Now The Nutters Are Going Against Birth Control
From a piece in the Stevens Point Journal by Ivy Fargueson:
In prayer vigils or protests from La Crosse to Appleton, men and women encouraged people not to use birth control pills, including emergency contraception, for its role in terminating life."It is crucial to mark June 7 with a symbolic time of silence to memorialize everything we as Americans have lost," said Peggy Hamill, state director for Pro-Life Wisconsin. "The deadly connection between contraception and abortion is all too real. The birth control pill acts to end a newly formed human life."
According to Hamill and other supporters, birth control pills terminate life by preventing a fertilized egg from implanting itself in the womb. Anti-abortion activists say that's because life begins at fertilization, not implantation.
Pro-Life Wisconsin members also encourage women to take seriously the side effects involved in taking hormonal birth control pills and to talk with natural family planning doctors in their area for more information.
"If you're using the pill consistently for any extended amount of time, you will be participating in the chemical abortion of your own children," Hamill said. "If someone is very serious about not becoming pregnant, they need to learn natural family planning, which is very effective, very scientific and very wholesome and healthy."
Oh, bullshit...on all of it. Ask Catholics how many of their children were the effect of "natural family planning."
If you're a religious nutter against abortion, put your money where your mouth is. You pay for the pregnancy, including any complications, of those teen mothers and others unprepared for parenthood that you convince to "choose life." Next, you pay to have some nice, qualified infertile couple to raise the kid. And then pay for the to go to college.
And by the way, if you're a guy and you're having sex, and not with grannies, you're a potential father, whether you want to be one or not. The only way you're remotely safe from that is if you control the condom from start to finish, including bringing it yourself and never letting it out of your sight. And I wouldn't necessarily trust a woman who says she's on pill, either. An IUD, if she actually has one, is a much safer form of birth control, since she can't "forget" to pop it in one day.
Sound terribly cynical? You read my mail and tell me different.
via ifeminist
According to Hamill and other supporters, birth control pills terminate life by preventing a fertilized egg from implanting itself in the womb.
Oh, really? Um, NO. If you use the pill correctly, it prevents the sperm from fertilizing the egg, thus preventing pregnancy. Where the hell are these people from, anyway?? Spreading this particular brand of bullshit is highly detremental. Nut cases, all of them. Good call, Amy.
Flynne at June 9, 2008 7:48 AM
When I was in my early teens, one of my best friends had a really dumb mother. How dumb? She found out that her older daughter (16 or 17) was smoking while on the pill. Sum total of her reaction was: "smoking while on the pill can cause blood clots - it's too dangerous for you to take the pill." So instead the girl had 4 kids before she was 23. Shocking! (Note: I'm not saying the daughter had any brains either, just that mom's response was *off*.)
TheOtherOne at June 9, 2008 8:25 AM
Uh... let me get this straight TheOtherOne - this woman was so dumb that SHE ADVISED HER DAUGHTER TO KEEP SMOKING?????
If breathing wasn't automatic, she'd have died by now, no doubt.
Flynne - I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't some kind of reaction to Muslim reproduction rates. After all, he who dies with the most followers wins, or something like that...
brian at June 9, 2008 8:27 AM
This seems the right time for an old joke. I learned it in the Ozarks, where I grew up, but my Jewish friends tell me the punch line is also attributed to Spinoza.
Bobby Joe: "You know, Jimmy, life is nothing but misery from one end to the other. The only happy people are the ones that never existed!"
Jimmy Dale: "That's right, Bobby. That's *right*! But how many are that lucky? Not one in a thousand. Not one in *ten* thousand!"
Axman at June 9, 2008 8:33 AM
This seems the right time for an old joke. I learned it in the Ozarks, where I grew up, but my Jewish friends tell me the punch line is also attributed to Spinoza.
Bobby Joe: "You know, Jimmy, life is nothing but misery from one end to the other. The only happy people are the ones that never existed!"
Jimmy Dale: "That's right, Bobby. That's *right*! But how many are that lucky? Not one in a thousand. Not one in *ten* thousand!"
