Welcome to Gaia! ::

I'm not Catholic (I'm non-denominational Protestant), so I'm no expert on Catholic beliefs. In fact, there are some aspects of this debate on which I'm not 100% sure where I stand; my opinions on contraception have been evolving quite a bit over the past couple of years. Anyway, here's how I see things:

One issue where I am sure of my position is hormonal contraception - be it the pill, the patch, NuvaRing, Depo-Provera, etc. My main moral objection to them is that - though it is not the primary function - they can prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg (as can IUDs). Since I personally consider it to be a human life at the point of fertilization, not implantation, I would consider that a very early abortion. I realize that I'm in the minority in that position; most people (including medical professionals) consider anything that prevents implantation to be purely contraception. You may think it's splitting hairs, but for me it's an important distinction. This may be a highly inconvenient position for me when I eventually get married because I've never thought I'd like to have a ton of kids, and before I realized that the pill could do more than merely prevent ovulation, I always assumed it would be my birth control method of choice.

That's true, and I would never base my argument against hormonal contraception (I'll get to other artificial contraception in a second) on "God's will" because I don't take that position on other medication. I believe if you're sick, you should take medicine; you shouldn't just sit around saying, "Well, if God wants me to get well, he'll cure me." But not all medical advances are necessarily morally acceptable. For example, I oppose embryonic stem cell research because it involves the destruction of human embryos. God gave us the resources and knowledge to conduct the research, but I don't think that automatically makes it okay. That, again though, is based entirely on the belief that a fertilized egg is a human life, which I realize many people don't share. (It's also the reason I don't believe in In vitro fertilization.)

Now come the areas where I'm a bit less certain:
Natural vs artificial contraception: what's the difference, morally? I've already explained why I oppose hormonal contraception, but what about barrier methods? Or spermicide? Until very recently, I was 100% okay with just about any method of birth control that wouldn't interfere with an egg once it's been fertilized (the exception being long-term abstinence by married couples). It was only when I became troubled by the casual attitude regarding hormonal contraception that seems (at least to me) to be so prevalent among Protestants that I began looking at the Catholic Church's position on family planning.

The idea of NFP always worried me because my cycle has always (at least until the last 6 months or so) been rather irregular - not super irregular, but unreliable enough. After reading up on it a bit, though, I'm kind of leaning toward NFP - for reasons (mostly religious) that are difficult to articulate, though not for lack of thought. My shift in position here is not only very recent but is also based more on feeling than on logic at this point, so I won't even attempt to form an argument in favor of NFP.

...Same with Plan B.

Some "Pills" contain the same drug, you know...