No wanting children and getting married in Catholic Church

agapecarrie

Starting last to first....Yes you absolutely can link them.

2nd, the mayo clinic is not comprehensive. The RESULTS for women over 50 were included...they disregarded results of young women. And it is relevant...its about YOUNG women who have not had children yet. 

THe link of the pill to breast cancer is astronomical, study after study is doing it. SO many but they are not being put in the journals. At this moment, I can't find where I found this...I'm working on it. 

The "lowering" of cancer is because pregnancy itself lowers risk of cancer. The pill makes the body think its pregant. 

Yes, the pill does shut down a working system. It puts artificial hormones into the body to mess with a working system. It attempts to prevent a woman from ovulating. Read the insert. 

Go see www.omsoul.com to find a long list of docs who can explain this better than I can.

MrsMack10612

1.  I'm not sure where cancer came into the conversation.  I never said anything about cancer - I'm just looking for unbiased research stating that birth control causes all those things.

2.  I didn't because I cannot listen to it while at work, but I did look up Dr. Smith.  Dr. Smith is clearly a staunch supporter of the Catholic belief system.  She cannot not be biased.

3.  I've never said I did any research, I'm not the one trying to convince someone they are wrong.

4.  The only instance that you are talking about re: judgement of actions that makes any sense is about terrorists; but you would have specifiy Muslim terrorists.   You know perfectly well I was referring to religious belief systems; Hitler was actually against all religion.  And, just like in Christianity, there are extreme fundamentalists; so there are in Muslim.  The Koran actually promotes peace.

agapecarrie

Regarding 2. I never said she wasn't biased. But again, she did NOT do the research.

however..since someone is a supporter of the Catholic belief system does NOT mean they cannot do unbiased research either. 

Dr. Scott Hahn was a staunch ANTI-Catholic ... pro-birth control. Till they studied the whys....they changed their mind. 

MrsMack10612

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wanting-children-getting-married-catholic-church?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural Wedding BoardsForum:615Discussion:e28f60c4-6ea2-442f-b9a6-ae6796eead9ePost:4da56826-9893-48ce-9e96-e6ff5da4411a">Re: No wanting children and getting married in Catholic Church</a>:
[QUOTE]Starting last to first....Yes you absolutely can link them. 2nd, the mayo clinic is not comprehensive. The RESULTS for women over 50 were included...they disregarded results of young women. And it is relevant...its about YOUNG women who have not had children yet.  THe link of the pill to breast cancer is astronomical, study after study is doing it. SO many but they are not being put in the journals. At this moment, I can't find where I found this...I'm working on it.  The "lowering" of cancer is because pregnancy itself lowers risk of cancer. The pill makes the body think its pregant.  Yes, the pill does shut down a working system. It puts artificial hormones into the body to mess with a working system. It attempts to prevent a woman from ovulating. Read the insert. <strong> Go see <a href="http://www.omsoul.com" rel='nofollow'>www.omsoul.com</a> to find a long list of docs who can explain this better than I can</strong>.
Posted by agapecarrie[/QUOTE]

Once again all you are providing for "proof" of these "facts" are resources with a religious and or Catholic bent.

For someone who seems (only because I don't "know" you) so intelligent and well educated - you are incredibly narrow viewed.

agapecarrie

No, this started when you said you were looking for unbiased research regarding effectiveness of the pill vs NFP   and harms it causes. 

I thought you said you had stats regarding the effectiveness of abc. You are demanding from me "unbiased" information. I'm asking whether the information that you apparently had (which I assume you would have a lot since your life is on the line here) was unbiased.

If you looked up risks of birth control from a birth control company, but wouldn't even take the time to read someone's information on the harms of the pill from another side, that is not fair evaluation. 

MrsMack10612

Hold up.  You started telling me that ABC had all these negative effects and I asked for unbiased research providing collaboration of your stance.

Not once, in any of my comments (and I will apologize if you find where I said this) did I ever say I did any research or had any statistics backing up the pro-side of ABC over NFP.

My understanding of the effectiveness of one over the other simply from my pre-cana class on the subject stating they are both in the high 90s for % effective.

Again, I have never once implied that the Catholic way of thinking was wrong (as I have been told I am).  I have conceded on several points that I either didn't understand or misunderstood.

