Would you want emergency contraception if you or yours were raped?

  • Thread starter Thread starter WhiteDove
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
jess7396:
David, I appreciate your zeal, but I have to tell you that you are misinformed on this, we are talking here about the “morning after pill” which is not the same as RU-486, here is a link where you can read about each of these and learn the differences:
all.org/brthcnt.htm
Click to expand...
The “morning after pill” is a term people use as short hand. There is no “morning after pill” made by a drug company.

The actual drug given is either RU-486 or a double strong dose of the normal birth control pill. The web site you link actually agrees with what I said.

Right from that web site…
EMERGENCY CONTRACEPTION: The morning after pill, contrary to what you may have heard, does cause abortions.
.
.
RU-486: Don’t believe those who say this is “birth control.” It’s a high-risk chemical form of abortion.
Click to expand...
 
I am not arguing what you are saying about it causing abortions, I am arguing that “Emergency Contraception” is not the same thing as RU-486. It is a double or triple dose of regular birth control pills, it is also marketed as Plan B. RU-486 is used later, not the “morning after”. EC can act as BC (preventing conception from taking place), or it can act as an abortifacient (just as all hormonal BC can), RU-486 can only act as an abortifacient.

They are 2 different things, both wrong to use.
 
“There are currently two specific morning-after pills on the market — Preven and Plan B. Additionally, double doses (or more) of existing birth control pills can be prescribed for similar purposes. Though no testing has been done to confirm the safety of these large doses of birth control pills for women, the Food and Drug Administration has approved this use.”

Taken from the ALL site which you have seen, so there is a specific “morning after pill” marketed by drug companies, and it is not the same as RU-486.

Just so we’re clear, I am simply trying to clarify what is being discussed and make sure all info. is clear and true. I am not trying to be rude/snarky 😉
 
40.png
jess7396:
They are 2 different things, both wrong to use.
Click to expand...
You are correct that there is no Catholic approved use of RU-486.

But the use of large doses of ovulation suppressents in the case of rape can and should be used, provided that there is no chance a fertization can have occured.
 
Jess,

I stand corrected but again the web site you provide states that the “morning after pill” is an abortifacient.

I do not believe that there is any evidence that it can act as a contraceptive post sexual activity.

And even if it can, it is still sinful and wrong.
 
I would never rid my womb of any child prematurely. I would raise the child if I felt strong enough, and surrender it for adoption if I didn’t think I could keep my mental stability.
 
I was under the impression that there exists spermacides that will not abort an embryo, if already conceived. Is that correct? If so, I believe this would be a licit, and perhaps the safest option.
 
40.png
itsjustdave1988:
I was under the impression that there exists spermacides that will not abort an embryo, if already conceived. Is that correct? If so, I believe this would be a licit, and perhaps the safest option.
Click to expand...
Contraception is a grave (or mortal) sin. It is never acceptable to do evil, no matter what the out come.

The word licit is only used in talking about the sacraments.
 
ByzCath,
Contraception is a grave (or mortal) sin. It is never acceptable to do evil, no matter what the out come.
Click to expand...
The use of spermacides, as a treatment for victims of rape, is licit (i.e. permissable) under Catholic law. Do you have an authoritative source that claims otherwise? If so, please provide it. Observe,

Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, Fourth Edition
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

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. [Part 3, directive 36, June 15, 2001, http://www.usccb.org/bishops/directives.htm”]http://www.usccb.org/bishops/directives.htm]
The word licit is only used in talking about the sacraments.
Click to expand...
Licit is a word used to describe whether something is lawful or permissable in accord with ecclesiastical norms. It is an English word, which Webster states is “from Latin *licitus, *from past participle of *licEre *to be permitted,” and is defined by Webster as “conforming to the requirements of the law : not forbidden by law.”

This is the way in which I used the word, which is also how it is used in my post-graduate course in Catholic moral theology. But thanks for you opinion on the matter. 😉

My question remains, is there a spermacide which does not kill the embryo? If so, the USCCB states that such is permitted. Unless the Vatican states otherwise (and I have found no such statement), then I suggest those that claim otherwise are not fully informed on the matter.

As for Humanae Vitae, it teaches “every marital act must of necessity retain its intrinsic relationship to the procreation of human life.” However, rape is not a marital act, but an assault. Find me where the Church prohibits the use of spermacides, etc., to protect victims of assault and I’ll humbly admit I am wrong.
 
40.png
itsjustdave1988:
ByzCath,
The use of spermacides, as a treatment for victims of rape, is licit (i.e. permissable) under Catholic law. Do you have an authoritative source that claims otherwise? If so, please provide it. Observe,

Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, Fourth Edition
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
Licit is a word used to describe whether something is lawful or permissable in accord with ecclesiastical norms. It is an English word, which Webster states is “from Latin *licitus, *from past participle of *licEre *to be permitted,” and is defined by Webster as “conforming to the requirements of the law : not forbidden by law.”