Axman at June 9, 2008 8:34 AM
This one really gets me, because I am pro-life but will not support any pro-life group that promotes this anti-birth control crap. I've realized over the years that a certain segment of the pro-life community is truly more interested in controlling people than they are with any concern for the unborn. If it is true that birth control pills cause early abortions (which I've never heard any credible evidence supporting), then why aren't they encouraging people to use barrier methods, such as condomns or diaphrams? Instead, they talk about completely unreliable "natural" family planning. Being against abortion and birth control at the same time is about as contradictory as it gets.
Karen at June 9, 2008 8:43 AM
Yes, there's also the old adage about what you call women who use natural birth control methods, including "rhythym." Mothers.
sirhcton at June 9, 2008 8:47 AM
It's a damn shame that those among us that really shouldn't be able to breed don't believe in birth control....
dena at June 9, 2008 8:52 AM
they need to learn natural family planning, which is very effective, very scientific and very wholesome and healthy."
The "pro-life" movement is about one thing and one thing ONLY: making sex illegal if it's not between married people for the purpose of procreation. What else could explain the hypocritical madness of being anti-abortion rights AND anti birth control?
"The deadly connection between contraception and abortion is all too real. The birth control pill acts to end a newly formed human life."
Their pseudo-scientific babble is just window dressing. They want to force people to obey the rules of the christian religion whether they are christians or not. It's just like dressing up creationism as "intelligent design" in order to sleaze it back into the schools.
If someone were to justify making all birth control illegal because “The invisible flying spaghetti god hates it when people have sex for fun” they would be rightfully rejected as a crackpot. A Christian demanding the end of birth control because “God hates it when people have sex for fun” is no less a crackpot. They know this, so they wrap their jesus-based folly in pseudo-science in the hopes of conning rational people out of their rights.
This "life begins at conception" crap is nothing more than an arbitrary milestone used by religious fanatics as a "moral hammer" to judge us "sinners". If given the chance, they'd happily claim that life begins at penetration.
Were going to drink what we want to drink,
were going to read what we want to read,
were going to play what music we want to play,
and were going to FUCK however we want to FUCK!
If the christians don’t like it they can shove their dogma up their dark ages.
Redpretzel in LA at June 9, 2008 10:09 AM
similar set of nutcases in Colo. is trying to get a Colorado Constitutional Ammendment that defines "Person" as including any human being from the moemnt of fertilization... just to circumvent roe v. wade. it's on the ballot for Nov.
Coupled with the fact that so many hospitals have gone private AND Catholic... any kind of birth control is in trouble. Recently Lutheran Hospital has been purchased by a Hospital consortium that is Catholic based. I haven't a thing against that, except the law of unintended says that hey, suddenly anything having to do with birth control is right out. Including things you NEED a hospital for like a vasectomy. It ain't no big thing, until there is only one public hospital in a large city that will do such proceedures...
It's the full gonzo of all unintended consequence. People have to make decisions about bringing life here, and we can have the mental hopscotch about "what IS life"...
But none of that is GOOD or SOUND public policy. Separation of Church and State demands that we fall back on either scientific proof, or what is considered reasonable by all, INCLUDING the non-religious. roe v. wade has allowed us to dissemble, and not ask the question, this is true... Ultimately though this has to take a heavy dose of personal responsibility, AND the sovereignty of your ownself.
I'm religious, and I have my ideas about the relative merits of life, but those are personal. To make it public policy, I need Amy to agree, and I need somebody who follows Buddha to agree, etc... AND even my mom and I of the SAME religion, don't agree on when human life actually begins...
ooops./rant
SwissArmyD at June 9, 2008 10:35 AM
Including things you NEED a hospital for like a vasectomy.
Just a FYI, you don't need a hospital for that procedure. It can be done on an outpatient basis in any urologists' office.
Redpretzel in LA at June 9, 2008 10:48 AM
> put your money where your
> mouth is. You pay for
> the pregnancy [...] Next,
> you pay to have some nice,
> qualified infertile couple
> to raise the kid. And then
> pay for the to go to college.
Overreach.
Shortly after the attacks, in the early days of blogdom, Glenn Reynolds spoke on a panel at UCLA with Kaus and Volokh. By then he was obviously one of the breakout stars of the new medium. People were catching on to just how expressive and persuasive some people could be by posting a few niblets a day, rather than a whole argument at once (as in a book, or speech, or column).
Reynolds says he'd get emails from people with differing viewpoints: "Your wrong about X and Y, and I can prove it! So I challenge you to a debate... On your blog!
His reply: "Nah... Get'cher own blog." He's under no obligation to provide space for competing viewpoints. The gift of his eloquence and the audience it brings are his blessings to use as he sees fit.
Neither are these anti-abortion types responsible for raising all these unwanted kids. The fact that other people are misbehaving doesn't compel them (or their well-loved children) to make further sacrifices. They're well within their moral right to point out that it's the misbehaviour of other people that's causing this problem.
And it is a problem. Maybe abortion should be kept legal, and maybe it's often a better outcome than bringing unwanted children into the world. But it's unnecessary killing because of the incompetence of adults, and you shouldn't have to offer to pick up the tab to acknowledge that this is true.
The reason North Korea can't feed itself is that dictatorships don't work... Are we responsible for the starvation that's happening there>
Crid at June 9, 2008 10:57 AM
The reason North Korea can't feed itself is that dictatorships don't work... Are we responsible for the starvation that's happening there>
If we made it illegal for them to have anything BUT said dictatorship, then yes.
Redpretzel in LA at June 9, 2008 11:10 AM
Oh, tell me more.
Please. Please
Crid at June 9, 2008 11:36 AM
"Ask Catholics how many of their children were the effect of 'natural family planning.'"
Don't slag on NFP just because people you disagree with promote it. For individuals with self-control the dedication to pull it off, it works damn well, as my parents and mom's sisters will attest.
dulcibella at June 9, 2008 11:40 AM
Yeah, that's how I like my sex. Full of self-control. All that measuring, tracking and counting makes me hot! But not right now. How about....now!?
moreta at June 9, 2008 12:05 PM
The question at hand isn't "life", it's whether or not a woman can legally choose to have an abortion.
So you're either pro-choice or anti-choice, not pro-life or anti-life.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at June 9, 2008 12:14 PM
so, Gog_Magog... what is it exactly are you aborting? A tumor? A mass of extra cells? r' somethin'? At some point in time you have to decide when you CAN'T abort it anymore, because it is alive in a human way. Currently I believe its 3rd trimester, nutters want to move that back to fertilization.
SwissArmyD at June 9, 2008 12:24 PM
> The question at hand isn't "life"
Says who?
Crid at June 9, 2008 12:28 PM
My information was that the pill prevents ovulation. No egg = no pregnancy. The body already thinks it's pregnant so it doesn't send out any competition. The "backup" is preventing fertilization, and the "backup" to that is preventing implantation. So, theoretically, there is some miniscule chance that it fails in 2 out of 3 ways and there is fertilization but no implantation, I guess. But like the others, I don't think that's what theyre really after. If it ever makes it that far, I'll be stockpiling the pill like crazy. Just saying. If the fundies ever win, the hookup's over here.
christina at June 9, 2008 12:48 PM
>Don't slag on NFP just because people you disagree with promote it. For individuals with self-control the dedication to pull it off, it works damn well, as my parents and mom's sisters will attest.
My first child was conceived while I was on my period. Tell me again how well NFP works.
Kimberly at June 9, 2008 12:53 PM
She didn't literally say "keep smoking" but she DID say "stop taking the pill, it's too dangerous to take the pill and smoke". She didn't tell the girl to quit smoking. . . .
Similarly, the woman who was my sister-in-law for a while got pregnant at 15 by my brother and had her daughter (call her "Kay") at 16. (They had a couple more kids and were married for a while starting between the two boys.) When Kay was 16, she was living with her dad and his girlfriend. Girlfriend finds out she's having sex, so she takes Kay to Family Planning and gets her on the pill. Kay visits her mom one weekend, and mom finds the pills. Mom throws away the pills, and tells Kay "if you're going to have sex, you have to face the consequences just like the rest of us."
So Kay gives birth to twins at age 17. She, unlike her mother, married the dad before the birth, then went with him to live with his mom for a while. They've since had another daughter and seem to be doing a great job raising those kids. But STILL . . . .
TheOtherOne at June 9, 2008 12:54 PM
Karen has posted the best question yet. Christina is correct that the pill prevents ovulation, so there is never any conception that takes place to begin with. But let's just say the fundies are innocently wrong. " ... then why aren't they encouraging people to use barrier methods, such as condomns or diaphrams?"
I think they are deliberately tryinig to spread misinformation, in order to link birth control pills to abortion. Now that's just sickening, but it also obscures their own real motive, and I'm not even sure what their real motive is. It seems to be something along the lines of "all babies, all the time," but I don't know what they propose for people who don't want kids.
Pirate Jo at June 9, 2008 12:58 PM
"If you're using the pill consistently for any extended amount of time, you will be participating in the chemical abortion of your own children," Hamill said. "If someone is very serious about not becoming pregnant, they need to learn natural family planning, which is very effective, very scientific and very wholesome and healthy."
The Far Left and Far Right went so far, they went all the way around and met in the back. This is their offspring.
Cousin Dave at June 9, 2008 1:01 PM
"pro-life" movement is about one thing and one thing ONLY: making sex illegal if it's not between married people for the purpose of procreation"
Not really. I am pro-life. As in, once the life is in there, it's life. I am very PRO-HOICE, as well. As in, you can choose to use any 1 (or more) of the 8 or more effective birth control methods available. All of which are pretty damn cheap. Or free, at a lot of clinics.
I have 3 kids (duh, right!)I managed to make it through 7 years of schooling, including lots of drinking and lots of boys, without having an oops pregnancy. Once I wanted kids, I stopped the birth control. When I didn't want them, I took it. It's easy, really, I promise.
I also have read no literature anywhere that states the primary function of the pill is to block fertilization. My pill insert here says it "stops ovulation, and thickens cervical mucus, lessening the likelihood of fertilization. It may also prevent implantation." So yeah, that's #3 on the chain there. Not a huge issue I don't think.
Crid: "But it's unnecessary killing because of the incompetence of adults, and you shouldn't have to offer to pick up the tab to acknowledge that this is true." You got it exactly right!!!!!!!!!!! Why would an abortion ever ever ever be better than preventing it in the first place??? Even Amy must agree that the best thing to do is pop your pill or roll on your rubber.
momof3 at June 9, 2008 1:01 PM
"Mom throws away the pills, and tells Kay "if you're going to have sex, you have to face the consequences just like the rest of us.""
My mom knows a woman who did the same thing. She snooped in her 15-year-old daughter's dresser drawer and found birth control pills, and then threw them out, saying that if she was going to have sex then she deserved to suffer the consequences. Like a child deserves to be thought of as a "consequence."
The 15-year-old girl got pregnant the same year (dummy - I'd have simply gone out and bought more pills, and then done a better job of hiding them) and then ended up having two more kids ... all of whom ended up being raised by the grandmother who threw away the pills in the first place. So I guess she got her "consequences" too.
Pirate Jo at June 9, 2008 1:02 PM
"The question at hand isn't "life", it's whether or not a woman can legally choose to have an abortion."
It became a legal issue only because the technology is available. Otherwise, we will not be having this conversation.
I think the real legal issue is whether a woman owns the eggs in her body or not. In another words, did Mother Nature use women's body to produce Her Eggs to push Her agenda? I don't think anyone can claim an ownership on something they did not create or pay for it. In my opinion, Mother Nature owns the eggs and SHE had Her eggs got fertilized in exchange for the women's orgasm and that gooey feeling of being loved by someone. I am sorry to break it to you but you, yes, all of you are just being simply used by Her to promote Her agenda.
If you refuse to get pregnant after experiencing orgasms and feeling loved after sex, you are not following through the contract you had with Mother Nature. Accordingly, SHE would like to be paid for the orgasms you experienced without getting pregnant. As I am collecting checks for Her, please send me the check for $500 per orgasm....
Chang at June 9, 2008 1:14 PM
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
Now that that's out of the way.... what?!
So, does that mean if I don't have an orgasm I don't have to have a baby? Or if I'm having sex with someone I don't love? What if I have an orgasm alone? Or what if I have two or three orgasms? Is that two or three babies? And where did I sign up for this contract? And what about egg donation... should I have the orgasm or should the recipient? So many questions...
Christina at June 9, 2008 1:44 PM
I am pro life also, but this loony anti birth control group has got to go. Surly there can not be that many of them...are there?
rusty wilson at June 9, 2008 1:50 PM
"pro-life" movement is about one thing and one thing ONLY: making sex illegal if it's not between married people for the purpose of procreation"
For some who call themselves pro-life, this may be true, but obviously not everyone. I do believe life begins at conception. I also know that not everyone believes this and that there is no way to "prove" it one way or another. I am all for choice as long as one's choice affects only his or herself and does not hurt others. Since I see abortion as killing an innocent human life, I can't support that choice.
I've used the pill, and am currently using Depo Provera. If it was proven that my birth control was indeed causing chemical abortions (more than a one in a million chance, that is) I would quit using it. Then I would probably get my tubes tied. I certainly wouldn't take my chances on having more kids (I have 2). Somehow, I doubt that Pro-Life Wisconsin would approve.
I should mention that a long time ago I was one of the "nutters" picketing abortion clinics. I now see this as a stupid waste of time that doesn't really help anyone. I prefer to give my time and money to the groups that do what Amy suggested: help women with unwanted pregnancies by taking care of thier financial needs and steering them toward adoption (the adoptive parents can pay for college!)
Karen at June 9, 2008 2:40 PM
I was curious once and looked up the Catholic rulings involving birth control. Evidentially, because my medical history requires me to constantly be on hormones, it's ok. The phrasing was something along the lines of, "the medication required to keep the woman healthy has the side effect of preventing pregnancy, but since that it's not the intended reason for the hormones it is ok". The site I checked out did say that sex was for procreation only, so since I most likely can never have children, am on hormones that would prevent me getting pregnant anyways, and definitely don't want them, does this mean I'm not supposed to have sex with my husband? When you factor in that the Catholics don't hold with divorce either, that's a recipe for disaster.
It depends on the birth control method as to how it affects the eggs or implantation. Older birth control focused on making the wall of the uterus a different consistency so that that fertilized eggs couldn't be implanted, and IUC's also prevent implanting. Many of the newer birth control pills (which is what most woman are on because they are safer) are combination pills, preventing ovulation and also restricting sperms access to the uterus, so that lady talking about birth control pills being chemical abortion is blowing it out of her ass.
Stacy at June 9, 2008 2:45 PM
Let's take this one step further (or is it backwards?)Cue the Monty Python:
Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.
Juliana at June 9, 2008 3:42 PM
Yep, those of you who corrected me, the bill prevents ovulation, thus preventing the pregnancy. Mea culpa. That said, this: "If you're using the pill consistently for any extended amount of time, you will be participating in the chemical abortion of your own children," Hamill said. is horseshit. I was on the pill for 14 years before I had #1. Went back on it for about a year and a half, went off again, and then had #2. Then I got my tubes tied. There was no evidence whatsoever of any pregnancies other than those 2, and I was very vigilant and consistent with my health care. In keeping with Monty Python, I would like to say to Ms. Hamill the moron: "I blow my nose at you. I fart in your general direction."
Flynne at June 9, 2008 4:46 PM
@Kimberly: sex during your period to avoid pregnancy is not the same as NFP. I know when I ovulate, even with the occasional short cycle.
to other detractors: Sure, I may be sacrificing some sexual sponteneity... if the only kind of sexual fulfillment you can fathom is vaginal penetration with a penis. The way I see it, I gain some concrete benefits in not worrying about my latex allergy flare-ups or putting exogenous hormones in my body.
I may be Catholic, but I've grown past the stage where I thought it was a good idea to legislate my personal decisions onto others. I make my choice based on the facts I know. Even if the chance of both the pill's ovulation- and fertiliztion-blocking mechanisms failing are slim to none, I'd have no way of knowing. My husband-to-be and I don't want to take that chance. It just riles me to hear anyone call BS on the method simply because it has been embraced by a misguided movement.
dulcibella at June 9, 2008 5:20 PM
"The question at hand isn't "life", it's whether or not a woman can legally choose to have an abortion."
It became a legal issue only because the technology is available. Otherwise, we will not be having this conversation.
No, it became a legal issue, because of so many back-alley abortions and other methods were killing women.
I saw an article by an OB/Gyn doctor that also worked the ER before Roe. At least once a month, and usually more often, they would have a teen or woman come in with sepsis or other similar problems from home made abortives.
The techniques have been around for centuries, but finally came to the forefront as medical care has become more institutionalized.
Jim P. at June 9, 2008 6:39 PM
Amy - Whatever diffences we may have -- as the pundits say - they pale in comparison to what we agree on.
This blurb of yours is right on.
Religion is fucking up (literally and otherwise) so many people.
It makes me a bit crazed that people don't get that religion is all about control (and tithes) of the masses.
This is where our education system has gone wrong and needs to be fixed - around the world.
A woman should have EVERY availability to control pregnancy.
Men should be aware that women can be messed up and not depend on their word about pregnancy capability.
This above fact should have nothing to do with women controlling their bodies. Until men give birth, they can STFU. But it would prolly be better if they applied their condoms as needed.
Inquiring at June 9, 2008 9:26 PM
"what is it exactly are you aborting?"
Since I'm male, I'm not aborting anything.
But if you're asking me to define it, the term is "fetus".
"Baby" is used after it leaves the womb.
This is why killing a "baby" is murder (got a law for that) and aborting a "fetus" is not (got a law for that one too).
I find it interesting that the Republicans, the party of anti-choice, have chosen to not repeal that law, ever. This includes the years of a combined Republican Presidency and both houses of Congress with an (arguably) conservative Supreme Court.
Let's face it, if the shills in Congress who are waving the anti-choice flag actually believed what they were selling, abortion would have gone out the window when the Republican Revolution came in.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at June 9, 2008 10:18 PM
SONG OF SOLOMON
CHAPTER 2
3 As the apple tree among the trees of the wood, so is my beloved among the sons. I sat down under his shadow with great delight, and his fruit was sweet to my taste.
Sucking balls
6 His left hand is under my head, and his right hand doth embrace me.
Fingering
SONG OF SOLOMON
CHAPTER 3
7 Behold his bed, which is Solomon’s; threescore valiant men are about it, of the valiant of Israel.
8 They all hold swords, being expert in war: every man hath his sword upon his thigh because of fear in the night.
Gangbang
SONG OF SOLOMON
CHAPTER 4
11 Thy lips, O my spouse, drop as the honeycomb: honey and milk are under thy tongue; and the smell of thy garments is like the smell of Lebanon.
12 A garden inclosed is my sister, my spouse; a spring shut up, a fountain sealed.
15 A fountain of gardens, a well of living waters, and streams from Lebanon.
16 Awake, O north wind; and come, thou south; blow upon my garden, that the spices thereof may flow out. Let my beloved come into his garden, and eat his pleasant fruits.
A rather lyrical description of going down on a woman
SONG OF SOLOMON
CHAPTER 5
4 My beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my bowels were moved for him.
Anal sex
SONG OF SOLOMON
CHAPTER 6
1 Whither is thy beloved gone, O thou fairest among women? whither is thy beloved turned aside? that we may seek him with thee.
2 My beloved is gone down into his garden, to the beds of spices, to feed in the gardens, and to gather lilies.
3 I am my beloved’s, and my beloved is mine: he feedeth among the lilies.
8 There are threescore queens, and fourscore concubines, and virgins without number.
Swinging
Aside from the gangbang and the swinging none of the other activities could ever result in pregnancy
lujlp at June 9, 2008 11:15 PM
I love talking to abortion fanatics, especially the religious ones.
I quote them a few scriptures from Joshua and Judges werin god commanded the death of entire populations including children and then ask why god allows the killing of toddlers but no the occasional fetus
ANd for those sick perverts who think sex is only for procreation read
Proverbs 5:19 and try the Song of Solomon, which I just posted exerpts of.
note to self no blogging after being up 54 hrs straight
lujlp at June 9, 2008 11:18 PM
Give it up, already, nutters. Abortion and birth control have gone on for centuries. Nothing has ever been able to stop them and nothing ever will be. You might as well try to make drugs and guns illegal...
Donna at June 10, 2008 8:33 AM
"What if I have an orgasm alone? Or what if I have two or three orgasms?"
I don't understand what you are saying. How is that possible?
Please, please, honey on top, tell us more.
Chang at June 10, 2008 9:57 AM
Ever hear of masturbation, Chang?
Flynne at June 10, 2008 10:08 AM
In my opinion, Mother Nature owns the eggs and SHE had Her eggs got fertilized in exchange for the women's orgasm and that gooey feeling of being loved by someone. I am sorry to break it to you but you, yes, all of you are just being simply used by Her to promote Her agenda.
Chang, in my opinion, you're a nut job!
Flynne at June 10, 2008 10:09 AM
Granted, dulcibella, there are certainly many types of sexual satisfaction besides penis in vagina (isn't that a Sue Johansen phrase?). However, I personally found having to structure my lovemaking activities based on "the schedule" quite a turn-off. I guess that's why when I was old enough for someone to agree, I went with a tubal to stop the babies and then an endo' ablation to stop the rest. Sex anytime, anyhow. Up until the tubal though, I personally found the pill to be the next best, least hassle alternative.
I once had a male physiotherapist who was horrified at the thought of women taking uncessary hormones just for "safe" sex and suggested men would never do such a thing. I suspect he disliked sex. Or he was trying to nail some uber-feminist in the office...
To clarify, this was back in the day when "safe" merely meant no pregnancy. STD's were still just something sailors & hookers got.
moreta at June 10, 2008 11:29 AM
"... when I was old enough for someone to agree, I went with a tubal to stop the babies"
Say, how old did you have to be before you found someone who would do that? And (if you don't mind) did you already have kids?
I think I got really, really lucky - I've never had kids and found a doctor to give me the Essure implants when I was 34. I had heard all these horror stories about childfree women having to undergo psychological evaluations before being allowed the procedure. My doctor even asked if I was surprised that I found someone to agree to it, and I admitted I had expected a lot more hassle. He said he felt it was my life and I could make whatever decisions with my life and body that I wanted.
Pirate Jo at June 10, 2008 12:14 PM
Moreta-
Endo' ablation to stop the rest of what?
Christina at June 10, 2008 12:58 PM
He said he felt it was my life and I could make whatever decisions with my life and body that I wanted.
And this is exactly what the religious nutters don't get!! It's my life, and I'll thank you, and the government, and everyone else, to butt the hell out.
Flynne at June 10, 2008 1:12 PM
An endometrial ablation is where the lining of the uterus is removed so that no more bleeding takes place during menstrual periods. (This has no effect on hormone levels, it only stops bleeding.) It also reduces risk of pregnancy, since there is no longer any uterine lining for a fertilized egg to implant itself in. However, I wouldn't rely on it for birth control, since you could still have a very dangerous ectopic pregnancy. I considered the procedure myself, but decided against it because a lot of times the lining grows back, and there is the risk of having your uterus punctured during the process.
Pirate Jo at June 10, 2008 1:30 PM
I'm hopin' someone can help me out to find where the study is, because I can't figure out how to phrase the query, but regarding the timed method of birth control dulcibella, I believe there are a group of women whose body drop more than one egg, and not necessarily in a predictible way. My ex was a demon about using this method, becuase of her latex allergy and dislike of hormonal controls, and we still ended up with beautiful daughter. It IS possible that ex was lying to me, and just decided to have another without my consent, but IIRC sometime in the early 2000's a study came out that women could drop more than one, and THIS was the reason that the timing method was often not successful...
SwissArmyD at June 10, 2008 1:57 PM
I know what an ablation is and what it does. I guess what I was really asking was why? Is tubal not effective enough? Or was it to prevent menstrual bleeding? Am I too nosy?
Christina at June 10, 2008 2:15 PM
Not trying to speak for moreta, but she did say, "I went with a tubal to stop the babies and then an endo' ablation to stop the rest."
I take that to mean she got the tubal to eliminate the risk of pregnancy and got the ablation so she could quit bothering with the messy periods every month. I was thinking the exact same thing when I looked into it.
I did get the Essure procedure, which is a relatively new type of tubal. Instead of having your tubes slashed and/or burned, they insert a little titanium alloy coil (looks just like the spring from a ball point pen) into each fallopian tube. They go in through the cervix, so there's no incision made, and in many cases it's done without anything more than a local anesthetic. Takes about 30 minutes and you're back to work the next day.
I thought the endo ablation would be nice, too, but it seemed a little risky, and what if you went through all that bother and the uterine lining just grew back anyway? Besides, after 17 years on the pill my cycles are pretty hassle-free. (There, I guess you're not being too nosy, if I'm going to offer THAT kind of personal information, hee hee.)
I never had a problem with birth control pills either, but they got awfully expensive. I had to pay $1,000 for my Essure procedure, and it paid for itself pretty quickly in terms of what I was spending on birth control pills plus the annual doctor visit every year. Depending on where I have worked and the insurance my employers have provided, sometimes these costs were alleviated and other times not so much. I didn't like having that always be an issue, either - having to evaluate a potential job in light of whether I might spend hundreds of dollars more on birth control. Bleh! So I just got it all taken care of permanently. I won't have to deal with any more hormones until I start to hit menopause.
When I first went on the pill as a teenager, it was a total godsend. It did everything from clear up my zits to regulate my cycles (as well as lighten them) and keep me from turning into a sick, sobbing mess every month from the cramps. I had gone to Planned Parenthood and gotten them myself when I decided to start having sex, but I wondered why every mother on earth didn't put her daughters on the pill, just for the other added benefits. And now, after 17 years on the pill, I don't feel ANY differently now that I'm not taking it anymore. The benefits seem to be permanent.
Pirate Jo at June 10, 2008 2:55 PM
Pirate Jo- You're lucky to have had such success. By now you've probably seen the debate as to effects of long- term exposure to any hormonal manipulation. I was taken off the Pill at the onset of opthalmic migraines (apparently I was at risk of stroke) but had my next doctor declare it was a bunch of hooey, the pill wasn't dangerous, and tried to get me back on it. I prefer to err on the side of caution since I'd hate to see my kids and hubby try to take care of me after a stroke; hell, they can barely feed the dog.
Some women do fine, others don't. Kind of like smoking and living to see your 97th birthday.
However, as to trying to make birth control decisions using the bible as a template, good luck. After my husband went to see Dr. Snipsnip, we found a passage about men with crushed testicles (Deut 23:1) Ooops, too late now. Sorry, but I'm not willing to keep cranking out babies until my bits fall out or my brain goes kablooey.
Juliana at June 11, 2008 6:13 AM
"It IS possible that ex was lying to me, and just decided to have another without my consent, but IIRC sometime in the early 2000's a study came out that women could drop more than one, and THIS was the reason that the timing method was often not successful..."
She probably wasn't. The problem with "Natural Family Planning" is that it has a 20% failure rate after one year. It's one of the worst forms of birth control you can have. (To compare, most pills have a 1-2% failure rate after a year, and IUDs have less than 1%.) And yes, it's entirely possible to ovulate twice in one month. NFP relies on a female's body to be a perfect little ovulating machine, AND for a male's sperm to be average (hang out for 24 hours, not go on egg-finding expeditions, then die.)
Many times, this simply isn't the case. Sometimes women ovulate twice, and sperm has been known to wait several days for an egg to fertilize.
Bottom line: NFP is unreliable. VERY unreliable. I had awful side effects with hormonal birth control pills, but you know what would be more awful?
...Screaming babies I didn't want.
Homeless in Seattle at June 11, 2008 9:07 AM
IUD! IUD!
Paragard - the copper one, no hormones.
Amy Alkon at June 11, 2008 9:36 AM
So if someone opposes abortion, they should pay for the child of every slut in the country?
So we have on one hand, personal irresponsibility leading to an abortion(which some want the taxpayer to fund), or personal irresponsibility leading to some traditional Christian paying for a pregnancy and child.
When does the slut deal with the consequences of her own mistakes? While not all abortions are the result of being a slut, your response doesn't distinguish. So why do sluts get a free ride?
Smarty at June 12, 2008 5:53 PM
I'm talking about a free-market solution for those who don't want women who are already pregnant to have abortions. Pay them to have the baby. Pay for the baby afterward. Put your money where your fundamentalism is.
I have no desire to persuade people not to have abortions. But, if you do, pony up, dude!
Amy Alkon at June 12, 2008 6:06 PM
Leave a comment