You, as you believe is your duty, wanted to prove me wrong and that I need to at least give NFP a shot due to all the harm ABC does.  I have asked several times for unbiased research to back up your opinions and you have not provided - therefore, I could conclude (and I'm saying I believe this) that the points you make about the downfall of society due to birth control are the Catholic conspircy.

Unfortunately, I have tried, despite some personal anecdotes, to keep this as an intellcutual conversation (like that up there about Catholic conspiracy), understandbly it is more personal for you and cannot be done from a wholly intellectual standpoint.

Again, please prove me wrong if I made any of the statements you claim I did and I will apologize and clarify if needed.

I am leaving the computer now so this will be my last post this evening.

agapecarrie

You cannot conclude its the catholic conspiracy merely from me not giving you research. I have not been attached to the computer, and in the couple hours, you make a conclusion like that, well, that is grossly unfair. If you want to say that I cannot do it on a wholly intellectual standpoint but make that conclusion in that time, well, I think that is pretty stinky.

If you are saying you are on ABC wihtout having done any research (of any kind), while your life is on the line, well anybody can tell you that would not be a smart move. 

There is no harm in you learning NFP...whether I give you biased or unbiased information or not. NFP is information itself. Its learning about observing the body. THat is it. 

I have already stated that I'm looking. I'm working on it. 

agapecarrie

The LIST on omsoul are not all Catholic doctors. For calling me so narrow viewed.... you dont' even appear to read the information that is sent. 

This is a list of doctors that have done research and can attest to the harms of birth control IN MEDICAL scientific terms way better than I can. This is why they do not perscribe it.  This is not "narrow viewed". 

I have not called you names, nor judged your motives,  but now you are making personal attacks and drawing conclusions that are unfair. 

agapecarrie

And last thing...

I'm not trying to "win" here. honestly...its not about winning an argument. If the situation were reversed...and someone were to tell me...."Hey...there's loads of stuff about how what you are doing is harmful to you"....whether they had research to back it up or not...or even if they just had biased research, 

I wouldn't just say "well, I'm happy with my decision and I will not change my mind". I would be scared into doing some major diving into it. I wouldn't wait around for them to present their case so publicly it can be debated. Debating is not what I'm after here. 

You can disregard everything I've said posted here...fine. It was only out of concern for other people's health and physical and spiritual well being that I've tried so darn hard to discuss it so long. 

smiatrow

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wanting-children-getting-married-catholic-church?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:e28f60c4-6ea2-442f-b9a6-ae6796eead9ePost:4da56826-9893-48ce-9e96-e6ff5da4411a">Re: No wanting children and getting married in Catholic Church</a>:
[QUOTE]Starting last to first....Yes you absolutely can link them. 2nd, the mayo clinic is not comprehensive. The RESULTS for women over 50 were included...they disregarded results of young women. And it is relevant...its about YOUNG women who have not had children yet.  THe link of the pill to breast cancer is astronomical, study after study is doing it. SO many but they are not being put in the journals. At this moment, I can't find where I found this...I'm working on it.  The "lowering" of cancer is because pregnancy itself lowers risk of cancer. The pill makes the body think its pregant.  Yes, the pill does shut down a working system. It puts artificial hormones into the body to mess with a working system. It attempts to prevent a woman from ovulating. Read the insert.  Go see <a href="http://www.omsoul.com" rel='nofollow'>www.omsoul.com</a> to find a long list of docs who can explain this better than I can.
Posted by agapecarrie[/QUOTE]

1.  I'm sorry, but I really don't see how you really can't link these things.  Yes, there has been an overall shift in our culture and BC is a part of that, but it isn't the cause.

2. How is the Mayo Clinic not comprehensive?  The Mayo Clinic is a reputable source and is a top hospital.  And while it doesn't provide exact details, it provides the overall consensus based on all studies - not just one or two.  Do you know for a fact that the studies for younger women were excluded? I highly doubt the Mayo Clinic is cherry-picking it's data but if you have proof that they are, I would, in all honesty, be very curious and love to see it. Also if you go to the website it does address the possible link between the pill and breast cancer and does mention age groups.

3. Sooo....the pill still can reduce the risk of cancer.

4.  I will concede to this point.  The pill does prevent the release of eggs and does thicken the cervical mucus.  So while I personally wouldn't say that the uterus stops working, I understand  the argument for it.


