Original Sin?

If you use the pill exactly as prescribed it can cause you harm. If you use alcohol in moderation it is not bad for you, in fact wasn't there some studies that showed red wine is good for you as long as you don't go crazy. So the Church is against the abuse of alcohol because that is bad for your health. It is also against the use of the pill because even using it as its own directions say, it is bad for you.

Quote: Dalex64

Which of these is false:
When used correctly, natural family planning is 100% effective.
Natural family Planning is the only acceptable way for non-abstenant married catholics to avoid unwanted pregnancies, because it leaves open the possibility of conception.

It looks like a trick question because they are both false.

In the first case NFP can be 100% effective if you have sex during the infertile period of the month, the trick is of course knowing for sure when that fertile period begins and ends. This and human error are the only reasons the method is not 100% effective.

NFP is not morally acceptable because it leaves open the possibility of conception, even artificial contraceptive methods are not 100% effective, it is morally acceptable because it is a natural way to plan your family and encourages communication between spouses and doesn't in any way put barriers up chemical or physical to the mutual gift of self in the marriage act.

Quote: FrGamble

If you use the pill exactly as prescribed it can cause you harm. If you use alcohol in moderation it is not bad for you, in fact wasn't there some studies that showed red wine is good for you as long as you don't go crazy. So the Church is against the abuse of alcohol because that is bad for your health. It is also against the use of the pill because even using it as its own directions say, it is bad for you.

If you use the pill exactly as prescribed, it can do you good. For instance, it helps prevent certain cancers. See how easy and disingenuous it is to cherry-pick your facts?

It should be obvious that if the pill had no benefits, no one would use it.

Also, the church is not against using the pill, it is only against using it as a contraceptive.

Quote: FrGamble

If you use the pill exactly as prescribed it can cause you harm. .

It also is very good for a multitude of
women, like my daughter. What a
feeble attempt to defend a drug,
alcohol, that has ruined countless
lives and broken up countless
families. The truth is what I've been
saying all along. The Church is
against most forms of BC because
it reduces the number of new Catholics.
You aren't fooling anybody, 98%
of Catholic women ignore you poor
sex deprived men who are trying
to run their sex lives for them. They
know what a blessing the pill is,
they aren't fooled by your chicanery.

Quote: Dalex64

If you use the pill exactly as prescribed, it can do you good. For instance, it helps prevent certain cancers. See how easy and disingenuous it is to cherry-pick your facts?

Yes, I hope you do see how disingenuous you are being by ignoring the fact that while it can been seen to protect from some cancers it can cause others. It also can cause depression and lowers the sex drive. Does it really matter to you which cancer you get?

Quote:

It should be obvious that if the pill had no benefits, no one would use it.

It does have one obvious benefit for some people and that is in preventing pregnancy. However, the question is why take the risks that come with the pill when a natural, healthy, alternative exists?

Quote:

Also, the church is not against using the pill, it is only against using it as a contraceptive.

True, there are some cases, like the one Evenbob mentioned when it can be used to eliminate painful cramps and such when no other medicine can do the trick. However, if some other medication could do what the pill could do for someone wouldn't you recommend taking the medication with less serious side effects?

Quote: Evenbob

What a
feeble attempt to defend a drug,
alcohol, that has ruined countless
lives and broken up countless
families.

Believe me I am not defending alcohol and I would happily join you in condemning the abuse of alcohol which produces all the disastrous effects you mention. However I hope you can see that a glass of wine with dinner will not hurt you but taking the pill will.

Quote:

The truth is what I've been
saying all along.....

Why do you continue to claim to have the truth and an authoritative knowledge of things you know absolutely nothing about.

Quote: FrGamble

a glass of wine with dinner will not hurt you but taking the pill will. .

Alcohol is exactly like the pill. A certain
% of people will abuse alcohol and a %
of women will have adverse effects
from the pill. The difference being,
the Church is totally against one, and
is ambivalent about the other. This
only leads to one conclusion. The
reason they are against the pill is
not because of health issues, that's
just the convenient excuse. The pill
gets in the way of producing more
little Catholics and we can't have
that, can we.

Quote: FrGamble

In the first case NFP can be 100% effective if you have sex during the infertile period of the month, the trick is of course knowing for sure when that fertile period begins and ends. This and human error are the only reasons the method is not 100% effective.

There is a set of infinite numbers between 0% and 100%. How far below 100% does this non-method fall? I keep getting figures like 92%. As contraception goes, this is abysmal.

Quote:

NFP is not morally acceptable because it leaves open the possibility of conception, even artificial contraceptive methods are not 100% effective, it is morally acceptable because it is a natural way to plan your family and encourages communication between spouses and doesn't in any way put barriers up chemical or physical to the mutual gift of self in the marriage act.

