NFP Poll- please vote!

Does counting days work?

How to save money in healthcare? Use NFP! It's cheaper and more accurate- right?

My little poll in the right side bar here has to do with NFP awareness- how much do you know?

If you want to learn more? Visit ccli.org

Do you know anyone who used it? Or thinks they used it? Get them to answer the poll.

Are you an engaged couple who knows? Are you a single person who knows?

Lots of cool NFP bloggers have been posting about making NFP more accessible to modern young couples.

Let's see where people fall on the scale of "NFP awareness."

Leave a comment with your thoughts!

Please select ALL that apply and thanks for voting !
Please RT to your followers! #nfppoll

The 43rd anniversary of Humanae Vitae

Today, July 25, the Feast of St. James, is also the anniversary of the much misunderstood encyclical Humanae Vitae, or "On the Regulation of Birth" by Pope Paul VI. Where do you stand with this dry, yet landmark encyclical? This brief article reveals some of the prophecies of the encyclical, if birth control was to become the norm. Did you know that it all began in Connecticut with the Griswold v. Connecticut decision?

As we all know, those prophecies came true, and it seems impossible to turn back the clock. But what does move ahead is research. Janet Smith, in her newest "Contraception:Why Not" talk, she reveals the research of anthropologist Lionel Tiger, on the behavior of male monkeys when subject to contracepted female monkeys. Interesting study, and it explains a lot.



This week is Natural Family Planning Awareness Week, a time to pray for an increase in chastity, within and outside of marriage. On the threshold of New York's decision to redefine marriage, and more states to follow suit, we need to pray more than ever.

This anniversary day, and this NFP Week, is a time to pray for all those who courageously embrace chastity, as a single, married, celibate, or same sex attraction. It is also a day to pray for those who don't.

Miserere nobis.

UN Wants Billions for STD Vaccination Scheme

NEW YORK, May 5 (C-FAM) The UN is about to ask governments to fund the vaccination of every girl in the world against the sexually transmitted disease HPV, human papillomavirus. The controversial campaign could cost as much as $300 per person, totaling billions.

Dignitaries who launched the campaign at the UN in mid-April included a prominent African first lady, leaders from the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), the American Cancer Society, and the contraceptives manufacturer PATH.

UNFPA and PATH want donor nations to buy the vaccine at $14 per shot. Three shots are required over a period of six months, totaling $42, and the treatment is only good for five years. Seven treatments would be required to cover each woman’s reproductive lifetime.
Advocates warned the assembly that the idea would be contentious. Casting the campaign as an effort to eradicate cervical cancer rather than a massive vaccination program against a sexually transmitted disease will help steer clear of political resistance, they said.
One advocate advised the dignitaries that when they are asked why children should be vaccinated against a sexually transmitted disease, the UN should use the precedent of infant vaccinations against Hepatitis B.
When American local governments tried to mandate inoculation of school girls against HPV several years ago, popular outcry quashed the initiatives.
While none of the UN speakers addressed the issue, cervical cancer is caused by HPV infection, which is spread through sexual contact.  The panel lamented a dramatic increase in the cancer in the developing world, but were less clear on the reasons for its rise, sidestepping issues of sexual behavior and focusing instead on gaining political will to fund the vaccination program.
Of the half million new cases of cervical cancer each year, more than half of the patients die, usually because they did not know they had the disease until it had reached advanced stages.
UNFPA deputy executive director Purnima Mane said UNFPA would spearhead the campaign.  If approved by UN member states, UNFPA stands to receive a significant boost in funding, given the fact that there are billions of women and girls who would require the $42 treatment every five years.

The funding would reverse a decline in donations for international population programs, which have fallen from a high in 2008 due to the global economic downturn and plummeting global fertility rates. The Obama administration had to marginally cut UNFPA funding for 2011 during budget battles with U.S. lawmakers, but promised to increase it to $50 million in 2012. PATH likewise received $50 million, about a fifth of its funding, from the U.S. government in 2009.

Critics are concerned that the vaccination scheme will subsume the fight against cancer into the already well-funded reproductive rights agenda at the UN. They warn that because UNFPA aggressively promotes “sexual rights” for minors, the effort will not address sexual behavior or parental rights regarding medical decisions and could lead to an increase of the disease rather than its cure.

UN member states will deliberate the issue September 19th and 20th at the UN High Level Meeting on Non-communicable Diseases.

