Defeating " No Uterus, No Opinion"

[CrossCuT]

TRIPLE POST!

 

 

And Im not addressing the faith/pro-life/catholic perspective only because I am sure a vast majority of people who come into contact with who take contraception do not feel the same on the issue as you so its important to come from a different angle in order to reach some common ground with them.

[blazeingstar]

http://www.livinghealthy360.com/index.php/improving-thin-uterine-lining-naturally-40219/

 

There are very big concerns about thin uterine linings in those trying to get pregnant and they acknowledge it causes early miscarriages. 

[CrossCuT]

That is a blog post from someone who doesnt have the background or authority to make such a claim. 

[blazeingstar]

http://www.drmalpani.com/thin-endometrial-lining.htm

 

Here's a doctor speaking about it.

Edited December 18, 2013 by blazeingstar

[CrossCuT]

http://www.drmalpani.com/thin-endometrial-lining.htm

 

Here's a doctor speaking about it.

 

The article doesnt discuss contraception at all.

 

 

But he does point out that estrogen is important for a healthy endometrium...and thats true. Estrogen is released from the follicle to trigger the growth of the endometrium. The combined birth control pill (which is the most common and most prescribed) is a combination of progesterone AND estrogen. Your body already thinks its pregnant when its on birth control thus it does not shed its endometrium so menses doesnt occur. 

Edited December 18, 2013 by CrossCuT

[NotreDame]

That was interesting. All day they kept saying the Church was sexist, but they refused to tell me how. I asked, and she said it was offensive to ask her that. I kid you not.

 

FP, are these Catholic women?  What's the context of the discussion?

[CrossCuT]

^ Yes,

Context would help!! That way we know from what perspective these women are coming from. 

[OnlySunshine]

This thought is completely understandable and not uncommon. The site you linked is a prolife site and thats perfectly fine, but you need to be aware that they are not looking for anymore reasons to dislike contraception any less so there will be a small bias. 

 

I looked at the link you provided (its a hefty document!!!) but I did a word search for all the locations where "implantation" was used just to find the info I wanted easier. If you do that, you will find a contradiction to the summary on the main site page that you linked. That means whoever wrote that summary is not taking into consideration all the facts...they simply took the parts they linked and used that to make claims. 

 

Here are quotes from the document you linked:

 

 

Again,Id like to stress that I am NOT a contraception supporter I am merely providing information so that we can all have better and informed conversations with people when these topics come up. The issue can still be argued that it PREVENTS a life that would have occurred even if it does not END it. And isnt that good to know? That contraception is not directly causing abortions?

 

Another key thing to remember is that while contraception does not cause early abortions, abortifacients (which is the huge title of the page you linked me) DOES cause early abortions...thats its purpose. 

 

The only stipulation with the implantation issue is that certain contraceptives do decrease the thickness of the endometrium by 0.6 to 2.2 mm however there is no evidence at this time to suggest that this prevents implantation. As as the article above states that if implantation was a mechanism in how the contraceptives work then forgetting to take your pill for a day would NOT result in a pregnancy...but it happens. 

 

I was actually linking that website for you because of what you said.  If you need another source, there are plenty of reputable sources:

 

http://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/birth-control-pills

 

Hormonal contraceptives can also prevent pregnancy by making the lining of the womb inhospitable for implantation.

 

http://www.thesurvivaldoctor.com/2013/02/23/abortion-and-the-pill/

 

 

• The copper IUD (ParaGard) causes an inflammatory reaction within the female organs and lessens the sperm’s ability to fertilize. However, should fertilization occur, the uterine wall is too irritated to maintain a pregnancy (implantation).
• The hormonal IUD (Mirena) and other forms of hormonal contraception share the following same basic mechanisms of action:
  1. Prevent ovulation. No egg means no fertilization.
  2. Thicken the cervical mucus so sperm can’t easily pass into the uterus (thus preventing fertilization).
  3. Thin the uterine lining. On the chance that ovulation and fertilization do occur, implantation becomes difficult or impossible.

 

 

 

http://ec.princeton.edu/questions/ecwork.html
 

 

The Copper-T IUD does not affect ovulation, but it can prevent sperm from fertilizing an egg. It may also prevent implantation of a fertilized egg.

 

 

These are a few I found. Unfortunately, I don't have a bunch of time because I'm going to Advent Penance tonight.  :(

[CrossCuT]

Like I have said previously there are certain types of birth control that do contribute to the thinning of the endometrium however I should have made it clear that I was discussing the "pill" or oral forms of contraception.

Your examples cites IUDs as the culprit however that isnt the most common form of contraception. 

 

I dont know the last time the site you linked was updated, but the article found here http://ec.princeton.edu/questions/ec-review.pdf discusses that while it was previously believe that implantation was a possible mechanism was tested later and thrown out. 

 

It is very possible these sites do not have updated information on them or else they mention it as side to cover their bases even while there is no evidence to support it. Im not sure.

Here is a link to an article discussing this very topic from Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/06/health/research/morning-after-pills-dont-block-implantation-science-suggests.html?pagewanted=all

 

 

 

But an examination by The New York Times has found that the federally approved labels and medical Web sites do not reflect what the science shows. Studies have not established that emergency contraceptive pills prevent fertilized eggs from implanting in the womb, leading scientists say. Rather, the pills delay ovulation, the release of eggs from ovaries that occurs before eggs are fertilized, and some pills also thicken cervical mucus so sperm have trouble swimming.

It turns out that the politically charged debate over morning-after pills and abortion, a divisive issue in this election year, is probably rooted in outdated or incorrect scientific guesses about how the pills work. Because they block creation of fertilized eggs, they would not meet abortion opponents’ definition of abortion-inducing drugs. In contrast, RU-486, a medication prescribed for terminating pregnancies, destroys implanted embryos.

The notion that morning-after pills prevent eggs from implanting stems from the Food and Drug Administration’s decision during the drug-approval process to mention that possibility on the label — despite lack of scientific proof, scientists say, and objections by the manufacturer of Plan B, the pill on the market the longest. Leading scientists say studies since then provide strong evidence that Plan B does not prevent implantation, and no proof that a newer type of pill, Ella, does. Some abortion opponents said they remain unconvinced.

 

As this link explains, it appears that some labels are just old and havent been updated for whatever reasons as well as the websites themselves.

 

 

Now coming from our Catholic perspective its easier for us to dismiss these facts because they can be troubling...believe me, the first time I heard that contraceptives didnt do the evil deed I thought they did was very confusing. But its a good thing knowing that children are not being aborted!

 

You can believe the science or the outdated information, but I wanted to supply people with the knowledge to discuss the topic more reasonably with people who may be already privy to it.

[southern california guy]

I've heard really bad things about the shot that women get from Planned Parenthood.  I think that it is called "depo".  I've heard that it makes them feel horrible, and it takes them a long time to get back to feeling "normal" again.

[PhuturePriest]

FP, are these Catholic women?  What's the context of the discussion?

 

 

^ Yes,

Context would help!! That way we know from what perspective these women are coming from. 

 

One -- My friend -- went to Anglican school, but she isn't practicing. The other is a fallen-away Catholic turned atheist, and the rest are atheists. The fallen away Catholic is a blatant moral relativist, which got me excited because I wanted to discuss philosophy (Debating philosophy is what I do best), but she didn't care about that, she just wanted to discuss laws that make contraception illegal. I said "But we can't discuss the laws by themselves -- every law passed has a philosophy and reason behind it, especially ones concerning contraception. We *need* to discuss philosophy if we ever intend to discuss the laws." She, however, said that was a crackpot theory (Even though I had an exhilerating talk about philosophy with my spiritual director today and he told me I was 100% correct), and she just kept saying the same stuff over and over again: The Church is sexist and oppressive, contraception is good, it should be legal everywhere, etc. etc. Mind you, she wouldn't ever get specific about anything. I kept asking her specific reasons for why the Church is sexist, and she told me it was rude of me to ask and I have no right to know. I said she is indeed correct that I have no right to know, but if we're debating about the Church being sexist and oppressive, she has to tell me why, otherwise I can't refute her arguments. 

 

I also kept using analogies (I always use analogies, especially when debating philosophy, because analogies are absolutely crucial to explaining philosophy), and they got mad that I kept using analogies. I used the analogies of the teachers and school curriculum and everything, and they said "That's totally different! That's a false analogy!". My spiritual director said they claimed that was a false analogy because it ripped a hole in their entire idea, so they wanted to discredit me so they could come out looking good.

 

They were all militantly against the Church and against any kind of reason whatsoever, and I knew debating them was no use. Thank goodness this girl with a really funny personality camein and started making jokes about everything and broke the entire thing up, or they might have ended up shooting me. I was entirely and completely calm the entire time, but they were flipping out and using colorful language in almost every post. 

