If contraception is intrinsically evil...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Debora123
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
WingsOfEagles said:
So, the question comes up, does it matter if it is 1 mortal sin or 2? 1 mortal sin on the soul is enough to put the soul in danger. Do additional sins put one in additional danger?

Then the question arises to me. If a rapist (for some strange reason) offered to use a condom. Does the victim need to say no? This could easily be argued as double effect. The victim is probably more worried about HIV/AIDs than pregnancy.
Click to expand...
This occasionally does happen where the rapist uses a condom, whether for the purpose of leaving no DNA evidence or preventing conception, because even a child conceived in the attack would help to ID the attacker and force him to face his crimes.

The victim has no need to say no to a condom. She may attempt to repel her attacker and his sexual fluids at any time, and may choose to protect her egg after the fact, as long as it has not already been released from the ovary.
 
mommamaree said:
This occasionally does happen where the rapist uses a condom, whether for the purpose of leaving no DNA evidence or preventing conception, because even a child conceived in the attack would help to ID the attacker and force him to face his crimes.

The victim has no need to say no to a condom. She may attempt to repel her attacker and his sexual fluids at any time, and may choose to protect her egg after the fact, as long as it has not already been released from the ovary.
Click to expand...
Yes, I definitely personally agree that the victim is under no obligation to say “no” to a condom. Who knows what STD the rapist could have?
 
mommamaree said:
Then why is it called Emergency Contraception? Why is the medication actually a high dose of oral contraceptives? Why does it function just as oral contraceptives do?

EC does NOT do anything to the sperm. It merely prevents ovulation, thereby preventing her egg from being fertilized by his sperm, meaning preventing conception (i.e. contracepting).
Click to expand...
Are you finished yet? 😃 I was considering responding, but I want to leave you plenty of room to have your say… Could you please post the relevant paragraph number from the CCC (I’m not arguing with you at this point, I just want to read what you’re citing)?
 
mgoforth said:
AFAIK, only some medications weaken the uterine wall.

Yes, from the victims point of view, it can be seen as self-defense and not contraception, because the victim did not intend to have sex or to have sperm placed in her body. Therefore it can be called double effect if conception is prevented. The victim is simply protecting a part of her body (the egg) from attack by a body part of an unauthorized intruder (the rapist’s sperm). If the medication prevents ovulation and does nothing to kill a developing fetus then it’s strictly self-defense.
Click to expand...
You are getting closer here, which I am thankful to see. However, EC and condoms is still contraception. The reason this is allowed is because of the nature of the act, the rape itself. A rape victim is not required to allow her attacker to impregnate her simply because he is violating her sexual intimacy. It is not a sexual act. It is a violent act against her sexual intimacy.
 
mommamaree said:
Then why is it called Emergency Contraception? Why is the medication actually a high dose of oral contraceptives? Why does it function just as oral contraceptives do?

EC does NOT do anything to the sperm. It merely prevents ovulation, thereby preventing her egg from being fertilized by his sperm, meaning preventing conception (i.e. contracepting).
Click to expand...
Because that is the medical name for it. Just like if you were to use ‘The Pill’ for theraputic means other than contraception, which given nessary gravity of what its used for, is licit. It would still be medically called contraception but the puprose is not to contracept but to correct an health problem.

In this case the victim has every right to defend her self agianst the attack and kill the sperm or use a contracptive medication to delay ovulation. She may not contracept however and do anything to hurt an already fertilized egg by preventing implantion, not does she have recourse to abortion.
 
mommamaree said:
You are getting closer here, which I am thankful to see. However, EC and condoms is still contraception. The reason this is allowed is because of the nature of the act, the rape itself. A rape victim is not required to allow her attacker to impregnate her simply because he is violating her sexual intimacy. It is not a sexual act. It is a violent act against her sexual intimacy.
Click to expand...
I think the bottom line is that this is an argument of language used. Nobody is actually in disagreement about what is okay in this situation (except maybe Mark Anthony).
 
LJN21 said:
Because that is the medical name for it. Just like if you were to use ‘The Pill’ for theraputic means other than contraception, which given nessary gravity of what its used for, is licit. It would still be medically called contraception but the puprose is not to contracept but to correct an health problem.

In this case the victim has every right to defend her self agianst the attack and kill the sperm or use a contracptive medication to delay ovulation. She may not contracept however and do anything to hurt an already fertilized egg by preventing implantion, not does she have recourse to abortion.
Click to expand...
The only reason for taking Plan B in the case of rape is to prevent pregnancy (due to a violent crime). By definition, this is a form of contraception.
 
