My first thought is that sometimes pro-aborts don't know when to keep their mouths shut, but I'm glad this one didn't. The video I saw on Crook & Liars blog shows a lady 'schooling' Romney on the effect 'life begins at conception' laws, will have on birth control.
Clearly, Mitt Romney had no idea some forms of hormonal birth control can in fact prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in a woman's uterus. I would venture to guess most American's don't know that. Listen to the exchange below at the link above (I apologize, I could not insert the video).
Can hormonal birth control allow conception and prevent implantation? Yes, it can.
ORTHO TRI-CYCLEN® Lo Tablets product information statement:
Combination oral contraceptives act by suppression of gonadotropins. Although the primary
mechanism of this action is inhibition of ovulation, other alterations include changes in the cervical
mucus (which increase the difficulty of sperm entry into the uterus) and the endometrium (which
reduce the likelihood of implantation). (emphasis is mine)
The above statement is regarding ALL combination oral contraceptives, not just that brand, so we need go no further. But as with proving any point, more evidence will be required.
YAZ product information statement:
COCs lower the risk of becoming pregnant primarily by suppressing ovulation. Other possible mechanisms may include
cervical mucus changes that inhibit sperm penetration and the endometrial changes that reduce the likelihood of
implantation.Ortho Evra product information statement:
Combination oral contraceptives act by suppression of gonadotropins. Although the primary
mechanism of this action is inhibition of ovulation, other alterations include changes in the
cervical mucus (which increase the difficulty of sperm entry into the uterus) and the
endometrium (which reduce the likelihood of implantation).
So hormonal birth control can in fact prevent a fertilized egg from implanting. Would I want birth control to be banned? No. Why? Because I remember when women were subjected to constantly being impregnated by their husbands, in an effort to keep them at home. Birth control made it possible for women to gain control of their own lives.
Women of child bearing age today, have no idea what women went through 100, 75, even 50 years ago. What they know, and all they care about, is that birth control prevents pregnancy. If it doesn't prevent fertilization, it will most likely prevent implantation, the point at which ACOG says is the beginning of pregnancy. Not all doctors agree with ACOG however.
"Pregnancy begins when a mature egg from a woman is fertilized by a mature sperm from a man." Dr. Mehmet Oz
The point at which ACOG says pregnancy begins, is ACOG's opinion. It's not a far stretch to say pharmaceutical companies had much invested in ACOG's opinion. After all, if ACOG stated pregnancy really begins at fertilization (it does), the pharmaceutical companies would have no choice but to be up front regarding birth control acting as an abortifacient. Many people will say they are up front with this little tidbit, after all it's on the product information sheet! But seriously, how many people read those?
Birth control promotes promiscuity sexual activity, which by default increases the national abortion rate. According to Guttmacher:
Women who have never married and are not cohabiting account for 45% of all abortions
Women in their 20s account for more than half of all abortions; women aged 20–24 obtain 33% of all abortions, and women aged 25–29 obtain 24%
And regarding the use of contraception:
Fifty-four percent of women who have abortions had used a contraceptive method (usually the condom or the pill) during the month they became pregnant. Among those women, 76% of pill users and 49% of condom users report having used their method inconsistently, while 13% of pill users and 14% of condom users report correct use.
I show these statistics to keep it real. It's easy to see that most unintended pregnancies which lead to abortions, are caused by carelessness. This is what must change in order to have a real reduction in the abortion rate.
I don't know about you, but I'm tired of the pity-poor-me attitude of today's young feminists. It's time for every young woman to hold herself accountable for her own actions. This is not to say that the men involved shouldn't be held accountable as well. But the fact is, men can't get pregnant, and men don't have abortions. It's up to women to protect themselves from being caught in the position where they feel they have to choose between life and death for their developing child.
So, where do we go from here? I support efforts to ban abortion, the only exception being when the mother's life is in danger. But I can't support a ban on hormonal birth control until we have something better in place, and readily available to women. If politicians continue to push for this legislation, we will lose everything. We have the momentum, and we are gaining the public's attention and support. Let's not lose ground because we're ignoring the effect banning hormonal birth control would have on million's of American women.
There's some dispute as to whether the Pill actually has this effect. While it's true that the endometrium is thinned by use of the Pill, implantation can take place in much more hostile environments than this, such as the Fallopian tube. With the IUD there's not quite as much room for doubt, especially when it's used as emergency contraception. I've collected a number of links on this over the past couple of years, which you can find by going to my blog profile and looking at the June entries.