I did visit the website you posted but only had time to read two of the studies posted on this website (which were the only real ones I could find) - the one written by Dr. Joel Brind and the one about bone loss.  For the former, I searched his name and it turns out that the vast majority of epidemiologists say his conclusions are dead wrong and began his research with a biased opinion. =/

<a href="http://discovermagazine.com/2003/feb/feathated" rel='nofollow'>http://discovermagazine.com/2003/feb/feathated</a>

For the latter,  I quote:

"The researchers note that while this study will help physicians counsel women with modifiable risk factors who wish to use DMPA, prevention of bone loss while using the contraceptive and reversibility of BMD loss are still not well understood and further research is needed."

I'm not saying that BC doesn't have it's risks, but it seems that you are making a general statement and that BC poses serious health risks for everyone without providing sufficient data to back that up.  However, I think we can both agree that more research does need to be done so we can conclusively say one way or the other.

I would also like to say that I do enjoy debating with you - I've really debated this subject before and I find it very interesting.

smiatrow

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wanting-children-getting-married-catholic-church?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:e28f60c4-6ea2-442f-b9a6-ae6796eead9ePost:a0a50857-b2af-4ff2-9540-92383795aa88">Re: No wanting children and getting married in Catholic Church</a>:
[QUOTE]And last thing... I'm not trying to "win" here. honestly...its not about winning an argument. If the situation were reversed...and someone were to tell me...."Hey...there's loads of stuff about how what you are doing is harmful to you"....whether they had research to back it up or not...or even if they just had biased research,  I wouldn't just say "well, I'm happy with my decision and I will not change my mind". I would be scared into doing some major diving into it. I wouldn't wait around for them to present their case so publicly it can be debated. Debating is not what I'm after here.  You can disregard everything I've said posted here...fine.<strong> It was only out of concern for other people's health and physical and spiritual well being that I've tried so darn hard to discuss it so long. </strong>
Posted by agapecarrie[/QUOTE]

I do appreciate the concern.  But please don't be offended when people ask you to back up your statements with facts.  If I have my doctor telling me one thing and a stanger on the internet telling me another - I'm going to be much more inclined to listen to my doctor UNLESS you can successfully back up your claims.  I might decide to research things a little more, but I'm not going to simply take your word for it.  It's nothing personal, I promise. =)

Also, speaking as an engineer, biased research is only good if the facts are presented in an unbiased way (i.e. providing the whole data set and not just the ones that fit your hypothesis), otherwise it's pretty much useless.

Anyway, I have to run.  Have a good evening!

agapecarrie

I was merely providing the omsoul web site to show the doctors who can counter any other doctors claims that bc is good for you.

I had not looked thuroughly into the research it provided.

afrenchprincess1

I'm not planning on using ABC we will use NFP as I feel that  ABC is not healthy for me as it has caused me some problems in the past. So, with doing NFP I feel that I am putting my self at greater risk-risk being greater openess to children. I know that "supposedly" it is very effective in preventing pregnany but I guess I have fallen victim to accepting medicine as being best. This whole discussion has become eye opening because now FI is saying that he REALLY does want children! Hmph making me think... to answer the question of what I would do with an unintended pregnancy? I will keep my child. I may not be thrilled at first but I will accept. Don't think I hate children but at times I don't see myself being a mother and doing and accepting all the things that requires. I mean sleepless nights, pain etc. and what will I get in reuturn? It's hard for me to see that at times and want it as well.

MrsMack10612

Carrie - First, I want to apologize for any typos etc as I am on my phone. Second, I did not mean any of that as personal attacks. What is hard about this ttpe of forum is tone of voice, body language and the other cues you get from face to face conversation. I most certainly do not think you ARE narrow minded or viewed, but you do come across that way a bit. I also do not believe there is a Catholic conspiracy, I meant that as a debating point since all of your backup has a religious bent, that only those in the religious community are anti-BC. Third, I do appreciate your concern for my physical and spiritual well-being. I have no doubts in the effectiveness of NFP, I read about women all the time on the who use to successfully to both concieve and avoid. My problem came when you started talking about how BC is the source of all the immorality in the world.

