Contraception: A Stumbling Block to Ending Abortion

[tammy57]

Tammy57,
That is all well and good, and I applaud your wanting to stand up for yourself. But you mention consequences and how they are not ours to suffer… what about the consequences that the baby suffers? There is a another person involved in your choice. Science and Faith show this, if you can’t see it then you are lying to yourself. I would guess that if the baby understood what was going to happen and could speak they would say the same thing…Back Off…you are not the one who is going to be dead (maybe, it happens sometimes). The only moral judgement that I render is when I let someone know that they are killing an innocent person, and killing innocent people is wrong. Just like I’d let the serial killer know that what he/she was doing is morally wrong. I’m sure you would not hesitate to tell a murderer that you thought what they were doing was wrong. God bless,

John

The consequences are not yours to suffer, quite right. Let the judgment you render manifest in prayer, or in self-contained activities that neither threaten nor scorn the pregnant woman. She has her God, the Higher Power she believes in; her decision and its outcome are private, between them only. Your thoughts are immaterial insofar as her actions are concerned. God will sort it out.

tammy57

 

[Granny_G]

I agree with the topic header, but feel we are missing the point when we spend so much time analyzing, and not much time with the mothers involved. 25 years after Rowe verses Wade, and we don’t seem to be getting very far. I think that if maybe we change our focus to being there for the pregnant women who could use our comfort and care, we may be able to bridge the hugh gap that is keeping these women from seeking help from the church or other pro life support efforts. I think it is time we worry more about caring for these women, and less time pointing fingers. If we feed and cloth the poor, they will see by our actions that we are interested in more then conversion. We care about them. Applying the same principals to our young women, will have them making good decisions, moral decisions, and maybe give them an opportunity to help others… The percentages, and laws do not matter as much to me as the lives being lost, the grief these women will then face. Lets do what we can to support our young pregnant mothers. I love the pro lifers, but feel there is another ministry here that is lacking.

 

[Dreamear]

The statistics going back and forth is starting to make my head spin…

Here is something I think we can all agree upon with the statistics in mind.

Using the beginning stats… If contraception was used correctly and regularly, there would be less unwanted pregnancies…therefore, less abortions.

The other thing I wanted to address was the person who was horrified at the amount of self identified “Catholics” / “Christians” who get abortions. A lot of people self identify as these groups. I think the key question should be “currently practicing catholics.” I have a friend who was born and raised Catholic…she now goes to a non-denominational “christian” church. She personally does not believe in many of the core Catholic beliefs including recieving communion and confession. She sends her children (whom she had while married) to CCD even tho she attends Mass twice a year. She married and divorced a non-Catholic in a non-Catholic wedding and her current boyfriend is of no religion. Ask her what religion she is…she will tell you Catholic. She is not the only one out there. There are a lot of people who were born as a religion and even tho they have not practiced in years, they still identify as that religion. I would hope and pray that is the vast majority of “Catholics/Christians” who have had abortions.

Now…not meaning to set off a fire storm I will say this when it comes to abortion and rape and children. If my 13 year old daughter is raped…you can bet she will have a D&C and everything else the hospital recommends for my child to not get pregnant. Up to and including the Morning After Pill. My 13 year old daughter would not need to “prove” her religion by have a child of rape. I would think she is going to have enough to deal with and to talk to a psychologist about not to including being pregnant by the man that raped her. I would never put my child through that. I believe and I am a practicing Catholic…as is my child. I believe God is a forgiving God and I believe God would forgive me this transgression in life and yes I would talk to my priest about it and I would go to confession and that cross would be mine alone to bare. But I would do what I would believe is in the best interest of my childs health and well being. I also believe many Catholics would do the same.

 

[SwingCorey]

The consequences are not yours to suffer, quite right. Let the judgment you render manifest in prayer, or in self-contained activities that neither threaten nor scorn the pregnant woman.