ReplyDeleteThank you for commenting Robert. The dispute, is what needs to be settled. Only time and research can do that.
ReplyDeleteRobert, I take it that you are like me. You seem to be ok with birth control, but prefer prevention of ovulation, rather than prevention of implantation?
ReplyDeleteabsolutely. I wondered about the discrepancy with implantation taking place in the hostile environments just described as early as 1979. Sometimes when I've taken part in vigils outside PP clinics they would hand out literature saying the pill caused early abortions, and it made me wonder about the younger people who would show up in our group for about a week ago and then drop out. I feel pro-life needed to resolve the discrepancies I've described a long time ago.
ReplyDeleteThere is just no way to be sure that the pill causes early abortions. And likewise, there's no way to be sure it doesn't. There's also the breast cancer link to be concerned with. Putting artificial hormones in your body for years can't be good for you. But that should be up to the woman to decide. That is, IF the information is given to the woman. Sadly, I think a lot of this information is squelched, mainly by the pharmaceutical companies that make millions off of the pill.
ReplyDeleteOh, and I think pro-life hurts itself by not meeting in the middle. The way I think about it is this. If half of the 54% of post-abortive women who admittedly took their bc inconsistently, made better use of the bc at their disposal, there would be 300,000 less abortions for PP to profit on. To me, that's do-able, and realistic.
ReplyDeleteI'm grateful this is coming out. Pro-choicers like myself have known that the anti-choicers' dirty little secret was the desire to ban hormonal birth control as well. Now people are catching on and exposing anti-choicers' extreme views. The more people realize the actual world you people want everyone to live by, the more people will support the pro-choice movement even more. And in the past year I've seen it with my own eyes.
ReplyDeleteJackie - If they discovered a birth control tomorrow that would prevent ovulation/fertilization 100% of the time, the vast majority of pro-life would be FOR it, not against. As a matter of fact, a lot of pro-lifer's are ok with birth control now.
ReplyDeleteIt may not be possible to know for sure whether hormonal contraceptives have an abortifacient action, but we might be able to draw a rough extrapolation by comparing the effectiveness of the various emergency contraception methods. If, as some studies have suggested, Plan B does not disrupt post-fertilization events, it would seem unlikely that the much smaller doses of hormones used in regular contraceptive pills would have this effect.
ReplyDeleteTAAG, there is no antichoice organization that supports the use of hormonal contraception. That is a fact. Whether some or most antichoicers believe hormonal contraception is ok is irrelevant. The organizations they support do not agree with them. The NY Times, for example, outlined the antichoice case against abortion. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/07/magazine/07contraception.html?_r=2&pagewanted=print
ReplyDeleteAlso, your post seems to indicate that you want your cake and eat it too. If you believe that a life begins at the moment sperm meets egg, hormonal contraception is in fact a tool of murder. Just because you remember what is was like before hormonal contraception should not be an issue if you truly believe it is the taking of an innocent life. After all, I'm sure you remember what it was like for women before Roe v Wade, but that doesn't seem to effect your outlook on overturning the ruling.
In addition, I want to thank you and your fellow antichoicers. You're true colors are starting to show and people who were once on the fence or opposed to abortion are now switching teams. As a volunteer for Planned Parenthood fundraiser hotline, I've experienced close to 200 donations in the past two months due to the attacks on women rights from antichoice legislators. I've heard countless times from people that, although they are not 100% behind abortion, antichoicers are intruding too much on women's personal lives and decisions. Most people believe a woman's right to chose should be a personal decision, even if they are personally against it. So keep up the good work!
In addition, this statement is ridiculous:
ReplyDelete"I don't know about you, but I'm tired of the pity-poor-me attitude of today's young feminists. It's time for every young woman to hold herself accountable for her own actions. "
This is a constant complaint among antichoicers but what you fail to see is that you are still not allowing women to be accountable for their own actions because you want to take that choice away from them. Taking away a woman's right to an abortion and therefore forcing them to give birth against their will is not forcing them to take responsibility. Its just, as I've said, forcing her to give birth against her will.
Robert - It's not possible to know whether or not hormonal birth control causes early abortion. If Plan B is shown to effective, shouldn't the abortion rate be drastically reduced?
