So much of the arguments for abortion are based on subjectiveness. When does life begin? Depends on the mother’s thinking, right?
When, in the timeline of growth, does a fetus become a baby worthy of protection? Even our President says that question is above his pay grade. What he and many pro-choicers mean is that the baby is worthy protecting when the mother says so and not a moment before. That’s the argument we hear.
But then why do the same pro-choicers attempt to cloak early stage abortion in some kind of science by making a distinction concerning implantation. I’ve heard that birth control pills and even the morning after pill are not abortion because they’re believe to occur before this “magical moment” of implantation.
We’ve even heard the argument espousing confusion about implantation from Catholic bishops in Connecticut who have allowed morning after pills to be taken in Catholic hospitals after allegations of rape.
Today, the story about the couple who had the wrong baby placed into her womb from IVF had this sentence:
The recipient – who doesn’t want to be identified – chose to take an abortion pill before the embryo was allowed to implant into her womb.
If they’re saying it’s an abortion pill why even bother to say that it was taken before implantation?
There’s all this pretended confusion about implantation. Yes, it’s a necessary part of life but why are many pretending that implantation is when life begins. There’s no logic to it as far as I can see.
I understand why some “pro-lifers” might want to pretend because then they can seem more moderate and not call birth control an abortifacient.
But why would so many pro-choicers who already have come out saying a baby is only a baby when the mother says so even bother with making up that implantation is the true start of life.
Am I missing something?
June 15, 2009 at 5:06 pm
A non-Catholic, devoutly pro-life friend and I were having this kind of discussion. I said sarcastically, "But the WHO and the UN say IUDs and the rest of them are okay! They don't prevent pregnancy because pregnancy doesn't start until implantation!"
She snapped, "Sure, but when does LIFE begin?"
I'm proud to call her my friend.
June 15, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Are you sincerely asking if you're missing something, or is this a rhetorical question?
The answer is that enough Americans flunked biology and/or don't care about the actual phenomena that guided their own conceptions.
Pro-abortion advocates recognize this mass-ignorance/indifference, and they wrangle language however it best panders to public emotion.
And there you have it.
June 15, 2009 at 6:17 pm
Implantation is tied to an earlier battle the Catholic Church lost, contraception.
Pregnancy was redefined in the early 1960s, as starting after embryo implantation, so the pill could be marketed as not interfering or cause an abortion, because pregnancy had not started yet.
Lets face it, we have abortion on demand because of massive Catholic support of contraception and the rejection of Humanae Vitae.
June 15, 2009 at 6:48 pm
Technically, I'm pretty sure the "morning after pill" isn't intended as abortion causing agent, because the pregnancy hasn't started. This fact only makes sense if someone paid enough attention in biology to know that there's no such thing as a "fertilized egg" stage of human development….. (Sorry, pet peeve. A zygote is NOT an egg.) (and yes, if the baby is already implanted, it will probably induce an abortion)
It kills a human, though, and that's why it's wrong.
I suspect folks avoid it because if they realize that a human life starts at conception, then the whole in vitro thing is REALLY creepy and horrific.
June 15, 2009 at 7:00 pm
You could go mad attempting to find logic in the culture of death's arguments. If Christ is the Divine Logos, it would make sense that satan would seek to advance his agenda using inherently illogical philosophies.
June 15, 2009 at 10:27 pm
Foxfier said it: "It kills a human…and that's why it's wrong."
This whole argument of when does life begin is really just trying to call truth a lie. Does it matter? Does it really matter if it's a zygote, egg, blastocyst, embryo, etc.? Does it really matter? We are talking about ending the life of a human being!
When I think of the countless millions of lives we have aborted in the name of choice…when I think about what God thinks of this…I shudder.
How much longer will God wait to judge these "choices? When we will stand up and say "No more!"
June 15, 2009 at 10:33 pm
Does it matter? Does it really matter if it's a zygote, egg, blastocyst, embryo, etc.? Does it really matter? We are talking about ending the life of a human being!
Judging from how angry they get when you inform them it is NOT an egg, it's a zygote, it matters a great deal.
The argument train I've seen goes "we eat chicken eggs, some chicken eggs are fertilized, and everyone is alright with that."
Zygote, on the other hand, brings that horribly solid "science" thing into the debate, in a way that does not favor those who want to deny a human life is involved.
June 15, 2009 at 10:34 pm
The birth control pill can be a contraceptive, preventing ovulation.
When ovulation and conception do occur, the pill can cause an abortion by thinning the lining of the uterus to prevent the embryo from being able to implant in Mom's womb.
The morning after pill is just a higher dosage set of birth control pills.
See http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jun/09061506.html on how these morning after pills are marketed as contraception only.
June 16, 2009 at 2:02 am
I guess the "I'll say when human life beins" is too arbitrary and irrational. So, they needed something scientific to fall back on, another rationalization. Whom are they kidding? I guess the voters and maybe they want to convince their consciences – for those who still have a functional one.
June 16, 2009 at 2:10 am
I know one of the things that every good writer knows is that you can't have all of your bad guys thinking of themselves as bad….most folks think of themselves as good.
So ya gotta have a rationalization…..
June 16, 2009 at 4:20 pm
What I've always wondered is why so many people want organic chicken and wholely natural foods but putting vast quantities of body changing hormones in our bodies for decades at a time that regulate a Working physical system, they're okay with this? I mean, I know people who want everything home grown, pesticide free and wholesome, and screech about the adding of chemicals to their lives…about the evils of pharmacy based living –using herbs and suppliments as an alternative, but when it comes to birth control…where's the patch? Where's the pill? Where's the nearest clinic that will tie the tubes?
June 16, 2009 at 4:34 pm
Never understood that, myself.
A lot of folks blame the way kids seem to physically mature faster on hormones in the milk– I kinda wonder if it might be more related to The Pill.
June 16, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Sherry Tex and Foxfier–
They've found tremendous amounts of synthetic female hormones in rivers, poisoning the fish.
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0729-05.htm
Yeah, you'd think the organic/natural food enthusiasts would put it together. Some do, but going by the widespread effect, most don't.
TRY NFP! Good for you, good for your marriage, good for the environment! 🙂
June 16, 2009 at 5:53 pm
The first I heard of it was the male frogs that had developed as females.
Most of the folks I know who go ga-ga for organic are also sympathetic to the voluntary human extinction movement, believe in over population, etc.
Me, I've a hard time having any sympathy for "organic" farming– too many folks I know have had their crops ruined because a neighbor went organic and became a nest of disease.
I think we've digressed….