True, we are not to threaten, nor scorn the pregnant woman. Neither, however, are we to stand by idle and allow an innocent child to die.

The intent of informing the pregnant women is not to heap guilt upon her head, but to enlighten her mind to what is actually happening (and who is actually living) in her body. The method by which this is done must be charity and compassion (e.g., NOT by shouting “whore! you’ll rot in hell!!!” as she enters the clinic).

But try, we must!

She has her God, the Higher Power she believes in; her decision and its outcome are private, between them only. Your thoughts are immaterial insofar as her actions are concerned.

My personal opinions regarding how the situation could have been avoided in the first place (e.g, “she shouldn’t have let this happen”, “she should have kept her pants on”), I agree, are immaterial to the present situation.

However, the FACT of the present matter - that there is a human life, with a God-infused soul, growing inside her and that it is currently in mortal peril - is my concern. Unlike Cain’s rationalization to God, I am, in fact, my brother’s (and sister’s) keeper - both of them: mother and child.

And that belief of mine may or may not be in line with “her God and the Higher Power she believes in”. My beliefs dictate what I will do - and I will attempt to rescue the child - and the mother - from mortal harm by attempting to convince her not to abort.

God will sort it out.

Yes he will… but he gives us the free will to choose into which “bin” we will fall: sanctified or condemned. He also gives us the opportunity to help others choose to be saved as well.

An analogy:

A woman is in the ocean after her boat capsized. I am in a boat nearby. Is it not my duty to try to save her from drowning? If I throw a life preserver, she still has the free will to grab on (and be saved) or to ignore me (and most likely die).

It will ultimately be sorted out - people will eventually be judged (and live eternally or be spiritually dead forever) by their actions - but do we simply say “let the ocean decide who drowns and who gets rescued?”

 

[PassingThru]

The statistics going back and forth is starting to make my head spin…

Here is something I think we can all agree upon with the statistics in mind.

Using the beginning stats… If contraception was used correctly and regularly, there would be less unwanted pregnancies…therefore, less abortions.

The other thing I wanted to address was the person who was horrified at the amount of self identified “Catholics” / “Christians” who get abortions. A lot of people self identify as these groups. I think the key question should be “currently practicing catholics.” I have a friend who was born and raised Catholic…she now goes to a non-denominational “christian” church. She personally does not believe in many of the core Catholic beliefs including recieving communion and confession. She sends her children (whom she had while married) to CCD even tho she attends Mass twice a year. She married and divorced a non-Catholic in a non-Catholic wedding and her current boyfriend is of no religion. Ask her what religion she is…she will tell you Catholic. She is not the only one out there. There are a lot of people who were born as a religion and even tho they have not practiced in years, they still identify as that religion. I would hope and pray that is the vast majority of “Catholics/Christians” who have had abortions.

Now…not meaning to set off a fire storm I will say this when it comes to abortion and rape and children. If my 13 year old daughter is raped…you can bet she will have a D&C and everything else the hospital recommends for my child to not get pregnant. Up to and including the Morning After Pill. My 13 year old daughter would not need to “prove” her religion by have a child of rape. I would think she is going to have enough to deal with and to talk to a psychologist about not to including being pregnant by the man that raped her. I would never put my child through that. I believe and I am a practicing Catholic…as is my child. I believe God is a forgiving God and I believe God would forgive me this transgression in life and yes I would talk to my priest about it and I would go to confession and that cross would be mine alone to bare. But I would do what I would believe is in the best interest of my childs health and well being. I also believe many Catholics would do the same.

Totally agree. I think this is not really a question of numbers.

My only point in all of this is A) I can not stand when numbers are used in a completely incorrect or misleading fashion. B) If there is the idea that somehow limiting contraception now will have any positive effect, you better believe you would need some very concrete evidence of this. (This will never happen of course, and there is no evidence that I know of to support such an idea).

But I agree, the most positive benefits can be gained through education and communication.

 

[lijjo]

What happened to my post, I had written what I believe is happening to American Cultured Catholic women. It is my sense. I liked the way I expressed it. The emocons gave it some animation. At the end the crippled emocon was meant to signify what happens to a Catholic woman’s soul after her terrible decision.

It is derived from not seeking a true relationship with the Lord, that is the starting point and from there she justifies her actions based on the disconnection. Why was my post taken down?

 

[lijjo]

Found it, forgive me:blush:

 

[JIMBARRY1946]

The priest at our parish has no problem “telling it like it is” when it comes to abortion and contraception. DON’T! He discusses these problems often during his homilies.

 

[mark_a]

The priest at our parish has no problem “telling it like it is” when it comes to abortion and contraception. DON’T! He discusses these problems often during his homilies.

That takes a lot of guts.

 

[Sherry_G]

Found it, forgive me:blush:

Hey! I had missed your post also, so thanks for bringing it to the forefront so I could go back and find it too! As the OP states or questions: Contraception: a stumbling block to ending abortion? Definitely, contraception is the green light to fornication whenever, wherever, with whomever possible ,putting sins of the flesh in the drivers seat and throwing the spiritual aspect of human sexuality right out the window.

 

[portarica]

Contraception= Belief in a consequence free sex.
Belief in a consequence free sex = More sex
More sex = More pregnancies
More pregnancies = More unwanted pregnancies
More unwanted pregnancies = More abortions.

Am I missing something? It seems pretty simple to me.
If there is no contraception and no abortion, people would be a lot more responsible with their bodies.

Actually you start off with a faulty conclusion: Contraception= Belief in a consequence free sex. Since not all people using contraceptives believe that sex is free of consequences your conclusions that follow your first faulty assumption are not necessarily true.

And if you used your logic and assumed your last two assumptions were true:
More pregnancies = More unwanted pregnancies
More unwanted pregnancies = More abortions.

Anything that preceded them and resulted in more pregnancies would lead to more abortions. We know that sex without ABC leads to more pregnancies so therefore ABC prevents abortions.

So preventing contraceptives from being used means more abortions will be performed, but more abortions is better than more contraception according to the logic used by your example.

Peace

 

[utunumsint]

Lets see what I can make out of these stats:
Translation:

Of the 54% (Group 1)
Most were pill or condom users. (I can only assume that only a very small fraction, maybe even 0, of those seeking abortions were NFP users)

Translation
Of the 46% (Group 2)
A-33% had perceived themselves to be at low risk for pregnancy,
B-32% had had concerns about contraceptive methods
C-26% had had unexpected sex and
1% had been forced to have sex.

Hmmm…this seems to indicate that only 8% of the woman from the 46% non contraceptive use category (Group 2) never used Birth Control.

Again, this is from the 46% category (Group 2), and it indicates that most have used contraception in the past. They they either took risks (A and C) or felt uneasy about contraceptive methods (B). (B) could mean anything…

Summary:

It seems that in most in Group 1 and Group 2 are contraceptive users. If you include the stats from A and C to Group 1, this group becomes a much large statistic. I guess you could call A and C, the risk takers, who have no problem with contraception, but just were not using it at the time. B would be the only ones in that group that would really have a problem with contraception.

God bless,
Ut

Just to break this down a little further,

Of the 100% of people who have abortions:

A-54% were pill or condom users who’s method failed either because of missuse of method, or because the method failed.
B-27% were not using contraception at the time, but have no problem with using contraception. They just took risks (because they thought they were safe, or it just happend unplanned)
C-15% had problems with contraception of some sort.
D-0.46% were forced
This accounts for 96.46 of all abortions. There is 3.54% unaccounted for.

