Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free

info: Please Sign Up or Sign In to continue.

info: Please Sign Up or Sign In to continue.

A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for the discussion of current events,cultural issues and politics especially in relation to Catholic values.

Saint Thomas More was martyred during the Protestant Reformation for standing firm in the Faith and not recognizing the King of England as the Supreme Head of the Church.
Learn More:Saint Thomas More

Contraception vs. Abortion

Apr 10th 2013 new

I was on facebook earlier and a friend posted how she felt that contraception (or atleast hormonal contraception) and abortion are bascially the same thing. As as a 7 for 7 catholic, I basically agree with this in theory, yet disagree in bringing contraception into the larger abortion debate since it is so divisive. Most people are probably aware that most protestant churches accept hormonal contraception, so I feel contraception and abortion are two separate debates. With hormonal contraception, the question is how often does it actually prevent implantation, and if it does, does life begin at conception or implantation, and even if you believe conception (my view and the church view) is the abortifacient aspect of the pill the same as a clear abortion? As someone opposed to the pill, I am not really sure.

So my point is since this is such a divisive issue within the larger pro-life movement, why not focus on larger issues like the abomination of live birth abortion, partial birth abortion and other legislative attempts that have been making progress throughout the country? That seemed like a reasonable argument, but my fb friend was clealy on a crusade and was not interested in dialouge. Here was her response:

"So, how do you decide what lives are important and what lives are not? I don't see how a "pro-life" person does that."

Ouch. I am not sure how she got that idea and why she felt the need to be so abusive - not sure I want her as a friend much longer. She could have
simply continued to disagree me without resorting to such language.

So, do you agree with her or do you agree with me? By simply saying it is mistake to bring contraception into the larger abortion debate, am I guilty of saying "some lives really aren't that important?"

Apr 10th 2013 new

Patrick I have to agree that if you are basing your opinion that abortion is wrong because it destroys human life (which begins at conception), then you must follow you principles to include all activity that destroys human life after conception. That includes most hormonal birth control. We also can't say with certainty that it doesn't include certain barrier methods such as a diaphragm. If we start making exceptions to make the message easier to swallow, we are guilty of moral relativism that Pople Benedict XVI warned us about. The truth is the truth. We can't make exceptions to the truth to appease people. So many in the Catholic church have fallen into this trap. I used to describe my own parish as peopled by "cafeteria catholics". If they didn't like some parts, they just ignored those parts. Sadly our former pastor led this sentiment. When we finally got a new pastor who insisted we actually follow ALL the catholic doctrines, we lost a lot of parishioners. But the ones that are left are true Catholics and we don't have to have a discussion with the catechism in hand to settle disputes. (In one case I did quote the catechism in a discussion with our then Director of Religious Education. She responded that "half that book is wrong"). The truth is the truth. Never apologize for it, never qualify it. The truth will set us free. I agree with your facebook friend--either all human life is sacred or it is not. We can't draw some imaginary line when it is sometimes not really a life.
I hope that helps you. Keep the faith and always defend it in truth.

Apr 10th 2013 new

We're in this mess because of contraception.

The fact Planned Parenthood's stats say 54% of women seeking abortions were using contraception in the month they fell prego is pretty cut and dry as pointing to contraception leading into an abortion mentality.

Contraception divorces procreation from sex. When this happens, people view sex purely for recreation, the right of the adult/s to enjoy sex free of consquences reaches beyond their Friday night orgy and then they will seek to remove the resulting pregnancy from the equation - as the pregnancy is a variable which prevents full enjoyment of sex. Subsquently, you will have women who were using contraception, when that fails they will say to themselves "I was doing the right thing, I was using contraception, I was being responsible, abortion is there as my safety net. I didn't want this pregnancy. I tried to prevent it. I did the right thing. Therefore, I am justified in seeking an abortion".

We need to be having the contraception conversation. We need to be correcting our Protestant brothers and sister, if we want to stop abortion, we need to stop contraception. That's why its going to be very hard to get rid of abortion, because people are thoroughly in love with contraceptives.

Life begins at conception, any device that prevents implantation is therefore murder, especially if willfully taken known that a child could be about to die.This is not a "beleif" its scientific fact.

Contraception has also brought us to this current debacle with attempting to redefine marriage to accomodate same sex couples.

I am confident to say contraception is the most evil thing that has ever been visited upon our society. It has always been there yes, but not like now, not as mainstream, not as readily available.

We need to get the facts out, contraception has led to abortion. It is NO friend to the Pro-Life movement.

Apr 10th 2013 new

I think both of you ladies summed up the point pretty well. Contraception was intended to prevent pregnancy, but if that fails, it also doubles as an abortifacient and will kill the newly conceived child. You'll never know which of these actually happens. Either way, it shows a complete disregard for all human life. Birth control has gotten people into the mindset that they don't have to deal with the consequences to their actions, and that life is something that can be disposed of when it is not convenient for one or both parties. But like y'all said, it's because of contraception that people have come to accept abortion. If we get rid of abortion, but keep contraceptives, then we're defeating our purpose. Now, I don't think we'll ever be able to ban them and make them illegal like we could abortion, but I certainly don't advocate to keep them. If there is legislation that passes that recognizes a human fetus as a human person, then they will have to ban things like the morning after pill because of it is an abortifacient.

Apr 10th 2013 new

(Quote) Loretta-867522 said: Patrick I have to agree that if you are basing your opinion that abortion is wrong because it d...
(Quote) Loretta-867522 said:

Patrick I have to agree that if you are basing your opinion that abortion is wrong because it destroys human life (which begins at conception), then you must follow you principles to include all activity that destroys human life after conception. That includes most hormonal birth control. We also can't say with certainty that it doesn't include certain barrier methods such as a diaphragm. If we start making exceptions to make the message easier to swallow, we are guilty of moral relativism that Pople Benedict XVI warned us about. The truth is the truth. We can't make exceptions to the truth to appease people. So many in the Catholic church have fallen into this trap. I used to describe my own parish as peopled by "cafeteria catholics". If they didn't like some parts, they just ignored those parts. Sadly our former pastor led this sentiment. When we finally got a new pastor who insisted we actually follow ALL the catholic doctrines, we lost a lot of parishioners. But the ones that are left are true Catholics and we don't have to have a discussion with the catechism in hand to settle disputes. (In one case I did quote the catechism in a discussion with our then Director of Religious Education. She responded that "half that book is wrong"). The truth is the truth. Never apologize for it, never qualify it. The truth will set us free. I agree with your facebook friend--either all human life is sacred or it is not. We can't draw some imaginary line when it is sometimes not really a life.
I hope that helps you. Keep the faith and always defend it in truth.

--hide--


Contraception is an important issue that deserves discussion particuarly in catholic circles. Yet, for whatever reason, our protestant friends tend to have a different view. Certainly dialogue between catholics and protestants can be helpful, but if it just turns into a civil war among pro-life advocates, then I feel it is unhelpful. (Furthermore, the pill is going to remain legal for the forseeable future, so in some ways it is something that we just have to live with - whereas, banning abortion is a realistic goal.)

I admit that stopping atrocities like partial and live birth abortion concern me more than whether or not someone chooses to take the pill. I don't feel that makes me quilty of moral relativism - one act is far more barbaric than another - even if both are technically wrong. A good anology would be stealing and assault. Yes, both are wrong, but assault is obviously far worse than stealing and thus understandibly is punished more harshly under the law.





Apr 10th 2013 new

So, what about barrier methods? Do those show a disregard for human life? I admit hormonal contraception pushes the envelope as it is unclear how often, if ever, it really acts as an abortifacient, and if it does, is that the same as abortion? Obviously, the better idea is just not to use it - but when it comes to the larger pro-life movement, I respectfully disagree in that I see it as creating an uncessary distraction since it is always going to remain legal.

Now in the case of barrier methods, those are clearly just contraceptives. Are they still the moral equivalent of abortion? Yes, married couples should just use NFP. But, if protestants were ok with barrier methods and decided to come out against the pill, would we then just agree to disagree on contraception and focus our attention on speaking out against abortion?

Apr 10th 2013 new

Here's another aspect. The "cheapening" of women. The objectifying of a women's body for pleasure. Birth control removes the "worry" of pregnancy and makes it easy for sex to be had without commitment. Lack of Commitment. ..... a real problem in all aspects of modern society. Why buy the cow......

Apr 11th 2013 new

(Quote) Patrick-341178 said: I was on facebook earlier and a friend posted how she felt that contraception (or atleast hormo...
(Quote) Patrick-341178 said:

I was on facebook earlier and a friend posted how she felt that contraception (or atleast hormonal contraception) and abortion are bascially the same thing. As as a 7 for 7 catholic, I basically agree with this in theory, yet disagree in bringing contraception into the larger abortion debate since it is so divisive. Most people are probably aware that most protestant churches accept hormonal contraception, so I feel contraception and abortion are two separate debates. With hormonal contraception, the question is how often does it actually prevent implantation, and if it does, does life begin at conception or implantation, and even if you believe conception (my view and the church view) is the abortifacient aspect of the pill the same as a clear abortion? As someone opposed to the pill, I am not really sure.

So my point is since this is such a divisive issue within the larger pro-life movement, why not focus on larger issues like the abomination of live birth abortion, partial birth abortion and other legislative attempts that have been making progress throughout the country? That seemed like a reasonable argument, but my fb friend was clealy on a crusade and was not interested in dialouge. Here was her response:

"So, how do you decide what lives are important and what lives are not? I don't see how a "pro-life" person does that."

Ouch. I am not sure how she got that idea and why she felt the need to be so abusive - not sure I want her as a friend much longer. She could have
simply continued to disagree me without resorting to such language.

So, do you agree with her or do you agree with me? By simply saying it is mistake to bring contraception into the larger abortion debate, am I guilty of saying "some lives really aren't that important?"

--hide--

Abortion and contraception produce the same effect of deleting human being who would have otherwise been born. By definition, abortion ends a pregnancy after it has already started, and contraception aims to prevent pregnancy in the first place. The two are different kinds of sins because they are different kinds of acts, but are both gravely immoral for one and the same reason, basically. Based on this, I think it makes no difference to the moral evaluation whether we are talking about surgical abortions, hormonal contraception, barrier methods, or whatever.

So, the moral question is clear. But the legal question is another matter, and political strategy another. Government is not morally obligated to legislate against every vice, even though every person is obligated to avoid vice. If government is obligated to outlaw murder, then it is also obligated to outlaw infanticide, which would include abortions insofar as they are the same as infanticide. Whether government is obligated to regulate or even outlaw the buying and selling of all contraceptives is not as clear to me. Buying and selling is a commercial transaction; it is not the act of murder, or even the act of aborting, so perhaps the law should treat these cases differently.

The political situation makes things even more clear. There is no political will right now to outlaw contraception, so much so that campaigning to outlaw it would be a waste of energy and even politically counter-productive. Legalized contraception is simply going to be the reality for the forseeable future. But most people do think its reasonable for governments to outlaw abortions in some cases. So it makes sense to focus on abortion and forgo any political campaign against contraception, so we can save at least some unborn souls. We can agree not to outlaw contraception as a political concession. This still means we can continue a societal campaign against contraception as much as ever, by persuading our fellow citizens that it is immoral, rather than by seeking to get a law passed.

Apr 11th 2013 new

(Quote) Florian-626971 said: Abortion and contraception produce the same effect of deleting human being who would h...
(Quote) Florian-626971 said:

Abortion and contraception produce the same effect of deleting human being who would have otherwise been born. By definition, abortion ends a pregnancy after it has already started, and contraception aims to prevent pregnancy in the first place. The two are different kinds of sins because they are different kinds of acts, but are both gravely immoral for one and the same reason, basically. Based on this, I think it makes no difference to the moral evaluation whether we are talking about surgical abortions, hormonal contraception, barrier methods, or whatever.

