If you're against birth control, you're for abortion

[9-10ths_Penguin]

A recent study from Colorado confirms what we already knew: access to contraception dramatically reduces teen pregnancy, abortions, and poverty:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/07/0...nancies-is-a-startling-success.html?referrer=

... which leads me to ask: if you're against birth control, exactly how are you "pro-life"?

 

[columbus]

.. which leads me to ask:
if you're against birth control, exactly how are you "pro-life"?

Which leads me to ask: if you're for abortion, are you for any sort of sex? Does responsibility enter the picture anywhere?
Tom

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Which leads me to ask: if you're for abortion, are you for any sort of sex? Does responsibility enter the picture anywhere?
Tom

Who do you think is "for abortion", exactly?

 

[columbus]

Who do you think is "for abortion", exactly?

Guys who don't want to pay child support, among many others.
Tom

 

[Nakosis]

A recent study from Colorado confirms what we already knew: access to contraception dramatically reduces teen pregnancy, abortions, and poverty:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/07/0...nancies-is-a-startling-success.html?referrer=

... which leads me to ask: if you're against birth control, exactly how are you "pro-life"?

So if I'm fine with birth control being "pro-life" is ok?

No, that's weird. In both cases you are preventing life. That would seem more of a contradiction in thinking.

Kids are great, how can anybody be anti-kid?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Guys who don't want to pay child support, among many others.
Tom

I don't see how this is relevant to the topic at hand. More and better birth control means that the question of child support won't even come up more often.

 

[Nakosis]

Guys who don't want to pay child support, among many others.
Tom

People who want the freedom of having sex without responsibility?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Or people can just learn how to ****ing control themselves instead of speading their legs and throwing sperm around like animals in heat. But that's too much to ask for in a society like this. You can't try to cheat nature. She'll always win. She has millions of years of evolution on your ***.

 

[columbus]

I don't see how this is relevant to the topic at hand.

The question I was responding to was:
"Who do you think is "for abortion", exactly?"
Tom

 

[fantome profane]

Guys who don't want to pay child support, among many others.
Tom

And how exactly would such a guy who doesn't want to pay child support go about getting an abortion?

This is where sex education would come in very handy.

 

[columbus]

And how exactly would such a guy who doesn't want to pay child support go about getting an abortion?

This is where sex education would come in very handy.

By not responding to baby-momma's sexts any more.
What kinda fool are you?
Tom

 

[Glaurung]

which leads me to ask: if you're against birth control, exactly how are you "pro-life"?

I'll quote the CCC, since it is largely the Catholic Church which holds out on the immorality of contraception.

1759 "An evil action cannot be justified by reference to a good intention" (cf. St. Thomas Aquinas, Dec. praec. 6). The end does not justify the means.

The procreative function is an inherent aspect of the sexual act, we cannot use artificial means to frustrate that teleological reality. As far as we're concerned, consent to sex is consent to the possibility of pregnancy. The marriage institution exists explicitly to facilitate the realities of the sexual function in the bringing about of children.

Of course I know most are not going to heed the Church on this, but the truth is the truth regardless of how many want to ignore it. But it is ignored at the at the risk of the immortal soul. Consequentialist argumentation does not justify the inherently immoral.

 

[columbus]

I'll quote the CCC, since it is largely the Catholic Church which holds out on the immorality of contraception.

Not really.
The men who have taken vows of chastity hold onto teachings about contraception. But most US Catholics don't.

The Catholic Church is a large and diverse organization.
Tom

 

[George-ananda]

>
If you're against birth control, you're for abortion

Not if you support abstinence before marriage. God forbid such a crazy notion today! But of course birth control is better than unwanted pregnancies and abortions.

 

[JoStories]

I'll quote the CCC, since it is largely the Catholic Church which holds out on the immorality of contraception.


The procreative function is an inherent aspect of the sexual act, we cannot use artificial means to frustrate that teleological reality. As far as we're concerned, consent to sex is consent to the possibility of pregnancy. The marriage institution exists explicitly to facilitate the realities of the sexual function in the bringing about of children.

Of course I know most are not going to heed the Church in this, but the truth is the truth regardless of how many want to ignore it. But it is ignored at the at the risk of the immortal soul. Consequentialist argumentation does not justify the inherently immoral.

So using birth control is going to get someone sent to hell? You are kidding me, correct? What about women who are not married and don;t want ot have children yet. Oh right, sex outside marriage gets one sent to hell as well. We might as well live in monasteries for pete's sake, at least in terms of your religion.

 

[ChristineES]

A recent study from Colorado confirms what we already knew: access to contraception dramatically reduces teen pregnancy, abortions, and poverty:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/07/0...nancies-is-a-startling-success.html?referrer=

... which leads me to ask: if you're against birth control, exactly how are you "pro-life"?

It seems to me that this study is a bit simplistic. Birth control and abortion are much more complicated than it suggests here. The study doesn't confirm anything to me. For one thing, the same people who are pro-life are usually abstinent before marriage, as well, which means they won't get pregnant outside of a marriage unless they are sexually assaulted. There are a lot of people, including Christians who do have sexual relations before marriage, but would probably get married if they did get pregnant while doing so (can't really say for sure, though)
There's a lot more to it, of course, I can't really get into a lot of details without making this post way too long.

 

[Glaurung]

The men who have taken vows of chastity hold onto teachings about contraception. But most US Catholics don't.

It's no secret that many live in open defiance of the Church's ruling on this. But they will answer for it when they stand before God.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

>
If you're against birth control, you're for abortion

Not if you support abstinence before marriage. God forbid such a crazy notion today! But of course birth control is better than unwanted pregnancies and abortions.

A notion so ineffective that even its loudest proponents cough Bristol Palin! cough cough can't even stick to it.

 

[columbus]

Not if you support abstinence before marriage.

You don't have to require abstinence before marriage.
People can have sex that doesn't risk pregnancy. People can have potentially fertile sex, using both diaphragms or something and condoms. If they are willing to take the tiny chance of pregnancy, they have the right. But if they wind up pregnant, they have made the Choice. Normal consequences to follow.
Tom

 

[columbus]

It's no secret that many live in open defiance of the Church's ruling on this. But they will answer for it when they stand before God.

So, who is the Church?
The cardinals in the ivory towers, or the hundreds of millions?
Tom