 

My friend told me at the end that I was being incredibly offensive by intruding on women's issues. I told her they had all been offensive to me, as they had spoken really badly about the Church and Mary (The Church is one thing for me, but come after my mother and it's a miracle if I can avoid going to blows), but that I had looked past it. I said sometimes, contrary to what society says, it is necessary to offend people when telling the truth, so I didn't mind that they were being offensive when talking about the Church, and they shouldn't mind if I "offend" them by daring to have opinions on "women's issues".

 

My spiritual director was deeply impressed, though. He told me I should look up being a canon lawyer because he said I have the disposition for it. He said my eyes lit up when I started talking about philosophy and the debate. Needless to say I swelled with pride. :P

Edited December 19, 2013 by FuturePriest387

[NotreDame]

Heck FP, with all those rhetorical skillz of yours, maybe you should be schooling us.

[OnlySunshine]

I've heard really bad things about the shot that women get from Planned Parenthood.  I think that it is called "depo".  I've heard that it makes them feel horrible, and it takes them a long time to get back to feeling "normal" again.

 

I've known a few non-Catholics who got that Depo-Provera shot and it DOES make you feel like crap according to what they said.  One such girl told me that she gained 30 lbs because her appetite was ravenous while on it.  She decided to get off it and then it took her 2 years to get her period back.  She said she'd never take hormonal contraceptives again.

[Cherie]

 

 

As this link explains, it appears that some labels are just old and havent been updated for whatever reasons as well as the websites themselves.

 

 

Now coming from our Catholic perspective its easier for us to dismiss these facts because they can be troubling...believe me, the first time I heard that contraceptives didnt do the evil deed I thought they did was very confusing. But its a good thing knowing that children are not being aborted!

 

You can believe the science or the outdated information, but I wanted to supply people with the knowledge to discuss the topic more reasonably with people who may be already privy to it.

 

Somewhat off topic, but this information has some very important implications for Catholics and is very good to know and be honest about. 

 

For example, couples who need to use "the Pill" for medical reasons (it can be recommended for infertility treatments as a way to "reset" a woman's cycle, for example) are often advised by moral authorities to follow complete abstinence during the duration the woman will be on the Pill for precisely that reason: the fear that it could disrupt implantation and cause an abortion. If there is solid scientific evidence that does NOT occur, then it would allow the couple to reasonably resume intimacy during this time without fear they could be killing a child who happened to be conceived. 

 

Also, I know a hospital that has been trying to implement a morally acceptable protocol for rape situations, wherein emergency contraception is used. The protocol involves a woman taking an ovulation test to reasonably ensure she is not ovulating, the reason being that if she IS, then she would not be administered Plan B as a result since it could cause an abortion. A very controversial measure, for sure, but you can understand the thought behind it: trying to deal with the horrifically tragic and traumatic situation of rape without adding another tragic injustice to the situation: that of abortion. If Plan B doesn't affect implantation, however, there would be no need for this protocol. 

 

All this to say (in a very off topic way, sorry) that this information is vitally important for us as Catholics to he aware of and take seriously! I do know a very reputable doctor who remains unconvinced that these oral forms of contraception DON'T cause early abortions, so I can maybe see if he has any up to date information to share. 

[CrossCuT]

One -- My friend -- went to Anglican school, but she isn't practicing. The other is a fallen-away Catholic turned atheist, and the rest are atheists. The fallen away Catholic is a blatant moral relativist, which got me excited because I wanted to discuss philosophy (Debating philosophy is what I do best), but she didn't care about that, she just wanted to discuss laws that make contraception illegal. I said "But we can't discuss the laws by themselves -- every law passed has a philosophy and reason behind it, especially ones concerning contraception. We *need* to discuss philosophy if we ever intend to discuss the laws." She, however, said that was a crackpot theory (Even though I had an exhilerating talk about philosophy with my spiritual director today and he told me I was 100% correct), and she just kept saying the same stuff over and over again: The Church is sexist and oppressive, contraception is good, it should be legal everywhere, etc. etc. Mind you, she wouldn't ever get specific about anything. I kept asking her specific reasons for why the Church is sexist, and she told me it was rude of me to ask and I have no right to know. I said she is indeed correct that I have no right to know, but if we're debating about the Church being sexist and oppressive, she has to tell me why, otherwise I can't refute her arguments. 

 

I also kept using analogies (I always use analogies, especially when debating philosophy, because analogies are absolutely crucial to explaining philosophy), and they got mad that I kept using analogies. I used the analogies of the teachers and school curriculum and everything, and they said "That's totally different! That's a false analogy!". My spiritual director said they claimed that was a false analogy because it ripped a hole in their entire idea, so they wanted to discredit me so they could come out looking good.

