Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jobim
... abortion cannot be reversed in this country until all Christians reject contraception ... I would respectfully disagree. Our fellow Americans need to realize the very real difference in contraception (preventing the union of egg and sperm) and rejection of the life support role. I don't know of a single word or two that would effectively contrast these two facts, but if there were such a word it would be most handy.

The term 'birth control' was used to covenant abstinence from sex, the ingestion of pills to try and stop ovulation, the placing of intrauterine devices to prevent or teminate automatically the newly conceived individual human life formed at conception, and finally the willful termination of individual human beings recognizable as human preborn infants!

All efforts to control birth numbers are birth control, but somehow we Americans have slid from condoning and welcoming the limiting of union of gametes to sanctioning and condoning the stabbing of preborn infants in the braincase and suctioning out their brains to kill and deliver them! Respectfully, I don't agree that accepting artificial measures to insure contra ception, to prevent union of gametes need necessarily lead to sanctioning murder once a new individual human being is present in a female human's body.

I do believe that a faction of the American people (dare we call them feminists in the Sanger mold) have exploited public ignorance of human reproductive science, to accomplish an agenda that has resulted in the sickness praised so highly by the democrat party in 2000 such that they sloganed it 'a woman's right to choose' a serial killer.

Has the horror we now face, of 1.2 million + abortions basically/truthfully for convenience, happened because people chose to control their fertility but not their sexual desires? I don't think it's that simple. Yes, I do believe in evil, and abortion is evil killing for selfish reasons in 99.99% of cases. But I wouldn't go so far as to label willful limiting of fertility, preventing conception, as evil and thus the cause of the effect we now see.

The valuation of life (if we could accomplish a heightening of such) could bring about a state where contraception can be a moral choice, but if ANY pregnancy occurs, that new individual life, being human from conception onward must be valued such that we work to give life support rather than choose to kill them if they aren't convenient.

Choosing to use serial/wholesale killing as a means to deal with personal/societal difficulties is evil in action and the sooner we Americans can admit we are complicit with such evil, the sooner we may defuse the emotional haze often purposefully created to obfuscate the truth in order for a special interest group to achieve their agenda. Killing as a routine societal solution must never be casually accpeted, especially in a nation with founding documents like ours. The same argument is applicable to ending slavery ... and it was soundly applied, eventually.

In light of Planned Parenthoods offer to do free abortions for a time following the WTC 9/11 atrocities, what would be the comparable offer regarding slavery in 1840's and 50's? It was, each state can choose whether to enter the union as slave or free ... thus effectively promoting slavery! We've been down the dehumanizing road before, America. Let's get off that evil track now!

19 posted on 10/12/2001 10:00:59 PM PDT by MHGinTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: MHGinTN
I respect you as a Fellow Traveller in the prolife movement. I believe in the depth of your convictions on this score.

Here comes the "but": aren't you curious as to why contraception was prohibited by all Protestant denominations until the Lambeth Conference of 1930?

Here's what the Catechism states: "So the Church, which is 'on the side of life,' teaches that 'it is necessary that each and every marriage act remain ordered per se to the procreation of human life.' 'This particular doctrine, expounded on numerous occasions by the Magisterium, is based on the inseperable connection, established by God, which man on his own initiative may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage act.'"

When Protestants reject the excluding of God's role in all marriage acts, a more profound understanding of God as the author of life will commence. As it stands, you actively exclude God when you choose to (as opposed to NFP which is simply calculated restraint), and you are in disobedience. But of course I realize this is based on your misunderstanding, and hence my elation at the title of the book by the author in question.

I salute everything else you say!

23 posted on 10/13/2001 2:39:28 AM PDT by jobim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: MHGinTN
WHile your point about contraception may have merit as it applies to barrier contraceptions it does not with chemical contraception. The pill aims to prevent ovulation but it is not entirely successful in this. As a backup measure it also prevents implantation. In these cases a woman does not know she has become pregnant but a tiny life has still been snuffed out.
27 posted on 10/13/2001 6:50:54 AM PDT by Straight Vermonter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson