More Contraception Means More Abortions, Not Fewer

[Michie]

Don't give up, there are people reading who agree (but don't post).
I saw a guy on EWTN who tried to justify contraception and abortion. The irony is none of this would be discussed by him (or others) if people kept sexual relations where they belong--in a marital bond. But he was there trying to say abortion was "Ok" under certain situations. He got set straight by the other guest in the segment.

Thanks Chrystal. I get discouraged when nobody reads the actual message and go automatically to the politics.

 

[Chrystal-J]

Thanks Chrystal. I get discouraged when bony reads the actual message and go automatically to the politics.

You're welcome! Politics has gone wild this year. Between that, the virus and riots--I'm surprised I haven't gone koo koo.

 

[Bob Crowley]

As far as I'm concerned the original article was just as much wishful thinking as that of any pro-abortionist.

Access to free birth control reduces abortion rates | Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis

The business of the contraceptive pill is a bee in my bonnet I'm afraid. I don't agree with abortion, but there's a huge moral difference between trying to prevent conception and killing a child once it has been conceived.

And as far as intention goes, I can't see one iota of difference between NFP and the pill. The INTENTION is precisely the same - to try to avoid conception.

Two Popes set up or expanded two committees, both of which recommended the pill would be moral for married couples, and then Pius VI jettisoned their findings and reasoning in favour of a hardline clique.

As for the mere fact the "pill" is "artificial", except for the absolute basics of air, water, soil, and sun, we spend our entire lives in an "artificial" environment, unlike the animals. We live in "artificial" homes, wear "artificial" clothes, drive "artificial" cars on "artificial" roads, use "artificial" gadgets to freeze our food and heat our meals, get our food in "artificial" containers, get injected with "artificial" vaccines, educated in "artificial" schools, live in "artificial" cities, obey "artificial" traffic lights, and "artificial" laws.

But don't get me started.

Contraceptive Use Is Key to Reducing Abortion Worldwide

Dramatic Results

Between 1988 and 2001, modern contraceptive use increased in Russia by 74%, while the abortion rate declined by 61%.

 

[chevyontheriver]

As far as I'm concerned the original article was just as much wishful thinking as that of any pro-abortionist.

Access to free birth control reduces abortion rates | Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis

The business of the contraceptive pill is a bee in my bonnet I'm afraid. I don't agree with abortion, but there's a huge moral difference between trying to prevent conception and killing a child once it has been conceived.

And as far as intention goes, I can't see one iota of difference between NFP and the pill. The INTENTION is precisely the same - to try to avoid conception.

Two Popes set up or expanded two committees, both of which recommended the pill would be moral for married couples, and then Pius VI jettisoned their findings and reasoning in favour of a hardline clique.

As for the mere fact the "pill" is "artificial", except for the absolute basics of air, water, soil, and sun, we spend our entire lives in an "artificial" environment, unlike the animals. We live in "artificial" homes, wear "artificial" clothes, drive "artificial" cars on "artificial" roads, use "artificial" gadgets to freeze our food and heat our meals, get our food in "artificial" containers, get injected with "artificial" vaccines, educated in "artificial" schools, live in "artificial" cities, obey "artificial" traffic lights, and "artificial" laws.

But don't get me started.

Contraceptive Use Is Key to Reducing Abortion Worldwide

I guess I'm getting you started. Sorry about that.

The 'commission' was set up by Paul VI, not Pius VI, and he didn't follow the recommendation of his own commission. He followed the recommendation of a Polish cardinal instead. That cardinal wrote 'Love and Responsibility' and authored the whole 'Theology of the Body' thing.

As for 'artificial' that simply isn't the point, even if NFP uses the word 'natural'. Bad choice of words there unfortunately. It IS natural, but that misses the point. See Janet Smith about that.

And the Russian contraceptive experience differs from most of the world in that abortion was the standard contraceptive. Almost nothing else was available in the 50's, 60's, 70's, and 80's. That's very different from the experience of Western Europe or the USA. They did lots of abortions. Women typically had multiple abortions. So in an environment like that even one 'success' with a contraceptive was one less abortion. Different situation from the developed world. So I'm not surprised but it's very apples and oranges.

 

[Bob Crowley]

According to Wikipedia, the commission was set up by John XXIII, and expanded by Pius VI.

