Sorry to bring up the issue yet again… but it is NFP awareness week here on L.I. and I thought this was a good list to reference in this forum:
TOP 10 Reasons to Use NFP, by Steve Pokorny:
I’ll have to admit the title of this thread is a bit misleading because I actually believe the difference between NFP and contraception is profound, and I would like to throw a question out to my non-Catholic brothers and sisters and those who think the two are the same:
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines the word the ‘same’ as:
1 a : resembling in every relevant respect b : conforming in every respect —used with as
2 a : being one without addition, change, or discontinuance : identical b : being the one under discussion or already referred to
3 : corresponding so closely as to be indistinguishable
4 : equal in size, shape, value, or importance —usually used with the or a demonstrative (as that, those) in all senses
(see citation source below)
Yet NFP can be used exclusively to achieve a pregnancy. The very practice of NFP gives couples the equal ability to postpone pregnancy or specifically have a child.
yet… all forms of contraception only prevent a pregnancy. The prevention of allowing God to bless a husband and wife with another human is build into the framework of what contraception is. It is also build into the mentality of couples that use contraption.
How then can one say the two are the same?
I suppose there are those who would say one could achieve a pregnancy by merely ending the use of the contraception… yet this response would predicate both means of achieving pregnancy were synonymous… and obviously they are not.
One is a *act that two individual knowingly commit with a willingness to let God influence the outcome, its very nature is open to new life. The other is merely an in-action.
Thus one cannot honestly call the two ‘the same’, there are obviously distinct differences. Heck, if one could consider the two as synonymous than I would challenge their ability to recognize differences in anything else. Here again, I presume those questioning the difference are truly informed as to what NFP is and how it should be used.
Let me pose a few scenarios here - I’ll let the audience decide which two are innately ridiculous…
- A couple wants to have a baby, they learn about NFP, and correctly using NFP they share the marital embrace during the woman’s fertile days.
2)* A couple wants to have a baby*, they start using the barrier method.
3)* A couple wants to have a baby*, the husband has his wife hormonally neuter herself every day of the month with chemical pills.
I would go on with other forms of contraption, but the point should be pretty clear.
Finally, there are those who use the idea that since the end results are the same (for those trying to postpone pregnancy) then they must be equal.
I think this analogy should suffice in un-blurring the distinction:
What’s the difference between letting an old person die naturally of old age & suffocating them to death with a pillow? Common, you know the ‘ends’ are the same!
And of course there is the sad reality that those who use the pill experience all sorts of un-healthy side affects. (ie dumping all those hormones into a woman’s body makes it act as though it is pregnant resulting in her experiencing many of the effects associated with pregnancy, although she is not actually pregnant). That of course is a key difference, that the article above highlights and is apparent with most woman who openly share how they feel when using the pill. On the other hand, NFP is void of those of those effects. The same…? Not even close.
What do you think?
same. (2010). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary.
Retrieved July 30, 2010, from merriam-webster.com/dictionary/same