Scientists are beginning to discover a link between killing fertility and killing sexual desire. Next to be studied: Is there a link between regular watering and the growth of plants?
"Taking the Pill for as little as six months could destroy a woman’s sex drive for ever, say scientists.
"The oral contraceptive dramatically reduces the levels of a hormone responsible for desire and simply stopping taking it fails to reverse the effect, it is feared.
"A survey produced such dramatic results that lead researcher Dr. Irwin Goldstein advised any woman on the Pill who has sexual problems to stop taking it and try another method of birth control.
"’There is a possibility it is imprinting a woman for the rest of her life,’ he said."
(Nod to Zippy Catholic for the link.)
Hmmm. I wonder if scientists will eventually offer an apology to the Church for the secular world’s scorn of the Church’s age-old teaching on artificial contraception…. After all, fair’s fair. John Paul II apologized for the Church’s handling of the Galileo affair.
Remind me when I can let out that gulp of air I’m holding.
Bummer that I can’t follow the link to the revolutionary study. Zippy Catholic’s link did not work either.
People finally can relate when told the pill fakes a women’s body into thinking it’s pregnant. Now think about pregnant women you may have been close to: weight gain, emotional, lack of desire,….. Then my wife points out, at least with pregnancy, it’s temporary!
Okay, a quick Google news search found these articles:
RESEARCH FINDINGS, The Guardian
Pill blamed for wrecking women’s sex lives, Life Style Extra (UK)
A quote from the latter article mentioned that the decrease in libido “was believed to be reversible when women stopped taking the drug.” So sly admission that this has been known?
Michelle, I hope you look good in blue; that apology is not going to happen.
Not to derail the thread here, but I was wondering what others think of the term “artificial contraception”. I was under the impression that the Church stood against all forms of contraception and its associated mentality, not just the artificial kinds (i.e., NFP is not contraception). Am I splitting hairs, or onto something?
It’s almost like the human body was created according to some sort of intelligent design, and like the designer intended that there would be some sort of connection between sexual intercourse and reproduction. This is really startling.
Not to derail the thread here, but I was wondering what others think of the term “artificial contraception”. I was under the impression that the Church stood against all forms of contraception and its associated mentality, not just the artificial kinds (i.e., NFP is not contraception). Am I splitting hairs, or onto something?
I believe you are correct. The term “contraception” is sufficient — any intended to render the sexual act incapable of resulting in conception is immoral, regardless of whether it involves some manufactured device or pharmaceutical. Of course, there is no “natural” contraception, really.
When I was a lapsed, cafeteria Catholic and after I agreed with my wife about getting her tubes tied, I felt the drop in MY libido. Somehow, the fact that there was an impossibility of life turned me off. I had never heard this then, until only a couple of years ago from Steve Wood.
It’s good that this is being recognized at last. Even if it’s supressed from medical journals and mainstream media, which is highly likely.
Forgive me, O Lord.
Wow! Surely this is the greatest discovery since the revelation that men and women are different!
Shhhh! LawfulGood, be careful! Men and women different? The High Priests of Secular Nothingism might brand you a heretic!
What, high and mighty scientists apologize to mere Christians? But that would mean…science doesn’t have all the answers!
+J.M.J+
>>>I was under the impression that the Church stood against all forms of contraception and its associated mentality, not just the artificial kinds (i.e., NFP is not contraception).
Correct. The word contraception comes from “contra- + (con)ception.” Contraception is something that is “contra” to conception, that exists to go against or prevent conception. NFP can be used either to postpone pregnancy OR to cause a pregnancy, so it is not contraception (you can’t say the same of a condom or Depo Provera).
Casti Connubi teaches that contraception is wrong because it thwarts the natural, life-giving power of the conjugal act. NFP does not thwart that power, but simply postpones the conjugal act until that power is not present (the infertile time). Thus NFP is morally acceptable if just cause exists for postponing pregnancy, but contraception is never morally acceptable.
In Jesu et Maria,
In all seriousness have you considered the impact this has on the divorce rate? Sexual fidelity? When people come to a minister with marriage problems they are usually either money management issues or sexual intimacy issues. Many men cite lack of sexual intercourse as a frustration in marriage (usually due to their wife’s lack of interest). This *could* be a contributing factor to the current divorce rates.
Contraceptants don’t allow a man and a woman to fully give themselves as intercourse was origonally and naturally intended to scince “The Beginning”.
Islam is not what you individually think it is. It’s defined by Muhammad, fourteen hundred years of history and the majority views of Muslims today. Face it, most Muslims do pine for a grand theocracy and a free people would prefer to not live under the nirvana that is sharia — where Irrationality, Immorality and Intolerance vie for hegemony.
Get a quick divorce at WDALAW