So using the chemical the body produces to prevent conception is unnatural how exactly? And how do things like the pill, condoms, sponges, diaphragms, Norplant or IUDs prevent a couple from communicating? I foresee a Nobel in medicine if you can just find the mechanism, you don't even have to explain it.

This quote is straight from the catechism of the
Church. The whole piece goes into detail about
why every form of BC, even the man pulling
out of the woman before he ejaculates, is evil
and an affront to god. This is some truly sick stuff,
folks. Not once does it mention that health is
the reason not to use BC. Nobody can read this
and not realize the Church wants one thing, for
there to be as many new Catholics born as is
humanly possible.

http://www.catechism.cc/articles/QA.htm#09

"Contraception deprives the sexual act of its procreative meaning, thereby causing the contracepted sexual act to be intrinsically evil and always gravely immoral. Since the use of contraception is intrinsically evil, no intention and no circumstance can justify its use. Intrinsically evil is always immoral, even with good intentions, even in dire circumstances. The use of contraception, even by married persons, is always gravely immoral.. Contracepted acts of natural intercourse are intrinsically evil because they are non-procreative."

I can't take it anymore!!! That is not from the Catechism at all. I covered this with Dalex when he first posted the link. It is from a kind of off the wall dude who prophecies that the end of the world is coming in 2437 and that Hillary will be president. He also has some other things that are strange and from the quote you gave it seems he has a obsession with calling things evil.

Since you probably won't read it here is the only section that mentions contraceptives in the real Catechism (find it at Vatican.va or usccb.org):

Conjugal fidelity
2364 The married couple forms "the intimate partnership of life and love established by the Creator and governed by his laws; it is rooted in the conjugal covenant, that is, in their irrevocable personal consent."146 Both give themselves definitively and totally to one another. They are no longer two; from now on they form one flesh. the covenant they freely contracted imposes on the spouses the obligation to preserve it as unique and indissoluble.147 "What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder."148
2365 Fidelity expresses constancy in keeping one's given word. God is faithful. the Sacrament of Matrimony enables man and woman to enter into Christ's fidelity for his Church. Through conjugal chastity, they bear witness to this mystery before the world.
St. John Chrysostom suggests that young husbands should say to their wives: I have taken you in my arms, and I love you, and I prefer you to my life itself. For the present life is nothing, and my most ardent dream is to spend it with you in such a way that we may be assured of not being separated in the life reserved for us.... I place your love above all things, and nothing would be more bitter or painful to me than to be of a different mind than you.149
The fecundity of marriage
2366 Fecundity is a gift, an end of marriage, for conjugal love naturally tends to be fruitful. A child does not come from outside as something added on to the mutual love of the spouses, but springs from the very heart of that mutual giving, as its fruit and fulfillment. So the Church, which "is on the side of life"150 teaches that "each and every marriage act must remain open 'per se' to the transmission of life."151 "This particular doctrine, expounded on numerous occasions by the Magisterium, is based on the inseparable connection, established by God, which man on his own initiative may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage act."152
2367 Called to give life, spouses share in the creative power and fatherhood of God.153 "Married couples should regard it as their proper mission to transmit human life and to educate their children; they should realize that they are thereby cooperating with the love of God the Creator and are, in a certain sense, its interpreters. They will fulfill this duty with a sense of human and Christian responsibility."154
2368 A particular aspect of this responsibility concerns the regulation of procreation. For just reasons, spouses may wish to space the births of their children. It is their duty to make certain that their desire is not motivated by selfishness but is in conformity with the generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood. Moreover, they should conform their behavior to the objective criteria of morality:
When it is a question of harmonizing married love with the responsible transmission of life, the morality of the behavior does not depend on sincere intention and evaluation of motives alone; but it must be determined by objective criteria, criteria drawn from the nature of the person and his acts criteria that respect the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love; this is possible only if the virtue of married chastity is practiced with sincerity of heart.155
2369 "By safeguarding both these essential aspects, the unitive and the procreative, the conjugal act preserves in its fullness the sense of true mutual love and its orientation toward man's exalted vocation to parenthood."156
2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality.157 These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" is intrinsically evil:158
Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality.... the difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.159
2371 "Let all be convinced that human life and the duty of transmitting it are not limited by the horizons of this life only: their true evaluation and full significance can be understood only in reference to man's eternal destiny."160
2372 The state has a responsibility for its citizens' well-being. In this capacity it is legitimate for it to intervene to orient the demography of the population. This can be done by means of objective and respectful information, but certainly not by authoritarian, coercive measures. the state may not legitimately usurp the initiative of spouses, who have the primary responsibility for the procreation and education of their children.161 It is not authorized to intervene in this area with means contrary to the moral law.