Given this informatioin, what kinds of conclusions can we draw from the stats:

-A and B have no problem with contraception. That gives us a statistic of 81% coming from a “contraceptive” mentality.
-As Passingthru pointed out, 8% of people who have abortions never used any contraceptive method at all. The study indicates that these people are poor, uneducated, and usually part of visible minorities. I wonder if this group is part of the C statistic? Probably. So 8% of C (15%) never tried contraception, but somehow have access to abortion… Interesting. I wonder why? Maybe these fall under the unsafe abortion catagory. I wonder how they can come up with the stats then, since these would usually be done in back alleys? Maybe they represent only North American statistics where abortion is easier to get than the pill in some neighborhoods. Whatever the reason, that leaves 7% of people unaccounted for in C.

What this seems to indicate is that a large majority of abortion seekers are contraceptive users, or have no problem with contraception, but were just plain reckless (81%). 8% are ignorant of any contraceptive method, including those approved by the catholic church. This leaves 7% having problems with contraceptive methods, but apparantly no porblem with abortion, and another 4 % unclassified.

God bless,
Ut

 

[portarica]

Just to break this down a little further,

Of the 100% of people who have abortions:

A-54% were pill or condom users who’s method failed either because of missuse of method, or because the method failed.
B-27% were not using contraception at the time, but have no problem with using contraception. They just took risks (because they thought they were safe, or it just happend unplanned)
C-15% had problems with contraception of some sort.
D-0.46% were forced
This accounts for 96.46 of all abortions. There is 3.54% unaccounted for.

Given this informatioin, what kinds of conclusions can we draw from the stats:

-A and B have no problem with contraception. That gives us a statistic of 81% coming from a “contraceptive” mentality.
-As Passingthru pointed out, 8% of people who have abortions never used any contraceptive method at all. The study indicates that these people are poor, uneducated, and usually part of visible minorities. I wonder if this group is part of the C statistic? Probably. So 8% of C (15%) never tried contraception, but somehow have access to abortion… Interesting. I wonder why? Maybe these fall under the unsafe abortion catagory. I wonder how they can come up with the stats then, since these would usually be done in back alleys? Maybe they represent only North American statistics where abortion is easier to get than the pill in some neighborhoods. Whatever the reason, that leaves 7% of people unaccounted for in C.

What this seems to indicate is that a large majority of abortion seekers are contraceptive users, or have no problem with contraception, but were just plain reckless (81%). 8% are ignorant of any contraceptive method, including those approved by the catholic church. This leaves 7% having problems with contraceptive methods, but apparantly no porblem with abortion, and another 4 % unclassified.

God bless,
Ut

Actually the stats don’t confirm your conclusions.

And to throw out a conclusion like abortions are easier to get than contraceptives in some North American neighborhoods seems to be a personal comment unrelated to any facts or stats .

It is great to be pro-life and totally anti-abortion, but when people start throwing out made up conclusions to bolster their arguments the people those conclusions are most likely to impress are already members of the choir.

In many instances, using contrived conclusions accomplishes the opposite of the desired result. When the folly of the contrived conclusion is arrived at by the target audience(in this case people inclined to have abortions) the rest of the valid arguments that lead to less abortions are frequently ignored as well, and the result may be the needless deaths of innocent souls.

Peace

 

[utunumsint]

Actually the stats don’t confirm your conclusions.

And to throw out a conclusion like abortions are easier to get than contraceptives in some North American neighborhoods seems to be a personal comment unrelated to any facts or stats .

It is great to be pro-life and totally anti-abortion, but when people start throwing out made up conclusions to bolster their arguments the people those conclusions are most likely to impress are already members of the choir.

In many instances, using contrived conclusions accomplishes the opposite of the desired result. When the folly of the contrived conclusion is arrived at by the target audience(in this case people inclined to have abortions) the rest of the valid arguments that lead to less abortions are frequently ignored as well, and the result may be the needless deaths of innocent souls.

Peace

Sorry about the comment on getting an abortion being easier to get than the pill. I take it back. It wasn’t really a conclusion, just an off hand speculation prefaced by “Maybe.”

