Help forming arguments against birth control

[SummerSmiles]

I’m hoping that I can get some ideas from some of you regarding how to have a productive discussion about birth control with some friends of mine. This is in light of the Obama administration’s edict that employers must include contraception in their health care plans. I’d just like to get a discussion going so that I can find some better ways to articulate the problems contraception causes for society.

So far, I’ve been discussing how contraception is not health care. Health care seeks to return a body to it’s naturally working state, where contraception takes a healthy functioning system and “breaks” it so it doesn’t function the way it should. Plus, birth control pills are classified as a class 1 carcinogen. Essentially it sends the message that putting women at increased risk for cancer is more favorable than an unexpected pregnancy.

I’ve also touched on how contraception is actually enslaving to women, rather than freeing women, as society would claim. I’m having some troubles fully articulating this point, though. I feel like I understand it that way, but am having trouble explaining it… any help?

Any other thoughts or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Hokomai]

Plus, birth control pills are classified as a class 1 carcinogen.

What is a ‘class 1 carcinogen’, who says ‘birth control pills’ are in this class, and what, exactly is the increased risk of cancer of women using them compared to controls of coupes using condoms, and NFP?

 

[TheRealJuliane]

What is a ‘class 1 carcinogen’, who says ‘birth control pills’ are in this class, and what, exactly is the increased risk of cancer of women using them compared to controls of coupes using condoms, and NFP?

Nice try to immediately derail the thread. Please, everyone, ignore this poster while you answer the OP. We can have an argument about his points later.

Hokomai, stop this. If you want to ask those question, start your own thread.

 

[Hokomai]

Nice try to immediately derail the thread. Please, everyone, ignore this poster while you answer the OP. We can have an argument about his points later.

Hokomai, stop this. If you want to ask those question, start your own thread.

I’m sorry Juliane, I had not realised the thread had its own rules. Can you tell me please what parts of the OP are ok to question or develop?

 

[TheRealJuliane]

I’m sorry Juliane, I had not realised the thread had its own rules. Can you tell me please what parts of the OP are ok to question or develop?

Just answer the OP’s question, if you can. Every thread is posted to answer a question or get advice. Why do you need to ask her the same questions she’s already getting?

 

[Julianna]

I’m hoping that I can get some ideas from some of you regarding how to have a productive discussion about birth control with some friends of mine. This is in light of the Obama administration’s edict that employers must include contraception in their health care plans. I’d just like to get a discussion going so that I can find some better ways to articulate the problems contraception causes for society.

So far, I’ve been discussing how contraception is not health care. Health care seeks to return a body to it’s naturally working state, where contraception takes a healthy functioning system and “breaks” it so it doesn’t function the way it should. Plus, birth control pills are classified as a class 1 carcinogen. Essentially it sends the message that putting women at increased risk for cancer is more favorable than an unexpected pregnancy.

I’ve also touched on how contraception is actually enslaving to women, rather than freeing women, as society would claim. I’m having some troubles fully articulating this point, though. I feel like I understand it that way, but am having trouble explaining it… any help?

Any other thoughts or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

The President can include them in employers plans, but you don’t have to take them. For me, it was a bad experience. I’m not on the abortifact (sp) bandwagon, I am more on the “chemical” side. When I was in my 20’s I took them. It was about a year later I realized something wrong was going on with “me”. I gained 25 lbs., I felt bloated all the time, I would snap at my husband for no reason, I was snarky to my co-workers and just all around a big grouch. I went to the Dr. and described what was happening. He flat out told me it was a hormonal reaction to the pill. I said, “I want off these things now”. I did get off of them, but it took awhile before I felt like my old self. I spoke to my mom about it, and she said, my aunt had the exact same experience. I would not recommend the pill at all. It’s a chemical and for me, it turned me into one angry, snappy, fat, bloated unhappy person. If I knew then, exactly what the pill would do to me, I never would have taken it.

 

[SummerSmiles]

What is a ‘class 1 carcinogen’, who says ‘birth control pills’ are in this class, and what, exactly is the increased risk of cancer of women using them compared to controls of coupes using condoms, and NFP?

