No, it actually makes sense when you read it in context and don't get stuck in the supposed established person of the writer.
Explain to me how a birth control method can be secular or not if it's got nothing to do with religion.
It's because religions like to make it an issue and take a stand on it, after which those methods not endorsed by that particular religious point of view can be considered secular by comparison.
It's like saying the right-hand rule is religious or secular, it's nonsensical.
If some church had decided to indoctrinate the right-hand-rule as the only correct co-ordinate system and endorsed it's use over other co-ordinate systems... then it could be argued that left-handed co-ordinates could be considered secular by comparison.
Don't ask me if any of this makes sense, I have no answers - just my own opinions and they say churches don't make much sense in any sense, why should they start now? I'm just saying that even though churches/religions by and large don't have much in the books of well-balanced arguments for their stories and claims, their members can still be nice people who can even disagree with their organized faith as arranged by the church. Assuming that
all of them are just drones for their denomination is without basis (although disturbingly often accurate).
I should know, I live with several students of theology and majority of them are perfectly nice bunch of people. I find their religious tendencies odd, but that hasn't prevented me from having many an actual discussion about things that go much deeper than the superficial issues that I have with religions (such as definitions of divine, universe, their separation and it's necessity).
So there, booyah. Then again they are actual students of theology so the terminology and level of discussion (and if necessary, argumentation) is likely better than even this forum (despite it's reasonably high standards by internet spectrum) by degrees of several magnitudes.