What do you think the stats mean? What else would you object in what I have said? I mean, I would like to have a discussion about these stats. I’m open to hearing your point of view.

God bless,
Ut

 

[utunumsint]

For example, it seems like the fact that the majority of persons getting abortions in this study, are using contraception, or have no problem using contraception, is clear.

Can you tell me why or where I am wrong with this?

God bless,
Ut

 

[tammy57]

In order to mark “Catholic” I think you should have to be going to Mass and Confession regularly. Otherwise, it should be “Christian - other.” If a woman went to Confession, she would be advised against an abortion and given the resources she needed to either take care of the baby or find an adoptive family for the baby.

Surely you’re familiar with the idea “Once a Catholic, Always a Catholic”? Mass-going or not, fornicating outside of wedlock or not, receiving the Sacraments or not, once we are born into it or indoctrinated with it and reach the age of reason, we cannot escape the designation and all of its duties and proscriptions. Catholic till the bitter end for many; Catholic to the end for others.

Maybe this is why so many Catholic women identify themselves as such on documents at the abortion clinics. They are bound to do so.

One correction: I do not believe a woman would be “given the resources she needed” to take care of the baby. * “WASHINGTON, June 18 (UPI) – Raising a child from birth to age 17 cost middle-income parents $222,360 last year amid rising childcare and education expenses, the U.S. government reported.”* That is June 18, 2010. That is to age 17. * That does not include college*. This staggering statistic may also help to explain the number of abortions which take place in the U.S. every year.

Please, I said explain, not excuse.

tammy57

 

[tammy57]

True, we are not to threaten, nor scorn the pregnant woman. Neither, however, are we to stand by idle and allow an innocent child to die.

The intent of informing the pregnant women is not to heap guilt upon her head, but to enlighten her mind to what is actually happening (and who is actually living) in her body. The method by which this is done must be charity and compassion (e.g., NOT by shouting “whore! you’ll rot in hell!!!” as she enters the clinic).

But try, we must!

My personal opinions regarding how the situation could have been avoided in the first place (e.g, “she shouldn’t have let this happen”, “she should have kept her pants on”), I agree, are immaterial to the present situation.

However, the FACT of the present matter - that there is a human life, with a God-infused soul, growing inside her and that it is currently in mortal peril - is my concern. Unlike Cain’s rationalization to God, I am, in fact, my brother’s (and sister’s) keeper - both of them: mother and child.

And that belief of mine may or may not be in line with “her God and the Higher Power she believes in”. My beliefs dictate what I will do - and I will attempt to rescue the child - and the mother - from mortal harm by attempting to convince her not to abort.

Yes he will… but he gives us the free will to choose into which “bin” we will fall: sanctified or condemned. He also gives us the opportunity to help others choose to be saved as well.

An analogy:

A woman is in the ocean after her boat capsized. I am in a boat nearby. Is it not my duty to try to save her from drowning? If I throw a life preserver, she still has the free will to grab on (and be saved) or to ignore me (and most likely die).

It will ultimately be sorted out - people will eventually be judged (and live eternally or be spiritually dead forever) by their actions - but do we simply say “let the ocean decide who drowns and who gets rescued?”

Women seeking abortion know what they are doing, unless they are handicapped with a mental illness and are unable to make decisions for themselves. In that case their guardians decide for them and act upon their own best judgment. Women do not need your efforts at “enlightenment”, however benign they may be. My advice is to keep your distance and behave respectfully. These are not whimsical decisions they have arrived at; your interference will not be helpful.

A boat which capsizes at sea is unlikely to have a companion boat at the ready with a life preserver or ring. In this case, the ocean does decide. Consider a moratorium on putting others’ fires out. Prayer would be more helpful.

tammy

 

[portarica]

For example, it seems like the fact that the majority of persons getting abortions in this study, are using contraception, or have no problem using contraception, is clear.

Can you tell me why or where I am wrong with this?