Although I suspect you’re just being argumentative, I’ll help you out with portions of this. “Class 1 Carcinogen” is defined by the FDA. The main ingredient in hormonal birth control pills is listed as such according to the FDA. Go look it up on their website or on the American Cancer Society’s website, it’s not exactly hidden information. There have been studies done to see what the increased risk is for women on the pill developing breast cancer, but I don’t remember all the specifics of it right off the top of my head.

 

[SummerSmiles]

The President can include them in employers plans, but you don’t have to take them. For me, it was a bad experience. I’m not on the abortifact (sp) bandwagon, I am more on the “chemical” side. When I was in my 20’s I took them. It was about a year later I realized something wrong was going on with “me”. I gained 25 lbs., I felt bloated all the time, I would snap at my husband for no reason, I was snarky to my co-workers and just all around a big grouch. I went to the Dr. and described what was happening. He flat out told me it was a hormonal reaction to the pill. I said, “I want off these things now”. I did get off of them, but it took awhile before I felt like my old self. I spoke to my mom about it, and she said, my aunt had the exact same experience. I would not recommend the pill at all. It’s a chemical and for me, it turned me into one angry, snappy, fat, bloated unhappy person. If I knew then, exactly what the pill would do to me, I never would have taken it.

I had a roommate in college who had a similar experience with BCPs. She was prescribed them to help “regulate her period” and after watching her struggle with them, I decided that I didn’t want any part in that–morality aside.

 

[samiam1611]

I’m hoping that I can get some ideas from some of you regarding how to have a productive discussion about birth control with some friends of mine. This is in light of the Obama administration’s edict that employers must include contraception in their health care plans. I’d just like to get a discussion going so that I can find some better ways to articulate the problems contraception causes for society.

I will be devil’s advocate for you. I will also attempt to answer your questions so that I don’t seem like I’m just here to instigate.

Plus, birth control pills are classified as a class 1 carcinogen. Essentially it sends the message that putting women at increased risk for cancer is more favorable than an unexpected pregnancy.

Not even the slightest bit convincing. Several reasons:
-there are types of birth control, other than the pill, that does not have this risk at all such as the copper IUD
-birth control pills decrease the risk of some cancers, such as ovarian cancer
-the increased risk of cancer is contested humupd.oxfordjournals.org/content/16/6/631
-tons of things are carcinogens. I barely raise an eyebrow when I hear something is a carcinogen unless it’s like a 700% increased risk.
-there probably ARE some conditions where cancer would be more favorable than pregnancy.

I’ve also touched on how contraception is actually enslaving to women, rather than freeing women, as society would claim.

I don’t know anyone who feels enslaved bc of it and I certainly don’t feel that way myself so I’d have to concur with society on this point. However, if you’d like to attempt to articulate it here, I will keep an open mind.

So far, I’ve been discussing how contraception is not health care. Health care seeks to return a body to it’s naturally working state, where contraception takes a healthy functioning system and “breaks” it so it doesn’t function the way it should.

THIS is your best argument by far. Note that it really is more of a political argument than an ethical one. Of course, I can come up with counter-arguments, but I would consider this a very valid point and if you focused your attention on this one, I think you will be more successful in your discussion with your friends.

 

[Hokomai]

I can’t find anything to indicate that either the FDA or the ACS classifies carcinogens in any way. They seem to reply on other organisations. I note the ACS’s note in its list of carcinogens:

Estrogen-progestogen oral contraceptives (combined) (Note: There is also convincing evidence in humans that these agents confer a protective effect against cancer in the endometrium and ovary)

 

[Hokomai]

Just answer the OP’s question, if you can. Every thread is posted to answer a question or get advice. Why do you need to ask her the same questions she’s already getting?

Juliane, this was not a question she was asked. It was an assertion she made. Why can’t I question/challenge her about it?

 

[Debora123]

Nice try to immediately derail the thread. Please, everyone, ignore this poster while you answer the OP. We can have an argument about his points later.

Hokomai, stop this. If you want to ask those question, start your own thread.

Actually, I think Hokomai brings up a valid point.

If the OP’s goal is to convince people that hormonal BC shouldn’t be in health care plans partly because of health risks, it would really help if she presented better, more reliable proof of those health risks.

 

[HouseArrest]

Have you listened to Janet Smith’s “Contraception, Why Not?”

 

[SummerSmiles]

I don’t know anyone who feels enslaved bc of it and I certainly don’t feel that way myself so I’d have to concur with society on this point. However, if you’d like to attempt to articulate it here, I will keep an open mind.

