Skip to main content

"The Pill: Is It Abortifacient?" From Challies.com

Interesting article for your information. First 10 responses included. To see the article and all of the responses, go to www.challies.com/archives/000564.php .

The Pill: Is It Abortifacient?

Here's a topic I've been meaning to bring up for a while. Before I start, I should point out that my knowledge of the sciences (other than aspects of computer science) is absolutely shameful. I last studied science in my second year of high school and only passed because during the final exam I sat behind and to the right of the class brain and was able to copy her multiple choice answers (I offer no excuse for my behaviour except to say I was unregenerate at that time). So my knowledge of biology and chemistry are poor at best.

Before I begin, I'd like to point out that I have no aversion to using birth control. My wife and I have had only two children in our six years of marriage, so you could correctly draw the conclusion that we have employed birth control to space out our children. Furthermore, I do not consider it wrong if a couple wishes to have only two children while another wishes to have eight. I believe that in Christ we have freedom to decide such things. So do not accuse me of believing that every Christian family should be comprised of fifteen children. Some quivers are full at three while others at sixteen.

So while I do not have an issue with using birth control, I have always struggled with accepting the pill as an acceptable form of birth control. I have asked many people the following question and have never gotten a satisfactory answer: “Can the pill cause an abortion?” A friend of mine who is a believer, a remarkably smart guy and a pharmacist could not even answer the question (after only a couple of years his conscience drove him away from his vocation and he became a fellow computer geek instead).

The pill is popular for several reasons. The foremost are:

Ease of use – No muss, no fuss. A woman need only take a pill once a day to have near perfect protection against pregnancy.
Effectiveness – The pill is highly effective. When used perfectly, the changes of becoming pregnant are miniscule.
Convenience – Any couple who has fumbled with condoms or other similar methods of contraception can testify to their inconvenience. The pill also increases spontaneity.
Compared to other forms of birth control, the pill is highly desirable. It offers greater ease, effectiveness and convenience than other methods. It is easy to understand why it has come into such widespread use.

When Does Life Begin?

We must preface this discussion with defining when life begins. Generally Christians believe that life begins at the moment of conception (fertilization) and I hold to this view. Competing views would try to have us believe that life begins later – either when a child is able to survive outside of its mother’s body or even not until it is born. In recent days more and more people actually hold to the belief that a baby cannot be considered a human life until a few days after birth. If your belief differs from the view that life begins at conception, you will likely not agree with most of what follows.

How Does The Pill Work?

The pill prevents pregnancy by fooling a woman’s body into thinking it is pregnant. There are two main types of birth control pills. The first is a combined oral contraceptive that contains two hormones: estrogen and progestin. Estrogen helps prevent ovulation by suppressing the hormones that would cause the ovary to release an egg. Progestin thickens the cervical mucus which hinders the ability of the sperm to travel through the fallopian tubes. It also prevents the lining of the uterus to develop normally which means that if an egg were fertilized, it would be unable to implant. The second type of pill is known as the minipill and contains no estrogen, so while it does not prevent ovulation, it does inhibit the ability of the sperm to fertilize the egg (both my thickening mucus and by suppressing its ability to unite with the egg) and should fertilization take place, the likelihood of implantation.

It is interesting to note that the “morning-after pill,” a pill which can be taken up to 72 hours after unprotected sex to reduce the risk of pregnancy is actually simply a combined oral contraceptive pill that contains both estrogen and progestin. The morning after pill, designed to prevent or terminate a pregnancy is no different from the birth control pill designed to prevent pregnancy.

Can The Pill Cause Abortions?

A search of resources geared mainly towards women’s health, shows that most people affirm that birth control does not cause abortions. However, it would seem their definition of what constitutes an abortion is different from what the majority of Christians believe. If life begins at conception, then preventing implantation is already causing an abortion. The pill will not, apparently, cause an implanted fetus to be aborted (though it does increase the likelihood of ectopic pregnancies which are pregnancies in the fallopian tubes that threaten the lives of both mother and child if the pregnancy is not quickly terminated). However, having read the warnings that come with the pill, the companies will not guarantee that the pill will not adversely affect a fetus. It is possible that birth defects and other health problems may be linked to the pill.

I have to conclude, then, that the birth control pill can and does cause abortions. If life begins at the very moment of conception, any implantation which is blocked by the pill is in fact an abortion. It hardly even seems like there can be any controversy about this – if the pill does what the pharmaceutical companies say it does, it may cause an abortion any given month. The changes may be remote, but they still exist. You may find my arguments non-scientific and even simplistic, but I see no reason to make them more complex than this.

Conclusion

I have often mentioned my misgivings about the pill to other believers, only to be met with blank stares and often some anger. It seems to me that if my wife and I were using the pill and found out it was possible that we were aborting children, we would immediately do some research and find out if this was the case. Perhaps I am wrong. I have had couples tell me that using other forms of birth control was hurting their relationship, as they would rather go without sexual relations than have to fumble with condoms or worry about undesired pregnancies using “natural” methods of birth control.

But if the pill really does cause abortions, there is no excuse for using it. How big a risk of abortion would convince you to rethink the pill? What if there was a one in one thousand chance that during the course of your life you would lose one child this way? One in one hundred? One in ten thousand? I do not know what the chances are, but frankly I don’t really care. In matters of life and death, we can take no chances!

I would encourage you to do the research for yourself. And when you do so, pass along your findings here. I am willing (and eager) to be corrected on my conclusions.

Posted by Tim 04:59 PM TrackBack (0) 1218 Words

Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.challies.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/220


Comments


I always understood it to be an abortifacient - as do my medical friends.

No arguments on this one.

(1) by jmark on October 4 02:30 PM

I have to assume that the majority of Christians do not believe it to be abortifacient OR they are simply ignorant that it even [i]could[/b] be, or else they would not use it. I refuse to believe that many God-fearing Christians simply use it for the sake of convenience, knowing they are risking lives

(2) by Tim on October 4 02:36 PM

I can't claim any greater knowledge of biology than you, but I read once that one in three fertilized eggs naturally fail to implant, and of the others, nearly half fail to reach full term. I'm not saying that Pill-induced abortion doesn't matter, but the risk should be seen in this context. You say that "in matters of life and death we can take no chances", but surely that's life - there is an element of risk in practically everthing we do. There may well be many lifestyle decisions we make that increase the risk of a natural abortion.

I realise that you're talking specifically about whether the Pill is appropriate for Christian couples, but in the greater context of millions of deliberately terminated viable pregnancies which would be avoided by use of effective birth control, I'm not sure that a small risk due to the Pill should be of prime concern -- but perhaps I'm being over pragmatic.

In the light of these question, I think Christians (like me) need to better educate themselves about reproductive biology -- these are important matters.

(3) by RobS on October 4 02:53 PM

RobS - While I see your point about seeing this in the context of millions of spontaneous abortions, which we must agree are decreed to happen by God, I don't think it really concerns this argument. It is true that many (perhaps even a majority) of pregnancies do not reach full term, but that does not negate our responsibility to ensure we do not contribute to that.

You are also right that there is an element of risk in everything we do, but to deliberately introduce an element of risk to another seems to take it to a different level. Any time I eat an apple I risk choking and dying and God doesn't hold me accountable for taking that risk - but if I were to add arsenic to every 10th apple - well, that's a different story.

But anyways, I think the important thing is that Christians take a look at the facts about reproductive biology and see if they find the evidence does indicate that the pill is inconsistent with Christian views on reproduction.

(4) by Tim on October 4 03:39 PM

May I throw out a really wild suggestion? Birth control doesn’t work. Whether or not you use any form of birth control, you are not affecting the population one iota.

Yes, since you ask, I am crazy; but that doesn’t mean I couldn’t be right. This is a thesis I’ve been working on and off for some time. At this point, I certainly could not be dogmatic about anything. I’m just trying to work through it logically.

Here is the proposition: if God did indeed know us “before the foundation of the world”, he obviously planned in advance whom he was going to create. Could one of his creatures decide to overrule him? Can you imagine God saying, “I had a plan for him, but since I wasn’t allowed to create him I’ll have to go with plan B”?

I know, people who use birth control have fewer children than those who do not, but considering God’s ultimate sovereignty, that may not prove what it appears to prove. I believe that only God has the right to decide who will and will not be created. Ultimately, however, I do not think anyone is able to usurp his authority over his creation. I think this is a time when “he that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh”.

Someday I’ll finish this and be dogmatic one way or another- I can’t help it. For now, just consider it food for thought.

(5) by david on October 4 04:58 PM

To throw another wrench in the system: The IUD (or Inter-Uterin-Device). Many persons believe this is also an acceptable form of preventing conception but in reality just attempts to prevent the fertalized egg from attaching to the wall of the uterus. Even the "side affects" detail that many women experience increased bleeding and painful menses (i.e. monthly spontaeous abortion).

The bottom line here is that EVERY woman should examine in detail ljust how each form of birth control "works" so that they can honestly and with a clear mind determine if it is worth taking. The time for trusting health care professionals to make these choices for us is over. When we allow others to make our decisions for us, we abdicate our choice but not our accountability.

(6) by yellow duck on October 4 05:25 PM

More and more Christians are taking a closer look at "birth control" lately and determining that it's not part of God's plan. There's been a lengthy series on Tim and David Bayly's blog on the same subject, and I seem to recall seeing it on another Reformed blog as well. Up until the 1930s, I'm told it was uncommon for a church to consider contraception within the bounds of Christian morality. Oddly enough, most denominations at that time also held to now-antiquated principles like prohibitions on female ordination and homosexuality.

But as I said, we're seeing a new wave of conservative Christians looking past the phrase "family planning" and seeing contraception for what it is: an attempt to dictate to God what our family size should be.

I believe in birth control; I just let God do the controlling. And my quiver runneth over.

(7) by Joel on October 4 05:29 PM

I have noticed that the divorce of sex from reproduction has given a lot of ammo to the argument that homosexuality is not immoral.

(8)Contraception by Scott on October 4 07:23 PM

OK, I'll open the can of worms that Tim placed on the table. When does life begin? Can I say that I'm not really certain without being stoned?

My wifes cousin quit his job and moved his family to Houston, Texas for one reason, to attend the Berachah Bible church and sit under the ministry of Colonel Robert B. Thieme Jr. A Google search will provide you with some information or you can go here or here.

Thieme`ism spread like wildfire throughout the south in the 80's and early 90's. A group split off of First Baptist Church, here in Hope, AR, to devote themselves to the teachings of Thieme. I've listened to a large number of his tapes and took most of his teaching with a grain of salt but his teaching on when life begins was interesting.

God formed man from the dust of the ground, God BREATHED into man's nostrils the BREATH OF LIFE, and man became a living soul. Thieme teaches that life begins with the first breath.

As for passages that speak of God knowing someone from the womb, such as Jeremiah, Thieme is correct in pointing out that the Hebrew is literally "Out from the womb" or "From without the womb" indicating that they were elect from birth when they took the breath of life.

I tend to see a difference between BIOLOGICAL life and the SOUL/SPIRITUAL life. There is biological life at conception but I'm not certain that it is a living soul.

However, I had rather ERR on the safe side. I'm pro-life and anti-abortion because I just can't take hold of the above with 100% certainty.

(9)Can of Worms.... by Jabbok on October 4 07:45 PM

Jabbok - That is a very tenuous position to hold. I don't think you could possibly find a biblical example supporting the separation of biological life from spiritual life. It sounds like Thieme has drawn a principle from a verse that teaches nothing about the origins of life other than Adam's life. Eisegesis at its worst...

(10) by Tim on October 4 07:50 PM

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Issues I Have Been Associated With Recently

The King James Only Controversy : I have been in 3 churches since the Lord was pleased to save me, the last 2 of them as a pastor. The first church was when I was not a pastor, but did teach Sunday School, and preached occasionally. It was a church that used the KJV of the bible, but neither I or the pastor was hardcore KJV Only. The second church was the first church I pastored. For the sake of some long time members in that small church, I used the King James version for sermons, but after I was there a year or two, I began using the NKJV for Scripture Readings. My third church, which is the one I'm pastoring now in Idaho, does not use the KJV. We offically use the NASB for our sermons, and the ESV many times when quoting other scriptures. I know some of my long time Christian friends from Maryland are KJV Only. I am not. I think it is an issue that we can agree to disagree on, but it seems there may be some that cannot. In the not so distant future, I'll post on the Blog why

Christian Discussions and Chem-Trails

What a title, huh? I just didn't want to post these separately :-). This morning as we were sending off our daughter, son-in-law, and grandchildren, there was a Chem-Trail right over us in the sky. Have you heard of Chem-Trails? They are chemicals being put in the sky to supposedly help with so called global warming  :-). Sadly, too many people still think this is a conspiracy theory. For those that do, I recommend you just put that in a search engine and see what comes up and just start reading. They come from the exhaust of commercial airliners, but they are not the same as "contrails." Contrails dissipate and follow the plane. Chem-trails stick around. They have certain chemicals in them (Aluminum and Barium are two of them if I recall correctly) and they just add to the list of toxins that our bodies absorb and endanger our health. If more people would pay attention and communicate with our elected officials at all levels perhaps, we could put a stop to this Lord will

Are Arminian Baptists Legitimate Biblical Churches?

With all the discussion going on about whether Presbyterians are biblical churches because of infant baptism, I would like to ask if we believe that Arminian Baptist churches are legitimate churches? If a Baptist Church, regardless of their affiliation if any, believes in a universal, insufficient atonement by Christ, issuch Baptist Church really a biblical church? And if so, how can we say that it is when it involves the very heart of the gospel in the atonement. Further, how can we say that those Presbyterian churches that believe in a particular, sufficient atonement yet infant baptism are not biblical, yet those that believe in a universal, insufficient atonement yet believers baptism by immersion are biblical churches. Inquiring mind wants to know ;- ). Thanks..... P.S. Still Baptist and thank the Lord for it!