These other people are on the apologists forum, and back what I have been saying.
I am corresponding with a very knowledgeable CA apologist who currently takes your position. The problem is, your stance is not in line with Church teaching and Sacred Tradition. I will provide more on that later, but lets look at a few things here:
The birth control we are talking about was designed at the outset as an implantation inhibitor(ie abortifacient). The developing research that was done with these chemicals was done with regard to this mechanism.
If you have marital relations knowing that you are taking a medicine that is designed to prevent new life often by aborting it, then you are in sin. If you are using barrier methods or spermicidal methods to avoid pregnancy for legitimate medical needs, then you are not doing anything to kill off that which the Lord is creating.
If you are getting sterilized(ex hysterectomy) for therapeutic reasons, all further marital relations will be rendered unfruitful… is this sinful? No… if the reason for the surgery is sufficiently grave, and the other moral restrictions are in line(ex. motive for procedure), then the woman is not in sin as far as we can tell.
If, however, you take a drug that was designed to kill God’s creation because your prodeath physician thought it the best therapy(rarely is this the case) then you are taking part in the killing of the unborn.
I cannot see this one standing up in court… at the great white throne judgement…
‘I had a tendency to get acne, so I took birth control pills, which is the reason that these little ones had to die.’
‘My periods were infrequent, so I took birth control to ensure regularity, which is the reason that these little ones had to die.’
‘I get ovarian cysts which are often painful, so I took birth control in the hopes of curing them, which is the reason that these little ones had to die.’
The above are the ‘most legitimate’ non-contraceptive uses these days, and the conditions are not sufficiently grave to warrant the killing of God’s little ones. Neither is birth control the only(or even most appropriate) therapy available for the treatment of these conditions.
We are in an age when abortifacients don’t cause one to give pause in any way. There is no longer any scandal or shock value when one thinks of a drug that flushes new lives down the toilet. Physicians and patients alike will opt for ‘therapy’ with these medications very often for various reasons, but none sufficiently grave to warrant death of the unborn.
We have to be VERY careful to ensure that the patient is sexually inactive, etc. when we give Accutane, a drug that could render the little child without eyes, limbs, etc. What would you say if the children came out in this manner due to this acne treatment. Would we cite legitimate treatment and move on just to see millions of such children born this way? NO! The shock value would be there, because the sin of chemically mutilating God’s creation would be manifest before our eyes. We would most certainly start seeking other acne remedies, or ensure that we kill them before we have to actually look them in the face(ie use birth control which is one of the requirements now).
50 years ago, the thalidomide scare came about. This drug which helped pregnant mothers sleep and combated morning sickness, was the cause of very dramatic harm to the unborn. “From 1956 to 1962, approximately 10,000 children were born with severe malformities, including phocomelia(no limbs), because their mothers had taken thalidomide during pregnancy.[1] In 1962, in reaction to the tragedy, the United States Congress enacted laws requiring tests for safety during pregnancy before a drug can receive approval for sale in the U.S.[2] Other countries enacted similar legislation, and thalidomide was not prescribed or sold for decades.”
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide
WHY ON EARTH would we stop the use of thalidomide in women who are of childbearing age? Just because their children would be born without limbs is not a sufficient reason. It’s not like we are killing them or anything… Of course I am mad to talk like this.
The reason we would stop the use of this drug in women of childbearing age, is because it is a whole lot more personal when you actually have to FACE THE PERSON and ask their forgiveness for taking a drug that rendered them mutilated.
NOW, if the mother took this drug to help with sleep, with the physician and patient knowing full well the risks to mutilating this child, would you say that this was sin?
Please answer above question, and all other questions will be answered for us concerning this debate.
