Expert Answer Forum
NFP followup QUESTION from Dave April 14, 2000
Your answer didn't really answer my question. I fear we'll have to agree to disagree on this topic. I maintain that it is horrifically delusional for a couple to attend NFP classes, learn how to chart menstrual cycles, cervical positions, and do mucous measurements - all with an intentional desire to vastly reduce the odds of getting pregnant; and at the same time hold the belief that they are truly open to pregnancy. With all due respect, this is a ludicrous position. When a man has sex with the knowledge that his odds of conceiving are less than one in ten thousand, the act essentially becomes masturbation. The couple might as well be using the pill. Either way, it reduces to Onanism - it is an intentional waste of sperm. Again, if a couple is truly open to children, NFP would certainly not be practiced!(right??) How can you say with a straight face that truly open can mean truly open to less than a one in ten thousand chance of conception.?? How can you claim that NFP is morally different than the pill? Both methods are intellectual exploitations of our knowledge of a woman's reproductive system whereby a couple intentionally reduces the chance of conception to near zero. Condoms employ a physical barrier, pills a chemical barrier, and NFP an intellectual barrier. Nevertheless they are all barriers and as such are COMPLETELY contradictory to the idea of true openness. And while I'm at it, there is nothing natural about doing mucous measurements! Perhaps these contradictory views are held because the barrier in NFP is intellectual. The couple doesn't see any pill or plastic. I guess they would take the position that an airplane is truly open to falling, by being unable to see the atmosphere or by being ignorant of physics. This, despite that people do everything in their power to design airplanes that do not crash. Which of course means the obvious - airplanes are not truly open to crashing. None of the passengers, assuming their sanity, are open to crashing either. On the other hand, perhaps NFP couples believe they are truly open to pregnancy because they really, truly want to engage in sex. People delude themselves all the time with ideas that will allow them to rationalize the sex act. But, as I pointed out earlier, NFP reduces to Onanism and is a sin. But, hey, if the Church condones it, what the heck, right? If you are not able or willing to answer my questions directly, I would appreciate it if you could refer me to someone who can. Thanks, Dave ANSWER by Mr. John Miskell on April 14, 2000 P>Dear Dave, I already answered your question in considerable detail but you're evidently unwilling to accept it. Something that I failed to mention in my response to you is that in addition to all the stated reasons against the use of artificial birth control, there are some other compelling reasons to not use these methods; 1. The pill is a KNOWN CARCINOGEN. 2. The pill causes the blood to CLOT which has caused many women using the pill to suffer HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE, CYCLE IRREGULARITIES, STROKES, HEART ATTACKS, PULMONARY EMBOLISM AND SUDDEN BLINDNESS. 3. At least 20% of the time the pill FAILS TO PREVENT OVULATION. Because of this the pill also works as an ABORTIFACIENT, causing millions of early abortions in unsuspecting women. 4. For those who use the pill for long periods of time, these potentially deadly side-effects remain for up to 10 years AFTER THEY STOP TAKING THEM.
5. Fully HALF of the women taking the pill STOP TAKING THEM WITHIN THE FIRST YEAR BECAUSE OF ADVERSE SIDE-EFFECTS. 6. More American women die each year because of side-effects from the pill than all the people COMBINED who die in fires each year. Every October is Fire Prevention Month - when will we have a Pill Awareness Month? Even when they do work correctly, we have someone taking a pill that tricks her body into thinking it's pregnant in an attempt to prevent ovulation. The result is a young woman who is constantly feeling the symptoms of early pregnancy such as breast tenderness, moodiness, morning sickness, low sex-drive, etc... and society tells her that because of the pill she's a LIBERATED woman! Huh! All of the above mentioned side-effects were taken from the Physicians' Desk Reference. In addition to those mentioned the PDR says;
The following adverse effects have been experienced by women on the Pill: Headaches, migraines, mental depression (even to the point of suicide and/or suicidal tendencies), a decrease or loss of sexual drive, abdominal cramps, bloating, weight gain or loss, and water retention; nausea and vomiting (in about 10% of users); symptoms of PMS, vaginitis and vaginal infections, changes in vision (temporary or permanent blindness, and an intolerance to contact lenses); gall bladder disease and either temporary or permanent infertility, when discontinuing the Pill, in users with previous menstrual irregularities or who began the drug before full maturity. Several of the symptoms, such as migraine headaches, contraindicate the use of the Pill because of life endangering complications. Good deal eh? And incidentally, doing mucous measurements is about as unnatural as doing blood sugar or cholesterol measurements. It's natural for a married couple to practice sexual self- control. No one denies that at times this is difficult, but such difficulties do not make periodic abstinence unnatural. All the major religions including the Catholic Church accept the use of NFP when couples have a sufficiently serious reason for spacing babies or family limitation. This is all I have to say on the subject. If you're looking for a debate, try another webpage. Sincerely, John Miskell Back to Index Page