Contrary to popular belief, contraception is not an intrinsic evil.

[JacktheCatholic]

I recall reading 18-36 months ago, that the Vatican said that at the urging of some Bishops, it would look at the specific situation where one partner in a marriage has AIDS and whether ABC might be justifiable in such a circumstance. However, I never heard anymore. Does anyone know if the issue is still pending or did I just miss Pope Benedict's teaching?

It was regarding homosexual men with aids and how using a condom to try to keep their homosexual partner from getting aids was a good sign (not sure of language, just that it was a good sign). It had no impact on the teaching of contraception. Just a lot of media hype.

 

[WarriorAngel]

If you have sex without using other contraception, your regular birth control fails, or you are forced to have sex, take action right away to learn what your options are. Even though emergency contraception is often called the “morning after pill” or “day after pill,” you can actually use any type of emergency contraceptive pill for up to 5 days (120 hours) and still significantly reduce the chance that you’ll get pregnant.
In the United States, there are two different kinds of emergency contraceptive pills available: ulipristal acetate (ella) and progestin-only (Plan B One-Step or Next Choice).



Emergency contraception: Timeframe for using emergency contraceptives (the morning after pill)

Plan B One-Step and Next Choice can be purchased directly from the pharmacist by women and men aged 17 or older. Both contain the same total amount of progestin (1.5 mg). Plan B One-Step is just one pill that you take as soon as possible after sex. The instructions for Next Choice (which contains 2 pills) say to take the first dose within 72 hours after sex and a second dose 12 hours later (however, studies show that you can take both pills at the same time). But studies show that progestin-only and combined EC (such as regular birth control pills taken in different doses to work as emergency contraception) can be taken for up to 5 days after sex, with a decline in effectiveness on the 4th and 5th days after sex. Click here for more detailed instructions for using daily birth control pills as emergency contraception.

Continued....

 

[WarriorAngel]

How do emergency contraception/morning-after pills work?
The emergency contraceptive/morning-after pill has three possible ways in which it can work:

1. Ovulation is inhibited, meaning the egg will not be released;
2. The normal menstrual cycle is altered, delaying ovulation; or
3. It can irritate the lining of the uterus so that if the first and second actions fail, and the woman does become pregnant, the tiny baby boy or girl will die before he or she can actually attach to the lining of the uterus.

In other words, if the third action occurs, her body rejects the tiny baby and he or she will die. This is called a chemical abortion.
Abortion is an act of direct killing that takes the life of a tiny human being-a life that begins at fertilization.
Is it safe?
No. Here are some of the side effects:

• nausea
• vomiting
• infertility
• breast tenderness
• ectopic pregnancy-can be life threatening
• blood clot formation

Emergency contraception also offers no protection against sexually transmitted diseases including AIDS.
There are no long term studies to show whether women will be permanently damaged, or risk such diseases as cancer, from these chemicals being given in such high doses.







Emergency Contraception: The Morning-After Pill | ALL.org

 

[WarriorAngel]

Some people call RU-486 “the abortion pill,” but in fact there are two different abortion pills now widespread in America. One is RU-486 (scientific name mifepristone), used in early pregnancy to induce abortion, often in combination with another drug. The other is the morning-after pill (MAP), sold under the brand name Plan B and which is simply a high-dose version of the standard oral contraceptive pill. Both kill unborn children, meaning that there are two abortion pills exterminating children in our low-birthrate land. And all this is separate from the possibility that sometimes, the regular oral contraceptive pill acts an abortifacient, too.

MAP must be taken within a few days—within 72 hours for the maximum chance of effectiveness—after sexual relations to prevent or abort pregnancy. MAP’s supporters including the mainstream media label it “emergency contraception,” but many of MAP’s scientific supporters say that MAP not only prevents fertilization, but can sometimes prevent the implantation of an already fertilized egg. Another name for a “fertilized egg” is a “conceived child,” a separate person with his own DNA and pattern of growth.

Two Different Abortion Pills Grow in Use - HUMAN EVENTS

 

[WarriorAngel]

Emergency "Contraception" and Early Abortion

The recent approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of a new drug (Preven), specifically for use as "Emergency Contraception" (EC), is raising questions as to whether the drug's mechanism is contraceptive or abortifacient in nature.

A major problem in this debate is the manipulation of terms. The FDA, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and abortion advocacy groups long ago endorsed a change in the definitions of "conception" and "pregnancy" to confuse the issue. Instead of equating conception with fertilization, and seeing a woman as pregnant if her body contains a living, developing embryo, they equate "conception" and "pregnancy" with the implantation of the embryo in the uterus 6 to 10 days later. Thus a drug or device that destroys the early embryo or disrupts its development is redefined as "contra-ceptive," even though it is abortifacient in nature.