ReplyDeleteJackie - Pro-life orgs do not have proxy of pro-life voters, like me. The reason they are against bc, is that is does cause promiscuity, and it results in even more abortions. BC leads to a false sense of security.
"Also, your post seems to indicate that you want your cake and eat it too." Yes, and I do struggle with that. But still, I can not support a ban on bc because women (grown married women) would suffer for it. You no doubt think of young unmarried college age students when you think of bc. You support freedom of sex, and abortion on demand. I don't. I support giving that baby it's right to life, whether or not the mom is married.
"After all, I'm sure you remember what it was like for women before Roe v Wade," Yes I do - They didn't kill their babies in utero. My fam had 8 children, the fam across the street, 6, down the street, 12, etc. Families raised their kids to the best of their ability, and all the families pitched in to help one another. You will never know that family value.
The reason you're getting donations for PP, is because of the massive amount of propaganda, a.k.a. LIES that have been broadcast. Like the MS personhood amendment banning bc. I call that BS.
Finally, killing your unborn child so you don't have to give birth to him/her, is not being 'accountable', it's being selfish. You put your needs before that of a developing human being which most often, you had the choice of preventing in the first place.
I was arguing that some studies have shown that Plan B doesn't disrupt post-fertilization events. I wasn't trying to say it was "effective" in preventing pregnancy. Quite the contrary, it has not been shown to reduce abortions, and there are indications that the effectiveness of both Plan B and Ella have been overstated. An IUD is considered much more effective as EC, but this extra effectiveness means it almost certainly acts abortively at times. In fact its use has even been suggested 7-12 days after unprotected sex, which would make it abortive even by ACOG's definition (post-implantation). Again if you go to my blog entry described above, you'll find a couple more links on this, "Emergency Contraception-a Last Chance to Prevent Unintended Pregnancy" and "IUDs as emergency contraception". The latter is a discussion thread containing a link to one of Jill Stanek's posts.
ReplyDeleteRobert - I'm convinced that the makers of Plan B and other morning after pills, make money selling 'peace of mind'. I do not support Plan B, or IUD's.. as both clearly have the ability/intention of preventing a fertilized egg from implanting. The intention of The Pill, regular old birth control, is to prevent ovulation.
ReplyDelete"The reason they are against bc, is that is does cause promiscuity, and it results in even more abortions."
ReplyDeleteWhat is your evidence for such a remark? Are there reputable studies that support this- emphasis on reputable.
" Yes, and I do struggle with that. But still, I can not support a ban on bc because women (grown married women) would suffer for it."
So continuing with your belief that a fertilized egg is a human being (something I do not support) a married woman has a right to kill her baby.
"You no doubt think of young unmarried college age students when you think of bc."
I support all women having access to birth control and abortion. And yes, I do support a healthy sex life for all regardless of sexual preference or marital status. I view sex as a healthy and normal act.
"They didn't kill their babies in utero."
Women most certainly had abortions before 1973. You people seem to think abortion was invented after Roe v. Wade. I should ask my aunt, a nurse since 1964, to come on here and school you on septic wards in hospitals for example.
"The reason you're getting donations for PP, is because of the massive amount of propaganda, a.k.a. LIES that have been broadcast."
No, like I've said, the anti-choice movement will now use this amendment to start a ban on bc. You wait and see. Don't worry though, I won't expect a, "You were so right, Jackie" moment from you.
'Finally, killing your unborn child so you don't have to give birth to him/her, is not being 'accountable', it's being selfish."
Perceiving someone whose had an abortion as being selfish is a great personal opinion, but it had no basis in legal or medical fact. The antichoice stance seems to be rooted in hatred and judgment.
"What is your evidence for such a remark?" - Experience, as in personally watching the actions of some young women who take birth control.
ReplyDelete"So continuing with your belief that a fertilized egg is a human being (something I do not support) a married woman has a right to kill her baby." - No. Do you wish birth control to be banned? Now might be a good time to zip it.
"I support all women having access to birth control and abortion. And yes, I do support a healthy sex life for all regardless of sexual preference or marital status. I view sex as a healthy and normal act." - Of course you do, and that's part of the problem. Having sex at a young age is dangerous, not only physically, but emotionally as well. Best to wait for someone who deserves you.