Courage Philippines: This Way Out

Testimony - Frank Worthen

"Born Anew to a Living Hope"

My pastor took me into his office and said, "Frank, you are a homosexual." Being only thirteen, I needed him to explain same-sex attraction. He did. Then he added that homosexuals were different from other people.

I'd been called different before! When my mother took me to kindergarten, my teacher told her, "Your boy is very different from the other boys." And she was right; I'd detached from my family's constant arguing by hiding in the attic and creating my own fantasy world. In response to my patterns of isolation, my peers called me names (which I later learned meant "homosexual").

When I was ten, I began taking piano lessons. My piano teacher knew the Lord in a powerful way. She was ecstatic when, three years later, I accepted Him. She took me to her church, where I began to study organ.

My father died that year. The pastor took an interest in me, assuming the "father" role in my life. He was everything I looked for in a father! But in my heart, I hoped he was wrong about me being a homosexual. Certainly, I was different; I had no friends, I wasn't into sports, and I devoted a lot of time to music. Still, I hoped that I was just late in developing opposite-sex attractions.

When I turned eighteen, I met a young lady. We went together for about a year. It was very exciting to think, Thank God, I'm normal! I love this woman and I want to marry her. So I proposed. She answered, "There are only two things that I love: horses and other women." Crushed, I returned to my pastor, who told me that I'd been attracted to my girlfriend's masculinity. He reasoned, "I've been telling you for years that you are a homosexual." I left the church that day, making the decision to accept my homosexuality. Since "God's man" had convinced me that I was homosexual, I hoped that God would accept me.

I entered the gay lifestyle at that time. By accepting my homosexuality, I believed I'd found where I belonged. The male homosexual lifestyle, however, is built on youth. And so, by the time I was 40, it was pretty much over for me. The only steady lover I could find wasn't even really homosexual—he just stayed with me for the money! But even then, we both cheated on each other. It was very depressing.

The business I owned required me to travel around the world a great deal. During one of my trips, the manager of my biggest store hired a "hippie" boy. Though I didn't want Michael there at all, the manager promised to keep him out of the customers' sight if I'd let him work in the stock room. I agreed, reluctantly.

Returning from another trip, I was startled to see Michael with short hair, properly washed, and working at the front counter. He was efficient, the customers loved him, and he smiled all the time. Finally, after a week of watching him, I asked, "What in the world happened to you?"
He answered, "I accepted the Lord." I wondered if Michael's Christianity would last. During the following year, his life kept getting brighter and brighter. I began to wonder if God could change me the way He had changed Michael. But I told myself, "No. God has never changed a homosexual person." I vacillated between hope and despair.

One day, the Lord spoke to me, saying, "Today I want you back." I knew, without a doubt, that this was the voice of God. I ran to the store and located Michael, gasping, "I've just heard from God, I don't know what to do." I was beside myself. Michael responded that he had the keys to his church, and suggested that we go over there to pray.

Michael had me kneel on the altar's marble steps as he led me through a 20 minute sinner's prayer! Because he knew nothing about homosexual activity, he had me confessing all kinds of things I'd never done. But I wanted everything God had for me, so I thought, "If I have to do this to change, I'll confess anything!" When the prayer ended, the Lord's Spirit came alive in my heart. I came out of the church a changed person!

When I went to Michael's church, the people expressed love for me. Later I learned that they'd spent two years praying for "Michael's gay boss." And for the next year and a half, people from that church came to see me every day! That accountability kept me from going back to the homosexual lifestyle.

At Michael's suggestion, I made a testimony tape to reach out to people who were trapped in the homosexual lifestyle. I decided to advertise the tape in the worst sex paper in town. The ad read: "Do you want out of homosexuality? Send for a Brother Frank tape on a Christ-centered way out of homosexuality." During the first year of its run, my ad brought in 60 people who wanted out of homosexuality! Men in my own church sought me out for counseling on leaving homosexuality. After a while, I started meeting with these men on Saturdays.

Eventually, the Lord put me in contact with a pastor who needed help in counseling homosexuals. Since he was a writer, he and I produced a book called "The Third Sex?" (the first Christian book on homosexuality). Going all over the English-speaking world, that book generated an average of 200 letters a month.

Though I'd had no intention of leaving my business, the Lord impressed me with the need to enter ministry full-time. Thus, Love In Action began with weekly support group meetings.
After a little time had passed, I received a distraught phone call from Barbara Johnson, a woman in Los Angeles. Barbara's son had entered the homosexual lifestyle, but the ex-gay ministry there didn't offer ministry to parents. This was the first time I'd ever heard of any ex-gay ministry besides Love In Action! Intrigued, I hopped on a plane the next morning and went down to see them.

