I'm sorry for my prior bad attitude, litany_of_lies. I've got too much on my plate and on my mind here the past 2 weeks, I'm not spending enough time in prayer, and I just didn't have the patience or the grace to answer you as I should have. My apologies. If you desire to continue this debate with me, consider my prior rant withdrawn. If not, I understand.
you'll forgive me if "your" position struck me as a reactionary and unwarranted extension of Church teaching. It obviously isn't, which leads me to wonder why the Church, at least the American Church, has been so gung-ho on rhythm and NFP all these years without pointing out its proper place.
I also thought a few days ago that the Church MIGHT be okey-dokey with a "mythical" egg-preventing pill (so much for "mythical"). That's obviously not the case.
It seems clear that the Church has three fundamental and clear positions:
- You don't take life in the womb.
- You don't snuff out a life just because it hasn't implanted itself.
- You don't mess with Mother Nature (Natural Law) in the reproductive process, except in "grave or serious" situations (the definition of which is subject to at least some debate).
Most of society buys into #1. People who bother to understand what's involved buy into #2. The American Church at least has done a lousy job of explaining #3. Very few are even aware of #3, and almost no one buys into it. This is not a good thing.
You are a good soul, litany_of_lies.
Good summary...now we have lots of common ground ;-)