MrsMack10612

Sorry for the 1/2 post, phone issues. I cannot get behind that without more unbiased research. Fifth, of course I have researched the risks associated with using ABC, I am satisfied for me that those risks are negligiable. I also have little to no interest in switching to NFP because I have successfully us ABC for many years. I reiterate, if ain't broke, don't fix it and I don't consider myself broken. Again, I apologize for anything that came across as a personal attack, it was not my intention; simply my way of making observations during debate. I also meant no offense to you or your beliefs, just the debate. You have given me much to think about and look into; but my lack of changing my mind, is no different than not planning to change yours. I really do find what you've said interesting and thought provoking; I look forward to taking advantage (in a good way) of your deep knowledge of Catholic doctrine in the future. Have a lovely evening.

ingeniousidea

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wanting-children-getting-married-catholic-church?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:e28f60c4-6ea2-442f-b9a6-ae6796eead9ePost:07d66c3f-9936-41ef-a3d0-305a66fd9b7c">Re: No wanting children and getting married in Catholic Church</a>:
[QUOTE] So this actually a pet peeve of mine.  Correlation does not imply causation!!! You cannot link the use of BC to any of those things you listed.
Posted by smiatrow[/QUOTE]

Without wading into the details of Humanae Vitae's predictions, any sociologist or women's studies scholar will absolutely agree that the widespread availability and use of artificial contraception, especially the Pill, had enormous social and societal effects.  By creating more or less "consequence-free" sex for women as well as men, the Pill was a major factor in the sexual revolution of the 60s and 70s, and the sexual revolution itself can, I think at least <em>plausibly</em>, be connected to many of the adverse effects initially cited (e.g., increase in divorce, abortion, pornography, etc.).  There's more to be said and argued, of course, but saying that the Pill hasn't had an enormous effect on contemporary Western society is not true.

Calypso1977

This whole discussion has become eye opening because now FI is saying that he REALLY does want children! Hmph making me think...

french, good luck to you.  I really hope you two come to the best decision here, even if its a painful one to go your separate ways.  if that does happen, it will be hard, and very sad, but the joy you will each find later with a person who is on the same page with these things will be wonderful!

professorscience

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wanting-children-getting-married-catholic-church?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:e28f60c4-6ea2-442f-b9a6-ae6796eead9ePost:498ef3db-d73c-4d67-af82-2b327830ecf3">Re: No wanting children and getting married in Catholic Church</a>:
[QUOTE]I'm not planning on using ABC we will use NFP as I feel that  ABC is not healthy for me as it has caused me some problems in the past. <strong>So, with doing NFP I feel that I am putting my self at greater risk-risk being greater openess to children. I know that "supposedly" it is very effective in preventing pregnany but I guess I have fallen victim to accepting medicine as being best.</strong> This whole discussion has become eye opening because now FI is saying that he REALLY does want children! Hmph making me think... to answer the question of what I would do with an unintended pregnancy? I will keep my child. I may not be thrilled at first but I will accept. Don't think I hate children but at times I don't see myself being a mother and doing and accepting all the things that requires. I mean sleepless nights, pain etc. and what will I get in reuturn? It's hard for me to see that at times and want it as well.
Posted by afrenchprincess1[/QUOTE]

<div>Ugh.  <strong>NFP is based in science.</strong>  Just like medicine.  It only increases your "risk" if you half do it, just like being on the pill or using condoms increases your risk if you "half" use them.  I mean, yes, unlike using artificial means, if you decide to have sex while you're fertile then you probably WILL get pregnant, but that's a decision I'm happy to have the ability to make.  Being "open" to children doesn't mean you just throw caution to the wind and cross your fingers every time.  It means you and your husband prepare yourselves to provide a loving, Christian home for your future family, whenever they may come around.</div><div>
</div><div>I'm with Calypso, I really do pray that you and your FI will make decisions that are best for the two of you with regard to this. </div>

smiatrow

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wanting-children-getting-married-catholic-church?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:e28f60c4-6ea2-442f-b9a6-ae6796eead9ePost:7a8388e9-da98-4f72-a85c-554d70205c08">Re: No wanting children and getting married in Catholic Church</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: No wanting children and getting married in Catholic Church : Without wading into the details of Humanae Vitae's predictions, any sociologist or women's studies scholar will absolutely agree that the widespread availability and use of artificial contraception, especially the Pill, had enormous social and societal effects.  By creating more or less "consequence-free" sex for women as well as men, the Pill was a major factor in the sexual revolution of the 60s and 70s, and the sexual revolution itself can, I think at least plausibly , be connected to many of the adverse effects initially cited (e.g., increase in divorce, abortion, pornography, etc.).  There's more to be said and argued, of course, but saying that the Pill hasn't had an enormous effect on contemporary Western society is not true.
Posted by ingeniousidea[/QUOTE]

Oh I'm not saying that the pill didn't have an affect, I agree that it did. I'm just saying that the pill isn't the cause of all problems in society and that you can't link those specific things she listed, except maybe hormones in the water - but I would need to see scientific proof before I concede to that point. 

