Your web-browser is very outdated, and as such, this website may not display properly. Please consider upgrading to a modern, faster and more secure browser. Click here to do so.

Pro-Choice and Pro-Voice

Jul 31 '11

I am just stating my opinion on birth control here…


I was going to post a video by a girl named Mary, who I admire a lot for her pro-life stance, but I felt like her video wasn’t as articulate as I would like for the topic. Like me, she doesn’t believe in using birth control, but she started describing as being “a form of abortion” because of the way contraception keeps a child from being conceived, which I found to be incorrect, in my view. 

Medical and science professionals say that it is at the point of conception that a unique, living, human person comes into existence. That is why I believe that abortion is wrong: it kills a child with a heartbeat, brain-waves, and a soul. I believe that all life is sacred and each life, from the moment of conception to the moment of natural death, has a right to life, and therefore abortion, or any other method of barring a new life from implanting in its mother’s womb or terminating a pregnancy is inherently wrong. 

When it comes to birth control my belief is that God designed conjugal love between a husband and wife to be a beautiful, selfless, total giving of one to the other, and that act should be open to the transmission of life. Since acts of contraception are not selfless, not a total giving of one to the other and are not open to the transmission of life, contraception—which actually means “against conception”—is inherently wrong.

Most, if not all, people I know who support birth control argue that it prevents unwanted pregnancies, but I notice that Planned Parenthood’s own research arm notes that there is an increase in abortions among those who use birth control. This is just my speculation, but I think this comes from the philosophy from the Sexual Revolution that we should be able to have sex without consequences; so people employ birth control to attempt to avoid sexually transmitted infections and pregnancies, and then believe they should be able to terminate their conceived children if the birth control doesn’t work properly (or if they don’t use it correctly). 

My belief is that I support abstinence. I believe God has exclusively given the gift of intercourse to a man and woman who have pledged their lives to one another in marriage as a way of fully giving oneself to the other, ,being fully open to the transmission of life should God so choose to bestow this blessing. 

So I think my views on pre-martial sex, pro-life ethic and birth control sum up my thinking on this. 

I’m not going to touch that religious stuff with a ten-foot pole. Suffice to say, I don’t need anybody’s permission to have sex except from the person I’m having it with.

But, I did want to point something out. “Conception” itself is an outdated term from when pregnancy was not fully understood. Its current definition is the point of fertilization - when the sperm meets the egg, becomes a zygote, and begins to travel down the Fallopian tubes towards the uterus.

If you believe that conception is when a new person comes into existence (Catholic pro-life blog post expanding on this idea), and that extinguishing that life is an abortion, then all birth control that contains progesterone - that is:

- are all abortifacients, or methods of abortion. Synthetic progesterone, or progestin, works in part by thinning the lining of the uterus, which prevents a zygote from implanting and growing. This means the new “person” breaks down and is released in the next period.

Now, only methods of birth control that prevent the sperm from reaching the egg, or from entering the fallopian tubes at all, are left as morally acceptable (that is, non-abortive). These are:

The Guttmacher Institute gives statistics on birth control use from 2006-08:

If abortions are the ending of a conceived life, 40.2% of uterus owners are using forms of birth control that would be classified as abortifacients.

Now, if you’re like me, and you agree with medical professionals that a pregnancy begins at implantation, because anywhere from 30-70% of all zygotes fail to implant (PDF) (and personhood is not a scientific or medical issue but a legal and philosophical one), then these are not abortifacients. But if you believe in the vague “life begins at conception,” then you are going to need to take it up with that 40.2%, as well as the 30% of American uterus owners who will have an abortion by age 45. [Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States - Guttmacher Institute]

Oh, and citation needed on that connection between contraception and abortion, please!