Morning After Pill in the case of Rape

[EvelynEVF]

Texas Roofer, spermicides, etc, which you list, impede fertilization. They do not disrupt a fertilized egg. I wonder if something got lost because of all the quoting and line breaks.

Barrier methods and spermicides stop or kill the sperm before they get anywhere near the egg. That’s okay by Church standards in the case of rape. Plan B can do that, too, by delaying ovulation until the sperm are dead. The problem is that Plan B’s backup plan is to prevent the already fertilized egg, the zygote, from implanting. We don’t know how often this happens, because most women don’t have a clue when they ovulate. All we know is that babies don’t implant. Whether there is a baby to implant in the first place is unknown.

That’s why we can’t morally use Plan B unless we know a woman hasn’t ovulated. If she has already ovulated, then it is no good to try to delay ovulation, and the only remaining function of Plan B is to make her womb inhospitable to the baby that may or may not already be there.

Is that any clearer?

One illustration that may help is to imagine a woman raped soon after having consensual relations with her husband. She has just ovulated. To give her Plan B would cause any zygote to be lost in a premature menstrual period. What if her husband’s sperm has fertilized an egg? Any baby deserves to live, but we are instinctively protective of “wanted” children. Plan B could cause the sacrifice of a child between husband and wife. We can’t take that chance, no matter who the father might be.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Texas Roofer, spermicides, etc, which you list, impede fertilization. They do not disrupt a fertilized egg. I wonder if something got lost because of all the quoting and line breaks.

It would seem we agree on this

Barrier methods and spermicides stop or kill the sperm before they get anywhere near the egg. That’s okay by Church standards in the case of rape.

It would seem we agree on this

Plan B can do that, too, by delaying ovulation until the sperm are dead. .

possibly however I would suggest that is a bit to be proven, my bet is plan B creates a hormone surge rather than completely change the female cycle

The problem is that Plan B’s backup plan is to prevent the already fertilized egg, the zygote, from implanting. .

now here is our problem zero proof of this, zero, none, it can be inferred through a far reaching weak set of assumptions.

We don’t know how often this happens, because most women don’t have a clue when they ovulate. All we know is that babies don’t implant. Whether there is a baby to implant in the first place is unknown.

This is incorrect, completely, incorrect, there are pill babies so implants do occur. Whether more or less implants occur is unknown, some evidence suggests less implants occur however it is a statistical based argument and is weak. It may or may not be correct. Until more is known the best answer is we do not know.

That’s why we can’t morally use Plan B unless we know a woman hasn’t ovulated. .

This is my personal issue with theses presentations The opinion of the fanatic is not and has never been the Church’s standard. And they are fanatic we know this because they have misrepresent the actual facts and standards. The actual standard is -If a woman knows she is pregnant it is immoral to do things intended to lose a pregnancy- There is no standard which requires her to “prove” she is not pregnant. The facts on whether implantation is affected is- we do not known.

If she has already ovulated, then it is no good to try to delay ovulation, and the only remaining function of Plan B is to make her womb inhospitable to the baby that may or may not already be there.

Is that any clearer?

One illustration that may help is to imagine a woman raped soon after having consensual relations with her husband. She has just ovulated. To give her Plan B would cause any zygote to be lost in a premature menstrual period. What if her husband’s sperm has fertilized an egg? Any baby deserves to live, but we are instinctively protective of “wanted” children. Plan B could cause the sacrifice of a child between husband and wife. We can’t take that chance, no matter who the father might be.

many things may affect pregnancy, hospitable, and ovulation. you may set any standard you wish for yourself, but not for others. Some say athletics, and many medicines affect pregnancy; some even say a man should wear boxers not briefs. So are boxers immoral(?) female athletics (?) medicines (?) arbitrary is arbitrary. The standard involves known pregnancies, the facts are inconclusive. So we have two choices - facts or arbitrary. I personally shall stick with the facts.

 

[EvelynEVF]

Huh. So you figure if a woman is raped, she can go ahead and take Plan B or its equivalent, because she really doesn’t know what may happen? And that abortifiacient action is unlikely enough that you don’t worry about it?

I tend to err on the side of caution, I guess, but I also know that I would never want to take the smallest chance of aborting a baby, and I do know my cycle from years of charting, so I would know what was going on.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Huh. So you figure if a woman is raped, she can go ahead and take Plan B or its equivalent, because she really doesn’t know what may happen? And that abortifiacient action is unlikely enough that you don’t worry about it?

I tend to err on the side of caution, I guess, but I also know that I would never want to take the smallest chance of aborting a baby, and I do know my cycle from years of charting, so I would know what was going on.

I believe that it may be okay for a woman to take Plan B if she is raped (not sure if date rape will work here as date rape is different from rape because it is about the sex and not about power) if she undergoes the test to determine that ovulation has not yet occurred.

But my question would be how likely is it that between the taking of the test and the actual taking of Plan B that ovulation did not occur in that time.

 

[EvelynEVF]

Lordy, I hadn’t thought of the time delay.

I’d ask you to rethink what you’ve said about date rape, though. It can be just as much about power and control as stranger rape, just like marital rape. It may be that his primary motive is to finish the sex act, but that can’t be separated from the choice to subdue a woman and force her to accept rape. And really I don’t think that has much bearing on the appropriateness of contraception.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Lordy, I hadn’t thought of the time delay.

I’d ask you to rethink what you’ve said about date rape, though. It can be just as much about power and control as stranger rape, just like marital rape. It may be that his primary motive is to finish the sex act, but that can’t be separated from the choice to subdue a woman and force her to accept rape. And really I don’t think that has much bearing on the appropriateness of contraception.

