(In response to this post)
Whenever I see someone spreading lies about contraception and abortion, I sate my rage by getting my CC out. Marc and his bullshit made me up my monthly donation to abortion funds.
Did anyone else see the comments section of the other post? Looks like the catholics swarmed it.
I’m sure the 1flesh supporters will be over here too when they notice this post.
The comments in that thread only reinforce my belief that they have paid narcissists to attack and drown out any criticisms of their bullshit. Post anything criticizing the catholic church on the internet and sooner or later the drones will show up.
The funny thing that unlike around here there’s absolutely no discussion going on on badcatho blog. All you read in the comments is stuff like “Oh marc, how great you are for writing stuff about skyfairy” in various forms and then they start blessing stuff all around and hail to the magic man in the sky….
On the bright side, it looks like 1flesh wasn’t smart enough to disable comments on their YouTube videos. Check out the comments in their channel: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NRyiyIKwG8
Lol. “It doesn’t pay attention to that particular woman’s needs, it just reduces all women to the same cycle.” …then why are there so many different types of bc pills with different balances of hormones?
Don’t you know, there’s only one pill. The Pill.
I always have to pause a bit when someone refers to hormonal contraception as The Pill. It’s like uhm…are you not aware of the plethora of options? You just have to wonder when we’ve got people like Limbaugh talking about birth control like it’s something you pop every time you do the deed.
Apparently medicines that treat the symptoms are bad. So screw you pain killers!!!!
Must be some sort of talking point they learn in church. One of the Catholic trolls made the exact same “argument” in the other thread.
I’m sure that my diabetic parents will be surprised to learn that taking insulin or sulfonylureas medications is wrong and their doctors are hacks for prescribing these medications, because they merely treat the symptoms of diabetes, they don’t cure it.
every sperm is sacred: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0kJHQpvgB8
I get so confused about their logic. If you have sex and use birth control, you’re withholding part of yourself from the other person. Okay…but what about abstinence? Isn’t that withholding a lot more? In marriage, you should be giving all of yourself to the other person, not just during sex. Abstinence within marriage is denying your partner quite a bit of yourself. I don’t get why that’s okay when birth control isn’t. They mock the idea that birth control keeps you from giving yourself completely, but then they support abstinence which withholds completely. And in the end, it’s the same thing. Birth control is about having sex without the negative consequences. But so is NFP! If withholding your reproductive ability is a sin, then Catholics should be having sex whenever they are most likely to get pregnant.
There’s a kind of hypocrisy here, isn’t there? It reminds me of the orthodox Jews who will use timers and other technology to get things done on the sabbath. These people- Catholics and Jews alike- are so focused on the word of the law that they completely overlook its spirit.
I think refusing to turn on a stove on Saturday or refusing to use birth control are silly positions… but if you believe these things on personal moral grounds, it’s simply unethical to then seek out loopholes.
Not all God-believers, even those who practice abstinence UNTIL marriage, are opposed to birth control within marriage, btw. I grew up in church and I never heard that “birth control = withholding yourself” before! I agree–if that’s the standard, the logic is very bizarre. (Or . . . just not logic.)
That said, I disagree that 1 Flesh is wrong. Just maybe in that above understanding.
Correct on the first paragraph. Most American women use some form of contraceptive, even those whose religious persuasion teaches against it. Last figure I saw, 95% of American women use contraceptives. The figure for Catholic women was about 90%.
Actually, the real statistic is that 95% of women over a certain age (I think it was 40 or so) will have used some form of contraception at least once during their life, not that 95% of women use it regularly. This includes women who use hormonal birth contraception for purposes other than birth control.
Well other denominations of Christianity usually don’t have a problem with birth control (or at least it isn’t as big of a deal to them). For Catholics, it is a big issue that their church has an official position on. I had never heard of it either until my Catholic (ex)boyfriend mentioned that if we got married, we would have to be ready to have kids right away because we wouldn’t be using birth control. My response: “What????”
Yeahhhh . . . definitely need to be on the same page with that one!
On the ethics of birth control, they are not wrong, because that is a matter of values only. People can disagree. But they are substantially wrong on many matters of fact, such as the efficacy of different methods, statistics on safety, statistics on abortion, and numerous other points.
There was a person over there that was trying to say that did not use NFP was different than contraception because they did not use “NFP with a contraceptive mentality.”
Exactly what they say. But any rational person would argue that by abstaining during fertile periods intentionally requires a contraceptive mentality. Otherwise you wouldn’t be doing that.
