Do Birth Control Pills Cause Abortion?

Yes, but the Snowflake babies come from frozen embryos that were used during contraception efforts when multiple eggs are fertilized.

It has nothing to do with birth control pills.

 

I know, I was just responding to Unchartedspirit

 

The pill prevents ovulation. So, should a woman who cannot ovulate avoid having sex even when she is filled with desire for her husband? And like wise the man only give his seed to fertile wives. Did not God give us the desire for those we loved and married? Should not the elderly continue to make love after their child-bearing years. Or should they just ignore their God-given pleasure from their love for each other?

 

because we don't want another debate on overpopulation starting?

 

oh and thanks for replying. I thought it was relevant because I believe the sole purpose of marriage was for creating a family.

 

I think the question sanderson has put forth is whether or not we believe in birth-control even if it does NOT prevent spontaneous abortion. His essay indicates he does NOT.

I disagree.

 

But, yet, he also believes women should not wear pants.

For a person who believes in "easy-believism salvation" he sure does preach legalism from his pulpit.

 

Contrary to the propaganda, no. Birth control pills are designed to prevent ovulation. That is, they are designed to prevent the immature egg in the fallopian tube from maturing and being released into the uterus. In cases where the egg has already been released, it prevents the egg from being fertilized. In a small percentage, it can prevent a fertilized egg from implanting, but the statistical likelihood are less than those of the a woman's body rejecting a fertilized egg without any contraception (which, btw, happens frequently among healthy fertile women normally).

Pregnancy begins when the egg implants in the uterine wall. Neither the birth control pill, nor the oft mentioned "morning after pill" interfere with a fertilized egg that has already implanted itself in the uterine wall. Neither the birth control pill nor the "morning after" pill cause abortions.

Now, we can argue the moral implications of birth control until we're blue in the face. But we cannot accurately claim that the pill causes abortions.

 

Johnv...now you know better than to go messing up someone's theology with facts...

 

Actually, a pregnancy test will not show a positive result prior to implantation. Pro-Life, Anti-pill doctors and pharmacists believe life begins at fertilization.

And claims that the pill will prevent implantation of a fertilized egg are included in the manufacturers literature - so no complaint should be made when someone uses this information. It should be noted, however, that these claims are unproven.

 

For the purpose of this thread, that's irrelevant. The quetion was if pills cause abortions. Pregnancy begins at implantation, at which time the pills have no effect. Hence, the pills do not cause abortions.

 

For the purpose of this thread, that's irrelevant. The quetion was if pills cause abortions. Pregnancy begins at implantation, at which time the pills have no effect. Hence, the pills do not cause abortions. </font>[/QUOTE]My original comment (the second post in the thread) related to the FACT that the definition of pregnancy has changed in accecpted medical dictionaries. Today you are correct. According to medical dictionaries of a bygone era - you are incorrect. Pregnancy began at fertiliztion. Also, note that a number of states define pregnancy as beginning before implantation.

http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/p139.htm
PREGNANCY - This is defined by medical writer; to be the state of a female who has within her ovary or womb, a fecundated germ which gradually becomes developed in the latter receptaale.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/media_rel1.htm
A general consensus exists among all sides to the abortion access question. When life, in the form of a sperm and ovum, becomes a human person, then almost everyone agrees that an abortion should only be performed in very critical situations. However, there is little agreement about when this transition happens: at conception, at birth, or some time in between.

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/08/2/gr080207.html
A review of state laws conduced in April 2005 by The Alan Guttmacher Institute found that 22 states have enacted one or more laws defining "pregnancy." (Some of these states have adopted an explicit definition of pregnancy, whereas others have done so implicitly, by defining either "fetus" or "unborn child.") Despite the clear and long-standing medical consensus that pregnancy is not established until implantation, 18 states have enacted provisions premised on the notion that pregnancy begins at fertilization or conception (see table). (Although many of these laws use the imprecise term "conception," all but five leave it undefined. Significantly, however, all of the five states that do define the term equate it with fertilization.) Six states have provisions defining pregnancy as beginning at implantation, although two of these states include other definitions as well.

As a side note - how can one have an ectopic pregnancy without a proper implantation? I guess they were never pregnancies at all since implantation did not take place in the uterine wall.

 

If an unimplanted fertilized egg is considered a pregnancy, then that means whenever a woman discharges a fertilized egg, she is having a miscarriage. By that reckoning, the average healthy adult women will have numerous miscarriages in her lifetime. Sorry, but it's clear that pregnancy is not accurately defined simply by the presence of a fertilized egg. Instead, pregnancy is accurately defined as having a fertilized egg implanted.

As for ectopic pregnancies not being "true" pregnancies, that's ridiculous. It's clear that an ectopic pregnancy is a pregnancy, because the egg has implanted and proceeded to gestate as a redult of that implantation. The problem with an ectopic pregnancy is that it did not implant in a proper place. BTW, in a sidenote, ectopic pregnancies are a good example why, if elective abortions are made illegal, nonelective abortions should be permitted, even if the life of the mother is not in in danger.

Now, as far as Guttmacher, that issue is one of legal definition. This topic isn't addressing the legal definition.

 

Um...Johnv...the whole point is the definition. Medical definitions have changed in the last 50 years. Legal definitions are undecided and differ between states. Even among the medical community the definition is not written in stone when some doctors and pharmacists choose not to prescribe the pill because of the definition. And obviously if the pill manufacturer includes literature that describes the product as a possible abortificant, they underestand the possibility. Why then can't you?

 

By the way - regarding miscarriages:

http://www.answers.com/topic/miscarriage

Some miscarriages occur before women recognize that they are pregnant. About 15% of fertilized eggs are lost before the egg even has a chance to implant(embed itself) in the wall of the uterus. A woman would not generally identify this type of miscarriage. Another 15% of conceptions are lost before 8 weeks gestation. Once fetal heart function is detected in a given pregnancy, the chance of miscarriage is less than 5%.

Note that they still recognize the unimplanted fertilized egg as a miscarriage despite most women generally not identifying it as such.

 

KeithS you have fallen into a trap by Johnv. He has managed to get you to quibble over the term "pregnancy" and not the beginning of life.

So let's set the records straight.

From WebMD

So at the moment of fertilization you have a unique person with his/her own distinct DNA. And after ferilization but before implantation this zygote continues to grow:

I think it is quite obvious that life begins before implantation. That is why the argument was steered to talk about "pregnancy" instead.

 

The pill prevents ovulation, and now there's one on the market that prevents ovulation for 3 months at a time.

I don't think BC pills are a license to sin, but to each his own.

 

gtbuzzarp - agreed. I was actually going to look up information similar to what you posted and did not have time. Thanks for the info.

 

It was no trap. The issue of the topic jas not been when life begins. The question was "do birth control pills cause abortion?". The answer to that is a solid "no".

 

It was no trap. The issue of the topic jas not been when life begins. The question was "do birth control pills cause abortion?". The answer to that is a solid "no". </font>[/QUOTE]Still ignoring the literature? I don't get it.