Pro-LIFE Birth Control

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
181

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
You are the one who has no problem with abortion. This subject is not a gray area where you can sit on the fence. In addition, I said the link was some light reading. Damn dude, read and comprehend before you post. not intended as an attack of any sort
[/quote]

Wrong yet again. Where have I said I have no problem with abortion?

Find it please. You won’t because I’ve never said it. Because I have a problem with abortion. A big one.

So you admit the comment on the pill “killing multiple women each year” was a red herring? Good. Thank you for that.

I will admit I misread your intention with the link. Seemed to me you posted it as a reply H Factor’s last point, but that was because you were responding line by line.[/quote]

This thread has partially been difficult because we have gone back and forth between abortion and whether or not birth control is abortion or should be made illegal.

We can talk about abortion and I have thoughts on that, and despite being pro-choice I am very much for doing everything in our power to eliminate (or as close as possible) voluntary abortion. Decreasing unwanted children is the best way to do this and avoiding pregnancy in situations where the child will be unwanted (or even cannot be cared for) is vital. The absolute BEST tools to achieve this are contraceptives.

Wishing people won’t have sex doesn’t work. Fighting against the tools to limit unwanted children is counter productive to the pro-life movement.

And finally equating contraceptive use with abortion is just flat ignorant. If using a condom, jacking off, or having a girl take birth control is murder then I’m the biggest serial killer in the history of humankind.

182

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

And stop it with the “contraception kills babies” bullshit unless you are going to take Sloths position and say the denial of any POTENTIAL meeting of sperm and egg is a moral wrong–and even then, you cannot say it is abortion because by definition no human being was conceived.

So stop it.
[/quote]

Eh? Just to be clear, my position has nothing to do with “contraception kills babies.” Abortificatients set aside. The way it’s worded above, or maybe it’s the way I’m reading ya, it sort of comes off as if you’re saying that.

Knee, how are you? I understand you might have had a really bad accident some time back. I’ve caught snippets of it before, and I see your avatar. [/quote]

Nope, I might completely disagree with you Sloth (and think it’s a little nuts), but I respect both you and your position as consistent in fact–I know you did not say that. Unless I am vastly mistaken you have quite clearly said that the POTENTIAL for a sperm and egg to meet must not be interrupted artificially, and therefore contraception is a moral wrong against the self. However, you have never said that it is “killing babies” or “abortifacient”. Kneedragger is saying “contraception is abortifacient”, which is patently false if we are excluding RU486 and the like.

183

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Universally accepted source please. You will NOT find it, but you are welcome to waste your time.

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
By definition, contraceptives kill innocent children [exception of barriers]. An ovum is still released and can be fertilized if sperm are present.
[/quote]

Check your current science.[/quote]
[/quote]

“May” is the word. Still, it certainly takes down a peg or ten the certainty with which you proclaim that “by definition, contraceptives kill innocent children.”

By the way, I’d like to clear something up. A contraceptive is something that prevents (contra) conception (ceptive), so your claim is actually exactly wrong. A contraceptive, by definition (to use your terminology), prevents conception and therefore cannot induce an abortion.[/quote]

Don’t bother. I’ve gone and hammered this on the previous pages, even providing a list of clinical and biochemical textbooks as references, along with peer reviewed articles. His answer was “because it kills babies it is abortifacient” in return. This, of course, is scientifically illiterate.

184

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
In addition Aragorn, when does a new human life begin? At the moment of conception. Read up on your birth control, if an ovum is released and sperm are present, a new life has begun. The embryo does NOT attach in the uterine wall eight to ten days after ovulation and the embryo dies. You might need to take a biology class if my word is not good enough for you.[/quote]

Look man, I don’t know what you think you know, but I’m the one who’s spent roughly 10 years in science. As a researcher for most of that time.

YOU ARE NOT READING A DAMN WORD I HAVE POSTED. If you had, you would have seen reference after reference, in cold hard scientific literature and textbook, that tells you you are wrong. You would have also seen the following:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
if you want I can show you–AGAIN–the scientific literature that indicates that hormonal birth control does not affect rate of implantation and thus pregnancy from implantation in the uterine wall. In other words, and I can even quote directly if you like, that oral contraception does not prevent implantation and therefore is NOT an abortifacient.[/quote]

So, your response to “there is no evidence whatsoever, and I can provide direct quotes and scientific references, to the idea that oral contraception prevents implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterine wall” is…“The embryo does NOT attach in the uterine wall eight to ten days after ovulation and the embryo dies. You might need to take a biology class if my word is not good enough for you.”

Refutation by fiat is not acceptable. Nor is telling a person who has a lifetime worth of expertise more than you that he is wrong about his area of expertise and needs to go back to school WITHOUT PROOF OF ANY KIND.

So stop it.

185

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
In addition Aragorn, when does a new human life begin? At the moment of conception. Read up on your birth control, if an ovum is released and sperm are present, a new life has begun. The embryo does NOT attach in the uterine wall eight to ten days after ovulation and the embryo dies. You might need to take a biology class if my word is not good enough for you.[/quote]

Look man, I don’t know what you think you know, but I’m the one who’s spent roughly 10 years in science. As a researcher for most of that time.

YOU ARE NOT READING A DAMN WORD I HAVE POSTED. If you had, you would have seen reference after reference, in cold hard scientific literature and textbook, that tells you you are wrong. You would have also seen the following:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
if you want I can show you–AGAIN–the scientific literature that indicates that hormonal birth control does not affect rate of implantation and thus pregnancy from implantation in the uterine wall. In other words, and I can even quote directly if you like, that oral contraception does not prevent implantation and therefore is NOT an abortifacient.[/quote]

So, your response to “there is no evidence whatsoever, and I can provide direct quotes and scientific references, to the idea that oral contraception prevents implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterine wall” is…“The embryo does NOT attach in the uterine wall eight to ten days after ovulation and the embryo dies. You might need to take a biology class if my word is not good enough for you.”

Refutation by fiat is not acceptable. Nor is telling a person who has a lifetime worth of expertise more than you that he is wrong about his area of expertise and needs to go back to school WITHOUT PROOF OF ANY KIND.

So stop it. [/quote]

A huge difference exists between Sloth and Knee. Sloth will listen, reason, debate, and use your words to talk to you. Kneedragger just flat out asserts wild things and ignores anyone who says anything contrary to what he says. Sloth is a reasonable person you can debate. Kneedragger is pretty much just here to post vortex videos and ignore replies.

186

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

And stop it with the “contraception kills babies” bullshit unless you are going to take Sloths position and say the denial of any POTENTIAL meeting of sperm and egg is a moral wrong–and even then, you cannot say it is abortion because by definition no human being was conceived.

So stop it.
[/quote]

Eh? Just to be clear, my position has nothing to do with “contraception kills babies.” Abortificatients set aside. The way it’s worded above, or maybe it’s the way I’m reading ya, it sort of comes off as if you’re saying that.

Knee, how are you? I understand you might have had a really bad accident some time back. I’ve caught snippets of it before, and I see your avatar. [/quote]

Nope, I might completely disagree with you Sloth (and think it’s a little nuts), but I respect both you and your position as consistent in fact–I know you did not say that. Unless I am vastly mistaken you have quite clearly said that the POTENTIAL for a sperm and egg to meet must not be interrupted artificially, and therefore contraception is a moral wrong against the self. However, you have never said that it is “killing babies” or “abortifacient”. Kneedragger is saying “contraception is abortifacient”, which is patently false if we are excluding RU486 and the like.[/quote]

Cool, cool. Just wanted to make sure.

187

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

And stop it with the “contraception kills babies” bullshit unless you are going to take Sloths position and say the denial of any POTENTIAL meeting of sperm and egg is a moral wrong–and even then, you cannot say it is abortion because by definition no human being was conceived.

So stop it.
[/quote]

Eh? Just to be clear, my position has nothing to do with “contraception kills babies.” Abortificatients set aside. The way it’s worded above, or maybe it’s the way I’m reading ya, it sort of comes off as if you’re saying that.

Knee, how are you? I understand you might have had a really bad accident some time back. I’ve caught snippets of it before, and I see your avatar. [/quote]

Nope, I might completely disagree with you Sloth (and think it’s a little nuts), but I respect both you and your position as consistent in fact–I know you did not say that. Unless I am vastly mistaken you have quite clearly said that the POTENTIAL for a sperm and egg to meet must not be interrupted artificially, and therefore contraception is a moral wrong against the self. However, you have never said that it is “killing babies” or “abortifacient”. Kneedragger is saying “contraception is abortifacient”, which is patently false if we are excluding RU486 and the like.[/quote]

Cool, cool. Just wanted to make sure.[/quote]

Btw, I very much enjoy conversing/debating with you–all occasional outbursts from myself aside. Always good to have a conversation.

188

[quote]H factor wrote:
This is where people like Sloth get it backwards. Like if I’m atheist somehow I must be for murder. Or if I’m agnostic somehow rape is ok. I don’t HAVE to believe in an afterlife, a God, a hell to know the difference between wrong and right. None of us really do. Many people of all different faiths and non faiths come to the same conclusions ALL the time. With the exceptions of extremists in all faiths most of the country is pretty basic on what goes and what does not go. Slight differences based on location of course, but agreements on ALL the big stuff.[/quote]

No, no, no. I do not think you have to believe rape is ok.

Do you want me to be direct? Oh, you do? Ok, then. I think you feel obligated to deny the actual existence of good and evil in order to not give faith room at the debate. If you show faith in actual good and evil, the theist has to be treated as an equal.

But, I don’t think you take it to heart. Not entirely, at least. Your renewed/beginning charitable work? I’m sorry, I just don’t think you really believe you’re doing nothing more than exercising some emotional whim, empty of any real moral value. Charity IS morally good. And not as empty as choosing favorite colors. And I suspect you agree.

H-factor, your charitable work IS a good. I’m not saying I believe it as only my personal opinion, which just happens to coincide with your own, yet has no reality. I’m saying you ARE doing good. Thanks.

189

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

And stop it with the “contraception kills babies” bullshit unless you are going to take Sloths position and say the denial of any POTENTIAL meeting of sperm and egg is a moral wrong–and even then, you cannot say it is abortion because by definition no human being was conceived.

So stop it.
[/quote]

Eh? Just to be clear, my position has nothing to do with “contraception kills babies.” Abortificatients set aside. The way it’s worded above, or maybe it’s the way I’m reading ya, it sort of comes off as if you’re saying that.

Knee, how are you? I understand you might have had a really bad accident some time back. I’ve caught snippets of it before, and I see your avatar. [/quote]

Nope, I might completely disagree with you Sloth (and think it’s a little nuts), but I respect both you and your position as consistent in fact–I know you did not say that. Unless I am vastly mistaken you have quite clearly said that the POTENTIAL for a sperm and egg to meet must not be interrupted artificially, and therefore contraception is a moral wrong against the self. However, you have never said that it is “killing babies” or “abortifacient”. Kneedragger is saying “contraception is abortifacient”, which is patently false if we are excluding RU486 and the like.[/quote]

Cool, cool. Just wanted to make sure.[/quote]

Btw, I very much enjoy conversing/debating with you–all occasional outbursts from myself aside. Always good to have a conversation.
[/quote]

Oh, absolutely! You’re a sharp guy, so I appreciate hearing from you in the forum. Honestly, I wasn’t offended. Just curious. No harm done at all.

190

[quote]H factor wrote:
Sloth will listen, reason, debate, and use your words to talk to you. Kneedragger just flat out asserts wild things and ignores anyone who says anything contrary to what he says. Sloth is a reasonable person you can debate. Kneedragger is pretty much just here to post vortex videos and ignore replies. [/quote]

Awww.

Lol.

The feeling is mutual. We clash often, but I do try to make sure not to be disrespectful. It can be very difficult in some of the debates we’ve been in, because passion can all too easily come off as aggression. Take care.

191

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:
This is where people like Sloth get it backwards. Like if I’m atheist somehow I must be for murder. Or if I’m agnostic somehow rape is ok. I don’t HAVE to believe in an afterlife, a God, a hell to know the difference between wrong and right. None of us really do. Many people of all different faiths and non faiths come to the same conclusions ALL the time. With the exceptions of extremists in all faiths most of the country is pretty basic on what goes and what does not go. Slight differences based on location of course, but agreements on ALL the big stuff.[/quote]

No, no, no. I do not think you have to believe rape is ok.

Do you want me to be direct? Oh, you do? Ok, then. I think you feel obligated to deny the actual existence of good and evil in order to not give faith room at the debate. If you show faith in actual good and evil, the theist has to be treated as an equal.

But, I don’t think you take it to heart. Not entirely, at least. Your renewed/beginning charitable work? I’m sorry, I just don’t think you really believe you’re doing nothing more than exercising some emotional whim, empty of any real moral value. Charity IS morally good. And not as empty as choosing favorite colors. And I suspect you agree.

[/quote]

I’m still a little confused by this so I’m not really sure how to respond. I believe good and evil is subjective. It always has been and always will be. What is “good?” What is “evil?” We all have certain instances where we agree or disagree on these definitions. I’m a limited government guy who believes in some form of taxation. Nick calls that direct theft and an evil action. Am I “more right” than him or more wrong? Or are we both correct in our own manner? Wouldn’t you say Catholics disagree on what good and evil is often?

Despite this the VAST majority of people agree on most of the big things. Murder is not up for debate with most of the world. Doesn’t matter if you’re a Catholic, Hindu, Atheist, Agnostic like me, etc. Now are some people ok with it? Sure. Always will be some people who will do that.

I don’t think I’ve ever said theists are not equal. I don’t view my opinion as more correct than yours. Well, I may in some instances and passionately argue against what you propose…but I believe that is just humans being humans. I THINK getting rid of birth control WOULD be bad for the nation. I honestly believe that. I think it would lead to more abortions, more pregnancies where moms can’t support the kids, etc. And I think we have enough of that. I’m not going to say you can’t be right, but I’m going to argue strongly against your point of view. That’s just debate.

Maybe it’s the terms that we are throwing each other off with. I have done charitable work before. My 2014 goal was to solve more problems and help people out more. I make goals all the time whether in fitness, health, education, etc. I don’t need some light at the end of the tunnel to motivate me. I’m not doing this to serve someone I cannot see. I’m doing things like this because I want to help humans out. Now you may do some of those things because you want to help humans out AND you view it as pleasing to your Lord. Nothing wrong with that at all.

I just don’t believe our political system is designed to work very well if everyone just says I believe X is right. If you can explain to me why X is a great position then I will probably support it whether it comes from a believer or not believer. The origin of it or the person saying it simply does not matter to me. Good ideas can come from people of all faiths. So can bad ideas. Good ideas can come from believers or non believers. I don’t believe a system where we based everything off the beliefs of a few people works. Are my ideas less valuable to you because they are formed without God in mind? I’m genuinely asking.

And also though I enjoy the debate I don’t always “get” what you mean with some of this morality doesn’t exist type talk. I mean I know what you are saying I just don’t really know why it is worth using brainpower on. I don’t believe YOU can’t be moral because you believe in God and I don’t. I don’t believe I can’t be moral because I don’t believe in God either.

Values in society are constantly changing anyways. Catholic in 2014 is not the same as Catholic in 1414. Surely even if I was a non believer 300 years ago my values may be different. Who’s to say I wouldn’t be “ok” with slavery if it was the accepted position of the time?

192

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:
Sloth will listen, reason, debate, and use your words to talk to you. Kneedragger just flat out asserts wild things and ignores anyone who says anything contrary to what he says. Sloth is a reasonable person you can debate. Kneedragger is pretty much just here to post vortex videos and ignore replies. [/quote]

Awww.

Lol.

The feeling is mutual. We clash often, but I do try to make sure not to be disrespectful. It can be very difficult in some of the debates we’ve been in, because passion can all too easily come off as aggression. Take care.[/quote]

I don’t mean to come off as aggressive though I must admit I can just type like a madman without thinking too much. It just seems as if knee usually doesn’t participate in his own threads and try to debate anyone. He just usually posts a video. In fact this is one of the few threads where he has multiple replies. He’s like a hit n run religious man where you are interested in the spirit of debate and learning religious man. I can talk to the latter type much easier because I know he will listen and may get me to challenge my own views. The other type will just assert something and walk away.

193

I could be very, very, very mistaken, but I think knee might have some challenges he’s had to overcome. To put it delicately, I wonder if some of those challenges aren’t ongoing, coming to the surface when he expresses himself. That is absolutely not meant to be a knock, as he went through a heck of an ordeal.

194

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I’ve never been blackout drunk, which is irrelevant. Unless some guy tied this imaginary girl down and poured alcohol down her throat until she passed out, it was still her choice.

Evidence of rape.[/quote]

At some point, one’s ability to make conscious decisions is no greater than one who has been drugged. You can certainly argue that because Woman A chooses to drink, she has no right to be upset about anything that happens to her. The first-time drinker may have a hard time determining the point at which her ability to make decisions is compromised to that point.

What would be evidence of rape? If a man holds a gun to Woman A’s head and tells her he is going to kill her if she doesn’t let him stick his dick in her, the physical evidence will be no different than consensual sex…but that would still be rape.

195

[quote]Sloth wrote:
I could be very, very, very mistaken, but I think knee might have some challenges he’s had to overcome. To put it delicately, I wonder if some of those challenges aren’t ongoing, coming to the surface when he expresses himself. That is absolutely not meant to be a knock, as he went through a heck of an ordeal.

[/quote]
His biggest challenge is keeping his mouth shut long enough to actually learn about Catholicism, among other things, from sources other than Vortex.

196

Sloth mang, if I complained it would be H U G E lie! In addition people would not even believe me :o ] My life is beyond blessed. If I even knew what I did right previously, I would do it over and over again.

As for accidents thus far in life, I have had three Traumatic Brain Injuries [TBI]. First one around the age of eight; Literally fell ~25 ft out of a pine tree and landed on my back, blacking out for just a moment. In my mind I thought that I broke my spine because I couldn?t breathe. In reality I had just knocked the wind out of myself. TBI of the mild variety.

Second TBI of the moderate category; I was growing up in Spokane, WA and we had a sandbox in the backyard with railroad tires surrounding the sandbox. We had a swing set with a slide and my intelligent self thought I could go down head first. Well you can imagine what I did to myself. I really have no clue how long I was out but it had of been a minute to an hour, I am guessing.

The third TBI is the picture you see to the left <---- I blew my motor while club racing in the Washington Motorcycle Road Racing Association. Specifically I rented the track in Spokomton with my buddies, as the day was winding down I blew the number three crank bearing. Moscow, ID is where I was living and my GOOD friend Matt was working at the Yamaha shop there. The winter of ?04 was a great year for snow, so my motor sat on the bench the whole winter. A TBI works like this; I am told what I had done but in my brain the day it is a blank slate. I was working at JJ Building Supplies and they were opening a new shop in Colfax, WA. I went home that night and went to bed. The next thing I remember was laying on my back at a hospital. Next memory is of me in Spokane and my cousin Pat visited me with his friends. Next was a plane ride from Spokane to Boise, oh my, the pain. As for a reason why, my guess the altitude / pressure changes. I am probably wrong though ; )

Then as my wife finished teaching last year, I came down with mono. Less than three percent of the population never contracts the virus as a baby into adulthood. Mono places a huge burden on your immune system and that is why I experienced the TBI symptoms.

Currently my family lives in Laveen, AZ near Cesar Chavez High School and I never have to look for trouble. My neighbor to the direct east is a guy named Freddie and after I moved in last year, he told me in a non-threatening way that he has killed multiple people and served time in prison. The worst part is the cycle of gangs will always continue as children look for a place to belong. The cycle will never end until people make the choice to break the cycle, almost identical to parents who raise their children using corporal punishment. My mom beat me almost every day, well I make the choice to never beat anyone that is so tiny and dependant on me. The cycle of physical / emotional abuse ends me. One last thing about my neighbor though, he uses his children as drug mules to buy products from him. Someone comes with money to Freddie and after cash is in hand, his children run the product out to their vehicle. The neighborhood is so sad. Many black adults think of me as crazy I hit my head so hard I was in a coma for nearly six weeks. I was talking and awake shortly after the wreck yet all the other people I meet treat me with the respect I always try to give them.

This message took three days and the majority was after I couldn?t sleep the night before. Oh well, hat am I to do? Nothing but pray to GOD.

The provided link is titled perfectly - http://www.churchmilitant.tv/dispatches/contraception/ -

197

Obviously I am failing at describing the action of common birth control in a simple manner. Please let me try a different tactic.

As a general rule and how our human body function, we are incredibly efficient. Say a person stops consuming dairy products for a long period of time. The human body will slowly cease the production of lactase; ceasing the ability to produce the protein. Large numbers of that crown fall in this category. Very, few people lack the genes for this protein.

So thinking about the above situation, if a young girl consumes a contraception protein, such as the pill, what do you think would happen to her progesterone levels? Sure she might cycle for a short while, but her body sees no need to produce her own progesterone so her body stops ceases the production of that hormone. Her levels hit the deck.

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
You are the one who has no problem with abortion. This subject is not a gray area where you can sit on the fence. In addition, I said the link was some light reading. Damn dude, read and comprehend before you post. not intended as an attack of any sort
[/quote]

Wrong yet again. Where have I said I have no problem with abortion?

Find it please. You won’t because I’ve never said it. Because I have a problem with abortion. A big one.

So you admit the comment on the pill “killing multiple women each year” was a red herring? Good. Thank you for that.

I will admit I misread your intention with the link. Seemed to me you posted it as a reply H Factor’s last point, but that was because you were responding line by line.[/quote]

198

Dang Sloth, how did you pick up on that? My above story tells me that you are far more intelligent than you let on!! = D

[quote]Sloth wrote:
I could be very, very, very mistaken, but I think knee might have some challenges he’s had to overcome. To put it delicately, I wonder if some of those challenges aren’t ongoing, coming to the surface when he expresses himself. That is absolutely not meant to be a knock, as he went through a heck of an ordeal.

[/quote]

199

After six months my post here is never answered. Aragorn I am a busy guy, but I will follow a discussion with someone who seems to be honest with themselves. I struggle with people who knock me more than four times, even with my own family members. But please answer my response below. [edited for clarity]

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Obviously I am failing at describing the action of common birth control in a simple manner. Please let me try a different tactic.

As a general rule and in how our human body functions, we are incredibly efficient. Say a person stops consuming dairy products for a long period of time. The human body will slowly cease the production of lactase; ceasing the ability to produce any large levels the protein. Large numbers of people fall in this category. Very few people lack the genes for this protein.

So thinking about the above situation, if a young girl consumes an artificial contraception protein, such as any birth control pill anything other than a barrier type of birth control, what do you think would happen to her progesterone levels? Sure she might cycle for a few short cycles, but her body sees no need to produce her own progesterone so her body stops or ceases the production of that hormone. Her levels hit the deck. Similar to the production of lactase. [slightly edited]

200

Ironic how everyone has a problem when my life does not allow me to respond, then when other people behave in the exact same manner it is supposed to be somehow different. Rich jajajaja = ]