HOME | DD
PieWriter — Bc Stamp
Published: 2013-09-26 13:59:51 +0000 UTC; Views: 1852; Favourites: 26; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
Not all pro-lifers are against birth control.I don't know if there's another stamp out there like this, so let me know in the comments so I can link to it.
Wanted to make this, since I'm sick of hearing the generalizations. Yes, I am against (artificial) birth control, along with some other religious folk, but not everyone in the pro-life movement thinks lowly of birth control. Even some Christians are not against it, and there are plenty of non-religious people involved with the pro-life movement who see birth control as a way to help decrease the number of abortions.
While I disagree with their views (seriously, I REALLY don't think birth control is all it's cracked up to be!), I understand that they may have to deal with generalizations created by the pro-choice crowd. Gotta stick up for mah bros!
Not as informative as my other stamps, since this is mainly just a reminder for people about reality and a gift for my pro-life peeps. Take it as you wish.
*EDIT* A secular pro-life blog I thought as appropriate for the topic: blog.secularprolife.org/2012/1…
Related content
Comments: 64
Except that not one form of birth control is 100% effective.
👍: 1 ⏩: 1
That’s why gynecologists recommend using at least two. Or just don’t risk it at all if you can’t handle the risk.
👍: 1 ⏩: 1
And where, exactly, did you get that "recommendation?"
👍: 1 ⏩: 1
From my gynecologist..? Any doctor will tell you to use two kinds of birth control.
👍: 1 ⏩: 1
I would prefer a site or two because I don't think one real-life source is good enough for me.
👍: 1 ⏩: 1
There’s no need to be rude.
Here’s one: www.bustle.com/p/should-i-use-…
You can also give your local gynecologist a call if you still doubt me. Using two forms of pregnancy prevention (such as the pill or spermicide, and a condom) is always safest. Just don’t combine chemical or hormonal birth controls without discussing it with a gynecologist first.
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
Instead of birth control, people should strive for sex control
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I don't think I'll ever buy or use birth control in my life, but hey, getting rid of contraceptives would be a little radical.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The issue is being forced to pay for the fucking things. No pro lifer wants to outlaw the damn pills, but I'll be damned if I have to pay for them.
Fuck, why doesn't anyone get it?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh I understand that. I would never pay for them. You want to use them, fine. Contraceptives are also harmful. Not only to women, but to the environment.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Right here! I don't see any reason why pro-lifers can't support both artificial contraception and abstinence.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The issue is being forced to pay for the fucking things. No pro lifer wants to outlaw the damn pills, but I'll be damned if I have to pay for them.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Lol if you were me taking it for medical reasons and some "paranoid" reasons you might think it's the shiz niz. XD You don't have to though. I'm pretty sick without birth control. Heavy sporadic periods, very very hurtful cramping, ehem loose stool, pimples the size of rubber bouncy balls that hurt like bruises, and so on. Birth control, more mild symptoms when on period and cleared up acne. It's a relief to my face and other parts of my body. I still get it, but not nearly as bad. >.>
That being said I really do know this. The facts I gave to you I learned from a prolife site. It was cool.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Artificial birth control isn't a bad thing. Birt h control artificial or not prevent abortion same with he morning after pill. If use of there are murder so is a girls period.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I would think a lot of pro-life people would be all rally-ho for birth control! xD After all, it makes it so no one has to kill a fetus, which I think would be more terrible a thing, in the end.
I understand why you're not though. x3 But I figured there were pro-lifers out there who would say, "use a condom instead!" or something.
Although sometimes when I hear the news on TV it seems like people are against both, and then I get confused. @_@
I'd figure, one thing is CLEARLY worse than the other ("murder" versus ..."indecency" I guess?), so I was certain some people out there put contraception as a little bit better than abortion. x3
...For other people, of course, because if you're against BC yourself of course you wouldn't use it. x3
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Most pro-lifers are against (artificial) birth control since it has the potential to kill a fertilized ovum, which is the earliest stage of human life. In terms of natural birth control and what not, we support it since it can prevent pregnancy without the potential of killing life. Of course, each pro-lifer will have individual ideas and opinions concerning different forms of birth control, both artificial and natural. XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
Only certain unnatural forms of birth control have that effect only in theory. Even in theory the chance of actual conception not latching onto the wall is very very very very slim. It's not even what the birth control is meant to do. The body does it to itself from thinking it's pregnant. When it thinks it's pregnant the wall doesn't build up.
When having natural unprotected sex the body naturally doesn't let a fertilized egg latch onto the uterus. Actually your body kills more fertilized eggs naturally than what artificial means are supposed to do as a latch ditch effort.