"Women most certainly had abortions before 1973. You people seem to think abortion was invented after Roe v. Wade. I should ask my aunt, a nurse since 1964, to come on here and school you on septic wards in hospitals for example." - A few maybe, but not as many as you'ld like people to believe. And I have read about septic wards at hospitals.. Penicillin eradicated the problem of sepsis for most women.
"No, like I've said, the anti-choice movement will now use this amendment to start a ban on bc. You wait and see. Don't worry though, I won't expect a, "You were so right, Jackie" moment from you." - Remind me, and I will. No worries though, even if 'they' come after bc, it ain't gonna happen. :)
Is it not selfish to want to finish your education, your partying, your traveling, etc? We are all judmental Jackie, even you. Not to call out what we see as wrong, is to tolerate what is wrong, rather than trying to make it right.
" Experience, as in personally watching the actions of some young women who take birth control."
ReplyDeleteSo anecdotal, therefore irrelevant.
"No. Do you wish birth control to be banned? Now might be a good time to zip it."
Why? Because I'm pointing out a fact that clearly has implications for you. See, eventually when you work hard to punish those dirty sluts who refuse to "take responsibility" that you obsess over, it will eventually bite you in the ass as well. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
" Of course you do, and that's part of the problem. Having sex at a young age is dangerous, not only physically, but emotionally as well. Best to wait for someone who deserves you."
Another anecdotal statement that has no basis in reality.
"A few maybe, but not as many as you'ld like people to believe. And I have read about septic wards at hospitals.. Penicillin eradicated the problem of sepsis for most women."
It was a huge problem. And just because penicillin can help with a problem like this today, it is not acceptable. Plus we do have a problem with antibiotic resistance bacteria now so your ridiculous response to the huge human suffering your so pro-life to promote is moot.
"Is it not selfish to want to finish your education, your partying, your traveling, etc? "
Not to me its not. As long as a woman decides on her own free will to have an abortion (for any reason) she should be able to get one. Even the UN believes so now. Soon they will declare access to safe and legal abortion a human right----which it is.
Something rarely mentioned/studied re: hormonal birth control-most women do not realize they're pregnant until after the first missed menstrual period, and will go on taking BC unaware of the presence of the new life-would be interesting to see how many of these unborn developed birth defects from the BC and were subsequently aborted because of those birth defects. Another way BC could cause abortion.
ReplyDeleteJackie - To you, the entire pro-life argument is irrelevant. people telling you of actions they've seen, is irrelevant. Penicillin, is irrelevant. A human fetus, is irrelevant. The only thing that IS relevant is your choice to have sex and kill the developing human that may result from that sex, so you can continue your education, partying, etc. Got it.
ReplyDelete"Soon they will declare access to safe and legal abortion a human right" The UN does not write the laws of the United States of America, which is the only country this blog, and myself, are concerned with.
MPQ - You're right, it would be interesting to find out. Even the rate of autism, and other mild disorders are concerning. Something has to be causing it.
ReplyDeleteUnder "What happens if you take birth control pills while you're pregnant?" you'll find "there's very little evidence that exposure to the hormones in birth control pills causes birth defects.", which means there's at least a little evidence out there. http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/birth-control-pill/WO00098
ReplyDeleteThere just doesn't seem to be a lot of info on something that probably happens more than we know. It was kind of an off topic comment anyway, this post just got me thinking about it. I mean, it must happen all the time, women not knowing they're pregnant and continuing to take the pill. The 'very little evidence' just seems to me (to me) that no follow up studies have really been done. Makes you wonder.
ReplyDeleteYes it does. Information would be buried by the people that make big bucks, would it? I'll look in it, probably won't find much though
ReplyDeleteIt may add up to nothing, but it is something I've thought about a lot, like an additional cause for abortion. It just makes sense that years of ingesting extra hormones are unhealthy for both mother and baby, and babies are extra vulnerable in the early stages of pregnancy. I didn't mean to derail or go off-topic, this post just kind of brought it up again for me. It may be impossible to know the answer, it just seems like a scenario that would happen more often than we know. I've known quite a few women who were unaware they were pregnant until they were fairly far along, so it makes me wonder how many continue to take the pill unaware, and for how long.
ReplyDeleteSome 30 years ago it was thought the use of spermicides would lead to birth defects, but a few years later this study was revealed to be flawed. As for pills, they are believed to predispose to ectopic pregnancy by affecting transport through the Fallopian tube, at least in the case of progestin-only pills and Plan B.
ReplyDeleteMPQ - I've thought about it also, but I never researched it. I agree that ingesting artificial hormones for years on end can't be good for the body. There is so little we actually know about the effects of long term use, and short term for that matter. BTW, Robert has some excellent links on his blog for birth control's possible abortive effects. You may find some interesting reading there.
ReplyDeletehttp://roberttreat.blogspot.com/2011_06_01_archive.html
Robert - I had no idea about the possible effects of spermacide. The study being flawed only invalidates the study itself.
"The only thing that IS relevant is your choice to have sex and kill the developing human that may result from that sex, so you can continue your education, partying, etc."
ReplyDeleteIt must be exhausting to be so hateful and judgmental.
Unlike living in lala land where nobody else matters but you? You're right.. standing up for things that are important to me IS exhausting.
ReplyDeleteTAAG, you have this belief about women who get abortions, and the people who support them, as selfish, soulless, careless people. You've created this construct and project it onto anyone who disagrees with your supposed morally superior beliefs. That hatred and judgment you project on 1 in 3 women in this country must be exhausting and its only hurting you.
ReplyDeleteIt comes down to this. What's more important to protect? Newly created human life, or an orgasm? Simple enough?
ReplyDelete"It comes down to this. What's more important to protect? Newly created human life, or an orgasm? Simple enough?"
ReplyDeleteIf the choice is between what a fully developed person with feelings and a fully developed nervous system or a potential human life dependent on the body of the host (which can cause the host medical problems, etc) I will support the choice of the fully developed person every time. And when I say the fully developed person's choice, I mean whatever choice they decide-whether its carrying to term or termination.
I think Randell Terry's (president of Operation Rescue) statement to pro-life activists represents the pro-life position as a whole very accurately:
"I want you to just let a wave of intolerance wash over you. I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good..."
Just what Christ would say, I'm sure.
As long as you understand that the fully developed person, is taking the life of a developing human being, who yes, is dependent on it's mother. Sad. It won't be long before you tolerate mothers killing newborns. Oh wait, you probably already do. Am I close?
ReplyDelete"Oh wait, you probably already do. Am I close?"
ReplyDeleteIt really is impossible to have a grown-up discussion with you. Just let the intolerance and hatred wash over you. According to your leaders, its a good thing.
It was a serious statement Jackie. Do you defend her or not?
ReplyDeleteBaby found alive - http://www.midlandsconnect.com/news/story.aspx?id=667479
Baby found dead - http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/10/16/newborn-found-dead-aboard-cruise-ship/
It just happened to be FOX, so no smart comments about the AP story.
Normally I would find such a question to be offensive to say the least but I have to consider who its coming from.
ReplyDeleteNo I don't defend it. I also don't see abortion as equal to infantcide.
Normally i would find your statement insulting, because most of your statements are. With that said, a lot of pro-choice people DO defend it. Whether it be because she was just scared, or had PPD, didn't want her parents to find out, etc. I have chatted with pro-choicer's who defend women who kill or abandon their newborns. This is the slippery slope of pro-abortion mentality. Some pro-choicer's think abortion is nothing, that it doesn't involve killing a developing human being, it's 'just a clump of cells'. After years of perfecting this attitude, it's now defensable for a woman to kill her newborn. All I'm saying is, it's starts with abortion. It won't stop with newborns. It will at some point be defensable to kill toddlers.
ReplyDeleteI have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Someone who wants to talk about WHY a woman would do such a thing (in terms of social or cultural pressures) is not defending that woman. They are trying to open up a discussion about the restrictive social pressures and expectations that are placed on women in our society and how WE as Americans can change such attitudes to prevent something like this from happening again. Most actions do not happen in a vacuum.
ReplyDeleteFor you to say that these incidents start with abortion is unbelievable. We live in a society in which we have the largest homicide rate in the Western World (which has decreased since Roe v. Wade), we are the only society in the WEst with the death penalty, and we have a huge military industrial complex that invests 53% of federal funds a year for wars around the globe.
Expectations? You mean like expecting a woman not to kill her child? Geez.
ReplyDeleteI'm referring to the lack of respect for humanity. Pro-choicer's have already lost theirs on unborn babies. it's not a far stretch seeing it expand to newborns, toddlers etc.