USCCB - Pro-Life Activities - Emergency "Contraception" and Early Abortion

 

[WarriorAngel]

Pro-life Chair Voices ‘Grave Concern’ Over FDA Plan to Approve Abortion Drug for ‘Emergency Contraception’
WASHINGTON—The chairman of the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities voiced “grave concern” to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over its move toward approving a new drug that may induce early abortions as an “emergency contraceptive.” In a June 17 letter to Dr. Margaret Hamburg, Commissioner of the FDA, Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Galveston-Houston criticized the FDA’s move to hold an advisory committee meeting on the drug Ulipristal “without broad public input or a full record on the drug’s safety for women or their unborn children.”
The Cardinal raised concerns that Ulipristal is more similar in effect to the drug RU-486, which can cause abortions several weeks into pregnancy, than it is to other emergency contraceptives, which are believed to have no post-implantation effects.
“Millions of American women, even those willing to use a contraceptive to prevent fertilization in various circumstances, would personally never choose to have an abortion,” said Cardinal DiNardo. “They would be ill served by a misleading campaign to present Ulipristal simply as a ‘contraceptive.’ In fact, FDA approval for that purpose would likely make the drug available for ‘off-label’ use simply as an abortion drug – including its use by unscrupulous men with the intent of causing an early abortion without a woman's knowledge or consent. Such abuses have already occurred in the case of RU-486, despite its warning labels and limited distribution.”
Cardinal DiNardo went on to cite the support of this and previous Administrations for federal laws ensuring no one is involved in an abortion without his or her knowledge or consent, as well as the Obama Administration’s rationale for supporting broad access to contraceptives as a means of reducing abortions.
“Plans for approving a known abortion-causing drug as a ‘contraceptive’ for American women is not consistent with the stated policy of the Administration on these matters,” the Cardinal wrote.

http://www.usccb.org/comm/archives/2010/10-121.shtml

 

[Gwendolyn]

RU-486 is for inducing miscarriage. Abortion.

It is NOTTTTTTTTT used as a morning-after pill. It is used for women who want to abort their child within the first three months.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Let us briefly review what the medical literature claims are the three methods of action of OCs.
1. Primarily, they inhibit ovulation by suppression of the pituitary/ovarian axis.
2. Secondarily, they inhibit transport of sperm through the cervix by thickening the cervical mucus.
3. They cause changes in the endometrium that have historically been assumed to decrease the possibility of implantation, should conception occur.
It is this third mechanism of action that lies at the crux of our debate.



First, we will present the argument that oral contraceptives cause abortions. Those that believe that oral contraceptives may cause abortions have plenty of evidence that concerns and convinces them. There is an impressive amount of medical literature that claims that one of the ways oral contraceptives work is by preventing implantation of an embryo into the mother’s endometrium, which is the inner lining of the uterus. OC’s make the endometrium thinner, less glandular. In vitro fertilization studies have well-documented that thinner and less glandular endometriums are less receptive to a living embryo. If this secondary mode of action prevents implantation of the embryo and causes an abortion, then the oral contraceptive would not be acting as a “contraceptive” at all in this instance; that is, it would not be acting “against conception.” On the contrary, it would be acting as an abortifacient because it aborts a human being.

...
On the other hand, there is much medical literature that contradicts this notion that OCs cause abortions; unfortunately, however, not in terms that the pro-lifer can accept. Much of this contradiction in the medical literature is a result of an equivocation over the word “pregnancy”.
...

A second reason that pro-life physicians may not hold the position that oral contraceptives cause abortions is that they are unconvinced by the evidence. There is ample data to support the first two method of actions of OCs mentioned above. But the third proposed method of action, the so-called “hostile endometrium theory”, has little direct evidence to support it. Drug manufacturers have heralded it from the beginning without proof, and it has been echoed by two generations of investigators without verification.

There is indirect evidence that the OC produces a thinner, less glandular, less vascular lining, and there is direct evidence from the field of in vitro fertilization that a thinner, less glandular, less vascular lining is less likely to allow the attachment of the new human being when it enters the uterus. However, when a woman taking OCs does ovulate, the corpus luteum (the ovarian follicle turns into the corpus luteum after ovulation) produces ten to twenty times the levels of both estrogen and progesterone seen in a non-non-ovulatory pill cycle. This results in the growth of stroma, blood vessels, glands, and glandular secretions to help prepare the lining for implantation. If there is no conception after ovulation, the corpus luteum ceases to function about two weeks after ovulation and menses follows. However, if conception occurs following ovulation, the embryo releases the human chorionic gonadotropin hormone (HCG), which stimulates the corpus luteum to continue its function until the placenta takes over hormone production two months later.


5. This paper is not meant to be the "final word" on this issue. If scientific study should validate that a hormonal contraceptive agent is partly abortifacient in its action, we would oppose that agent just as we oppose elective medical and surgical abortions.

We must constantly examine valid data as it becomes available in our effort to discern what is abortifacient vs. what is appropriate birth control to be used or prescribed by those who hold to the sanctity of human life from the time of conception.

do oral contraception cause abortion?

I am not seeing anything conclusive from experts to suggest this is non abortificient.

 

[Gwendolyn]

I am not seeing anything conclusive from experts to suggest this is non abortificient.

I'm confused about this paragraph, because it seems to suggest that if a woman ovulates on the pill, she is more likely to conceive/implant...

However, when a woman taking OCs does ovulate, the corpus luteum (the ovarian follicle turns into the corpus luteum after ovulation) produces ten to twenty times the levels of both estrogen and progesterone seen in a non-non-ovulatory pill cycle. This results in the growth of stroma, blood vessels, glands, and glandular secretions to help prepare the lining for implantation. If there is no conception after ovulation, the corpus luteum ceases to function about two weeks after ovulation and menses follows. However, if conception occurs following ovulation, the embryo releases the human chorionic gonadotropin hormone (HCG), which stimulates the corpus luteum to continue its function until the placenta takes over hormone production two
months later.

That seems kind of contrary to what the article started off with, or maybe I just read it wrong.

Also, NO ONE has said that "the morning-after pill" is not abortifacient. EVERTYONE has agreed that it is.

 

[WarriorAngel]

I'm confused about this paragraph, because it seems to suggest that if a woman ovulates on the pill, she is more likely to conceive/implant...

However, when a woman taking OCs does ovulate, the corpus luteum (the ovarian follicle turns into the corpus luteum after ovulation) produces ten to twenty times the levels of both estrogen and progesterone seen in a non-non-ovulatory pill cycle. This results in the growth of stroma, blood vessels, glands, and glandular secretions to help prepare the lining for implantation. If there is no conception after ovulation, the corpus luteum ceases to function about two weeks after ovulation and menses follows. However, if conception occurs following ovulation, the embryo releases the human chorionic gonadotropin hormone (HCG), which stimulates the corpus luteum to continue its function until the placenta takes over hormone production two
months later.

That seems kind of contrary to what the article started off with, or maybe I just read it wrong.

Also, NO ONE has said that "the morning-after pill" is not abortifacient. EVERTYONE has agreed that it is.

Yah i left that portion for more brilliant minds.

I am thinking a typo somewhere?
Or maybe misdirected proposal?

It makes no sense to me why if it aids implantation, it would be a contraception.

I think the writer missed a word somewhere?

 

[Basil the Great]

I looked up the definition of "intrinsically" and it seems that I misunderstood it's meaning. Hence, I now understand why adultery is called intrinsically evil.

 

[JoabAnias]

I recall this definition of an intrinsic evil that has always stuck with me:

An intrinsic evil as an act that is always bad, always sinful, always always always. Never good, never appropriate, never useful, never, never, never. It is an act that is ALWAYS SINFUL in every time, every epoch, every era, every age, every place, every situation, every every every. There is NO GREY AREA! No doubt, no question that these acts (acts that are intrinsically evil) are always and everywhere and for everybody and for every situation, SINFUL and NEVER ACCEPTABLE.

http://www.40daysforlife.com/saltlakecity/documents/INTRINSICEVIL.pdf​

 

[Rebekka]

Adultery can only occur between a married and unmarried person.

No, it can also occur between married people not married to each other.

The adulterous act can never be redeemed unless there has been the death of a spouse and the other is free to marry the one they entered into the adulterous relationship with. . but then it is not the adulterous act that is redeemed. . it is abandoned and a proper conjugal love is entered into.

It has always been my understanding that catholics can not remarry their accomplice in the adultery even after the death of the betrayed spouse. I don't see why the church would change this rule, it protects the victims of adultery from being murdered.

 

[StThomasMore]

That makes no sense david.


If ovulation has not taken place, and there is no threat of it taking place in the near future, there is no need for any contraception.

If there is any question then you have another problem.

If ovulation hasn't taken place, that doesn't mean it's not about to take place.

If you give such drugs, it does not ensure that ovulation wil not take place.

If you give such drugs, it does not ensure that conception does not take place.


If conception does occur, then you have given a drug that most assuredly will make it impossible for that newly conceived child to live.


The ONLY EFFECTIVE contraception is the morning after pill post rape. And that is condemned by the Church for the reasons above.

When someon is raped, there is not time for any other form to be effective, as there is significant delay between the time of rape and the time help is sought. By then, even using spermicides will have little effect. It is like putting a bandaid on a mortal wound.


So, even though some try to confuse the issue, let's be real.


There is no real contraception after rape that is not an abortificant.

If the woman gets to the hospital immediately after the rape, the spermicides would be very effective in preventing the sperm. And since spermicides are the only thing that don't act as an abortificient it would essentially be what the USCCB was meaning when it stated about preventing conception. Since they were stating regarding chemicals that would prevent and attack the sperm but would not hurt the fetus if conception did take place.