I was thinking along the lines of us being enslaved to sexual desires. In essence, contraception encourages us to have sexual partners just for the fun and the pleasure of sex. Women are encouraged to have sexual relationships with men who have no intention of staying around for the “long haul.” (Of course, men are encouraged to do the same thing.) Sex outside of a monogamous relationship becomes a fun pastime, rather than a beautiful bonding experience.

Even when a loving committed couple has sex using contraception they are saying, “I love you so much that I want to share every part of myself with you and I accept every part of who you are–except for your fertility. I want none of that.” We are told that we must change a fundamental part of how our bodies work in order to be acceptable to the opposite sex. We are attempting to enjoy the pleasures of sex without the responsibility of the natural ends of sex. And then, when contraception fails, we feel cheated and misled–because we have been. We act surprised when having sex leads to babies, even though that is what sex was created for in the first place.

 

[SummerSmiles]

Have you listened to Janet Smith’s “Contraception, Why Not?”

No, I haven’t listened to that one. I’ll have to go take a look at it.

 

[timotheos]

I’ve also touched on how contraception is actually enslaving to women, rather than freeing women, as society would claim. I’m having some troubles fully articulating this point, though. I feel like I understand it that way, but am having trouble explaining it… any help?

Any other thoughts or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Summer, contraception does not only enslave women, but men also.

I doubt that the “enslaved” have any interest in hearing any of your arguments. Most people with psychologic addiction to drugs would similarly have little interest in hearing about the negative effects. In my opinion, the current contraception-aided pursuit of sex is little different from drug use, and the dangers are invisible to them.

We all hear that the desire to have sexual relations is “only natural”, and that we should be free to behave in such a natural fashion. But this is how animals behave. The difference is that with animals, little animals are born, ie. sex has a purpose. With human beings, contraception removes the purpose of sex, and now both men and women have the “freedom” to behave in a manner not just at the level of animals, but below it. What exists as a natural desire on an animal level is never fulfilled on a procreative level; and the act in all of its passions never completely fulfills even when the conscious intent of contraception is to bring it down to this level. But we human beings are not created as just animals, we are human with intelligence and emotion, we are spirituals beings with souls. We “know” – intellectually, biologically, emotionally, spiritually – the connection between sex and procreation. The breaking of this connection not only dehumanizes us, it makes us less than animals who are not enslaved to this pleasure-seeking behavior. On some subconscious level we know this is true.

But as I say, those caught in the trap cannot see it. It is only when they are forced to look at the evil squarely in the face that they can choose to leave it. And that is the job of the Holy Spirit.

Tim

 

[SummerSmiles]

Summer, contraception does not only enslave women, but men also.

I doubt that the “enslaved” have any interest in hearing any of your arguments. Most people with psychologic addiction to drugs would similarly have little interest in hearing about the negative effects. In my opinion, the current contraception-aided pursuit of sex is little different from drug use, and the dangers are invisible to them.

We all hear that the desire to have sexual relations is “only natural”, and that we should be free to behave in such a natural fashion. But this is how animals behave. The difference is that with animals, little animals are born, ie. sex has a purpose. With human beings, contraception removes the purpose of sex, and now both men and women have the “freedom” to behave in a manner not just at the level of animals, but below it. What exists as a natural desire on an animal level is never fulfilled on a procreative level; and the act in all of its passions never completely fulfills even when the conscious intent of contraception is to bring it down to this level. But we human beings are not created as just animals, we are human with intelligence and emotion, we are spirituals beings with souls. We “know” – intellectually, biologically, emotionally, spiritually – the connection between sex and procreation. The breaking of this connection not only dehumanizes us, it makes us less than animals who are not enslaved to this pleasure-seeking behavior. On some subconscious level we know this is true.

But as I say, those caught in the trap cannot see it. It is only when they are forced to look at the evil squarely in the face that they can choose to leave it. And that is the job of the Holy Spirit.

Tim

I agree, most people just don’t see it. Whenever it gets brought up, they are always saying, “What?! I’m not enslaved, I’m free! I can have sex whenever I want and I don’t have to worry about the negative consequences of it. I’m educated and I’m using modern health care to it’s fullest! I’m more than an animal because I’ve used my brain to figure out how to have some fun and bond with my partner without worrying about pregnancy–that puts me above animals because I’m smarter than them.”

