Skip to main content

More Creative and Romantic

A non Catholic woman discovers Natural Family Planning:
On average, for us, using NFP means abstaining about ten days per month (in a row). So about 2/3 of the month is fair game. But since we're not Catholic (and this is where I throw out some of the chapters in the aforementioned book, though I did weigh them a good deal first), we still do other stuff that can't result in the conception of a child. It forces us to be more creative and romantic--I even prefer it when we abstain from the overtly sensual and stick with affection, massages, etc.

And when we do the deed itself, it's actually more enjoyable because of the fact that we can't do it whenever we want. It's like we appreciate it more. As for the notion that women feel the strongest urges on their fertile days, there is some truth to that (another reason why not being a Catholic comes in handy...ahem...), but overall, I don't find my hormones being the driving force behind the desire to consummate our relationship.

I have total peace about this area of our lives. I like understanding the way God designed my body. Sort of like how someone else might feel if they're able to fix their own car rather than rely on a mechanic. I also like doing things in cycles and seasons (rather than continuously), since that's also a Biblical principle of design. NFP allows us to plan our childbearing but still leaves room for God to surprise us if that's his will.

Consider this a supplement to the Posts that Rebecca and I have done on the problems with sexuality today (My posts are here and here, and Rebecca's are here and here).

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reuters joins CNN on the bench

Makes room for CanWest to join the majors Kudos to CanWest for calling a terrorist a terrorist . Many, including The Last Amazon , will be happy to hear it. Reuters is among the worst of the major western news services, where I would also place the BBC and the CBC. Unsurprisingly, Reuters is not happy about the changes CanWest made to Reuters wire stories: Our editorial policy is that we don't use emotive words when labeling someone," said David A. Schlesinger, Reuters' global managing editor. "Any paper can change copy and do whatever they want. But if a paper wants to change our copy that way, we would be more comfortable if they remove the byline." Mr. Schlesinger said he was concerned that changes like those made at CanWest could lead to "confusion" about what Reuters is reporting and possibly endanger its reporters in volatile areas or situations. "My goal is to protect ...

Wordpress

My move to Mac has been very happy except for two issues - gaming and blogging. For websurfing and multimedia, a Mac is of course a terrific machine. Games on the Mac platform are often ports of games made for the larger PC market and that means a Mac gamer will have to wait for the port. I'm not a heavy gamer by any means but I am very happy that the Mac port of Civilization 4 is finally here. Well, my copy isn't here quite yet - but it has been ordered and ought to be here soon. The blogging issue is more complicated. I'm not fond of writing my posts in a browser window. This goes back to when I was first blogging and I lost one or two large posts into the ether. After that I moved to w.bloggar - a great little app that let me compose on my desktop and then click send when all was said and done. I have not been able to recreate that experience on my Mac, and not for a lack of trying! I looked at Marsedit , but that forces you to compse while staring at a bunch of HMT...

A very limited form of inquiry

Real Clear Politics is carrying commentary on James Q. Wilson's WSJ article on ID (got that?). Wilson, the respected social scientist, gets it mostly right when he says that ID is not science because it can't be tested: So ID is not science. Does this mean that science, in any way, implies the non-existence of God? No. Does this mean that belief in God is irrational and that we should all be "free thinkers"? No. Does this mean that it is impossible to arbitrate between various theories of the existence/non-existence of God and come to some reasonable conclusions? No. Does this mean that we cannot say that humanity is meant to exist? No. In other words, rationality outside of science is quite possible, and has been around for a long time. How do you think humanity invented science in the first place? We surely did not do it scientifically. Science as we know it is the product of millennia of philosophical debate -- from Aristotle to Lakatos. Science depends upon phi...