However, I do think that you could link some things directly to the pill.  For instance a rise in pre-martial sex and an increase in children born out of wed lock I would say are directly linked to the use of the pill.

Resa77

I just want to add something to this conversation.

I was on ABC for 1 year, then off for a year.  I went back on and, at 23 years old, had a stroke.  I went off at the advice of my primary care dr.  When I went to my next ob/gyn appt, my dr asked why I wasn't on BC anymore (I was taking it for endometriosis).  I told her about the stroke.  She said I was probably okay to take it, that I hadn't been back on BC long enough when I had the stroke to attribute it to ABC.  I went back on.  I had another stroke at 24.  I went off BC. 

After TONS of tests, nothing showed up as a cause.  My ob/gyn AND hemotologist BOTH said it was okay for me to go back on BC, because it probably didn't cause the stroke. I asked my neurologist, and he said it would be up to my ob/gyn. 

I was very nervous, but wanted to preserve fertility.  My ob/gyn said to go on depo, because it's progesterone-only and DOES NOT have stroke risk like other ABC does.  I went on depo.  I later looked on the depo website, and....it specifically has a stroke risk warning.  I went off depo.

What I'm trying to get at is that it appears it's almost politcally incorrect for doctors to say BC is unsafe.  Despite the fact that there are warnings on BC for stroke risk, they all said I'd be ok (except my Catholic primary care dr).  I had 2 strokes on BC.  They were mini strokes, or TIAs, so permanent damage wasn't done.  However, it was very scary and puts me at risk for strokes later in life. 

Why do doctors freak out about, for instance, smoking, but not BC?  Even if someone DOESN'T have a smoking-related condition, doctors will tell you don't smoke.  But with BC, even if you have strokes, they still want you on BC.

This experience has made me completely distrust my doctors regarding BC.  Prior to this, I'd roll my eyes when Catholics would start with the "ABC is evil and will kill you" thing.  Now, I'm like "yeah, it really can kill you." 

I know I'm just ONE person.  I know MANY people on ABC who've never had a stroke.  I just think it's unsettling that 3 highly regarded doctors would say it's ok to be on BC when you've had 2 strokes in your early 20s.  

And...that's my two cents  

mica178

As a medical doctor, I know that hormonal birth control definitely has known risks (I'm sorry about your experiences with strokes/TIAs, Resa).  Sadly, most medical schools downplay these risks.  Sadder still, few teach anything at all about NFP, and many confuse NFP with the rhythm method.

I had to teach myself about it.

I would hope that most open-minded physicians would be willing to at least do some reading on their own about NFP, just out of respect for patients who are interested in practicing it (either because of their beliefs or because they want a valid alternative to barrier or hormonal birth control).  Sadly, many on this board have found this not to be the case.  

Riss91

Resa - WOW! I'm so sorry. If you don't mind me asking - how are you "treating" the endometriosis without ABC? I have a friend with endo. that is trying to find an alternative option and obviously all her docs are telling her the 'only' option is ABC.

Also, just to add another interesting "experience", if you will. I have 9 women that are my closest friends. Add me to the group, there's 10 of us. Three of us do NOT use and have NEVER used the pill, the rest have all been on the pill since high school/college. The 7 pill users all suffer from relatively frequent, severe migraines that all came on in highschool/college (similar timing to when they started taking the pill). The three non-pill users have NEVER had a migraine. Out of the 7 pill users, three have gone off all BC temporarily at some point due to random reasons (lost their health insurance, etc). During those periods that they were off the pill (6 - 18 month stints), they had NO migraines. When they went back on, the migraines started again.

Unfortunately, only one of them has thought there could be a link. Now I don't have any proof that the pills are the only reason for the migraines, but in my mini-scientific study, it's pretty black and white....

chelseamb11

Resa, I am so sorry about your experiences!

