STDs and Invitations for Catholic Convalidation

chelseamb11

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_stds-and-invitations-for-catholic-convalidation?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:69d5e8e0-41c6-470f-ab43-2ff0931870e6Post:74312efe-f63a-4e55-9dcb-e342425d4722">Re: STDs and Invitations for Catholic Convalidation</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: STDs and Invitations for Catholic Convalidation : That can't possibly be what Calypso is saying because what she said was, "NFP is NOT the rhythm method.  at all.  completely different." I never ever said that the rhythm method is the only method. I literally only asked the OP if that was the method she was using.
Posted by Simply Fated[/QUOTE]


Techincally the rhythm method IS a form of NFP, just not a good one (only accurate if your cycles are more or less "ideal"), but because so many people think the rhythm method is the ONLY form of NFP, it's made a huge misconception that NFP doesn't work.  Of all the people that use NFP effectively, I'd wager that only 5-10% of them use the rhythm method.

Simply Fated

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_stds-and-invitations-for-catholic-convalidation?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:69d5e8e0-41c6-470f-ab43-2ff0931870e6Post:7773aba3-4b7c-489b-ab4d-fb88497482ec">Re: STDs and Invitations for Catholic Convalidation</a>:
[QUOTE]i assume you were in 8th grade 20 years ago?  so much has changed in 20 years with regard to all methods of BC, natural and otherwise.  i cant beleive anyone would rely on stuff taught in an 8th grade health class as accurate info. it really all goes back to the point in the thread where you assumed that because kristan didnt use ABC she must of course be on the rhythm method.  and of course, lets mock her and her lack of "common sense" right?  
Posted by Calypso1977[/QUOTE]
What the hell?

Let's recap:
She said she was using a method where she abstains from sex. I asked if it was the rhythm method. She said no and told me which one.

It wasn't meant to be a condescending question, it was honestly just a question.

I never once mocked her.

Calypso1977

As far as my where I'm getting my information goes: School, my doctor, gynocologists, other doctors (I've had a few speak to me), books, friends, family, internet, common sense...

this came across as a little bit of mockery, specifically the bolded.

Simply Fated

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_stds-and-invitations-for-catholic-convalidation?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:69d5e8e0-41c6-470f-ab43-2ff0931870e6Post:bac15420-da97-45a8-88b4-73e66e50f14e">Re: STDs and Invitations for Catholic Convalidation</a>:
[QUOTE]I never ever said that the rhythm method is the only method. I literally only asked the OP if that was the method she was using. because you assumed, iwth your 8th grade health class education on the subject, that is what people use who shun ABC.
Posted by Calypso1977[/QUOTE]
Seriously?
You said it was never taught. I proved you wrong. Go sulk in a corner for being wrong.
Where did you learn your information? Wikipedia?

Also, I never said I shunned ABC.

Simply Fated

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_stds-and-invitations-for-catholic-convalidation?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:69d5e8e0-41c6-470f-ab43-2ff0931870e6Post:af8276ab-af24-4500-a09d-a817b340353e">Re: STDs and Invitations for Catholic Convalidation</a>:
[QUOTE]As far as my where I'm getting my information goes: School, my doctor, gynocologists, other doctors (I've had a few speak to me), books, friends, family, internet, common sense... this came across as a little bit of mockery, specifically the bolded.
Posted by Calypso1977[/QUOTE]
Yes, using birth control, whether it be ABC or BC is common sense if you don't want to get pregnant, but you don't want to abstain from having sex.
Using more than one form of ABC and/or BC gives you a better chance of not getting pregnant. That's common sense.
Etc.

At what point is that mocking the OP?

Calypso1977

its not taught NOW.  you said you learned it in 8th grade, which i assume was about 20 years ago although i dont know your actual age.  its not taught now because its been proven ineffective.

i didnt say you shunned ABC.  kristan (and me and numerous others) shun ABC and have found alternative methods that are just as effective, if not MORE effective.  i have at least 6 females in my life who have gotten pregant on the pill.  i personally do not know anyone using NFP who has had an unplanned pregnancy.  not to say it doesnt happen but that's just been my experience.