This is the way in which I used the word, which is also how it is used in my post-graduate course in Catholic moral theology. But thanks for you opinion on the matter. 😉

My question remains, is there a spermacide which does not kill the embryo? If so, the USCCB states that such is permitted. Unless the Vatican states otherwise (and I have found no such statement), then I suggest those that claim otherwise are not fully informed on the matter.

As for Humanae Vitae, it teaches “every marital act must of necessity retain its intrinsic relationship to the procreation of human life.” However, rape is not a marital act, but an assault. Find me where the Church prohibits the use of spermacides, etc., to protect victims of assault and I’ll humbly admit I am wrong.
justdave,
I found this already and posted as much in the other thread on this topic.

This is just another reason why we should not have multiple threads on the same topics.
Click to expand...
 
Oh … didn’t see the other thread.

Here’s what I’ve found …
sffaith.com/ed/articles/2002/0702so.htm
One faithful theologian who comes down squarely on the side of emergency contraception as abortifacient is Dr. Germain Grisez, professor of Christian Ethics at Mount St. Mary’s Seminary in Emmitsburg, Maryland. He claims that douching with spermicide as an immediate post-rape intervention would be morally licit since such means are not abortifacient in nature.
Click to expand...
This is what I’m saying. There exists non-abortifacient measures.
 
40.png
AmyS:
Women, who have their babies after getting raped, are heros… They are amazing, even though they don’t see themselves that way a lot of the time.
Click to expand...
Hi AmyS,
You have proved my point. I would go one step further and say they are very far advanceed on the road to sainthood without even realising it.

I never meant to offend you and I am sorry. I take your point that I should not compare rape to cancer. Very silly thing to do but since I am a male cancer patient I was trying to think about what the wort possible scenario was for me to even try to comprehend the horror of hearing the news of being pregnant from rape.
Sorry for the offence one again.

In Christ,
 
40.png
ByzCath:
Jess,

I stand corrected but again the web site you provide states that the “morning after pill” is an abortifacient.

I do not believe that there is any evidence that it can act as a contraceptive post sexual activity.

And even if it can, it is still sinful and wrong.
Click to expand...
Yes, I know that you said there is another thread on this topic…but if it bothers you so much to have more than one why don’t you only post in the original one?

Since you are here I would like to respond…

I think the previous 40-something posts have already shown that we acknowledge that the “morning after pill” can be an abortifacient. It has also been shown that Church teaching allows for it’s use if it is proven that ovulation has not occured.

Yes, contraception is morally wrong. But rape is not marital sex, it is an assault…which has also already been said.

If a woman is raped, the Church allows for emergency contraception. It does not allow for an emergency abortion. I will accept Church authority on this one.

Malia
 
I voted “other”. I’m pro-choice (although I really don’t want abortions to be done). I’m assuming it would be tough to be looking at the rapists face everyday. I think in this situation adoption is the best way to go. Abortion should only be considered if there is no way an adoption can be made.
 
Led Zeppelin75:
I voted “other”. I’m pro-choice (although I really don’t want abortions to be done). I’m assuming it would be tough to be looking at the rapists face everyday. I think in this situation adoption is the best way to go. Abortion should only be considered if there is no way an adoption can be made.
Click to expand...
 
Yes if the contraception was one that would stop the continued act of the rape, spermicides etc, no if it could possiblly lead to the innocent death of a child, morning after pills etc.

My wife was given up for adoption, she might have been the product of a rape, date rape, etc. we don’t know, but we thank the young women who had the courage to let her live.

God Bless
 
Just out of curiosity, you stated you are pro-choice although you wouldn’t want abortions to be done. Please in more detail explain your position. God Bless
 
Several months back there was an (70’s)older women at my work that related how a friend of her’s daughter had been recently raped and now she was pregnant. There were others around when she was brought this up. And ofcourse people expressed thier horror and sadness at what this women was going thru.

I asked if she knew what the women was going to do with the baby. She said she didn’t know but “she hoped she would have an abortion.” She continued with “after all I wouldn’t want a baby like that, I mean who knows what it will grow up to be.” I was horrified to say the least. I replied that that was rediculous, the child does not some how inherit a rapist gene. The child is completely innocent. I said an innocent human being can not be killed for the sins of another no matter how difficult the situation. I added adoption would probably be the best option.

I was then questioned what if the child goes looking for their parents and finds out they were a product of rape. I told them I was adopted and my father could be rapist, my mother could be a postitute for that matter. Doesn’t change who I am, doesn’t make me wish I was never born. I also added aborting the child would not make the pain of the rape go away, it would not erase the memory of the rape.

What floored me the most was someone thinking that a child that is a product of a rape would somehow turn out evil or defective.
 
I used to say that I would immediately do what I could to prevent pregnancy in that circumstance. A lot of that came from the thought of having a child that was not my husbands. But the more I learn of the faith, and give myself to it, I don’t think I would do that. Honestly I can’t say what I would do, but I would probably just lean to letting God decide. If you conceive, perhaps there is a reason for it that you just don’t understand right now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top