My 2 cents on NFP. I have a degree in biotechnology and have worked in research developing diagnostic kits for autoimmune diseases. Making precise and accurate diagnostic kits to obtain the correct signal (true positive vs true negative) is very cumbersome and requires experienced and knowledgeable understanding.. Such as is this result truly positive? What to the stats say, check the control, run different conditions etc. It can be hard for a trained scientist such as myself in a lab with experience and advanced equipment. Now you take that same required knowledge experience and technology and apply it to Joe Schmo who has vast knowledge in finance but has diddly squat in biomedical diagnostics, you're in for a heap potentially inaccurate interpretations. NFP requires CONSISTENT measurement and ACCURATE execution. A trained scientist in a lab with precise tools has no problem with this. For Joe Schmo, it's a problematic. While yes, in theory, with proper measurement and execution NFP is 90%+ efdective, with the addition variables such as diagnostic ignorance and lack of training, that effectiveness drops. But you would never know it, because of IMO, rampant bias among Catholics. What Catholic who obeys the CCC and practices NFP is going to publicly or privately decry a surprise child with NFP. They were open to life before the act, ergo the child was included in the fine print. Now, I'm not NFP, I support it. But when people say "yes it's 95% effective", keepnit.mind that's ideal. When you have regular people diagnosing their spouse or themselves as infertile, there is major discrepants. I've seen good scientists misdiagnose proper tests, heck even doctors do. I do support NFP, I do not support contraception unless to relieve medical conflicts. But people should not be led down a sugar coated path. People should only be intimate when they are absolutely open to kids no matter what, and therefore practice NFP. If they're not open, then practice abstience. Abstience will bring you closer, to each other than sex.