So, the moral question is clear. But the legal question is another matter, and political strategy another. Government is not morally obligated to legislate against every vice, even though every person is obligated to avoid vice. If government is obligated to outlaw murder, then it is also obligated to outlaw infanticide, which would include abortions insofar as they are the same as infanticide. Whether government is obligated to regulate or even outlaw the buying and selling of all contraceptives is not as clear to me. Buying and selling is a commercial transaction; it is not the act of murder, or even the act of aborting, so perhaps the law should treat these cases differently.

The political situation makes things even more clear. There is no political will right now to outlaw contraception, so much so that campaigning to outlaw it would be a waste of energy and even politically counter-productive. Legalized contraception is simply going to be the reality for the forseeable future. But most people do think its reasonable for governments to outlaw abortions in some cases. So it makes sense to focus on abortion and forgo any political campaign against contraception, so we can save at least some unborn souls. We can agree not to outlaw contraception as a political concession. This still means we can continue a societal campaign against contraception as much as ever, by persuading our fellow citizens that it is immoral, rather than by seeking to get a law passed.

--hide--


The point of my post was not to debate whether or not contraception is ok or not. The church clearly teaches against that and I respect that. I simply disagree that contraception and abortion are on the same moral playing field. That is my own personal opinion - I understand and respect that many people on catholic match are going to disagree with me about that. So agree to disagree.

My point on the facebook post was about the bigger, pro-life movement in America. I suppose since I am someone who has always been interested in politics and am particularly interested in the laws concerning abortion - that has always been my main focus. Contraception is NOT going to be outlawed in America, including hormonal contraception, that is a reality we have to deal with. Abortion, on the other hand, can be outlawed - as is being outlawed to some extent in various states across the country. They may very well be found unconstitutional under roe v. wade, yet, it is still a very important element of the pro-life movement. Now in these states where abortion is being curbed, it is being done with evangelicals leading the way. Evangelicals, for the most part, are ok with contraception.

Now, what should we do? Throw our protestant freinds under the bus and say they are no better than those who advocate live birth abortion? Pragmatism and incrementalism is very vital the larger pro-life movement. I have no problem with the catholic church teaching contracpetion is wrong. I agree with that teaching. Yet, my opinion is to look at the bigger picture and bigger evils. I suppose we will have to agree to disagree.

Apr 11th 2013 new

(Quote) Patrick-341178 said: The point of my post was not to debate whether or not contraception is ok or not. The c...
(Quote) Patrick-341178 said:



The point of my post was not to debate whether or not contraception is ok or not. The church clearly teaches against that and I respect that. I simply disagree that contraception and abortion are on the same moral playing field. That is my own personal opinion - I understand and respect that many people on catholic match are going to disagree with me about that. So agree to disagree.

My point on the facebook post was about the bigger, pro-life movement in America. I suppose since I am someone who has always been interested in politics and am particularly interested in the laws concerning abortion - that has always been my main focus. Contraception is NOT going to be outlawed in America, including hormonal contraception, that is a reality we have to deal with. Abortion, on the other hand, can be outlawed - as is being outlawed to some extent in various states across the country. They may very well be found unconstitutional under roe v. wade, yet, it is still a very important element of the pro-life movement. Now in these states where abortion is being curbed, it is being done with evangelicals leading the way. Evangelicals, for the most part, are ok with contraception.

Now, what should we do? Throw our protestant freinds under the bus and say they are no better than those who advocate live birth abortion? Pragmatism and incrementalism is very vital the larger pro-life movement. I have no problem with the catholic church teaching contracpetion is wrong. I agree with that teaching. Yet, my opinion is to look at the bigger picture and bigger evils. I suppose we will have to agree to disagree.

--hide--

I don't really think we disagree. I don't have a problem with the statement that abortion and contraception are not on the same moral playing field. I was just pointing out that they produce the same ultimate effect, which helps to explain why both kinds of acts are immoral.

Posts 1 - 10 of 27