Ask a Catholic

[Dystopia]

Randy, I'm reading the article and this reply serves the purpose of commentary (and asking a few questions) - If you wish you can reply.

Being a faithful Catholic couple does not mean you must have an unlimited number of children. The Catechism of the Catholic Churchallows that there are times when spouses “may wish to space the births of their children” using “a method of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods” (CCC 2368, 2370).

The obvious question - Why does God prefer one birth control method to another? Technically, any birth control method, as long as it is properly applied, can have satisfactory results - So why the preference for natural forms of birth control?

When I became a Catholic I didn’t know anything about this method, often called natural family planning. I found out that modern methods of NFP are highly effective when followed correctly—equally as effective as the contraceptive pill, according to a 2007 report published in Europe’s leading reproductive medical journal, Human Reproduction. And they are easier to use than ever due to modern developments such as a small hand-held device that detects changes in temperature, urine, or saliva to help determine times of fertility.

As for artificial birth control improving marriages, a number of women I talked to who have recently started using NFP instead of the Pill enthused about how their marriages have become much more of a loving partnership. Yes, using NFP requires self-discipline, commitment, and open communication from a couple, but don’t those sound like the very qualities that would be helpful in a mature, loving relationship?

It is effective, the issue is that it only occurs in certain periods and sexual libido may not be coincident with those - You do realize that is a problem, right? Using this logic, I could easily point out that abstinence is the perfect birth control method - Except that couples can't copulate, and they want to.

Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised to learn that couples using NFP have a dramatically low divorce rate—less than one percent (“National Survey of Family Growth” by Dr. Robert Lerner, University of Chicago, 2000). In society at large, the divorce rate has skyrocketed since the 1960s, which flies in the face of the assertion that the use of artificial birth control has been a boon to marriages.

It has been postulated in a few studies that our high divorce rates are partly because couples now are able to delay parenthood and have fewer children. The experience of parenthood generally has a maturing effect and strengthens marriages. Besides being a unifying source of love and pride for couples, it causes them to become more responsible and less focused on their own needs.

- Low divorce rates doesn't mean anything, and the reasons divorces have increased are due to a number of variables such as the emancipation of women and the lack of social prejudice against those who divorce. This is a huge fallacy. If I lived in a society where my wife is my property and I refused her divorce proposal, in theory this would mean low divorce rate.

- The experience of parenthood prevents divorces because of economic and social reasons - Most parents do what is best for their children, and not what they really want to do. The only reason my parents didn't divorce earlier was because of me.

Does having more siblings than the average family “handicap” children? Studies have shown, in fact, that due to the increased sibling connection, children from large families have better social skills (Journal of Marriage and Family, Ohio State University, May 2004), do better at school (Family Composition and Children’s Educational Outcomes, Institute for Social and Economic Research, 2001) and grow up feeling more emotionally supported (Sibling Relationships Across the Lifespan, University of Utah, 1982). These studies and others have shown that children in large families naturally develop skills to negotiate and accommodate, are more independent and self-sufficient as young adults, and are more resilient in coping with life’s stresses.

But it costs money. And time. And resources.

In 1973, the year abortion was legalized in the U.S. and statistics were first gathered, there were approximately 615,000 abortions performed (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Abortion Surveillance statistics). That annual number has increased substantially since then, reaching a peak in 1990 at 1.4 million. Why is this? With easier access to contraceptives, shouldn’t there be fewer unplanned pregnancies and therefore fewer abortions?

It is natural that when something is legalised more people do it, specially those who didn't do it before because they were afraid of going to jail. Not to mention abortion happens for a lot of reasons like sexual assault, disability, etc. I don't see what is the problem, have you ever wondered that some people may not be able to afford contraceptives? Or maybe, just maybe, they're not educated enough?

The answers are complex. The number of men and women who, from their teen years, became sexually active outside of marriage increased dramatically since the early 1960s. Pregnancy became seen as something under our control because of the availability of contraceptives, and there was a subtle shift in how children were viewed—not so much as “gifts from God” but as either inconveniences or, conversely, trophies. Nowadays, if an unplanned pregnancy occurs when contraceptives are not used correctly or not used at all, the first reaction for many is to terminate the “problem.” Attitudes toward the sacredness of life are much more cavalier, and abortion is now seen by many as merely another option in a range of reproductive rights.

If you mean sexually active without signing the papers - yes, I don't see the issue - If God condones love and affection, why shouldn't he allow for the greatest demonstration of love?

The ascendancy of pornography, which is filtering into mainstream media, is an assault on the well-being of women. From a very young age, girls are subjected to the pressure of conforming to the “norm” of no-strings sex and promiscuous behavior as projected in the movies, TV shows, and magazines all around them. All this has helped to solidify the image of women as sex objects. The huge numbers of young females being forced into prostitution around the world, and the high rates of sexual abuse of girls and women even in our own country, cast a dark shadow on the hoped-for benefits of sexual liberation kindled by the accessibility of contraceptives.

Please Catholics, don't pull the feminist argument. So it is suddenly ok to make a very rational exposure of problems with women's rights but when it comes to abortion and gender roles it's according to God's will?

Current statistics on the number of single mothers living in poverty contradict the belief that women’s lives would improve substantially with the advent of artificial birth control. From 1960 to 2000, the proportion of children in single-parent families headed by females has more than tripled in Europe and North America, and many studies have shown that coming from single-parent families plays a major role in the persistence of poverty. Even though more women are in the workforce than ever before, government statistics show that poverty rates among women are increasing.

That's because Europe is living in a crisis - Or because there's social pressure from certain groups of people to not abort and women are forced to have children they don't want to.