All that, and the no sex when you want it most issue, aside – NFP only suits women with very predictable cycles. Temperature tracking (and to some extent, mucus and cervical position) tells you only when you are ovulating, discounting the window of 3 days before when those tricky sperm can live long enough to impregnate you. Without ovulating like clockwork, NFP is next to useless.

No surprise they didn’t use any facts about error rates!

The soft drink and the orange are being compared on the basis of healthfulness. The orange is “healthy” because it doesn’t contain “chemicals”.

What should be compared is the significant unhealthfulness of suffering an unwanted pregnancy compared with the unhealthfulness associated with one or another form of contraception.

Here is the same trick reversed:

Wearing a seatbelt in a plane is “unnatural and unhealthy” in that a seatbelt impedes circulation. It’s much more healthy to avoid wearing a seatbelt because very few people suffer life-endangering episodes when flying.

This is a sad indictment of the intellectual quality of would-be persons in holy orders.

I guess that was because some (Irish and Kiwis?) erroneously thought “following” the rhythm of the metronome did the trick.

Sounds like a recipe for frustration and resentment for me.

Well, indeed; the control of women’s sexuality is the whole idea. It’s basically a Clayton’s clitorodectomy.

And anyone who thinks it makes for a happy sex life and/or marriage should read David Lodge’s The British Museum is Falling Down and its much less comic sequel How Far Can You Go?, in which the realities of being a young and penniless Catholic couple in Britain in the 1960s are unrelentingly explored.

I’m just curious that there’s so little emphasis in the videos on the idea that both the NFP and Contraception characters are meant to be married.

I’d be impressed if there’s anyone who didn’t know that about Catholic dogma. They certainly mention it in everything else they do.