God bless,
Ut

You went from a majority of people having used contraceptives in the month of the pregnancy(54%) to 81%using to less than 10% not using or not open to use…

For instance the group that comprised about a third of the group of non contraceptive users had the same rational as NFP- they didn’t expect to be getting pregnant, then the next largest part of that group expressed concern about contraceptives, also a church position from the scientific side and the next group had unexpected sex , could have been married catholics could have been any other group and you put them in a category as contraceptive users.

The only conclusive evidence about preventing abortion that can actually be gleaned from the statistics is that if the effectiveness of the contraceptive method used by 76% of the first group was improved and approached that of the best case scenarios of either the pill or condoms, more than 1/3 of all abortions would be prevented. And if those not inclined to used contraceptives used them that number would be closer to 75%. And that would still leave room for improvement in the 15% who screwed up their usage of contraceptives but didn’t blame it on inconsistent usage.

Peace

 

[utunumsint]

You went from a majority of people having used contraceptives in the month of the pregnancy(54%) to 81%using to less than 10% not using or not open to use…

I was actually fairly detailed in my justification for the 81%. I’m not sure where you go the 10% number. The number was 15% for those not open to using contraception (either because of poverty, lack of education, [8%] or because of some other reason [7])

For instance the group that comprised about a third of the group of non contraceptive users had the same rational as NFP- they didn’t expect to be getting pregnant,

None of them (pill, condom, NFP, or risk takers), apparantly, expected to get pregnant, it seems, so I’m not sure what your point is here.

then the next largest part of that group expressed concern about contraceptives,

You mean the 15% group?

also a church position from the scientific side

If you look at the study details, you will see that NFP is clearly listed as a contraceptive method. The concerns that this group have include NFP (or at least, they are not aware that NFP is an option through lack of education).

and the next group had unexpected sex , could have been married catholics could have been any other group and you put them in a category as contraceptive users.

The study says most of these were had taken contraceptives before, so I classified them, at least as not being opposed to contraception, since that category is already declared above (the 15% groups). Take a look at the study. I didn’t make any assertions without quoting evidence from the study.

The only conclusive evidence about preventing abortion that can actually be gleaned from the statistics is that if the effectiveness of the contraceptive method used by 76% of the first group was improved and approached that of the best case scenarios of either the pill or condoms, more than 1/3 of all abortions would be prevented. And if those not inclined to used contraceptives used them that number would be closer to 75%. And that would still leave room for improvement in the 15% who screwed up their usage of contraceptives but didn’t blame it on inconsistent usage.

Here is the actual quotation on the pill and condom users:

**Fifty-four percent of women **who have abortions had used a contraceptive method (usually the condom or the pill) during the month they became pregnant. Among those women, 76% of pill users and 49% of condom users report having used their method inconsistently, while 13% of pill users and 14% of condom users report correct use.[8]

hmmm… what about the other 11%? What was their problem with the pill?

So in a perfect, world, if everyone was using the pill properly, the abortion rate would be much lower. Agreed. But the same is also true for the statistics on NFP. If everyone used NFP as advertised and instructed, the unwanted pregnancies and abortion rates would also be as low.

The problem is that we don’t live in a perfect world. There is no sure way to avoid having children (except for sterilization) when you are having sex. And maybe that is the crux of the issue from the Catholic perspective.

Peace

And to you as well.

 

[Sherry_G]

Tammy 57 you wrote:
One correction: I do not believe a woman would be “given the resources she needed” to take care of the baby. “WASHINGTON, June 18 (UPI) – Raising a child from birth to age 17 cost middle-income parents $222,360 last year amid rising childcare and education expenses, the U.S. government reported.” That is June 18, 2010. That is to age 17. That does not include college. This staggering statistic may also help to explain the number of abortions which take place in the U.S. every year.

What is the cost of murdering your unborn child and living with that knowledge for the rest of your life?

Can our values be reduced to mathematical equations? Is morality governed by financing?