Establishment by John XXIII
With the appearance of the first oral contraceptives in 1960, dissenters in the church argued for a reconsideration of the church positions. In 1963 Pope John XXIII established a commission of six European non-theologians to study questions of birth control and population.[1][page range too broad][2][page needed] Neither John XXIII nor Paul VI wanted the almost three thousand bishops and other clerics then in Rome for the Second Vatican Council to address the birth control issue even though many of these bishops expressed their desire to bring this pressing pastoral issue before the council.[3]

Role of Paul VI[edit]
After John XXIII's death in 1963, Pope Paul VI added theologians to the commission and over three years expanded it to 72 members from five continents (including 16 theologians, 13 physicians and 5 women without medical credentials, with an executive committee of 16 bishops, including 7 cardinals.)[1][page range too broad][2][page needed]

Again according to Wikipedia -

Majority report
The commission produced a report in 1966, proposing that artificial birth control was not intrinsically evil and that Catholic couples should be allowed to decide for themselves about the methods to be employed.[1][page range too broad][4][page needed][5] This report was approved by 64 of the 69 members voting.[6] According to this majority report, use of contraceptives should be regarded as an extension of the already accepted cycle method:

The acceptance of a lawful application of the calculated sterile periods of the woman – that the application is legitimate presupposes right motives – makes a separation between the sexual act which is explicitly intended and its reproductive effect which is intentionally excluded.

The tradition has always rejected seeking this separation with a contraceptive intention for motives spoiled by egoism and hedonism, and such seeking can never be admitted. The true opposition is not to be sought between some material conformity to the physiological processes of nature and some artificial intervention. For it is natural to man to use his skill in order to put under human control what is given by physical nature. The opposition is really to be sought between one way of acting which is contraceptive and opposed to a prudent and generous fruitfulness, and another way which is, in an ordered relationship to responsible fruitfulness and which has a concern for education and all the essential, human and Christian values.[7]

Pius VI listened to the five who voted against it. That's what I would call a jaundiced decision. Why even bother setting up and expanding a committee, which finally included 16 theologians, 13 physicians and 5 women without medical credentials, with an executive committee of 16 bishops, including 7 cardinals, if you're then just going to ignore their findings and decision??

I haven't got much admiration for his decision.

Again on the "artificiality" business, since it is "natural to man to use his skill in order to put under human control what is given by physical nature", quoting the report above, when we have communion, which is when we approach the Holy of Holies most closely, we celebrate it in an artificial church using artificial wafers, at an artificial altar, and placed on an artificial plate. The wine is poured from an artificial cup, and the cup and plate are cleaned using artificial cloths.

The priest raises an artificial cup, we read from an artificial sheet of paper to proclaim the Word, quoted from an artificial Bible, using an artificial microphone and sound system, and we kneel on artificial kneelers if we've got them, having descended from an artificial pew.

Since we believe the Holy Spirit descends upon these gifts and makes them Holy, it seems God hasn't got a problem respecting our use of artificial means. After all, He's the one who gave us the brains to make all these things.

And these days, due to Covid, we then wipe down the pews after the mass using artificial cleaners.

Once again, I fail entirely to see the difference in intention between using NFP and an artificial contraceptive.

 

[chevyontheriver]

According to Wikipedia, the commission was set up by John XXIII, and expanded by Pius VI.

Pius VI was pope from 1775 to his death in 1799. You mean pope Paul VI. If you got your info from Wikipedia maybe that explains it.

I haven't got much admiration for his decision.

Noted.

Again on the "artificiality" business, since it is "natural to man to use his skill in order to put under human control what is given by physical nature", quoting the report above, when we have communion, which is when we approach the Holy of Holies most closely, we celebrate it in an artificial church using artificial wafers, at an artificial altar, and placed on an artificial plate. The wine is poured from an artificial cup, and the cup and plate are cleaned using artificial cloths.

The priest raises an artificial cup, we read from an artificial sheet of paper to proclaim the Word, quoted from an artificial Bible, using an artificial microphone and sound system, and we kneel on artificial kneelers if we've got them, having descended from an artificial pew.

Since we believe the Holy Spirit descends upon these gifts and makes them Holy, it seems God hasn't got a problem respecting our use of artificial means. After all, He's the one who gave us the brains to make all these things.

And these days, due to Covid, we then wipe down the pews after the mass using artificial cleaners.

Again, artificial or natural isn't the point. See Janet Smith about that.

Once again, I fail entirely to see the difference in intention between using NFP and an artificial contraceptive.

It's not the natural vs artificial distinction that is relevant. It is whether each act of sexual intercourse is open to all of the purposes of sex or not. With contraception that isn't ever true. With NFP it can be.

 

[Bob Crowley]

So if a married couple use the rhythm method, and a baby is not conceived because they used the rhythm method, but would have been conceived had they not used the rhythm method, and trusted to blind luck, having sex any old time they felt like it, this is somehow morally superior to the very same result because another married couple used the contraceptive pill?

Don't give me that.

 

[chevyontheriver]

So if a married couple use the rhythm method, and a baby is not conceived because they used the rhythm method, but would have been conceived had they not used the rhythm method, and trusted to blind luck, having sex any old time they felt like it, this is somehow morally superior to the very same result because another married couple used the contraceptive pill?

Don't give me that.

OK. You don't see the difference. I can't make you see the difference.