Not always. A woman who has had to much to drink can consider any sexual act as date rape because she was unable to consent due to being intoxicated. As the male may also have been in such a state we can not say that this is the same as rape.

But my main point is that even if the test is taken and shows that ovulation has not occurred there still is the chance that ovulation can occur between the time that the test was done and the results (I am sure that they do not know instantaneously) and when the woman can final procure the Plan B and take it.

 

[TLM08]

It would be a disabling mutilation and therefore is not proper.

Tell the bruised, beaten and bloodied woman lying on the emergency room gurney with her body full of offender semen that it isn’t proper.

What is it was YOUR wife, daughter, sister or mother?

If it was up to me, these animals might not even get the benefit of anesthetic!

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Tell the bruised, beaten and bloodied woman lying on the emergency room gurney with her body full of offender semen that it isn’t proper.

What is it was YOUR wife, daughter, sister or mother?

If it was up to me, these animals might not even get the benefit of anesthetic!

So the answer is to be just as much an animal as they are?

Does not seem very Christian and actually goes against what the Church Teaches.

 

[aggiecatholic05]

Tell the bruised, beaten and bloodied woman lying on the emergency room gurney with her body full of offender semen that it isn’t proper.

What is it was YOUR wife, daughter, sister or mother?

If it was up to me, these animals might not even get the benefit of anesthetic!

and eye for an eye? how about turn and offer the other cheek?

 

[EvelynEVF]

All I can wish for my rapist is that when he dies, he will have full understanding of what he has done. That will be vindication enough, without having to mutilate him, which would just make him angry and more defensive.

 

[TLM08]

So the answer is to be just as much an animal as they are?

Does not seem very Christian and actually goes against what the Church Teaches.

No, sometimes you have to be a little bit more of an animal. Those who choose to brutalize the innocent have no sense of justice and are not bound by the rules of a civilized society. Evil can only be defeated when the good guys become even more brutal than the adversary.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

No, sometimes you have to be a little bit more of an animal. Those who choose to brutalize the innocent have no sense of justice and are not bound by the rules of a civilized society. Evil can only be defeated when the good guys become even more brutal than the adversary.

This is not what the Catholic Church Teaches.

No evil may be done regardless of any good outcome that may occur.

Mutilation is an evil.

When a good person does evil they cease to be good and become that which they despise, evil.

 

[TLM08]

This is not what the Catholic Church Teaches.

No evil may be done regardless of any good outcome that may occur.

Mutilation is an evil.

When a good person does evil they cease to be good and become that which they despise, evil.

Then the only option is to roll over and die in submission to the evildoer. We have a duty to protect the innocent.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Then the only option is to roll over and die in submission to the evildoer. We have a duty to protect the innocent.

Not true and protection of the innocent does not mean committing an evil act on the guilty. Locking them up also protects the innocent.

The Catholic Church has clear teachings on this, I suggest that you read them.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Then the only option is to roll over and die in submission to the evildoer. We have a duty to protect the innocent.

A couple of thoughts have come to mind.

If this is your solution it still does not stop the “evildoer” from victimizing again. After all, as has been pointed out earlier, rape is not about sex, it is about power. Your choice of mutilation does not stop this person from using a foreign object.

Also how does one mutilate a woman who commits rape?

I know some people believe that only a man can commit rape but this is not true. See this article Rape by gender.

 

[NoWhereMan]

I believe if a Woman is raped or a young child through no fault of their own, they should not have to bear a rapist child & I think the morning after pill should be administered promptly.I feel that if God didnt want us to have these things at our disposal, we wouldnt have them. No woman should have to bear a rapist child

 

[tjm190]

The use of the morning after pill is immoral even if after a rape.

The morning after pill is different from plan B

 

[Et_Cetera]

I believe if a Woman is raped or a young child through no fault of their own, they should not have to bear a rapist child & I think the morning after pill should be administered promptly.I feel that if God didnt want us to have these things at our disposal, we wouldnt have them. No woman should have to bear a rapist child

Yes, thank you.

 

[thunderballs75]

U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ “Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services,” fourth edition, directive No. 36

“Compassionate and understanding care should be given to a person who is the victim of sexual assault. Health care providers should cooperate with law enforcement officials and offer the person psychological and spiritual support as well as accurate medical information. A female who has been raped should be able to defend herself against a potential conception from the sexual assault. If, after appropriate testing, there is no evidence that conception has occurred already, she may be treated with medications that would prevent ovulation, sperm capacitation, or fertilization. It is not permissible, however, to initiate or to recommend treatments that have as their purpose or direct effect the removal, destruction, or interference with the implantation of a fertilized ovum” (No. 36). www.usccb.org/bishops/directives.shtml

The Church is against ABC in the case of INTERcourse which of course rape is not.

That pretty much says it all for me…

 

[elts1956]

The issue is still not settled. There is very little, if any direct evidence that shows the morning after pill causes an abortion and there is a mounting pile of evidence that it does not. The only thing to do is sit back and wait and see how the issue is settled.

Here is a good article that explains how Plan B works.
ec.princeton.edu/questions/MOA.pdf#search=%22princeton%20mechanism%20emergency%20contraception%22

Notice that there is no secondary effect on implantation and more than likely the progesterone in Plan B actually helps, not inhibits, a fertilized egg from implanting. From what I understand it isn’t conclusive so, like I said, more evidence will be needed before anything final is decided.

The egg is already fertilized. Life has begun. Plan B causes abortions.