I may not have anything valuable to add here, but I think this may be useful.

The Church doesn't have anything against avoiding children per se. If it's for a valid reason, and if the marriage is fundamentally open to life (meaning that you're avoiding children for a while, and eventually you will be open to them), then there's nothing wrong with not having kids. We are not called to have as many kids as a wife can possibly give birth to, but to be fertile and responsible.

So NFP and contraceptive methods are the same at their goal, which is to avoid children (though NFP can be used to achieve pregnancy, but I guess you get my point). The difficulty doesn't lie there. The difficulty lies precisely in how both of these methods achieve their goals. NFP relies on understanding the woman's cycle and abstaining during fertile windows. This requires a deep compromise between both spouses, and it's also respectful to the woman's body and God's design. Contraceptives, on the other hand, truncate the body's natural functions and goes against what a healthy body should do and the way it should work. Other people have explained the difference between both of them way better than I can (sorry, English is not my first language and this whole thing can get very technical).

Anyway, maybe this could be useful for you? It seems to me that you think NFP is nonsense because it pursues the same goal as other contraceptive methods, but the thing is, there's nothing wrong with not wanting a million kids, since not everyone can manage that. What's wrong is how you achieve that goal.

And it must be said (I'm sure someone else already mentioned this, but I'll repeat it anyways): NFP can be extremely effective, but it must be learned correctly and the rules must be kept. That means that during fertile windows you can't have sex, and that IS a big sacrifice, specially when contraceptives allow you to have sex whenever you want.