Plan B and abortions

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lazerlike42
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lazerlike42

Guest
But he pointed out that pregnancy prevention can also occur under more natural circumstances, and whether the pregnancy is thwarted before or after fertilization is equally impossible to prove.
Click to expand...
For example, the majority of fertilized eggs simply do not successfully implant in the uterus, even when no birth control is used. Also, breast-feeding is known to reduce the chance of pregnancy for up to six months after a woman gives birth.
Click to expand...
“So if one really were opposed to anything that might prevent pregnancy after fertilization,” Trussell said, “one would need to be opposed to all hormonal methods as well as breast-feeding.”
Click to expand...
Is this information true? Does anybody have any good information on plan B?
 
For example, the majority of fertilized eggs simply do not successfully implant in the uterus, even when no birth control is used. Also, breast-feeding is known to reduce the chance of pregnancy for up to six months after a woman gives birth.
Click to expand...
“So if one really were opposed to anything that might prevent pregnancy after fertilization,” Trussell said, “one would need to be opposed to all hormonal methods as well as breast-feeding.”
Click to expand...
Regular breast feeding prevents ovulation. There is nothing wrong with avoiding a pregnancy (not ending one that is already happening) naturally if there is a good reason (having just had a baby is a good reason- and the body takes care of that on its own, so the couple doesn’t have to do- or not do- anything but keep breastfeeding).

Since the majority of fertilized eggs do not implant, then that is all the more reason to not prevent the development and birth of those that do implant.
 
40.png
Lazerlike42:
Is this information true? Does anybody have any good information on plan B?
Click to expand...
I did not RTFA, but it is indeed true that somewhere around 50% of embryos do not implant.
 
Doesn’t this somewhat… make it problematic to argue about abortions because if the embryo is a human being before it implants, then 50% of all human beings simply die naturally? What impact does this have on the theological side of things?
 
Maybe, but people die naturally from all sorts of causes. You have a 0% chance of surviving life. That doesn’t make it okay to kill people.
 
The difference is that pregnancy prevention in the case of breastfeeding and the failure of some fertilized eggs to implant are not the result of human intervention to make these things happen. They are natural processes.
 
40.png
Lazerlike42:
Doesn’t this somewhat… make it problematic to argue about abortions because if the embryo is a human being before it implants, then 50% of all human beings simply die naturally? What impact does this have on the theological side of things?
Click to expand...
It is God’s plan when an embryo does not “naturally” implant. The same for the ceasing of ovulation during breast feeding. It is murder when MAN interferes with the body’s natural process with birth control pills, abortion, etc.

Don’t you people read what you’re writing. Just listen to yourselves. I don’t understand why so many Catholics don’t understand such basic teachings of the Church. Ask your priest for a copy of the Cathechism of the Catholic Church and READ it! You might learn something
 
40.png
LeahInancsi:
It is God’s plan when an embryo does not “naturally” implant. The same for the ceasing of ovulation during breast feeding. It is murder when MAN interferes with the body’s natural process with birth control pills, abortion, etc.

Don’t you people read what you’re writing. Just listen to yourselves. I don’t understand why so many Catholics don’t understand such basic teachings of the Church. Ask your priest for a copy of the Cathechism of the Catholic Church and READ it! You might learn something
Click to expand...
woah woah woah 🙂 Hold up there, convert! I’ve got 15 days to go, too, believe me, I am more than a zealot for the truth and the Magisterium. I was only asking these questions because I need to write an opinion piece to the newspaper saying that plan B is an abortificant, and I am trying to get my facts straight so I can make a solid arguement.
 
40.png
Lazerlike42:
woah woah woah 🙂 Hold up there, convert! I’ve got 15 days to go, too, believe me, I am more than a zealot for the truth and the Magisterium. I was only asking these questions because I need to write an opinion piece to the newspaper saying that plan B is an abortificant, and I am trying to get my facts straight so I can make a solid arguement.
Click to expand...
Perhaps I got carreid away at the end, but some of the comments I’m seeing lately by Catholics make me wonder what Forum I’m reading. My last comment wasn’t necessarily directed at you and especially, now, that I now where you are coming form. :o
 
For example, the majority of fertilized eggs simply do not successfully implant in the uterus, even when no birth control is used.
Click to expand...
This is not the first time I have seen this quotation. Sometimes the figure of 60% is used. And I wonder how anyone can know?

Think about it - implantation takes place about 9 days after fertilization - before the woman’s menstruation is late! So, how can anyone know that she was pregnant and that the embryo failed to implant?

