If sex is only for reproduction then the Pope still has it wrong

I'm talking about the rhythm method, or per the old joke:

"What is rhythm and blues?"

"A Catholic form of birth control and the results nine months later."

And, in reality, it's the one form of birth control approved by Holy Mother Church.

But, as Jesus allegedly told Pharisees about Mosaic law on divorce, maybe that even is a concession to human weakness, if one inserts oneself into the shoes of orthodox Catholic theological teaching.

Because, if sex is ONLY for reproduction, the Pope, if not a hypocrite, should command Catholics to turn the rhythm method on its head and have sex ONLY during female fertility periods. Nothing else is allowed. Especially for men, now that we know what's going on, because:


-->

That said, let's shift gears here a sec.

I'm kind o surprised that Joe Smith didn't look at the golden plates one last time with his Urim and Thummim and combine a new revelation about this with plural marriage. Since the myth of menstrual synchronization is just that, it would kill multiple birds with one stone.

"Not tonight, dear, I can only sleep with Hepzibah, my Wife No. 3!"

After all, to extend the guys with red slippers logically out, it should be considered a sin, since men can control when they emit sperm, which women can't with egg cells, not to "scatter one's seed" as much as heterosexually possible (within the authoritarian male confines of marriage, of course).

But, back to the guys with the funky headgear, not the funky spectacles.

The appeal to natural law also falls flat.

First, animals have gay sex. And oral sex. And all sorts of other verschnizzle.

And, re masturbation? They do that, too, including any dogs in the Vatican, if they're male, humping the leg of its current occupant, Francis the Talking Pope.

And, if we really want to trump the guys with the gilded house? To get back to Joe Smith, the popes are sinning by not being married and procreating. Ditto monks etc.