Riss, I feel ya on the migraine thing.  I had the same issue.

Bottom line is this.  NFP is just as effective as ABC.  Why pump hormones into your body when you can do it naturally with the same result?  I was on the pill from junior year of high school (so about 6 years ago) until this summer.  Coming off the pill was literally like night and day for me.  It felt SO good and I honestly felt healthier.  I've had other people tell me the exact same thing after coming off of ABC.

agapecarrie

OH yea....the world health organization says the pill is a class 1 carcinogen.

and also, the huge potential for abortion.

MrsMack10612

I debated posting again because I know last night at times I didn't play nice and that was not my intention.

I also know that I am on the opposite of this debate.

I am sorry for those that have had very bad experiences with ABC (strokes? yikes!).  ABC has made my period/cycle much more pleasant for me - I do not get migraines anymore, I am more "comfortable" all the way around.  I will say the ONLY negative (for me) is the weight gain.

I am very curious about the alternative method mentioned above dealing with endo - I have other issues that I use the ABC for other than just not getting pregnant and I would love to know if there are other ways of, for lack of a better word, controlling them.

Thanks.

Riss91

...oh and was it catarntina? whose OB/GYN was telling her that she was likely miscarrying bc the doctor estimated she was further along in her pregnancy than she truly was? Because catarntina(?) was using NFP, she knew when she ovulated, but the doctor wouldn't base the timing off of that. Instead the doctor took the date of her last period + 14 days to determine ovulation. We know for a FACT (yay science) that the 14 day rule is completely inaccurate. Why would a doctor choose to use it?

I've seen many ladies on the nest who go through with a D&C when they are miscarrying (basically surgically removing the "tissue"). I'm horrified at how many of them weren't actually miscarrying, but just had inaccurate dates.

This has nothing to do with ABC, but just another plug for NFP.

Resa77

I am currently not treating the endometriosis.  I have decided I am very uncomfortable being on ABC because of the TIAs, regardless of how safe some of my drs say it is.   I've had no real alternative offered to me (just pain killers for the cramps), even by pro-life, anti-BC, Catholic drs. It makes me nervous because there's a good chance I won't be able to have children, but I'm not willing to risk my life to preserve my fertility.  Adoption is an option that FI and I are definitely open to.

agapecarrie

You can go to one of the docs on omsoul who have training in napro technology that work to actually heal and cure problems rather than cover them up with the pill.

That's what charting does...diagnose problems so docs can figure out the cause. Napro technology is awesome. I found out I had some potential pre-cancerous issues, as well as low progesterne, and PCOS from charting. I've learned how to actually fix these problems rather than cover it up.

RESA, have you tried a napro doc?

MrsMack10612

I actually am aware of what the problems are, and the pill is not covering them up, it is in fact easing the symptoms.

The only permanent solution for one of them is hysterectomy which I'm really not up for right now.

ETA:  And if there is no way to non ABC treat endo (my symptoms are similar) then NFP will not control those symptoms, I have no desire to "go back" to how things were without my current ABC.

Bec20

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wanting-children-getting-married-catholic-church?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:e28f60c4-6ea2-442f-b9a6-ae6796eead9ePost:395a2854-0493-444e-9495-a075c2144f8b">Re: No wanting children and getting married in Catholic Church</a>:
[QUOTE]However, I do think that you could link some things directly to the pill.  For instance a rise in pre-martial sex and an increase in children born out of wed lock I would say are directly linked to the use of the pill.
Posted by smiatrow[/QUOTE]

<div>Actually, the rate of pre-marital sex "way back when" was higher than we would assume.  I've heard that in colonial America, something like 20% of brides were pregnant.  Also, the pill probably played a lesser role in whatever increase did occur than the increasing secularization of society.  If people are atheist, agnostic, deist, etc, etc and don't believe that BC/pre-martial sex/abortion/divorce is wrong, the rates naturally increase.  It's like the connection of couples living together being more likely to get divorced, because a large percentage of couples who don't live together before marriage do so because of religious beliefs and are therefore also more reluctant to get divorced.</div><div>
</div><div>Also, a random historical interjection: Hitler was raised Catholic and believed in God, as can be seen in his writings (ex. Mein Kampf mentions the Divine Creator).    I know it's a bit late, but as a history geek I felt obligated to point it out.</div>