a diabetic coma. Of these two side effects of diabetes, insulin shock can kill a person, much, much faster.

[jedirhythm]

"diabetic shock" is a MADE UP term. A term to probably describe the MADE UP symptom that Julia Roberts' character experiences in Steel Magnolias. Holy shit, you people are ignorant. shut up already. if you don't know what the fuck you are talking about then please just shut the fuck up already. I shouldn't have to tell you that.

[jedirhythm]

also notice that "diabetic shock" appears in neither WebMD nor wikipedia

[HammerofHeretics]

I was trained as both a nursing assistant and an EMT, and the term is "insulin shock" not "diabetic shock." Further, it is no more a made up term than the term "heart attack. " You obviously have no idea what you're talking about and you are only making a fool of yourself now.

[jedirhythm]

Your 1st comment was a reply to my comment which was a reply to someone else's comment which used the overly used, made up term "diabetic shock". sorry. thought you were following that. Still. your 1st comment was pretty stupid to think I needed that clarified. maybe you were just explaining that for the general public???????????? have a nice life, Pillow of Heretics.

[swwaddell]

Sakmic, I see that you are completely out of ammunition. God bless you and I will pray that you get on the right side of this issue. I think you know in your heart that contraception is fundamentally dehumanizing.

[skamic88]

Out of ammunition how so?

I know my own heart better then you do, I know what is the 'right side' of this issue! Thank you though but I don't need your prayers.

And how is contraception dehumanizing?

[fearawen]

Very nice analogy!  These commercials of yours are refreshing.

[swwaddell]

This isn't really that complicated. The video is not a exposition of hormones, proper treatment of various forms of diabetes, etc. It's about the absudity of pouring chemicals into one's body that are not necessary.

[skamic88]

First of all, I was being facetious.

Their facts about diabetes were completely off! Their facts about birth control are completely off! There facts of nfp are also off!

What's truly absurd are the unwanted children born to irresponsible, and unready parents every minuet!

(If you're that worried about unnecessary chemicals, then stop breathing in atmospheric nitrogen NO2)

[skamic88]

were they trying to draw a parallel because insulin is a hormone and so is progesterone? Or trying to drop hints about "pop" progesterone only pill.

Diabetes is excessive amounts of glucose in the blood; so drinking a fanta might put him into shock. Therefore drinking that would only make it worse.

[skamic88]

I thought that doctors had to abide by the hippocratic oath and do no harm, not tell them to drink orange pop and kill themselves. Diabetics need to carry a shot of insulin incase their blood sugar spiked.

[batteddy]

I think the point was that doctors sometimes prescribe the pill for various non-birth control reasons. That doesnt mean that it's good for people without those excuses, nor even necessary for people with them when there are alternatives.

[skamic88]

The only off label non-birth control use is for treatment of Menorrhagia (heavy periods). Now look at the "alternative" which is a hysterectomy or other alterations endometrium rendering the woman infertile.

[batteddy]

No. Doctors give it, or at least used to, also for stuff as trivial as to clear up your skin.

[skamic88]

Actually they can't "give it." They would lose to much money. But yes you are right some people with bad acne might seek it out for this reason, but I personally do not know anyone who has gone on the pill just for that. the primary reason is the intended reason... BIRTH CONTROL

[batteddy]

Exactly. That's the point of the video. Pro-pill people will often say, "Well, there are other uses like acne" (trust me, I've argued with many of them)...but in reality, no one is doing it for that. People may make that excuse, but they're all really doing it for the contraception.

[skamic88]

Alright, so to sum that up; people use birth control as... birth control? Wow, who would have thought of that one? But the doctors are still prescribing birth control, for birth control, to people seeking birth control, and it just so happens to get rid of zits too.

I see nothing wrong with that!

[skamic88]

So betteddy, the video would have made a more compelling argument for you if he was saying i drink the pop cause it tastes good but it has sugar etc etc...

[batteddy]

It you do not believe artificial contraception is not immoral...of course you dont see anything wrong with that. And yet...why do so many pro-contraception people then try to make dumb little arguments about its use for acne??? If they're so confident in their beliefs, they wouldnt need to throw out deceptive false examples like that. They're not using it for the acne, they're using it for birth control...and yet everyone is winking and nudging and holding up it's alleged "other uses"...

[skamic88]

So betteddy, I'll reiterate, the primary only reason (that I have known) besides contraception is for menorrhagia.

[batteddy]

Well, exactly. Exactly. There are no other uses, just like it's silly to argue that soda is "good for" diabetics. And yet you will see people touting all sorts of other "medical" legitimizations of the pill as if that justifies it's existence. But it doesnt.

[skamic88]

Yes trying to stop a painful heavy period with something that won't permanently render the woman infertile is not another use...how?

Or desperate people with incurable acne, with anemia, or even ovarian cysts. No those are not other uses either!

Maybe it was a dermatologist who would recommend the pill. I personally think after all those years of med school he/she would know better then you and me put together!

[batteddy]

yes, but that's not the point. The point isnt about people who legitimately use it for other things. It's about claiming its use for other things only as a justificaiton for its use as contraception...which simply doesnt logically follow. It's like how medical marijuana is advocated by people who want to smoke pot even for totally non-medical reasons. It's a red herring and appeal to emotion, as its use for medical reasons doesnt have anything to do with justifying it as contraception.

[skamic88]

Yet the primary reason people are getting the medical marijuana is still to get stoned! Your answer just dose not jive.

So yes in studies, they have found that medical marijuana can ease pain from MS and other ailments, but those people are still getting high. Just like those who use the pill are using it as birth control.

All throughout high school I only knew one person who didn't use the pill for birth control, she used it to regulate her period.

[batteddy]

Exactly. Few people are really using it for alternative reasons, but many mention those reasons as if it justifies contraception, when that doesnt have anything do with anything. If you're using it as birth control, "It can be used to help acne or regulate a heavy period" doesnt justify anything. If you arent using it for that reason, if you're using it for contraception...argue in favor of contraception. Dont use indirect tactics by mentioning "other uses" when the real point is BC.

[batteddy]

That would be as silly as arguing that condoms are okay because they can be used as balloons or something like that. The legitimate uses of things dont justify the illegitimate uses. If you want to argue in favor of contraception...do so. Argue philosophically in favor of it. But it is deceptive to prey on weak minds by saying things like "Besides, the pill can be used for other medical things" in pro-contraception apologetics arguments. Because that is irrelevant when it comes to its main use!

[skamic88]

Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% in favor of contraception! But just like ibuprofen is both a fever reducer, pain killer, and anti-inflammatory pill. All 3 are medically relevant uses. Where as the birth control pill can also help with other conditions, and problems besides contraception.

[skamic88]

Betteddy you must remember that hormones have many roles in the body and can be medically useful for other things. It would be like yelling at someone for using ibuprofen to bring down a fever, instead of using it as a pain killer.

[skamic88]

See the point is, that hormones effect different tissues differently. With that in mind, the pill can have many other use implications if the hormones are useful.

[batteddy]

Yes. But other possible uses of the pill are irrelevant to the morality of contraception. Therefore, being irrelevant, pro-contraception apologists should not mention them in their arguments. But they invariably do for some reason. Which is illogical.

[skamic88]

So treating a painful disorder is irrelevant? Just because it is treating something different then contraception its moral. Dose the pill magically change its chemical make up? And yet it was you who was said " ...people touting all sorts of other "medical" legitimizations of the pill as if that justifies it's existence." Why flip-flop and say its now irrelevant?

Why is contraception so immoral? If you mention Onan or Genesis see my comments on NFP vs. Contraception I

[batteddy]

The pill as a mere chemical is obviously moraly neutral. It's the use that is going to determine its morality. Mentioning legitimate medical uses is irrelevant to its illegetimate use as contraception, and is just an appeal to emotion. It does not follow from the fact that the pill may have a valid use...that this somehow justifies using it for contraception, nor its original creation.

[skamic88]

Pills are often created that way. Viagra was a heart medication, before 1985 the drug MDMA was used by psychiatrists; first called empathy and now call ecstasy or E. Tamoxifen is mainly used to treat breast cancer, but also can be used to treat infertility, mania (in bipolar disorder). Lorazepam is used in severe anxiety sedative, treatment of insomnia, amnesic, anticonvulsant, and treating the nausea and vomiting from chemotherapy. Almost every drug has other uses other then the primary one

[batteddy]

And? What's the point of mentioning this? The whole point of the video is that everything can have other uses. That justify the bad uses.

[batteddy]

??? No. The other uses dont justify the bad uses. So why mention them as if it is somehow related to the morality of contraception. That's like saying that stabbing someone is okay just because a knife can be used to prepare delicious meals.

[skamic88]

So... why is birth control immoral?

If you're not going to quote the Bible, and you're going to ignore every time I ask; I don't think you can answer my question.

[batteddy]

i just did, see below

[batteddy]

And I'm certainly not going to quote the Bible to try to prove a moral point like this as that's a reversal of reasoning. The Bible provides support, but only once it's believed for more fundamental reasons. The reason contraception is immoral is not "because the Bible says so". Rather, the Bible says so BECAUSE it was already immoral and unnatural.

[skamic88]

Way to dodge the question.

I know you're not the best with questions, but why do you or the Bible or whatever/ whomever say its immoral and unnatural?

[batteddy]

Because the nature of sexuality is intrinsically connected with procreation. Sex has other ends, like the marital unitive end...but one cannot exclude the primary end without gravely perverting the nature of sex. That our culture has tried to abstract procreation away from sex as if they arent intrinsically bound up one to the other...is evil. And as these videos mention, pervert life-giving love into some sort of thing that can be seperated from its purpose.

[skamic88]

Very few creatures can draw pleasure from sex humans being one of them. It is ignorant to say that we humans should not enjoy this rare gift of sexual gratification! Marital unitiveness, if two people need sex to unite, need sex to love each other, need sex to be civil; then they should not have been married in the first place.

Another thing that is evil is destroying the Earth! Humans can be blamed for every environmental problem! Everything from habitat destruction to global warming.

[skamic88]

What is marriage anyway? Why do two people need a paper from the state to prove that they love each other? Church marriages have no legal standing, so what good is that? I find no merit in your marital argument. The sanctity of marriage went away with classist marriages for power and wealth, furthermore sanctity means nothing with all the failed marriages and anulments in the world!

[skamic88]

According to the University of Western Cape "...all moist tropical forest could be lost by the year 2050, except for isolated areas in Amazonia, the Zaire basin, as well as a few protected areas within reserves and parks." According to NASA " although deforestation meets some human needs, it also has profound, sometimes devastating, consequences, including social conflict, extinction of plants and animals, and climate change—challenges that aren't just local, but global."

[swwaddell]

The consequences of "correct" condom use in the mundane sense are the reduction of the marital act to mutual masturbation. The other consequences are if they should fail (and yes, I have no problem conceeding that it is not often.) What of it? Marriage-->sex--> children. It's only complicated if one wants it to be.

[JamaicaGR10]

What are the consequences of correct condom use?

[skamic88]

It takes a total of 15 seconds?

15 seconds that could have gone into some baby making!

[thealphacrow]

Brilliant analogy!!!

[urbanh196398105]

Thanks for making another video!

[paulus1027]

Glad to see another one! Good job, guys.