When my wife first introduced the idea of natural family planning to me, I thought that it was a terrible idea.  Quite frankly, I already thought that we were not having enough sex, and the main idea that I took away from this method was that it meant that there would be even fewer days where sex would be a possibility.  Worse, it seemed that the days we were specifically supposed to avoid were the days when my wife would be the most interested.  Somehow, not only was I supposed to have self-control, but I was supposed to help her with hers.  That had the markings of disaster all over it.

Yet we decided to try it anyway.  While there was a mild financial incentive for doing so, the main motivator was what we had discovered about most of the types of birth control available.  The largest concern was that most of the birth control methods available were actually forms of abortion, a practice which goes not just the teachings of the Church, but both of our personal sets of beliefs.  While the manufacturers of these products claim that their birth control process has nothing to do with abortion, the truth is that many of them work by destroying fertilized eggs (the start of human life).  Many of those that don't, such as the ones that keep a woman's eggs from releasing, cause long term problems with the woman's overall health and well-being.

Even the "safe" birth control products have significant side-effects.  While there has been a movement against vaccines due to rises in autism and ADHD, few people have publicized a stronger correlation (no causation proven yet) between those conditions in children and their mothers' use of pharmaceutical contraception.  Even the side-effects listed for these medications can be quite extreme.  All of this for a product that is not a hundred percent reliable even when followed correctly.  There is always a chance that an egg can get fertilized in the short release window and somehow survive to implant in the uterus (although this can often lead to birth defects).  Pharmaceutical companies are interested in profits, not women's health.  

Natural family planning, on the other hand, does not add pharmaceutical substances to a woman's body and thus avoids damaging the woman's body.  As this method relies on women knowing and understanding their ovulation cycle, it is 100% effective when followed.  It also helps a couple discuss the sexual activities more as men are now more invested, and interested, in the woman's cycle.  It requires the couple to work together rather than just keep the entire burden on the woman.

In our case, it led to better sex.  It turns out that one of the side effects of the type of birth control my wife had been using was a decreased libido, so we actually started having sex more often in a given cycle despite the smaller time frame.  We also were more open with each other when talking about sex since we were working together.  Now, this is not to say that everything has been perfect since we started using the system, but it certainly has been better.

My mother gave me a letter that she was sending and wanted me to proofread.  The contents of the letter were about my Grandma Marks and some of the events that happened to her through her life.  She was a remarkable woman.  I have been finding it difficult to believe that it has been nearly twelve years since she passed away.  

When I was still taking courses for my bachelor's degree, I expressed the desire to write about my grandmother's life.  My professor recommended that I start interviewing her soon, but it was (like too many of my ideas) something that kept getting pushed back until later.  I do not have many true regrets in my life, but that is certainly one of them.

I wanted to share just a few facts from her life (some which I did not know until today):
1. The first time she arrived in America (1922 when she was four), she and her family was turned back because they only had one visa for the family and her mother was too pregnant to make the trip.  She remembered scolding her baby brother in his crib for making her leave America.

2. She survived one of the ten most deadly tornadoes in history.  She didn't understand why the other girls "were screaming because is couldn't do any good".

3. She often suffered from pneumonia (even before starting to smoke at the age of 12).  Her mother used "upside-down shot glasses and just-blown-out matches" on her chest to create vacuums to suck out the infection, a practice she referred to as "voodoo."

4. She worked at Al Capone's Coliseum, but left after rejecting "propositions".

5. She lived, for a time, with prostitutes.

6. She left her first husband when she was pregnant with my uncle Norman and had difficulties with childcare and housing that her mother (who tried to get her to have an abortion) would not help with.

7. She was hired for (and often quickly fired from) several jobs in which she had no experience, but claimed that she did.

8. She met my grandfather in a crowded bar that neither of them wanted to go to.  It was love at first sight, and they married despite his family's disapproval.

9. Her lung problems continued throughout her life.  In the 1950's a doctor suggested that one of them be removed, a procedure that she decided against.  Thus she was surprised (and quite angry at God) when Paul, my grandfather, suddenly passed away in 1961, from which point she raised her four boys on her own.

10. On her last day, my uncle asked what he could do for her.  She wanted to dance, so he lifted her so her feet were on his and they "danced" in her room while she hummed a tune.

She was an amazing, courageous, and strong-willed woman.  I wish I had written her story.

I have been extraordinarily pleased with Pope Francis.  He is the down-to-earth yet connected-to-God sort of person whom I believe makes for an excellent religious leader.  He makes a point of not getting caught in the trappings of his position and points out hypocrisy both within the Church and throughout the world without being overly judgmental.  Most importantly, he has done an excellent job in returning Catholicism to its true message of love.

That said, I think many people are misinterpreting some of his deeds and actions.  They are looking for someone to shake up the Church (which he has) in ways that allow them to continue their own immoral practices without guilt (which he hasn't).  While he is redirecting the message of the Church, he is not changing its teachings that have held since at least the Council of Trent in the 16th century (which reaffirmed much older practices and traditions).

Those who expect him to overturn the Church's stance of homosexuality or abortion are going to be sadly disappointed.  However, he has brought a stronger focus on politicians who have claimed Christian values yet have embraced very un-Christian-like practices and policies, especially in regards to the treatment of the poor.  He has warned his fellow Catholics about the trap of voting for a candidate due to a single issue while ignoring the other evils that candidate might support.

Most importantly, he has warned his fellow Christians against being too judgmental, even against those people who espouse beliefs different from the Church's.  He has admitted that people do not have the ultimate power of judgment: that is left to God.  He has also clarified that this does not mean that everything is permitted or that truth is relative.  Rather he has reminded us that the greatest truth comes from the love of God.

I've already seen prejudiced hate-rhetoric spring up about Pope Francis.  Those people could probably learn something about mercy from this extraordinary man.  I, for one, am excited about his papacy.  

Every year at about this time, the discussion of abortion comes up again in the light of the anniversary of Roe v. Wade.  It’s been reported in the news, preached in church, and discussed on the Internet.  Some very ugly things are said on both sides, but one particular set of comments set me off this week.  It was suggested that there was nothing different between an unborn child and a cancerous growth.  I wanted to weep for the person who wrote it.

It should not surprise me that someone would believe that opinion.  After all, we treat pregnancy as a disease these days.  We have our preventative measures (contraception) and our treatments (abortion).  We are saddened when we hear about young women who are “afflicted” by it.  Should a woman have more than one child, each successive pregnancy brings comments such as “You know that they have ways of stopping that” or “You know what causes that, don’t you?” as though each life brought into the world is something to be regretted rather than celebrated.

We have been deceived, and in a relatively short time (historically).  Children went from being a blessing to a burden.  Pregnancy went from being to a joyful event to an avoidable one.  We were told that marriages would be better, that sex would be more enjoyable, that women would be freer.  But our divorces are higher, sex has been exploited, and many women are chained to a daily pill that slowly destroys their sex drive and their ability to have children in the future.  Pharmaceutical companies love it.  We spend billions of dollars each year keeping children out of our lives.

Our mindset needs to change.  The culture of death (or worse, anti-life) is so insidious that most people do not realize just how much they have tangled themselves in it.  We simply need to realize this one thing to turn our course back around: pregnancy is not a disease.