Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Birth Control & Abortions; when is it too far? - Part 1

So, I get emails from a website, and this was a really interesting one. It kind of was on a topic that I've been meaning to talk about. So, first off, here is the article (original):

No Birth Control for Baptists

In a sermon to the students of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary earlier this month, Dr. Thomas White said taking birth control pills is a “sin” and “murder,” according to a report on the WFAA TV website. The crux of his argument is that “although the pill is supposed to work by preventing the release of an egg, it can also prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterine wall.”

While his comments were certainly polemical, it is important for Christians to have a clear understanding of birth control. For those of us who believe that life begins at conception is there an ethical difference between abortion and birth control methods that prevent implantation?

What do you think?

HT: Jim West

Now, I think it's definitely worth looking through the comments on this one, there are some excellent ones. Now it's time for my several page comment. First things first: Birth Control. I suppose I should provide some insight to it. There are three types of birth control.
  • Prevent Ovulation
  • Prevent Conception
  • Prevent Attachment
  • "Morning After"
Now here's the low-down on all four of them. To prevent ovulation makes the female not produce the egg for fertilization. To prevent conception makes it so the sperm does not make it to the egg. To prevent implantation is so that the embryo does not attach itself to the wall of the uterus. And finally, the last method is the morning after pill. This essentially aborts the child within the first five days of conception.

Now, here's my view on it. I'm going to keep it short, simple, and straight. Preventing ovulation, to me, is not the end of the world, as there is no zygote created, thus no life. I think that this is a poor decision, mostly because I don't imagine the pills being very good for you.

Preventing conception, also not so bad. The sperm has not reached the egg, and again, no life has been created. This is fine, imho, and I have nothing against it. But frankly, I don't know how this works, and wouldn't use it either, as stated above, pills like these cannot possibly be good for you.

The next one is where I start to have a problem with it. Preventing the embryo from attaching itself to the uterus. I have heard arguments that because the body naturally aborts this way, that it is not wrong to cause it. Well to be straight up, does that mean aborting at eight and a half months wrong then? What about when babies die before they're born? It it happens at anytime in the womb, does that mean doing it with human intervention wrong? Of course it does! Just like shooting your next door neighbors dog is wrong, but running over it with your car isn't (Joke. Do not attempt ;-). But the basic principle is still the same. At no time is it right to kill a life.

The final one, is the "Morning After" pill. Not only is this a bad idea (pills yet again), but it actually ABORTS the embryo after attaching itself to the uterus. So this means, even for the people who argue that the blood streams of the woman and child have not yet started, thus no life, means that it's still killing someone. This is also known as the emergency pill.

Now, here's my take on the overall view of this type of... stuff. If you are not capable of taking care of a child, you are not responsible enough for intercourse. The only one that I don't have a problem with would be a condom, and not to prevent STD's. This one is only if you're trying to oranize having children at certain times/don't want children as a married couple.

That's all for today. Expect Part 2 tomorrow: Abortion.

No comments: