USCCB OKs contraception in rape cases?

  • Thread starter Thread starter CCF_Jeff
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CCF_Jeff

Guest
I was floored when I first read this. What’s up here?

Fact Sheet
Emergency Contraception and Treatment
of Victims of Sexual Assault

www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/abortion/ecfact.htm

…A woman who has been raped should be able to defend herself from a potential conception and receive treatments to suppress ovulation and incapacitate sperm. If conception has occurred, however, a Catholic hospital will not dispense drugs to interfere with implantation of a newly conceived human embryo.2

Hospitals should develop appropriate protocols to determine whether administering emergency contraception would have an abortifacient effect. Tests are available to determine whether ovulation has occurred.3

…
Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
3211 4th Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20017-1194 (202) 541-3070
 
Yes, only if ovulation has not occured and it would not cause an abortifacient effect.

So basically, if ovulation has not occurred, a raped woman could have spermicide used to kill the rapists sperm and the hospital could also attempt to clean that stuff out of her.
 
This is the only exception to the Church’s teaching against contraception keeping in mind the victim is not required to attempt to prevent conception.

Scott
 
There have been several threads on this already. The reasoning goes like this:

Contraception is inherently sinful between spouses because the marital act is frustrated. Couples cannot give themselves completely to one another by holding back their fertility. However, in cases of rape, the “marital act” does not exist and the dignity of human sexuality is already frustrated. A rape victim is not required to be open to life, and thus may receive contraception.

The very important point is that *conception must not have occurred. *This can usually only be verified if the woman is not ovulating. The USCCB decision is not a blanket approval of emergency “contraception” which acts as an abortifacient. So-called “morning after” pills such as RU-486 are most definitely not allowed. However, spermicides and other treatments that can prevent conception are permitted.
 
40.png
CCF_Jeff:
I was floored when I first read this. What’s up here?

Fact Sheet
Emergency Contraception and Treatment
of Victims of Sexual Assault

www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/abortion/ecfact.htm

…A woman who has been raped should be able to defend herself from a potential conception and receive treatments to suppress ovulation and incapacitate sperm. If conception has occurred, however, a Catholic hospital will not dispense drugs to interfere with implantation of a newly conceived human embryo.2

Hospitals should develop appropriate protocols to determine whether administering emergency contraception would have an abortifacient effect. Tests are available to determine whether ovulation has occurred.3

…
Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
3211 4th Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20017-1194 (202) 541-3070
Click to expand...
No, the USCCB has not condoned an “exception” in which contraception is allowed.

This is not contraception, it is the rape victim’s right to repel the aggressor before, during, and after the attack. For example, if a victim was able to escape during the attack this would not be “withdrawal” nor if she fought off her attacker and shot him dead would it be murder-- it is self defense.

This is not an act of intercourse, it is an act of rape-- one-way aggression. The victim may expell the semen from her body and take actions to halt the perpetuation of the attack (ie, sperm reaching egg). She may NOT take an action that would kill an already conceived child. At that point, the attack has ended and an innocent life has begun.
 
I appreciate the answers.

I scrolled down a ways & didn’t see any similar questions. I apparently didn’t scroll down far enough.

In any event, thank you again for your help.
 
40.png
CCF_Jeff:
I appreciate the answers.

I scrolled down a ways & didn’t see any similar questions. I apparently didn’t scroll down far enough.

In any event, thank you again for your help.
Click to expand...
No problem. The previous threads are by this point several months old. It would have taken a lot of browsing to find them. In the future you could always try the search feature.
 
40.png
CCF_Jeff:
I was floored when I first read this. What’s up here?

Fact Sheet
Emergency Contraception and Treatment
of Victims of Sexual Assault

www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/abortion/ecfact.htm

…A woman who has been raped should be able to defend herself from a potential conception and receive treatments to suppress ovulation and incapacitate sperm. If conception has occurred, however, a Catholic hospital will not dispense drugs to interfere with implantation of a newly conceived human embryo.2

Hospitals should develop appropriate protocols to determine whether administering emergency contraception would have an abortifacient effect. Tests are available to determine whether ovulation has occurred.3

…
Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
3211 4th Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20017-1194 (202) 541-3070
Click to expand...
The USCCB is getting further and further into heresy. They are going to soon be outside the Church.
 
40.png
jimmy:
The USCCB is getting further and further into heresy. They are going to soon be outside the Church.
Click to expand...
As you already seem to be.
 
40.png
jimmy:
The USCCB is getting further and further into heresy. They are going to soon be outside the Church.
Click to expand...
No, the USCCB statement is within the full teaching of the Catholic Church.

The Church has declared that contraception within the marital act is immoral. But rape is not the marital act.

The Church also prohibits the use of abortifcants after conception has occurred. That is why the USCCB put in the requirement not to use if conception has occurred.

The most common way is to perform a blood test to see if ovulation has occurred in the last 72 hours. This test is very accurate and would tell if a egg is present that might be fertilized.

If no egg is present, hormones may licitly be used to suppress ovulation until such time as the sperm of the rapist has died.

All of this is perfectly licit and in full compliance with Church teaching.
 
40.png
Catholic2003:
As you already seem to be.
Click to expand...
And that means what? In what way am I outside the Church or spreading heresy? I would like an answer to this. I support Rome in every way. If the USCCB contradicts Rome, the USCCB is wrong. So, where am I outside the Church?
 
40.png
Brendan:
No, the USCCB statement is within the full teaching of the Catholic Church.

The Church has declared that contraception within the marital act is immoral. But rape is not the marital act.

The Church also prohibits the use of abortifcants after conception has occurred. That is why the USCCB put in the requirement not to use if conception has occurred.

The most common way is to perform a blood test to see if ovulation has occurred in the last 72 hours. This test is very accurate and would tell if a egg is present that might be fertilized.

If no egg is present, hormones may licitly be used to suppress ovulation until such time as the sperm of the rapist has died.

All of this is perfectly licit and in full compliance with Church teaching.
Click to expand...
If its within the teaching of the Church, then fine, but it seems like it is stepping over the line.
 
40.png
jimmy:
And that means what? In what way am I outside the Church or spreading heresy? I would like an answer to this. I support Rome in every way. If the USCCB contradicts Rome, the USCCB is wrong. So, where am I outside the Church?
Click to expand...
It’s clear that you don’t consider yourself to be in the same Church as the USCCB. However, the USCCB is in the Catholic Church; in fact, most of the bishops were appointed by Pope John Paul II. Thus, the conclusion follows. QED
 
40.png
Catholic2003:
It’s clear that you don’t consider yourself to be in the same Church as the USCCB. However, the USCCB is in the Catholic Church; in fact, most of the bishops were appointed by Pope John Paul II. Thus, the conclusion follows. QED
Click to expand...
It does not matter if they were appointed by the pope. If they teach heresy, they are heretics. If they do not teach what Rome teaches, then they have removed themselves from communion with Rome, which means they are not Catholic. This has happened several times in history. Look at the fourth century, there were many times when the eastern Churches were removed from communion with Rome. The Orthodox have removed themselves from communion with Rome. If the USCCB removes themselves from communion with Rome, which will happen if they start to teach heresy, then I stay with Rome.
 
40.png
jimmy:
If the USCCB removes themselves from communion with Rome, which will happen if they start to teach heresy, then I stay with Rome.
Click to expand...
I’m unclear. Have they started to teach heresy or not, in your view? Do you claim the Vatican has reprimanded them for the emergency contraception viewpoint?
 
40.png
Pug:
I’m unclear. Have they started to teach heresy or not, in your view? Do you claim the Vatican has reprimanded them for the emergency contraception viewpoint?
Click to expand...
I don’t think so. But I think they like to walk a tight rope.
 
my first post does sound a little over the top. It should probably read “closer and closer to heresy.” I think that it is a very thin line between what they are doing now and what is heresy. But, as long as Rome accepts them, I accept them as my leaders.
 
Dr. Colossus:
Contraception is inherently sinful between spouses because the marital act is frustrated.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that if an unmarried couple contracepts when having sexual intercourse that they commit no additional sin by using contraception?
 
I would like to see an official Church document that says that it is fine to use contraception if it is not in the marital act, or somehow makes this exception. The teaching that I have always learned has been that contraception is inherantly evil, in all situations. I could be wrong though.
 
40.png
jimmy:
I would like to see an official Church document that says that it is fine to use contraception if it is not in the marital act, or somehow makes this exception. The teaching that I have always learned has been that contraception is inherantly evil, in all situations. I could be wrong though.
Click to expand...
Jimmy, you completely miss the point. Contraception is intrinsically evil and never allowed. Repeling an agressor is not contraception. Did you not read my post?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top