People can claim anything, but how would they prove this? Yes, if every woman went to the doctor when she has had a heavier period (a possible clue) and has tests that would show an increase in hormone levels or something like that. But, how many women do you know go to a doctor for that? Not unless it repeats and repeats…

I think we should be very careful of the statements we take at face value just because some “expert” has made them.
 
I see your point, Joan…Well, I’ve had it a few times that I started getting morning sickness just before my period was due, took a test, it was positive (strong pink line), but…2 days later my period arrived on time…it’s called a ‘chemical pregnancy’ my doctor told me, and it happens quite a lot, she said. So, I think 50-60% isn’t so far off: I’ve had 2 healthy pregnancies, 2 early miscarriages (before 6 weeks) and 2 chemicals…That’s 1-in-3 rate of success.

Anna x
 
40.png
anna1978:
I see your point, Joan…Well, I’ve had it a few times that I started getting morning sickness just before my period was due, took a test, it was positive (strong pink line), but…2 days later my period arrived on time…it’s called a ‘chemical pregnancy’ my doctor told me, and it happens quite a lot, she said. So, I think 50-60% isn’t so far off: I’ve had 2 healthy pregnancies, 2 early miscarriages (before 6 weeks) and 2 chemicals…That’s 1-in-3 rate of success.

Anna x
Click to expand...
Since we were talking about the quoted 60% failure to implant, your experience shows a 33% failure to implant - early miscarriages that are after implantation cannot be counted here.

In my experience, I am aware of only three pregnancies - one ectopic pregnancy followed by two live births. So, I did not experience any failure to implant - that I am aware of.

Between the two of us, there is only 16.5% failure to implant.

Anecdotal records are not much use in either confirming the claim or otherwise. It would need studies, requiring women to have pregnancy tests monthly, and measuring hormone levels etc. etc.

I am still extremely sceptical of this claim, since the only people I have ever heard make it are anti-life. It sounds to me like rationalization - “if so many babies spontaneously abort, what’s so bad about choosing to abort” My instincts are to roundly reject this number. As I already said - we cannot know.
 
40.png
Lazerlike42:
woah woah woah 🙂 I need to write an opinion piece to the newspaper saying that plan B is an abortificant, and I am trying to get my facts straight so I can make a solid arguement.
Click to expand...
You might want to read this.

Also, whether or not “the majority of fertilized eggs simply do not successfully implant in the uterus, even when no birth control is used” is irrelevant in my opinion, it’s a matter of intent.
 
It is my understanding that the morning after pill, actually two pills taken a day apart, provides a double dose of ordinary birth control hormones. The effect is to “force” a menstrual period within a matter of a few days. IF there is a fertilized egg present in a woman’s body, the shedding of the uterine lining prevents implantation, and thus terminates the pregnancy after conception, but prior to implantation.
 
The problem comes in determining when pregnancy begins. It used to be at fertilisation, but with the advent of the contraceptive pill and in vitro fertilisation it was changed to the time of implantation. However, text books now have pregnancy beginning at implantation.

This is why there is a problem with Catholic Hospitals handing out Emergency Contraception to women who have been raped.

Catholics believe it occurs at conception (fertilisation) and medical science also holds that a new human life begins at fertilisation but everyone else believes there is no moral or ethical problem with it.
 
Eileen T:
…This is why there is a problem with Catholic Hospitals handing out Emergency Contraception to women who have been raped.
Click to expand...
You misapprehend the Church’s position on this issue. There is no problem or inconsistency with the Catholic allowance of emergency contraception in cases of rape because it is only licit (for use by a Catholic victim)where there is evidence that the woman has NOT ovulated prior to the assault, but possibly could ovulate while viable sperm are within her body. In these cases the use of E.C. prevents ovulation and therefore conception, but is not used to eliminate a fertilized egg.

This use of E.C., even by someone who has not been raped, is an example of a non-abortifacient use of the medication.
 
Island Oak:
You misapprehend the Church’s position on this issue. There is no problem or inconsistency with the Catholic allowance of emergency contraception in cases of rape because it is only licit (for use by a Catholic victim)where there is evidence that the woman has NOT ovulated prior to the assault, but possibly could ovulate while viable sperm are within her body. In these cases the use of E.C. prevents ovulation and therefore conception, but is not used to eliminate a fertilized egg.

This use of E.C., even by someone who has not been raped, is an example of a non-abortifacient use of the medication.
Click to expand...
Yes, but determining whether or not ovulation had or had not occured in the previous few days would not always be easy.

How would they do that?
 
It doesn’t matter. Artificial contraception is not morally permissable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top