 

They were all militantly against the Church and against any kind of reason whatsoever, and I knew debating them was no use. Thank goodness this girl with a really funny personality camein and started making jokes about everything and broke the entire thing up, or they might have ended up shooting me. I was entirely and completely calm the entire time, but they were flipping out and using colorful language in almost every post. 

 

My friend told me at the end that I was being incredibly offensive by intruding on women's issues. I told her they had all been offensive to me, as they had spoken really badly about the Church and Mary (The Church is one thing for me, but come after my mother and it's a miracle if I can avoid going to blows), but that I had looked past it. I said sometimes, contrary to what society says, it is necessary to offend people when telling the truth, so I didn't mind that they were being offensive when talking about the Church, and they shouldn't mind if I "offend" them by daring to have opinions on "women's issues".

 

My spiritual director was deeply impressed, though. He told me I should look up being a canon lawyer because he said I have the disposition for it. He said my eyes lit up when I started talking about philosophy and the debate. Needless to say I swelled with pride. :P

 

Ahhhh, well I can see where some philosophical debates would come into play however its unlikely that they have the knowledge to really take you on in that department. Usually sarcasm and dismissal during a conversation in the way you described is them not wanting to engage with you because they arent confident in their ability to argue their point.

 

But I cant say that for sure. I also understand that people can get frustrated and flustered in such arguments and for me, that really distracts me from being able to think clearly. 

 

For me, I wouldnt argue any of the Catholic perspective only  because it would be meaningless. Moral relativism could be a good point to argue but that ties in with our Catholic beliefs and will likely just be a dead end.

 

My approach would be just to discuss it scientifically and how the World Health Organization has characterized contraception as mildly carcinogenic. I would also discuss the obsession with the organic food culture and relate that to taking "unnatural" hormonal pills considering there is a very natural method of achieving the same thing. 

I would then discuss the power of knowledge when it comes to fertility awareness and how it empowers women vs how the pill basically leaves them vulnerable if they miss just one day. (Note that the claims on the box are completely thrown out if you  miss just 1 day of taking your pill)

 

I just think its best for women to be educated to understand their bodies, not to take an easy way out. There are so many girls who literally dont understand how their fertility cycle works and are confused when they become pregnant if they miss a day.

 

 

Somewhat off topic, but this information has some very important implications for Catholics and is very good to know and be honest about. 

 

For example, couples who need to use "the Pill" for medical reasons (it can be recommended for infertility treatments as a way to "reset" a woman's cycle, for example) are often advised by moral authorities to follow complete abstinence during the duration the woman will be on the Pill for precisely that reason: the fear that it could disrupt implantation and cause an abortion. If there is solid scientific evidence that does NOT occur, then it would allow the couple to reasonably resume intimacy during this time without fear they could be killing a child who happened to be conceived. 

 

Also, I know a hospital that has been trying to implement a morally acceptable protocol for rape situations, wherein emergency contraception is used. The protocol involves a woman taking an ovulation test to reasonably ensure she is not ovulating, the reason being that if she IS, then she would not be administered Plan B as a result since it could cause an abortion. A very controversial measure, for sure, but you can understand the thought behind it: trying to deal with the horrifically tragic and traumatic situation of rape without adding another tragic injustice to the situation: that of abortion. If Plan B doesn't affect implantation, however, there would be no need for this protocol. 

 

All this to say (in a very off topic way, sorry) that this information is vitally important for us as Catholics to he aware of and take seriously! I do know a very reputable doctor who remains unconvinced that these oral forms of contraception DON'T cause early abortions, so I can maybe see if he has any up to date information to share. 

 

I totally understand your concern and I think it is a good reason to be cautious. However at this time, investigation into this subject has finally been a focus and they have stated that EC and regular oral contraceptives do not support the mechanism of preventing implantation. If you disregard the scientific reasons completely and just look at it logistically, it still makes sense or else no woman on the pill would ever get pregnant due to endometrial thinning. However this is not the case.

 

Where devout Catholics are concerned, this information does not change anything, however from a social perspective when considering protecting life, this seemingly small detail is significant. I agree that if there is a chance that this even happens once in every 1 million cases, I would still be against it! (well, Im against it anyway regardless lol)

 

The only reason I am pointing this out is because (now that we have better context on the women FP was talking to) its very unlikely that a conversation about passive abortion via missed implantation would likely be a good discussion point.