Calypso1977

certainly wasnt direct mockery, but as i read it in conjunction with your other posts, it could be intepreted as mockery, meaning those who dont use ABC must be so dense and will SURELY end up with all sorts of unplanned pregnancies but becuase you have common sense to use ABC  you wont end up in that situation.

Simply Fated

its not taught NOW.  you said you learned it in 8th grade, which i assume was about 20 years ago although i dont know your actual age.  its not taught now because its been proven ineffective.

i didnt say you shunned ABC.  kristan (and me and numerous others) shun ABC and have found alternative methods that are just as effective, if not MORE effective.  i have at least 6 females in my life who have gotten pregant on the pill.  i personally do not know anyone using NFP who has had an unplanned pregnancy.  not to say it doesnt happen but that's just been my experience.
 
Back when I was first taught that method, it was taught to us as being inaffective. But it was still taught because it was a method some people used, despite it's success/failure rate. The teacher didn't want to just go over the best methods (which, let's face it, would just be absitnence), she wanted to make sure we knew all the methods so we could make choices for ourselves. It's not like if the teacher didn't teach it to us it would vanish.

I know two people who have gotten pregnant while on the pill. They both misused the pill. One friend skipped pills and the other started having sex too soon. The pill, when used correctly has a high success rate. But people rarely use it successfully. I have never missed a pill (although I was late with one, I admit) and have never had an issue. On the show Teen Moms (or was it 16 and Pregnant?) Dr. Drew asked the girls if they were on birth control. They all admitted they either weren't or misused their birth control.
Just like the rhythm method gives all NFP a bad rap, so do people who misuse their ABC give ABC a bad rap.  
I would guess that because ABC takes so observation and headwork that people who are on it have to be more diligent and are therefore less prone to mistakes.

I honestly, don't believe, from a seculur standpoint, that one is more affective than the other if both are used correctly.


certainly wasnt direct mockery, but as i read it in conjunction with your other posts, it could be intepreted as mockery, meaning those who dont use ABC must be so dense and will SURELY end up with all sorts of unplanned pregnancies but becuase you have common sense to use ABC  you wont end up in that situation.

I never once mocked natural birth control. Ever. At any point. I wasn't even involved in the whole religious aspect of the conversation, let alone mocking it.

Resa77

The thing is, amongst those who actually use NFP, it's VERY VERY annoying for people to call it the "rhythm method."  Maybe technically it's a form of NFP, but unfortunately, most people think it's THE form of NFP.  That's annoying.  I, like Kristan, have experienced people mocking my method, telling me "it doesn't work...you know that, right?" or "you'll be pregnant within a year!"  Perhaps you're not one of those people, but the stereotype exists, and "legit" NFP users (non-calendar based methods) are trying to get rid of it. 

Simply Fated

@Kristan... I can understand this. The rhythm method is a form of NFP, but I can see why you wouldn't be in the same family as the others.


Here is a common conversation I've had:
Me - "Husband & I are practicing NFP to plan our family"
Person - "Oh, the rhythm method?  You know that doesn't work, right??"

Holy goodness, I'm starting to see why there is an issue here.
Ok, to clear everything up (I hope) this was not my intended train of thought. I promise you, I was just curious to know which method you were using. I took a stab in the dark with the rhythm method. I was in no way intending to follow it up with a lecture or a condescending, mockery of why you have no common sense if that's your chosen method. You can read any of my posts in other threads, I really do ask random questions sometimes. I'm a curious person. I don't know why, I just am.


Although I am a little bothered because, what if the conversation was reversed? What if I was in Kristan's place and mentioned I used ABC? If your guess happened to be the pill (a form you all shun and feel isn't as sufficient) should I be offended that the pill was your guess?

QueerFemme

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_stds-and-invitations-for-catholic-convalidation?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding BoardsForum:9Discussion:69d5e8e0-41c6-470f-ab43-2ff0931870e6Post:31b94a6d-8a85-4112-9793-c3689fe6fae4">Re: STDs and Invitations for Catholic Convalidation</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: STDs and Invitations for Catholic Convalidation : Glad I could help clear things up.  I could tell that (of no fault to either one of you), there were some misunderstandings.  Personally, H & I use the Creighton Model ( <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.creightonmodel.com/).">http://www.creightonmodel.com/).</a> I went with this approach because I have PCOS and my ob-gyn studied at the Pope Paul VI institute ( <a rel="nofollow" href="http://shop.popepaulvi.com/donate/index.php).">http://shop.popepaulvi.com/donate/index.php).</a> She uses my charts to help me with my diagnosis.  I'm honestly not sure if I see your comparison with using the Pill for ABC.  I'm trying to think of what would be the "<strong>red headed stepchild</strong>" of ABC.  I guess if the Pill was known to be a much less reliable form of contraception and mis-represented other forms, that could make sense.  I guess for us, people assume quickly that just because we don't use ABC, we are going to have 16 children irresponsibly and end up on welfare.  I can't remember who said it, but the families I know that have 6+ children provide for themselves and llive modestly.  They are truly some of the happiest families I know.
Posted by TXKristan[/QUOTE]

Well, I think we have covered it in this post.  In these 100+ posts we have somehow managed to offend catholics, people on birth control, people NOT on birth control, gays & lesbians, how people do or don't have sex, people who have pretty princess days. people with red hair and/or stepchildren, and I'm sure, a variety of other things.   Our work here is done.  <img src="http://cdn.cl9.vanillaforums.com/downloaded/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-wink.gif" border="0" alt="Wink" title="Wink" />

ridedatbike

In Response to Re:STDs and Invitations for Catholic Convalidation:[QUOTE]In Response to Re:STDs and Invitations for Catholic Convalidation:In Response to Re:STDs and Invitations for Catholic Convalidation: That's pretty lame but my point does still stand pamorental rights determine on a BC not a marriage certificate so in the events that a couple choose between religion and law parental rights would be unrelated.Posted by ridedatbikeyou replied while I was adding something to my previous post clarifying "parental rights".nbsp;nbsp;nbsp; So, yeah,l marriage and recognition of a same sex partnernbsp;does matter. Posted by
cmgilpin[/QUOTE]

Fail on my part. But ya im just saying that saying that giving up marital rights means giving up paternal rights isn't true. Like my so doesn't exactly have entirerights to my lo since he ist her Bio dad and hasn't gotten to adopt her yet.

ridedatbike

OR had her Bio dad filed he could have rights even though we never had any marital rights and by not being married I never forfeited any rights to my lo.

QueerFemme

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_stds-and-invitations-for-catholic-convalidation?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding BoardsForum:9Discussion:69d5e8e0-41c6-470f-ab43-2ff0931870e6Post:fd92a27d-6b7c-4c17-abe9-b5f79ab5cb52">Re:STDs and Invitations for Catholic Convalidation</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re:STDs and Invitations for Catholic Convalidation: Fail on my part. But ya im just saying that saying that giving up marital rights means giving up paternal rights isn't true. Like my so doesn't exactly have entirerights to my lo since he ist her Bio dad and hasn't gotten to adopt her yet.
Posted by ridedatbike[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure where I said giving up marital rights has anything to do with giving up parental rights.  What I am saying is being married CAN give you parental rights.  For example lets say you had got pregnant but didn't know who the father was (hypothetical situation). Had a baby. 2 months later, you get married (not the child's bio father).  And then, 10 years later, you die in an accident.  Your husband would almost always be grantedy custody, especially if he had been living as the child's father and the child's bio father wasn't there to contest it. And your husband would always have the legal right to adopt your child assuming the bio father wasn't in the picture.  

If the bio father never comes around, you can request that his parental rights be terminated by the court so your husband can adopt your child.   Under that scenario, even if we NEVER had a bio "father", and just used a sperm donor, we can not petition the court for the same rights.

If you divorced him, he would have legal remedies in the court within your divorce proceedings even if he was not the bio father or even an adoptive father.  He could petition the court for visitation because he had been raising he child, and most of the time, he would be granted those rights.

I could get pregnant today via artificial insemination with my partner by my side. We could spend the next ten years raising our child together. And my partner (in my states) would never be permitted to adopt my child as a second parent, because we both have a vagina.  Since we aren't married under the law, the courts would look to the next of kin (my sisters or my mother, who I do NOT have a relationship with) to assume custody of my child.    If my partner and I split up, my partner would have no legal remedies in divorce or family court, because they are not considered a legal parent, and we aren't legally married, so we don't have the rights to even go to court to petition for divorce, so they have no legal basis to even bring an action in connection with the child. I also can't petition my partner for child support because, again, there is no legal connection to the child.