One of the requirements (according to Catholic doctrine) for sex to be a “mortal sin” is that your INTENTION is not procreative. I think sex is to be 1) marital 2) communal and 3) procreative. It must be all three things at the same time in order not be sinful. Whether using a condom or NFP, you are “intending” not to be procreative, whether you end up pregnant or not. As far as I’m concerned, if you believe in mortal sins, NFP doesn’t erase this “contraceptive mentality” no matter what stupid excuse they give. It’s not a logical one.
I say condoms for all!
But NFP is “open to life!” UNTIL you’re talking about success/failure rates, then it’s the most successful means of contraception.
Exactly. I brought that up with somebody in the other post. Being “open to life” is a state of mind, and I’ve known more than just a few people using traditional contraception (probably poorly) who were thrilled (after shock, of course :)) with unintended pregnancies. I’ve also known non-birth control users (not even NFP) who were NOT.
But if NFP is so successful (so they say) and they are proud that it prevents pregnancy so well, well, ummm… ??? It’s just weird “logic.”
There is no “contraceptive mentality”. It doesn’t exist. NFP users like to believe that when they have sex while avoiding pregnancy, they are good and holy for doing so, but when someone else has sex using a different method (and let’s stick to barrier methods for now, to avoid the whole abortafacient argument), they’re bad and evil and using this so-called “contraceptive mentality”. They will go on to claim that if they get pregnant anyway, they will be thrilled and happy and full of joy, but if the other couple gets pregnant, they will absolutely always go get an abortion.
It is such a load of hypocrisy! I found a site where a Catholic outlined the logical fallacies of NFP and anti birth control sentiments:
I thought it was pretty good at spelling out the things that most of us already know.
They use this idea that you withhold something of yourself from your partner if you use birth control as some sort of FACT, but they don’t have any idea what this something is.
I really think they worship the human body. Like, in a literal sense.
They think semen is an aphrodisiac and that condoms are bad because you’re not touching your partner’s genitals with your own. They think that NFP is great because it’ll make couples talk to each other more, but what you’re talking about is where you are on your cycle. (Is that more important than the books you read, the ideas you have, and the stuff that happened to you that day?) They think that because women can give birth, it is their purpose.
They think that the heteronormative depiction of the sex act in which the man is “active” and the woman is “receptive” mirrors the relationship between God and the universe—that’s right, they think God is, symbolically, a male-bodied entity that can ejaculate.
So what you’re “withholding” is, literally, body parts/bodily products. Which, by this logic, are more important than love.
Um. Logic. You say, “Abstinence within marriage is denying your partner quite a bit of yourself” – so any time a person is not making love with their spouse they are denying them quite a bit of themself? When one spouse is in the shower, or at work, or taking the dog for a walk, and therefore abstaining from sex, they’re “denying their partner quite a bit of themself”? Couples abstain from sex on any given night for all sorts of reasons – does that mean they’re denying their love? You seem to suggest that is the case… illogical much?
Not every abstinent moment, but prolonged abstinence when both people would much prefer to be having sex. I don’t actually think that being abstinent is the same as denying love, but I’m saying that if Catholics believe using birth control is denying love because you’re giving less of yourself, abstinence is definitely denying love. With Catholic logic, you could easily make the case that abstinence within marriage is worse than birth control. With birth control, you are “withholding” pregnancy from your partner, but you can still enjoy each other’s bodies just fine. With abstinence, you are withholding the physical aspect of your relationship, along with withholding pregnancy from your partner…How is that better? Also, you and I both know that abstaining while you’re doing your day-to-day routine isn’t the same as *abstinence*. After all, it’s much easier to be “abstinent” after you’ve just had sex and when you know you’ll get more in a day or two than if you have to abstain for 7-10 days. Wow, and no masturbation or oral sex either. Don’t you think it’s time for the church to get out of your bedroom?
Of course, at its root this has very little to do with contraception at all. The focus on birth control really just masks a belief that runs deep in all Christian sects, back to the beginning, that sex is a bad thing, something to be tolerated under the narrowest of conditions (procreation), and never enjoyed. And while the Catholics and others have pretended to modernize, suggesting that enjoyment is acceptable (again within narrow bounds), their position on birth control, on celibacy in their leaders and the slaves of their leaders, on marriage, and many other issues clearly points to the fact that this is all about something they consider fundamentally nasty: sex.
The failure of most Christian sects to recognize the fundamental human nature of sex as a social behavior, disconnected from procreation, from marriage, from gender, is an instrumental element in the move of today’s youth away from Christianity. So ultimately, the puritanical conservatism of most Christian sects is a positive thing for society.
Preferring or needing an alternative activity is not abstinence.
“Um. Logic” lol
Don’t forget: married heterosexual PIV sex is the best thing ever UNTIL we’re talking about NFP, in which case it’s like eating junk food 24-7 and you need to practice self-control.
Julie, As a Catholic, I might be able to shed some light on this. We believe that sex is a very, very good thing– as close to Heaven as we can get on this earth, because to us, it points to eternal happiness. Because of this, it is a gift that cannot be given halfheartedly– in order to fulfill its intrinsic good, it must be given with no holds barred.
Think of it this way: say you have an iPad that you’re considering giving away to someone. You have a few options. You can keep it for yourself, which is a morally neutral act. You can take out a few key bits of hardware so that the person doesn’t get to use the entire iPad properly, which is morally objectionable. Finally, you could give the iPad to the person in its entirety as a selfless act, which is morally good.
For us, sex works in a similar manner. We believe there is a right way to give that gift, but witholding the gift is not an evil unto itself.
Abstinence as general method is much different than NFP. Yes with NFP there are time you don’t have sex but more often you can have sex. When you do have sex using NFP you hold nothing back. You’re not denying you spouse anything. It’s not as though couples are going long periods of time, it’s a matter of days.
Also you seem to cite pregnancy as a negative thing. Like another human being is a detriment to society. This is an essential difference in mindset. People who use NFP are completely open to life (or at least that’s how Catholics should be and they are the main users). This is not, however to say they have to be so they are okay with accidents. NFP methods are 95%-99% effective (depending on how you choose to track your fertility). Seeing a baby as a negative thing is like playing a sport because you like it and then being discouraged with the benefits it gives your body. The two go together. Nature is oriented to have one lead to another.
The only downside I could see to using NFP is if people cannot exercise a small amount of patience and cave to every craving of their body. Does your mind rule your body or your body rule your mind? NFP users let their mind rule them. Something that, again, Catholics understand well. Just as a person who succumbs to every craving for chocolate or any other food is ruled by their body and not their mind so is a person who wants sex now and cannot wait a few days.
And I would also not say that you are withholding your reproductive ability if you are having sex. You are using that ability, but you are wrongfully changing or stopping it.
And a last few AWESOME things about NFP over any other method, even outside of a moral sense. -Aside from the potential cost of classes, it free. Whether you have sex ten times or 300 times the cost is the same as is the amount of waste. -You don’t pump crap loads of hormones into anyone’s body. -You don’t have to touch any gross lubricated latex especially one filled with specimen.
Faithful Catholic apologists are forming an alliance with the “poz pigs” who cruise the bathhouse scene. That’s hilarious, in a tragic sort of way!
>Often claims that AIDS came from gay people >Promotes unsafe sex
You could right a goddamn book on everything contradictory about religion.
1Flesh sounds like a cheap sex toy.
I got banned from their Facebook page. Ugh. I’m glad that their bullshit has been brought to the attention of the atheist internet brigade, though. I was shocked at your first post but seeing their page flooded with actual science and truth was so reassuring. Thank you, guys! Keep it up!
1Flesh is the scariest crap I have read in a while. Meanwhile, I have students who can’t figure out why they keep getting pregnant (or keep getting girls pregnant).
Safe sex? What are you going to do when it’s you who breaks the condom? It’s a thin piece of rubber for God’s sake, not superman’s sock. it only makes sense that condoms break so how could they truly ever be used for “safe sex”?
Condoms usually break because they aren’t used properly, which is a failure of education more than anything else. Most condoms break because the package wasn’t opened properly which can result in a small tear, or because the wrong type of lubrication (oil based) was used which weakens the rubber.
Other failures are those of usage. Some people don’t squeeze the tip when putting it on, which can cause a rupture when the man ejaculates. Other times, if the woman is putting it on the man, she’s already touched his penis and contaminates the condom, before any sort of genital-genital contact has been made.
Most people don’t know to do certain things when putting it on: First, open the package properly, by gently squishing it into one side of the package and then tearing down the other edge. Second, don’t use an oil-based lube. Third, don’t put it on with a hand that’s already touched the penis. Fourth, squeeze the reservoir at the tip with the fingers of one hand while applying it with another.
If those guidelines are followed, the risks are significantly reduced. The relative rates of becoming pregnant or contracting an STD are roughly equal, between 85 and 90%. So while the term “safe sex” may be something of a misnomer, it cannot be argued that condom usage definitely results in safer sex.