When I met with the Director and the staff of Exit Ministry in Anaheim, California, we wondered if any other ex-gay ministries existed. I was very impressed with the organization of Exit Ministry. I asked them to train my staff at a meeting the following year. They agreed. After I left, the staff began calling churches around the country and found a number of ex-gay ministries. In the middle of 1976 we had our first conference. It was far more than I expected, sixty people representing twelve ministries attended. About the third day of the conference we knew this was not just a one time event, but would be a continuing thing: Exodus was born.
My busy life satisfied me. I enjoyed my work and loved my church. I felt secure and complete, able to settle into a life of comfortable celibacy. After five years, I sensed I was ready for marriage, but was unwilling to make the time commitment involved. I often worked in the office from morning to midnight. How could I give a wife proper attention? I saw no compelling reason to seek marriage.

Around the tenth year of celibacy, however, I began to grow uncomfortable with the single life. Intensely lonely, I began to pray for a mate. During this time, the Love in Action team held a seminar in Eugene, Oregon. I noticed the lady who sponsored the event across the room rapidly talking with a group of people. I thought, "What a hyper lady! I don't think I want to get involved with her!" So I kept my distance. I felt quite sure I never wanted to meet her!
A year and a half later, I visited Los Angeles with the director of Exodus' London ministry. We were on our way to Disneyland and had stopped by Barbara Johnson's house to pick up some passes. Barbara told me that she was obligated to take this woman to Disneyland, but that she just didn't have the time. Essentially, I would be doing her a favor if I could take this woman with us.

I was not happy at the prospect, but there is not much I wouldn't do for Barbara. So I agreed to take this woman along. She introduced us to Anita whom I had no idea I had ever met before. (Actually Barbara introduced me to her the day before at a conference I did, but I met so many people I didn't remember her.) Sometime during the day at Disneyland it came out that Anita had sponsored a conference in Eugene, Oregon where I was the conference speaker. I then remember that I had carefully avoided her, she was so hyper. The day at Disneyland proved to be the most fun I had enjoyed in years. Anita was light hearted and the life of the party. I thoroughly enjoyed her company and dreaded to see the day come to a close.

The next day, Chris and I returned to San Rafael and I became immersed in the day-to-day pressures of the ministry. The memory of that relaxing day faded until Barbara called to say that Anita had apparently liked me. Excitedly, I thought, "A woman really 'likes' me! Guess I did something right!" But calmly, I told Barbara that I couldn't remember having a better day. I asked her to tell Anita that I liked her very much also.

A month or so later, Barbara called again. This time she said that she and four other women were coming north to visit me. Since my late hours at the Love in Action office had never given me reason to furnish my home, I frantically prepared my condominium so that they would have a comfortable stay. Later Barbara called to say only three were coming, then again, only two, lastly that it would be only Anita. I panicked, how would that sound? "Director of Ex-gay Ministry Hosts Single Woman in Newly Furnished Apartment!"

Lori Thorkelson, a lady on Love In Action's staff, came to my rescue by agreeing to stay with Anita in my guest room. As a result of that week, Lori built a firm friendship with Anita and she was invaluable in helping me keep my romantic relationship on an even course. (Later, when I went to Europe for three months, I left a stack of cards for Lori to send Anita every few days, so Anita would know I was thinking of her.)

For Anita, it had been love at first sight (for the ministry that is). She became completely enamored with Love in Action. She loved all the staff and the work we were doing. She wanted to be part of it all. She cried all the way to the train station. It would take time for Anita's love for me to match her love for LIA.

Late one night Anita called me and wanted to see me. I suggested that she get in her car and drive to San Luis Obispo, the half-way point between Los Angeles and San Francisco. She was a little surprised that I was so impulsive, but she wasn't willing to act on the spur of the moment. So we agreed to meet there in a few days. This rendezvous inaugurated a series of long drives to our half-way point (about a 500 mile round trip for each of us).

During these times, we had many meaningful talks about marriage. I was already fifty-five, which made me uncertain that I could consummate our marriage. We decided that a life together was far better than our long-distance relationship. We would have each other, and that would be enough. (As it turned out, my worries were needless.)

Our marriage has been far better than our greatest expectations. The honeymoon continues!

Chastity Pledge Study "Deliberately" Skewed to make Programs Appear Ineffectual

WASHINGTON, June 16, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A so-called scientific analysis of the efficacy of abstinence pledges that concluded that young people who make pledges of abstinence were at equal risk for sexually transmitted disease (STD) and more likely to engage in anal and oral sex has been criticized as “deliberately” misleading, “inaccurate,” and “junk science.”

The Heritage Foundation’s Robert Rector and Dr. Kirk Johnson re-examined the data and claims as presented by professors Peter Bearman and Hanna Bruckner in the April 2005 issue of the Journal of Adolescent Health, concluding that “Bearman and Bruckner’s conclusions were inaccurate . . . Moreover, in crucial respects they deliberately misled the press and public.”

Explaining the deliberate misrepresentation of the facts, Rector and Johnson point out that Bearman and Bruckner “culled through the Add Health sample looking for tiny sub-groups of pledgers with higher risk behaviours,” then describing the high-risk behaviours of these tiny subgroups, allowing the press to draw their own conclusions, by inferring “that they are talking about pledgers in general.”

“The centerpiece of their argument about pledgers and heightened sexual risk activity is a small group of pledgers who engaged in anal sex without vaginal sex,” Rector and Johnson explain. “This ‘risk group’ consists of 21 persons out of a sample of 14,116. Bearman and Bruckner focus on this microscopic group while deliberately failing to inform their audience of the obvious and critical fact that pledgers as a whole are substantially less likely to engage in anal sex when compared to non-pledgers.”

“This tactic is akin to finding a small rocky island in the middle of the ocean, describing the island in detail without describing the surrounding ocean, and then suggesting that the ocean is dry and rocky,” they add. “It is junk science, a willful deception of the American public.”

Rector and Johnson conclude that virginity pledgers are substantially more likely to not engage in risky sexual behaviours, and that those who do break the pledge are still less likely than non-pledgers to engage in more risky anal or oral sex – a direct contradiction to the supposed conclusions reached by Bearman and Bruckner.

“Compared to non-pledgers from the same social backgrounds, pledgers have far fewer sex partners,” Rector and Johnson conclude. “Pledgers are also less likely to engage in sex while in high school, less likely to experience teen pregnancy, less likely to have a child out-of-wedlock, less likely to have children in their teen and young adult years, and less likely to engage in non-marital sex as young adults.”

Read Rector and Johnson’s paper: “Adolescent Virginity Pledges, Condom Use, and Sexually Transmitted Diseases Among Young Adults (Draft)

Abstinence Education Shows Its Wisdom

Studies Reveal Positive Effects of Certain Sex-Ed Programs

WASHINGTON, D.C., OCT. 9, 2004 (Zenit.org).- Government support for sexual education programs that promote abstinence continues to divide opinions. The U.S. House of Representatives voted for a 49% increase in funding for abstinence education, the Washington Times reported Monday. A Senate vote is not likely until after the November elections.

If eventually approved, the increase would give $105 million in federal funds for 2005 to the abstinence program, up from $70.5 million this year.

The federal funds are "making an impact," said Leslee Unruh, president of the Abstinence Clearinghouse. She told the Washington Times, however, that abstinence education still receives only $1 for every $12 given to programs that stress condom use.

Promoting abstinence has plenty of opponents. On Sept. 28 the organization Advocates for Youth released a pair of reports that, according to the press release, "raise new questions about the effectiveness of the abstinence-only-until-marriage approach to sex education endorsed by the federal government."

Research into abstinence programs in 10 states by Advocates for Youth reportedly shows that in the long-term there is "no long-term success in delaying sexual initiation or reducing sexual risk-taking behaviors."


Counterview

But the positive effects of delaying sexual activity is strongly defended in studies published by the Washington-based Heritage Foundation. On Sept. 21 the organization published a report entitled "Teens Who Make Virginity Pledges Have Substantially Improved Life Outcomes."

The report provides statistical evidence demonstrating that teen-agers who publicly pledge to refrain from sexual activity are less likely to experience teen pregnancy. And they will likely have fewer sexual partners.

The study cited data from the government-funded National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, showing that the behavior of adolescents who have made a virginity pledge is significantly different from that of peers who have not made a pledge. Teen-age girls who have taken a virginity pledge are one-third less likely to experience a pregnancy before age 18.

The Heritage report also observed that almost two-thirds of teens who do not make a virginity pledge are sexually active before age 18. By contrast, only 30% of teens who report having made a pledge become sexually active before age 18.