The point is, once you are married, your next of kin is your spouse and your rights under the law ARE different, and they are different in regards to your children ass well. 

Getting married doesn't automatically terminate the parental rights of a biological parent.  Like in the scenario you proposed.  If you have a child and the father wants and exercises his parental rights, then of course, you can't just terminate his rights in favor of your new husband. The whole point is, marriage DOES give you some parental rights, even if those rights are just access to the courts and recognition as a parent.

ridedatbike

In Response to Re:STDs and Invitations for Catholic Convalidation:[QUOTE]In Response to Re:STDs and Invitations for Catholic Convalidation:In Response to Re:STDs and Invitations for Catholic Convalidation: Fail on my part. But ya im just saying that saying that gimving up marital rights means giving up paternal rights isn't true. Like my so doesn't exactly have entirerights to my lo since he ist her Bio dad and hasn't gotten to adopt her yet.Posted by ridedatbikeI'm not sure where I said giving up marital rights has anything to do with giving up parental rights.nbsp; What I am saying is being married CAN give you parental rights.nbsp; For example lets say you had got pregnant but didn't know who the father was hypothetical situation. Had a baby. 2 months later, you get married not the child's bio father.nbsp; And then, 10 years later, you die in an accident.nbsp; Your husband would almost always be grantedy custody, especially if he had been living as the child's father and the child's bio father wasn't there to contest it. And your husband would always have the legal right to adopt your child assuming the bio father wasn't in the picture.nbsp;nbsp;If the bio father never comes around, you can request that his parental rights be terminated by the court so your husband can adopt your child.nbsp;nbsp; Under that scenario, even if we NEVER had a bio "father", and just used a sperm donor, we can not petition the court for the same rights.If you divorced him, he would have legal remedies in the courtnbsp;within your divorce proceedings even if he was not the bio father or even an adoptive father.nbsp; He could petition the court for visitation because he had been raising he child, and most of the time, he would be granted those rights.I could get pregnant today via artificial insemination with my partner by my side. We could spend the next ten years raising our child together. And my partner in my states would never be permitted to adopt my child as a second parent, because we both have a vagina.nbsp; Since we aren't married under the law, the courts would look to the next of kin my sisters or my mother, who I do NOT have a relationship with to assume custody of my child.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp; Ifnbsp;my partner and I split up, my partner would have no legal remedies innbsp;divorce or family court, because they are not considered anbsp;legal parent, and we aren't legally married, so we don't have the rights to even go to court to petition for divorce,nbsp;so they have no legal basis to even bringnbsp;an action in connection with the child. I also can'tnbsp;petitionnbsp;mynbsp;partner for child support because, again, there is no legal connection to the child.The point is, once you are married, your next of kin is your spousenbsp;and your rights under the law ARE different, and they are different in regards to your children ass well.nbsp; Getting marriednbsp;doesn't automatically terminate the parental rights of a biological parent.nbsp; Like in the scenario you proposed.nbsp; If you have a child and the father wants and exercises his parental rights, then of. course, you can't just terminate his. rights in favor of your new husband. The whole point is, marriage DOES give. you some parental rights, even if those.
rights are just access to the courts and. recognition as a parent. Posted by
cmgilpin[/QUOTE]

Ah see and I was reading it as this is what youget when your legally married and no.one else does so be greatful. When as you've stated you don't have to be married to have parental rights. Termination of rights is also such a pita to deal with OMG! Im so glad that over for me now we Haute Ned to have gmfi adopt an our troubles will be over..

tekwriter1221

I am in the same situation as you and planning a wedding around the same time. It never occured to me that there would be limitations on how much joy I could create. My convalidation is going to be way bigger than yours. I say do whatever the Church allows and whatever your heart desires. Who is anybody to say what you "should" or should not do?  Most marriages don't last as long as yours has, and I'd say that's reason enough to celebrate!!!  Congratulations.  Do it in full regalia!!! A wedding/convalidation is a joyous thing.  Do not let the Negative Nellies rain on your day.  Life is too short.