I hardly believe I'm about to say this but ... in defense of Catholicism
... the source that you're quoting is does not adhere to Catholic doctrine. Is this more from SSPX? They were only founded 40 years ago and it's doctrine/ministries aren't recognised by the Church. For some reason, the more recently something was founded, the crazier it seems. (Church of Latter-Day Saints, anyone?)
There is, too, a difference between traditional Catholicism and traditionalist. It's hard for them to be truly traditional when they were founded in the latter 20th century. Rather like how there is the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamists, and then there's actual Muslims.
Just for reference, the Church has no problem with natural methods of family planning.
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Part Two, Section Three, Chapter Three, Article Six:
2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. 158 These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" is intrinsically evil:159
Not that I want to defend the Church as sane or rational, I just think it's important to recognise there is difference between these splinter traditionalist "Catholics" and the actual Catholic church. For one, they are much
crazier. And second of all, it's simply misrepresentation. Like when creationists misrepresent evolution as a theory of chance.
Still a good example of how ridiculous religion can be, and the thread is good for a laugh. But I think we should be clear about whose doctrines these are.