Even though those who pledge to chastity may eventually break their commitment, the report notes that delaying the onset of sexual activity has a number of positive effects. One to reduce the number of sexual partners by about half. Surveys cited in the report show that the benefits last into adulthood. For example, women who become sexually active in their early teen years are less likely to have stable marriages in their 30s when compared with women who wait.

Another advantage is the reduction in children born outside marriage. The report observes that children born and raised outside marriage are seven times more likely to live in poverty than those born and raised in intact married families. As well, they are more prone to a number of social problems, ranging from crime to emotional difficulties.

Adolescent girls who make a pledge to refrain from sexual activity are substantially less likely to give birth in their teens or early 20s. By age 18, 1.8% of those who were firmly pledged had given birth, compared with 3.8% of girls who did not make a pledge.

"Regrettably," the study notes, "teens today live in a sex-saturated popular culture that celebrates casual sex at an early age." Social institutions that teach abstinence values can play an important part in helping teens to media and peer pressure, concludes the report.

Further support for the efficacy of abstinence programs came in a study carried out by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Washington Times reported July 16. The results attribute a 53% drop in teen pregnancy, from 1991 to 2000, to increased abstinence. Increased use of contraceptives accounted for 47% of the decline, according to the study.

Further data showed that girls aged 15 to 17 who were sexually active decreased from 50.6% in 1991 to 42.7% in 2001.

Comprehensive, in theory

Another report published by the Heritage Foundation helps explain why abstinence programs can help change teens' behavior. The study, "Comprehensive Sex Education vs. Authentic Abstinence: A Study of Competing Curricula," was published Aug. 10. It explained that in the past there were two basic approaches to sex education. There was the "safe sex" approach, which encourages teens to use contraception, especially condoms; and abstinence education, which focuses on delaying the onset of sexual activity.

In recent years a new approach, termed "abstinence-plus" or "comprehensive sexuality education," has been developed. This combines, in theory, information on abstinence and contraception.

Research for the report analyzed nine major abstinence-plus curricula and nine abstinence curricula. It revealed that in practice the abstinence-plus programs devoted only 4.7% of their page content to the topic of abstinence and 0% to healthy relationships and marriage.

Moreover, a detailed analysis of the contents of comprehensive sex-ed programs shows that their aim is not to have teens abstain from sexual activity. Rather, their aim is to reduce the risk of pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases that results from "unprotected" sexual activity. "Abstinence -- or not having sex -- is mentioned as one option that teens may consider to avoid risks, but the overwhelming emphasis is on reducing risk by encouraging contraceptive use."

By contrast, the programs promoting abstinence "take a more holistic approach to human sexuality." They place more emphasis on the social and psychological aspects of sex. As well, they examine themes such as love, intimacy and commitment. "Young people are taught that human sexuality is not primarily physical, but moral, emotional and psychological in nature."

The abstinence programs also promote the idea that "personal happiness, love and intimacy are most likely to occur within the commitment of a faithful marriage and that, in contrast, casual sex with multiple partners is likely to undermine the natural process of bonding and intimacy."

Where pregnancies rose

The ill effects of sex education programs that merely promote "safe sex" were made evident in a study published earlier this year in England. On March 14 the London-based Telegraph reported on a survey carried out by the Family Education Trust, entitled "Sex Education or Indoctrination?" The survey analyzed zones where the government's Teen-age Pregnancy Unit had set up programs to reduce the number of girls falling pregnant.

The unit's strategy involves more explicit sex education in schools, often conducted by nurses without teachers present. It also hands out free condoms and sends birthday cards when girls reach 14 asking them to attend confidential health checks without their parents.

The Trust's report found that in most places, there was a rise in teen-age pregnancies following the implementation of these programs. One, in Cornwall, saw a 17% rise in teen-age pregnancies between 2001 and 2002. In York, teen pregnancies soared 34%.

Scotland saw similar results after programs were introduced to distribute free morning-after pills and condoms, the Sunday Times reported April 11. Girls aged 13 to 15 in the zone affected, the Lothians, were 14% more likely to get pregnant than their counterparts elsewhere in Scotland, compared with 3% before the program started.

The region was selected as a test area for the government's Healthy Respect project. Cardinal Keith O'Brien, president of the Scottish bishops' conference, said the Healthy Respect model had failed. He urged that it should not be expanded.

"This approach has failed to tackle the rise in sexually transmitted infections, unwanted conceptions and abortion levels," he said. "Its value-free style should certainly not be used elsewhere in Scotland." Evidence is mounting, on both sides of the Atlantic, on the advantages of programs that promote abstinence and a more comprehensive view of human sexuality.