Eucharist and contraception

[klmt123]

Hormonal contraceptives are always wrong. If it were a condom it depends on the reason WHY you are using it. If it’s to not get pregnant that’s not an acceptable reason for using them in Catholicism… If a woman is taking medication that could cause harm to an unborn baby that may be an acceptable reason to use them or to prevent an infection. In the updated Christian ethics book, there is nothing wrong with the use of condoms if a couple really can’t afford a child at that time and need to rely on more than just charting, but it is against all hormonal contraceptives because of the abortificant factor. Pray about it, for Gods direction.

 

[LittleFlower]

Hormonal contraceptives are always wrong.

Sorry, that is wrong. Please see the links I posted.

Also birth control pills do not contain Mifepristone. Mifepristone is very different to Plan B, or contraceptive bills.

I am quite surprised how many people lack this basic education. I guess that’s American Sex Ed for you.

 

[Pup7]

That is, is it immoral to directly choose to use artificial means to stop the implantation of a fertilised egg that would have happened had we not made this decision.

Women get pregnant on the pill, Tatum. Women can faithfully take it for months, forget one, double up the next day, ovulate, get pregnant, not know it, keep taking the pill, and they carry the baby to term. If the pill were an irrefutable abortifacient, this would not happen. If Plan B were an irrefutable abortifacient, rape victims (and others) who take it wouldn’t get pregnant.

RU-486, though, IS abortifacient, and is not the same as Plan B. I can’t profess a knowledge of how RU-486 works, but it is known as the “abortion pill”. It’s not Plan B.

 

[LittleFlower]

RU-486, though, IS abortifacient, and is not the same as Plan B. I can’t profess a knowledge of how RU-486 works, but it is known as the “abortion pill”. It’s not Plan B.

http://www.medicationabortions.com/mifepristone

Mifepristone (a synthetic steroid) is an anti-progestin that blocks the action of progesterone, a hormone necessary to maintain a pregnancy. By blocking the action of progesterone, mifepristone alters the endometrium (the uterine lining), induces bleeding, and causes the uterine lining to shed. Mifepristone also causes the cervix to soften and initiates uterine contractions.
Mifepristone is used in conjunction with misoprostol. Misoprostol is an analog of prostaglandin E1. By interacting with prostaglandin receptors, misoprostol causes the cervix to soften and the uterus to contract, resulting in the expulsion of the uterine contents.

 

[Pup7]

Also birth control pills do not contain Mifepristone. Mifepristone is very different to Plan B, or contraceptive bills.

OCPs are a combination of synthetic progestins and estrogens. Plan B is a high-dose OCP. About a week’s worth of OCPs at once.

Mifepristone is the abortion pill, RU-486.

I had forgotten it’s a high-dose anti-progestin, mostly because I couldn’t remember the chemical name and had gone to look it up when you posted.

 

[LittleFlower]

Yep I am aware of that.

But many aren’t.

 

[Pup7]

Oh I know. Sorry -that was meant to be informative. Not really for you.

 

[LittleFlower]

All good.

 

[Tatum]

Tatum:

That is, is it immoral to directly choose to use artificial means to stop the implantation of a fertilised egg that would have happened had we not made this decision.

And again - where have I said this isn’t the case? It bugs me that you keep repeating this, because it’s as if you’re trying to state I’ve said this is okay. And I haven’t.

reveal the clash of values involved by simply avoiding the contentious definitions.

I can’t avoid “the contentious definitions” because they’re scientifically and biologically accurate.

You may have forgotten what started this.
I was pointing out that MCH1 was correct in his moral assertion:

Also what makes artificial contraception wrong is that sometimes the pregnancy has already occurred, and the Baby dies.

While his language is imprecise its pretty clear he meant that it is immoral to take the OCP if the egg is reasonably known to be already fertilised but not yet implanted. He is correct.

Your post materially argued against this moral assertion on the basis that the OCP is not abortifacient.

That is a profoundly misleading statement to make on a Catholic Forum.
You need to be aware of how the Church and many non medically trained Catholics speak.

I believe I have now done that in a polite and good faith manner.
I can understand how this could offend you as you are clearly a medical professional.
But it seems there is an imbalance between the levels of professional training in your medical hat compared to your Catholic hat so your bridling is understandable and I am sorry about that.

 

[LittleFlower]

So an actual abortion pill forces the uterine lining to shed, and basically gives the woman a period.

Plan B is just OCPs, which either inhibit the release of an egg and/or the implantation of a fertilised egg into the uterine lining.

Those are two very different mechanisms. And it shows that people arguing that OCPs are abortifacient are actually either confusing the two, or very poorly educated in terms of women’s health.

 

[Pup7]

Your post argued against this moral assertion on the basis that the OCP is not abortifacient.

No, I didn’t argue anyone’s moral assertion.

All I did - and you may not believe me, and I can’t help that - is say the pill is not abortifacient. I wasn’t attempting to be moral about anything. I was simply saying - hang on, this isn’t the case.

You need to be aware of how the Church and many non medically trained Catholics speak.

Really, you can stop with the patronizing. I’m not a kid and as an RN I’m well aware of how the untrained speak and think. I have to teach the untrained as part of my daily work. (Yes, that’s a bridle, and I think it’s fair.)

You keep hammering with the morality thing. Again, not once have I said OCPs are okay. I said they’re not abortifacient. Because they are not. Please explain how women get pregnant on them if they are.

 

[Pup7]

But it seems there is an imbalance between the levels of professional training in your medical hat compared to your Catholic hat so your bridling is understandable and I am sorry about that.

I’m not bridling in the least. I think you think I should be. It might even annoy you that I’m not - I don’t know, but I’ve been nothing but civil, even while you’ve questioned my very faith.

I have no problems with either hat. The Catholic hat knows the pill is not an abortifacient and it knows OCPs are morally wrong.

 

[LittleFlower]

I think @Tatum doesn’t get it, and many here don’t know the difference. It’s what they have been taught, and bad or non-existent sexual health education doesn’t make it an easy task.

Many believe that the Pill is abortifacient. Trying to change that belief, morals aside, is an uphill battle.

Maybe we need to start a birds and the bees thread?

 

[Pup7]

The one thing that’s really grating on me is the constant statements questioning my Catholicity. That actually doesn’t grate, that out and out hurts coming from a complete stranger who knows nothing about me other than what they believe they know.

They don’t know that I flat out went to the docs I work with and told them if a walk-in pregnancy test patient comes in and wants an abortion, I can’t counsel her on that, and I’d appreciate it if I could ask for assistance. Pretty Catholic if you ask me. And it wasn’t easy for me to do that, but I knew that now, I have to - even though I’ve always thought abortion was wrong anyway.

But deny a rape victim Plan B? No. Never.

 

[Tatum]

… the pill is not abortifacient. I wasn’t attempting to be moral about anything.

Pup7 you are making a moral assertion whether you realise it or not … that is the issue.
The way you attempt to clinically define human realities in the context of a moral discussion clearly has ethical ramifications - especially as you did attempt to deny MCh1’s moral assertion and continue to speak as if the Church’s definition of “abortion” (and hence what constitutes an abortifacient) is irrelevant to this Catholic discussion.

MCH1 is essentially correct.

 

[LittleFlower]

Yep, I get the same treatment when I call people out for calling people with SSA “sodomites”. My faith is questioned.

It’s bizarre.

I feel ya, like I said uphill battle with lot’s of mud.

 

[Pup7]

Tatum I am not making a moral assertion.

Saying something isn’t correct by definition isn’t moral.

If I said “you can use the pill, it doesn’t cause abortions” that would be a moral stance.

What I said was, it’s wrong for these reasons, and the Church shouldn’t say something that isn’t accurate.

I never said it’s irrelevant to a Catholic discussion. I said it’s unfair and inaccurate, and here’s why.

 

[ratio1]

Words do matter,

I know right? All these arguments just over definitions. That’s why it’s always simpler to have the same definition. But I know that is often difficult because of the underlying agenda. That’s why people like to change definitions of words eg “marriage”.

In some years time I can see a Catholic trying to suggest marriage definition is between two people and that the church is inaccurate.

 

[Pup7]

But I know that is often difficult because of the underlying agenda.

I have to ask - who’s agenda? The medical community doesn’t have one. The only agenda I have is correct information. We’re not out to get Catholics. A lot of us are Catholics.

I personally have no difficulty saying the medication doesn’t cause an abortion, because it doesn’t. That’s not an agenda. It doesn’t lessen the fact that Catholicly speaking no one should be using it for contraception because it stops pregnancy.

 

[LittleFlower]

I know right? All these arguments just over definitions. That’s why it’s always simpler to have the same definition. But I know that is often difficult because of the underlying agenda.

What’s the underlying agenda to stick to medical definitions that the Vatican and Bishop’s conferences around the world also use?

Pray tell, what agenda do we have laying out the facts on how medications affect the body?

No one here is making moral assertions, except for perhaps me who is raising how OCPs are the devil for so many but NSAIDs are alright.