Debora123 said:
I’m not sure how I put words in your mouth. I asked you 3 questions for clarification. 🤷
Click to expand...
And it was good you clarified. We discover from this that MGO was not in agreement with Mark Anthony (who does actually believe Plan B is never okay).
 
mgoforth said:
Are you finished yet? 😃 I was considering responding, but I want to leave you plenty of room to have your say… Could you please post the relevant paragraph number from the CCC (I’m not arguing with you at this point, I just want to read what you’re citing)?
Click to expand...
Yes. I am finished.

CCC 2356

cf CCC 2353 and 2354 and 2355

The first is regarding rape. The other three concern fornication, pornography, and prostitution. Notice the difference in the language in the CCC. Nowhere does the Church teaching imply that rape qualifies as a sexual act.
 
mgoforth said:
The situation you described is not contraception, it’s self-defense with the possible double effect of preventing fertilization. That’s why the USCCB allows it, not because they think contraception is ok sometimes.
Click to expand...
What?? This makes 0 sense.

The prevention of fertilization is the * sole reason* why rape victims take the morning after pill, not the “possible double effect”
 
Debora123 said:
What?? This makes 0 sense.

The prevention of fertilization is the * sole reason* why rape victims take the morning after pill, not the “possible double effect”
Click to expand...
My thoughts too. Plan B doesn’t act as spermicide and rid the body of sperm. It prevents conception. No double effect.
 
LJN21 said:
Because that is the medical name for it. Just like if you were to use ‘The Pill’ for theraputic means other than contraception, which given nessary gravity of what its used for, is licit. It would still be medically called contraception but the puprose is not to contracept but to correct an health problem.

In this case the victim has every right to defend her self agianst the attack and kill the sperm or use a contracptive medication to delay ovulation. She may not contracept however and do anything to hurt an already fertilized egg by preventing implantion, not does she have recourse to abortion.
Click to expand...
Contracept means “against conception”. It is not abortion. It means preventing conception. There are various methods of preventing conception. Some are medicinal, some are devices, some are sexual techniques.
You are right that she may not do anything to hurt an already fertilized egg. In fact, she may not even use Plan B if testing indicates she has ovulated, because the chance of accidentally causing an early abortion is too great.
But contraception does not equal abortion. Contraception acts to prevent conception, which is exactly what Plan B does.
 
WingsOfEagles said:
Correct me if I’m wrong, but the morning after pill does not protect against STDs. Therefore, the intent is to avoid conception, even in cases of rape.
Click to expand...
You are not wrong. You are correct. I did not think mgoforth’s post made any sense either. 🤷
 
WingsOfEagles said:
The only reason for taking Plan B in the case of rape is to prevent pregnancy (due to a violent crime). By definition, this is a form of contraception.
Click to expand...
Plan B is actully morally problmatic and does not have blanket approval because it can also not allow implantion of an fertilized egg which is immoral. I link an article earllier talking about it.

It has nothing to do with the fact rape if a violent crime or whether is is a sex act or not but the fact the raper has NO moral right to his victims body, there for she has every moral right to deffend against his attack.

You guys are making this all way more confusing than it needs to be.
 
mommamaree said:
Yes. I am finished.

CCC 2356

cf CCC 2353 and 2354 and 2355

The first is regarding rape. The other three concern fornication, pornography, and prostitution. Notice the difference in the language in the CCC. Nowhere does the Church teaching imply that rape qualifies as a sexual act.
Click to expand...
I don’t think I agree, and I’ll respond in more detail shortly.
 
LJN21 said:
Plan B is actully morally problmatic and does not have blanket approval because it can also not allow implantion of an fertilized egg which is immoral. I link an article earllier talking about it.

It has nothing to do with the fact rape if a violent crime or whether is is a sex act or not but the fact the raper has NO moral right to his victims body, there for she has every moral right to deffend against his attack.

You guys are making this all way more confusing than it needs to be.
Click to expand...
Well, yes, once fertilized the egg is a life. The okay use of Plan B in this case though is because rape is a crime. It is not okay to take Plan B in the case of a mutual one night stand, even if ovulation has not yet occurred.
 
mommamaree said:
Contracept means “against conception”. It is not abortion. It means preventing conception. There are various methods of preventing conception. Some are medicinal, some are devices, some are sexual techniques.
You are right that she may not do anything to hurt an already fertilized egg. In fact, she may not even use Plan B if testing indicates she has ovulated, because the chance of accidentally causing an early abortion is too great.
But contraception does not equal abortion. Contraception acts to prevent conception, which is exactly what Plan B does.
Click to expand...
I am aware of what contraception means. In this cause the going agaisnt conception is self defence not contracpetion.

Any contracpetive that prevents a ferlized egg form emplanting is causing an abortion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top