 

[thereselittleflower]

I recall this definition of an intrinsic evil that has always stuck with me:

An intrinsic evil as an act that is always bad, always sinful, always always always. Never good, never appropriate, never useful, never, never, never. It is an act that is ALWAYS SINFUL in every time, every epoch, every era, every age, every place, every situation, every every every. There is NO GREY AREA! No doubt, no question that these acts (acts that are intrinsically evil) are always and everywhere and for everybody and for every situation, SINFUL and NEVER ACCEPTABLE.

http://www.40daysforlife.com/saltlakecity/documents/INTRINSICEVIL.pdf​

Yep. ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS . . I included that quote in one of my posts too.

 

[thereselittleflower]

No, it can also occur between married people not married to each other.

Of course it can . . my point was that it does not occur between two who are married to each other and it does not occur between two who are unmarried to anyone else. I simply left out the example you provided above.

The point is adultery is always between a married person and someone they are not married to.

It has always been my understanding that catholics can not remarry their accomplice in the adultery even after the death of the betrayed spouse. I don't see why the church would change this rule, it protects the victims of adultery from being murdered.

Not sure that this is a hard and fast rule. David married Bathsheba.

 

[Rebekka]

Of course it can . . my point was that it does not occur between two who are married to each other and it does not occur between two who are unmarried to anyone else. I simply left out the example you provided above.

The point is adultery is always between a married person and someone they are not married to.




Not sure that this is a hard and fast rule. David married Bathsheba.

David did get reprimanded for the relationship, though.

I have an old catechism that condemns this.

 

[thereselittleflower]

If the woman gets to the hospital immediately after the rape, the spermicides would be very effective in preventing the sperm. And since spermicides are the only thing that don't act as an abortificient it would essentially be what the USCCB was meaning when it stated about preventing conception. Since they were stating regarding chemicals that would prevent and attack the sperm but would not hurt the fetus if conception did take place.

That is NOT true.

For spermicides to be effective, they must be applied BEFORE the sexual act.

Spermicides

Spermidices include contraceptive foams, creams, gels, films and suppositories. Spermicides must be placed in the vagina at least 10 minutes before intercourse so that they can spread and fill the vaginal space. They are effective for up to 1 hour but must be reapplied with each intercourse. Spermicides are inexpensive and easily purchased at drug and grocery stores without a prescription.
How Do They Work?

Spermicides are placed deep up into the vagina using an applicator (similar to inserting a tampon). The spermicide forms a thick liquid or foam that slow the migration of the sperm. Then a chemical in the spermicide immobilizes the sperm in so that they cannot travel into the uterus to fertilize an egg.

Effectivenes

If 100 couples use spermicides correctly as their only form of birth control, about 18 of them will become pregnant within a year. In practice, about 29 couples will experience a pregnancy using only spermicides. The effectiveness of spermicides is improved if they are used with condoms, diaphragms or the cervical cap (discussed elsewhere in Birth Control).

Birth Control (Depo-Provera, Birth Control Pill)
​

So, if used PROPERLY, which includes using it BEFORE intercourse, 29 out of 100 will experience pregnancy.


If you put it in even 30 min after intercourse, you are way, way too late for a spermicide to do anything effective. Most the sperm aren't even there anymore and those that are are dying already.


Even if you used it within minutes of intercourse, you are already too late. It takes time to expand and do its job. . . and the sperm are already on their way through the cervix within minutes, which put them out of the reach of the spermicide.


This is nothing more than a "feel good" psychological bandaid, that has actually no real physical benefit as far as doing what it is intended to do after the fact.


People need to inform themselves about what they are being told. . they are being sold a bill of goods, and seem all to ready to accept it simply because it is what they want to hear.





ALSO, something I was not aware of till now,

Spermicides cause irritation and according to the CDC, studies have shown that spermicides increase the risk of HIV.

Spermicide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/news/reutnonox.htm

​

So, one would be giving the rape victim a completely ineffectual method of contraception, which cannot do for her what she is being led to believe it can do for her, and which, AT THE SAME TIME, increases her already increased risk of contracting HIV.

 

[thereselittleflower]

David did get reprimanded for the relationship, though.

I have an old catechism that condemns this.

Yes he did get reprimandid. But he married Bathsheba and he WAS culpable for her husband's death.

 

[Rebekka]

Yes he did get reprimandid. But he married Bathsheba and he WAS culpable for her husband's death.

Yes, it does contradict what was written in the catechism. The same goes for marrying inlaws by the way. The levirate marriage was custom in the OT but nowadays we're not allowed to marry our brothers-in-law (or sisters-in-law, and some other degrees of affinity). So despite it happening in the OT, it doesn't automatically mean that the catholic church allows this now.