Yes, I know what the Roman Catholic Church teaches regarding NFP. But in practice, it is used to avoid having children. In other words, NFP is in most cases just another form of birth control.
So you’re equating those who use NFP and other forms of birth control with homosexual sex? If you can’t live with that conclusion, then your assumptions are faulty.
In your world, would you require severely depressed wives, and wives with life-threatening physical problems, to either avoid sexual relations or contraception? You would require them to potentially become pregnant, despite the dangers? Kinda legalistic and heartless, don’t you think?
“Yes, I know what the Roman Catholic Church teaches regarding NFP.”
No, you don’t, which is why I corrected you before.
“in practice, it is used to avoid having children.”
Again, not true, as many faithful Catholics use it to help them conceive.
“In other words, NFP is in most cases just another form of birth control.”
Except that it isn’t. This is what you are not getting. Is choosing to wait until you get married a form of ‘birth control’? No. Choosing not to have sex is not the same as contraception.
“So you’re equating those who use NFP and other forms of birth control with homosexual sex?”
FFS.
That’s three times you’ve failed to successfully quote my argument. I am arguing that married men and women who engage in CONTRACEPTIVE or STERILIZED sex are separating SEX from PROCREATION, just as in homosexuality.
“In your world, would you require severely depressed wives, and wives with life-threatening physical problems, to either avoid sexual relations or contraception?”
Give me an example of a condition where a woman would be in serious danger of dying if she were to get pregnant.
“You would require them to potentially become pregnant, despite the dangers? Kinda legalistic and heartless, don’t you think?”
Why would I require of them to do anything? They can simply abstain from sex. Or is that not an option to you?