So by actually taking birth control you are saving fertilized eggs from being destroyed by preventing the egg from being fertilized in the first place.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Is there any scientific literature on this?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You could do some digging. I came up with a lot by searching how many eggs fail to implant. I'm getting a little bit more of mixed answers, but still a high rate. I think the yahoo question actually has a good link. You might want to follow it.
About the thinning of the uterus no one is sure what completely happens, but if your ovulating that much the birth control isn't working and you are not going to have a thin lining in the uterus. It's uncertain of whether the lining of the uterous can bounce back, but the body has to ovulate in order for an egg to be released. Which is known to be a pretty slim chance on birth control if at all. That isn't even confirmed..... hmnnn.
I'm really going to have to get back to you and see if I can find anything definitive, but all these medical sites.....
Plus I've been up all night so if you'll forgive me I'll get back to you later unless you find something.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's something I'll have to look into then whenever I get inspired to research. One reason why the Catholic Church advocates for natural family planning is because it prevents the killing of a fertilized egg; if that is not the case, I'll definitely look into it. Thanks for pointing that out.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes. So far as much as I'm looking up break through ovulation is just a theory when birth control is used properly. We all know what happens when it fails or is used improperly. Baby time. So basically we have a bunch of people arguing what would happen if an occasion would actually happen. Nothing actually confirmed as far as I am reading. So I kinda choose to believe that even if it does it still spars a lot of fertilized eggs by not letting it happen at all in the first place.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Ohhh!! I see! I honestly didn't know that about the ovum, I thought if you're taking it properly, it prevents everything to begin with!
NOW a lot of things make sense!
...See, this is why I ask questions. x3
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Birth control actually prevents conception to begin with. Only few birth control actually may in theory have this affect. In theory only a very few are actually discarded. You actually end up saving more fertilized eggs because you prevent conception in the first place.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's how I thought it was. I never knew there was a chance of destroying a fertilized egg at all, I always thought that if somehow a pregnancy began despite the BC (pills) being used, it could not "abort" the fertilized egg (but the fetus/child might end up having problems if the BC is continued while it develops).
...Is it only a theory that a fertilized egg can be discarded? As in...have there been any recorded accounts of it happening?
I take birth control pills, and I'm all for contraception, by the way (I'm terrified of becoming pregnant). x3 But, ~PieWriter 's a cool lady and my buddy, despite the fact that she's not a fan of it.
I honestly don't know much about the idea of fertilized ovums being destroyed by BC, I hadn't known about it until ~PieWriter told me, so forgive me if I'm understanding wrong. x3
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Birth control doesn't destroy at all. It just makes the body think that it's pregnant. The body in response doesn't build up a lining in the uterus. Therefore a fertilized egg can't properly latch on. That is why the normal morning after pill can't actually cause an abortion of fertilized eggs at all. When I say normal I am talking about the ones that can only protect up to five days after. They body doesn't have time and not build up the lining because it thinks it's pregnant. Just so you know as a by the way fact.
I'm pretty sure that it's a theory. All that I have read says it can't be proved indefinite, but who completely knows. Things change all the time. Last I read it was and in that theory it can only happen to very very very few fertilized eggs.
I take them as well for pregancy and non pregancy related reasons. I'm not having sex, but I am dealthy afraid in our society of being raped and conving. People tell me that I am paranoid and I probably am, but I would rather be safe than sorry. I really don't think I am parnoid considering the recent happenings in my own town and considering just about everyone I know has been raped. I've been raped myself and know that there is a high chance of it happening again even if I take precautions. The even more fearful part is that this town doesn't seem to give a crap if anyone is raped unless they are under the age of 16. If you are older it's hard to get them to do anything even with proof.
It's okay. A lot of people don't, but I still consider that preferable to actually aborting a developing fetus. A lot more gory than not letting a couple cells take hold.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I see, thank you! That is also reassuring, because after I read what ~PieWriter said, I was worried even more about accidental pregnancies. And while I am pro-choice, I don't exactly LIKE the idea of killing a fetus or future fetus, so it kinda had me worried. x3 Although I guess...were it to happen...I'd never really know. But, the thought that it might happen was a little unsettling.
"...but I am dealthy afraid in our society of being raped and conving. People tell me that I am paranoid and I probably am, but I would rather be safe than sorry."
I agree!! I don't want to become pregnant under ANY circumstances, and since I'm female (and so are you, by the sounds of it) that's also a possibility! So I'm with you in that boat! Absolutely, better safe than sorry.
Even if you were to plan on using condoms with your partner, I HIGHLY DOUBT a rapist will allow you to use one during a rape. And, since I am terrified of pregnancy, if I were raped and got pregnant...it would be a huge, HUGE problem, on MULTIPLE LEVELS. So to be constantly on birth control alleviates a lot of fears.
...Plus, it makes periods a whole lot more tolerable, as I'm sure you've noticed. x3
I absolutely agree, I would rather prevent fertilization altogether!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah. There would be a slim chance of it happening if it happens.
Yes. I am a female and I don't like the thought of it at all. People then tell me that there are side effects and that I could possibly suffer from the reactions to birth control, but then it's still better than suffering from a possible pregnancy. Pregnancy has a lot more side effects and a lot of time those happen more often than with birth control. The number of death rates from a person taking birth control is lower than the death rates with pregnancy. I think I would rather take my chances with birth control. Besides pregnancy actually provides very little benefits to the mother other than actually giving her a child. I don't think at this point in time a child would be worth that.
This is so true. Now a rapist might think to use one not to leave evidence behind, but I think that very few actually think of that.
It does because you don't have as much blood built up. But then again only certain birth control actually helps with that. Not all birth control does.
A thousand times yep.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
LOL That's okay XD Prevention is okay, it's just the killing part that bothers us, lol.
And hey, even I ask a lot of questions, and I will until I pass on. It's how we silly humans learn!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I understand entirely.
And that's why I was confused, exactly, because I had thought that birth control (except of course the "morning after" pill or things like that) never let anything grow in the first place. So I thought...why would they be against it, then, unless of course it's for the fact that sex "for fun, not babies" is a sin? ...Which is understandable, but then I thought they'd prefer THAT sin to perhaps an eventual abortion.
But it TOTALLY makes sense now, and I am not confused any more.
Yeah, I have learned...SO MUCH just from talking to people online. x3 The problem is, I have to word my questions VERY DELICATELY, or people think I'm being...what's the word...not sarcastic, but...like I'm being condescending. But the truth is, I really want an answer, that's all. xD I notice though that in debates, people ask questions, get an answer, and then say, "YOUR ANSWER IS STUPID!" ...so I understand the fear there, but I swear, I am not asking to "trap" them. xD I'm asking, because I don't know everything about everything, and a new perspective sometimes changes everything.
THAT was a huge confusion for me, and now...wow, now everything makes sense! xD
Thank you!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
LOL I have had that problem in the past; usually now I just say, "Hey, I'm curious about something..." or something like that. It's gained me a few new people to watch over time, since I found them to be very helpful and insightful.
And you're very welcome! I love being able to answer your questions.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
You can look it up: blog.secularprolife.org/2012/1…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Just added it to the description. Thanks!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Not against birth control.
I'm pro-pay-for-the-damn-things-yourself.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I think very few people understand the reality of birth control and the "contraceptive mentality". It is more than just getting pregnant when we want. Sex was created purposefully, just like the rest of our bodily actions, and so it has a specific purpose. Using it in other ways is disordered, contrary to its intended function and deeper significance.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Hm, if the (artificial) birth control is used to help with things when there should be no possibility of pregnancy, then I have no problem with it. For instance, I have no problem with women using it control the amount of pain they have during periods. However, I DO have a problem when they are trying to use it to avoid pregnancy. Kinda like how I have no problem with drinking (non-abusively), but I have a problem with people getting drunk (abuse).
(natural) Birth control, however, I do not have a problem with either. Assuming that (natural) birth control is just when one is having sex during the periods that she is either not able to or unlikely to become pregnant. That is really the only kind of "birth control" that I am fine with.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Err, actually, I think ~PieWriter gave me a good reason, and I understand now.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah, I was in the middle of writing you a response when I got called away. Glad you understand!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
xD I was confused on that one for a while, but finally ~PieWriter set me straight. x3
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Quite understandable . I thought she explained it quite well... and in fewer words than I would have .
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Can you explain what the difference is...? Between avoiding pregnancy using birth control, and avoiding it by only having sex when you think a pregnancy is not likely to happen?
The way I see it, either way the people involved are trying to have sex for the sake of having sex, and not trying to have a baby, so isn't it "sinful" (from what I understand) either way?
xD I'm not trying to like...debate, or anything, I'm just not sure what the difference is. It's clearly something I don't understand so I'd like to know. x3
Oh oh, also, what if a person gets their tubes tied or something...is that still bad (the way you see it)?
Trust me, I've considered it. xD
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
My apologies... looking further into the issue of birth control for the sake of trying to not get pregnant, I believe I was wrong in my original stance. Sex is meant as a a way to procreate, no not the only thing but I believe it is something that it should not be without. To try and bypass our bodies in order to avoid a gift that our Lord has given us, I believe that is sinful. So, yes, I believe you are quite correct with your original question regarding why birth control can be sinful one way, but not in another. Thinking about it further and remembering the original point of sex, I believe it makes much more sense to say that birth control (that is used to control when one has children, not for other possible reasons) is always sinful.
Yet, I still understand why people may have a need for birth control (natural) for they may have 5+ kids already but they still would like to engage in sexual activity while also trying to avoid having more children. Not being able to care for more children due to any reason is another side effect of being in a cursed world. While I can understand the reasoning behind it, I believe it actually does not make it "less sinful" or "not sinful" because we are overriding God's original wish for us to fill the earth with the gift we were given to reproduce, thus it would be as though "we" are our own "god" because we may think we know better... if that makes sense.
I think your last question was pretty much answered here too .
I hope none of this was offensive and if it was. There are many things that I myself do that are sinful and I can guarantee I will continue on in sin (part of our curse). For instance, I may "preach" that I am against something but then I may also end up doing that "said thing", I can only hope that I would repent of it. I would never demand the same thing from you or anyone though, the "best" I can really do is to vote while trying to respect my beliefs (hence why I would not support "free" birth control, abortion, etc). Yet you would never find me literally throwing Bibles in your face and/or demanding that you change your ways because "my God said so" (actually, violence is also against God so I would then be at fault there). I cannot and certainly would not try to force you to stop your behavior/beliefs "because my beliefs tell me so", but at the same time, I would also not support it. If that makes sense...
Your question was quite valid and I believed helped me correct me .
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I see, I see! That's how I thought it might be. I am not Catholic or Christian, but my ex-stepdad sent me to Catholic school for a short amount of time, so that's why I thought it might be because it was related to it being a sin, since I didn't know about the possibilities ~PieWriter told me about.
But that's what I was asking, yup, and I think you gave me a good answer, too.
I understand your rules, although I don't follow them. And of course, I would never ask you not to follow them, yourself! Or try to convince you not to...or whatever. xD I hope you understand what I'm trying to say.
"I cannot and certainly would not try to force you to stop your behavior/beliefs "because my beliefs tell me so", but at the same time, I would also not support it. If that makes sense..."
Absolutely! And this is how I feel, too. I may support, say, gay marriage, but I DO NOT support forcing churches who find it sinful to do it. THAT would just be cruel. And it would make as much sense as making a Jewish person eat ham, or something. If you are in a religion which has rules, of course, follow them! And I won't tell you not to! But I also appreciate that you wouldn't tell me I had to follow your rules, too.
I had a friend who was Muslim, and she was the same way. I did a lot of things she was not allowed to do, and she didn't mind, and I also didn't tease her about it or try to insist she did things that were against her rules.
Although I will admit...I am SORT OF Shintoist, which involves being respectful for the animals that lose their lives so that you can eat. My boyfriend often makes jokes about, or refuses to think about, the animals he eats, and I'll admit, it makes me very upset. -_- So I also understand that watching someone break a rule for your religion or your beliefs can be painful, and for that, I'll admit, I commiserate, and I'm sorry.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah, I see .
Goodie .
Quite understandable, at least I think so .
Ah, I am glad I was able to express that well . You are one of the few that I have met that feel that way, though I have not met many regarding "forcing churches to allow gay-marriage", especially considering many churches do allow it (maybe not most, but many) so people may expect other churches to follow.
Hm, I have had similar experiences. I recall one was where the person's beliefs had more "strict rules" while another person had more "lenient" rules compared to my beliefs (they allowed things in their church that I believe are wrong). Good to see that people certainly can be respectful of one another . It can be tough in real life (or maybe the opposite?).
Interesting, I think I have heard of that, but never really looked into it.
Ah, sorry I do not think I am interpreting the "break a rule for your religion" correctly, uh, what do you mean ? Sad thing is, it probably should be obvious to me, sorry .
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh, I meant, when my boyfriend disrespects animals that have died for his food, by making fun of them, or by pretending it was never an animal (because he doesn't like to think about it). According to my beliefs, you should always be grateful for an animal who has died for you (some Shintoists believe that if you aren't, it creates a vengeful spirit, but I am not that superstitious, I just like to be respectful). So when he says things like, "Oh it was never a cow, meat is magical and comes from fairy dust!" it bothers me. -_-
But he and I have different types of parents, his aren't spiritual/religious in any way, and my mom is an animist of sorts (close to Shintoism), so the way he sees the world is just different. He doesn't believe in any kind of soul, so of course, he doesn't feel like an animal deserves respect after it is already dead.
I'm not sure if I believe in souls, or "kami", as the Shinto call it, but I still like to show respect for animals, especially those who have died for me. It's probably the biggest bit of spirituality I have, thanks to my mom. x3 So, I understand how it can be when someone disrespects your beliefs, that's what I was trying to say.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
| Next =>