Is the Pill Abortive or not?

Do you have anything to link to about that, Fran? From all indications, there's quite a bit of "breakthrough" ovulation when using the pill "correctly." How must it be used to wipe out the bodys function completely? I understand wanting to treat a disease, but I'm still REALLLY cautious when it comes to the long term detriments not worth the current benefits. Completely change the bodys hormonal functioning for years--there's got to be a mess that comes wtih it.

Fran75 said:

Thank you, however if hormone/s are used on a certain schedule than the user does not ovulate and has no cycle at all so is not an abortificant for those users, some of us will be on a "pill" for years and at least I'll speak for myself aren't willing to be abstinent indefinitely.

Click to expand...

choirfiend said:

Do you have anything to link to about that, Fran? From all indications, there's quite a bit of "breakthrough" ovulation when using the pill "correctly." How must it be used to wipe out the bodys function completely? I understand wanting to treat a disease, but I'm still REALLLY cautious when it comes to the long term detriments not worth the current benefits. Completely change the bodys hormonal functioning for years--there's got to be a mess that comes wtih it.

Click to expand...

What choirfiend said. I haven't seen anything to indicate what you are claiming Fran.

BUT if you are right, and you can be absolutely certain that you will not be ending the life of a baby (fertilized egg), then I don't see a problem. Most rules do have exceptions... But exceptions don't make the rule (Someone wiser than me said that once).

Fran75 said:

Thank you, however if hormone/s are used on a certain schedule than the user does not ovulate and has no cycle at all so is not an abortificant for those users, some of us will be on a "pill" for years and at least I'll speak for myself aren't willing to be abstinent indefinitely.

Click to expand...

Not really. The pill suppresses ovulation to a certain rate, but it absolutely does not eliminate it. 3 out of 100 women who use the pill correctly for a year will actually get pregnant. Obviously if they are getting pregnant, they ovulated.

choirfiend said:

Do you have anything to link to about that, Fran? From all indications, there's quite a bit of "breakthrough" ovulation when using the pill "correctly." How must it be used to wipe out the bodys function completely? I understand wanting to treat a disease, but I'm still REALLLY cautious when it comes to the long term detriments not worth the current benefits. Completely change the bodys hormonal functioning for years--there's got to be a mess that comes with it.

Click to expand...

I am certain, yes, the "pill", synthetic progesterone, same dose every day, I take causes me to have no cycle, I haven't had one for years, at all, and my husband and I are infertile anyways, baby stroller baby in my pic was adopted. Every body needs to look their own situation objectively in the context of how they take the pill or hormone/hormones and their personal medical condition, same with cancer risk with regard to taking hormones. There is no way we are going to be abstinent for years because the "pill" can cause fertilized eggs to not implant, our chances of having a fertilized egg before I took my pill/hormone were slim to none, and the chance of it now is a close to 0 as it could be with me having my ovaries removed, which I would be willing to do if my doctor offered me the option. The pill is either estrogen or progesterone or a combo, there are different ways/schedules to take them and different doese so it will not have the same effect on every one, medical plans are individualized for each patient if one is going to compare their situation with another they must be certain that they are comparing apples to apples so to speak, the internet and word of mouth are poor ways to do this a person's doctor can explain their situation to them the best. There is not one "the pill".

Kristos said:

While this statement might be justified by defining the terms in a narrow manner, we are not trying to do that here. Life begins at conception. That is the Orthodox view. Anything that artificially interferes with the natural process after conception is considered termination of a human life. Call it abortion or call it induced wastage - either way the life that was created is willfully terminated and therefore either way it is wrong. Unfortunately, many people are ignorant of this because the medical community chooses to define their terms in a very narrow manner which lead to statements such as yours.

Click to expand...

what do you mean by narrow manner?

i still disagree with most of you but i do not want to start any off topic arguments. message me if you want to.