And to be honest, this is where I start to have trouble answering back. Just because we have figured out how to do something doesn’t necessarily mean it’s something that we should be doing…

 

[Slinger]

I was thinking along the lines of us being enslaved to sexual desires. In essence, contraception encourages us to have sexual partners just for the fun and the pleasure of sex. Women are encouraged to have sexual relationships with men who have no intention of staying around for the “long haul.” (Of course, men are encouraged to do the same thing.) Sex outside of a monogamous relationship becomes a fun pastime, rather than a beautiful bonding experience.

Even when a loving committed couple has sex using contraception they are saying, “I love you so much that I want to share every part of myself with you and I accept every part of who you are–except for your fertility. I want none of that.” We are told that we must change a fundamental part of how our bodies work in order to be acceptable to the opposite sex. We are attempting to enjoy the pleasures of sex without the responsibility of the natural ends of sex. And then, when contraception fails, we feel cheated and misled–because we have been. We act surprised when having sex leads to babies, even though that is what sex was created for in the first place.

I’m not sure if you are seeking a non-Catholic perspective but thought I would add one…

I would say that, for me, the most convincing argument I have ever read on these boards is in regards to how NFP draws a couple closer together because both spouses have to be aware of the fertility cycles. To me, this causes couples to never take their intimate relations for granted (something that can potentially occur if they are using ABC and can have sex anytime they want). I would probably encourage my own daughters to use NFP when they get married (if they asked) because I agree that the side-effects of the pill can be harmful and that condoms really take away from the experience between husband and wife.

I do not think that the argument against contraception that you posed in this post (“I love you so much that I want to share every part of myself with you and I accept every part of who you are–except for your fertility. I want none of that.” ) would be effective as it almost implies that a couple would not be in agreement with each other that they are not ready yet for children…or that their bodies are separate from their minds. And, just because someone contracepts does not mean they are not open to having a child if they were to get pregnant. My husband and I were contracepting (albeit not very effectively) when we got pregnant both times…we were surprised (as anyone is when they find out they are pregnant) but not disappointed at all. I would assume people who use NFP to space children but find out that their calculations were off and they got pregnant go through those same emotions. That being said, I absolutely agree with NFP as being the most healthy (physically and emotionally) way for a couple to plan their family.

Hopefully this perspective helps you in your approach with your friends!

 

[SummerSmiles]

Well, our birth control conversation actually went better than I expected. We did it over facebook, and most people were able to remain online throughout the entire discussion. Both sides of the argument were able to keep their cool, and it turned into a very good discussion. I don’t think either side got anywhere close to swaying the other, but at least we were all civil about it.

And then last night one of my friends put a comment on my facebook about how she feels sad for me that I have a view that is “so disrespectful of women.”

 

[RedSoxWife]

For those who are seriously asking who classifies it as a carcinogen, the World Health Organization does (and used the words: "class 1). Here’s a link to an article about it on Catholic.org.

Here’s a bit of the article’s info, but there’s way more there:

In 2005 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (a technical arm of the World Health Organization) declared the combined oral contraceptive (the most commonly used form of the Pill) a carcinogen due to its documented negative effects on the risks of breast, cervical, and liver cancers. Overall, women on the Pill are at about a 24 percent increased risk of breast cancer. For women who use the Pill for four years or longer prior to their first full-term pregnancy, the risk is 52 percent higher than women not on the Pill. (1) Is anyone telling young women this when they fill their prescriptions? (For perspective, the drug Vioxx was pulled from the market when it was shown to increase overall risk of cardiovascular problems by 59 percent. (2))

A recent study from Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center concluded that women younger than 45 who are using oral contraceptives are at a 2.5-fold higher risk for triple negative breast cancer (this type represents about 10 percent of all breast cancer cases and generally has a bad prognosis for long term outcome). (3) The study also found those who started taking oral contraceptives before age 18 were at a 1.9-fold increased risk for any type of breast cancer. Would mothers allow their teen daughters to use the Pill to treat acne if they knew this?

A 2009 study from the Mayo Clinic (4) examined the risk of smoking on breast cancer. Expectedly, the survey found smoking increased breast cancer risk by 25 percent. The same study observed, however, that women who had been using oral contraceptives for 11 years or more, more than doubled their risk of breast cancer.