Sunday, July 4, 2010

"Have to Abstain" and What That Means to Me

I had yet another day that I was too fatigued to attend Mass. I swear I am called to this to be more of a poster child for NFP. Nothing drives me crazier than the people who complain about the ten days of abstinence required for NFP. I have days where the marital act just can't happen. I am in too much pain. But I married a wonderful man who understands. The practice of NFP makes him more able to cope with my times of illness.

I have had debates with people who think that sex is the be all, end all of marriage. I have asked them about the weeks of abstinence after child-birth. Most feel deprived. That makes me sad. Some say, "well because you have to abstain, it is not so bad." Even this, I wish I better understood their mindset. "Have to" is a relative term. What do they say to teenagers who think "have to abstain" is dumb and old fashioned? Teens "have to" because they aren't married right? So why then do these same parents tell these young people not to get married young if it is only that they aren't married that makes them "have to" abstain. Could it be that they aren't ready for the babies that come with sex? Possibly. But isn't that the same reason older married people use contraception? Usually.

So these people who complain about abstinence in marriage want the bonding without the babies. Isn't this exactly what the teens want? They want the bonding, but not the babies too. So maybe those adults believe the teens aren't ready for the bonding side, the side that leads to the not so pretty side; paying bills, getting along, fidelity. So what exactly do these people who want teens to abstain but aren't willing to abstain themselves actually believe about sex? I am not so sure.

When I was of that mindset I thought that you could "bond" without really "bonding." I thought that it was like, as Professor Janet Smith has jokingly termed, "test driving before you buy." I thought you only test drove a car when you were in the market (marriageable age and "maturity"). But I discovered that I, and all of my friends, thought we were in the market ALL the time. We were willing to test drive anyone who looked hopeful. Two words: BAD. IDEA.

Now, I will grant that most people who are pro-contraception are against pre-marital sex...in theory. But when you ask them exactly how their ideas work, they are often contradictory. They want teens to abstain, but believe young adults probably can't, so they might need to marry young. So why would you want to be married to someone for the rest of your life (or until divorce does you part) who was supposed to grow up after marriage? But at the same time they believe you should be older and "financially ready and mature enough" to get married and even more so to have a family. I think they honestly believe somehow that contraception gives people time to grow up. But what I don't know is who they think should be using it, what type exactly they should be using, when they should be using it, why they should be using it and exactly how their minds and bodies are supposed to know this if they shouldn't be having babies in the first place.

I just want to understand. What does their ideal look like and is it possible for anyone to reach it?

No comments: