Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Birth Control’



Click the image to enlarge.

The graph tells the story, and comes from Chris Kahlenborn, MD. Dr. Kahlenborn is the founder of the Polycarp Research Institute, which has some excellent materials on the link between oral contraceptives and breast cancer, as well as abortion and breast cancer. Dr. Kahlenborn’s excellent book, Breast Cancer : Its Link to Abortion and the Birth Control Pill was written ten years ago and is a perfect source book for non-scientists. It was Dr. Kahlenborn’s stellar book that drew my interest in this subject and took me from DEEP skeptic to a properly educated and enlightened scientist through his presentation of all the scientific literature. Order it here.

This contraceptive fight is going to be a definitive issue in this presidential election. Dr. Kahlenborn, Dr. Lanfranchi, Dr. Brind, Ms. Karen Malec and others have written extensively on these issues, and a thorough and sustained reading of their work is going to be necessary if we are not going to be written off as religious zealots by those in the middle. The place to begin is with Kahlenborn’s book and his website. It’s an easy read for the layperson.

The individuals just mentioned, and myself, are out here doing the education, but now we need voices. Many more voices.

Perhaps many here have used oral contraceptives in the past, or are using them now. It’s never too late to learn what science and medicine are telling us, and to change our lifestyles; if not by the light of faith, then by the light of empiric evidence.

Our women are being ravaged by breast cancer, and while OC use and abortion don’t account for it all, they account for plenty.

I’m here to educate and answer questions. Let’s get going.

See also, World Health Organization Data on Birth Control Pill and Estrogen Replacement Carcinogenicity

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Word comes this week that Cardinal-elect Timothy Dolan received a telephone call from President Obama stating that the Catholic Church would not receive an exemption from the requirement to purchase contraception for its employees. Cardinal Dolan is less than enthused:

“It’s not about contraception. It’s about the right of conscience.”

“The government doesn’t have the right to butt into the internal governance and teachings of the church. This is not a Catholic issue, it’s an American issue. We’re strong on this issue of conscience, and that’s what’s at stake here.”

“While I appreciate his courtesy Friday morning to give me a call with the somber news, I had to tell him I was terribly let down, disappointed and disturbed.”

Yes, Eminence, it is about conscience where Obama and the Federal Government are concerned, but it’s about much, much more within the Catholic Church.

It’s about the contending issues of fidelity and narcissism that have torn the Church to pieces over the past fifty years, reducing a once-powerful and respected constituency to a laughingstock in many political circles. Obama’s actions and posture toward the Church, even the election of such a man, would have been unthinkable twenty-five years ago. His declaration to Cardinal Dolan was less a declaration of war than the final, sickening realization that we have had the terms of our self-incarceration dictated to us by the man who embodies all that we have become as a people.

In my 51 years, I have witnessed Mass attendance drop to 1/3 of what it was when I was a child. Since my twelfth year of life, we have butchered more than 54 million unborn babies, millions of them in their Catholic mothers’ wombs. My generation advanced the sexual revolution and spread AIDS like wildfire. Yes many of us have repented of our earlier sins and have pursued virtue, but many of us have not properly formed our children out of misplaced guilt and mistaken notions of what constitutes hypocrisy.

I can’t remember EVER hearing a homily on contraception or John Paul II’s Theology of the Body. I can count on two hands the number of homilies I have heard on abortion, and none, NONE on what makes for a sacramental marriage.

For as bad as it has been, the sex abuse scandal has been the LEAST damaging issue for the Church. That was a very small fraction of our priests, less than 4%. Our marriages are in free-fall, our children torn apart by divorce.

At every step of the way, rejection of what the Church teaches has been behind the disintegration. At every step of the way, we have elected increasingly radical politicians. There is a causal relationship in that pattern.

There is no “Catholic Vote.”

Enter Obama and Dolan.

Their contention, and our current condition, could be viewed as presaged by Abraham Lincoln nearly two-hundred years ago:

The Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions:
Address Before the Young Men’s Lyceum of Springfield, Illinois
January 27, 1838

This task of gratitude to our fathers, justice to ourselves, duty to posterity, and love for our species in general, all imperatively require us faithfully to perform.

How then shall we perform it?–At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it?– Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never!–All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years.

At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.

We are dying by suicide. We are killing our babies by abortion, and now our elderly in increasing numbers through passive and active euthanasia. The preservation of resources and lifestyle are the leading reasons offered up.

Malignant Narcissism and Hedonism.

That there is reason to believe Obama could actually be re-elected indicates we passed the conscience issue long ago. Conscience was determined in our last presidential election. We elected Obama knowing full-well his declared intent.

This election will determine whether or not we’re content with our chains.

Read Full Post »

From UPI today comes news that a team of researchers, including the Guttmacher Institute, are looking into the issue of abortion’s stigma. Here is a new front in the abortion war. In many ways, it is the vulgar inverse of post-abortion healing ministries such as Lumina and Rachel’s Vineyard.

CINCINNATI, June 29 (UPI) — U.S. and British researchers say they are examining the social issues surrounding abortion and the stigma sometimes associated with terminating a pregnancy.

Danielle Bessett, assistant professor of sociology at the University of Cincinnati, and colleagues at The Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, the University of Cincinnati, the University of California, San Francisco, the Guttmacher Institute in New York, Goldsmiths College, University of London and Center for the Study of Women, University of California, Los Angeles, say there is little research on abortion stigma.

“What does exist focused on women who have had abortions and on their experiences,” Bessett says in a statement. “We’re looking at stigma in a broader context.”

Each researcher is exploring a specific group that could be affected by stigma, such as healthcare providers who perform abortions, supporters of women who have had abortions, the male partner of a woman who had an abortion, women’s experience in pregnancy after previously having had an abortion and women’s self stigma after suffering miscarriage, Bessett say.

“This is new territory into research around the social issues surrounding abortion,” says Bessett, who adds the research will be conducted in both national and international settings, including the United States, Zambia, Nigeria, Tanzania, Mexico, Brazil and countries in Europe.

“Understanding abortion stigma will inform strategies to reduce it, which has direct implications for improving access to care and better health for those whom stigma affects,” the study authors say.

It will be interesting to see what their data have to say. The intent, however, is pretty dark, and is contained in the last line of the report. The researchers wish to reduce stigma with an eye toward improving access to “care,” which is proabort-speak for “abortion.” The goal here is to identify the stigma and then embark on a new campaign of verbal engineering in order to preemptively deaden the collective conscience.

This new campaign will be the most perniciously evil to date. The first wave of verbal engineering sought to distort and deny the scientific truth of the embryo’s development. Sonogram technology has since demolished those lies and shifted the momentum to the pro-life side. Post-abortion healing ministries such as Lumina, Rachel’s Vineyard, and Silent No More have similarly done severe damage to proaborts through the ever-increasing numbers of post-abortive women and men flocking to them for healing.

The cat is out of the bag.

Since the proaborts can no longer deny or suppress the truth, they can only acknowledge that abortion does indeed hurt women, and then begin to spin like mad in the newest attempt at distortion. Knowing their evil, it should come out sounding something like this:

There has been confusion surrounding the stigma of abortion. Abortion is nothing more than a medical procedure that terminates a pregnancy. While it is true that the human embryo is indeed a human animal in its earliest stages of development, much of the stigma comes from the mistaken notion that the human embryo is somehow to be equated with a sentient human being, that is to say, a human person. Reinforcing these notions are religious belief systems which claim that there is no distinction between the single-celled zygote and the newborn baby at its mother’s breast.

In a world increasingly overpopulated, with an environment increasingly devastated by human activity, with climate change accelerating out of control, with famines and wars over economic resources, it is worth pointing out that institutions such as the Catholic Church that encourage indiscriminate reproduction by stigmatizing access to reproductive freedom (contraception and abortion) should be held up to appropriate criticism. Those who advance the cause of responsible reproduction and a greener planet need to be lauded as the true heros and responsible individuals.

The stigma, then, is a misplaced sense of responsibility, both personal and global. The role of the counselor is to reorient the focus of the pregnant woman and abortion clinic staff.

If that sounds too far-fetched, consider this week’s quote from that scientific luminary, former Vice President, Al Gore:

“One of the principle ways of [stabilizing the population] is to empower and educate girls and women,” he said, as reported by the Daily Caller. “You have to have ubiquitous availability of fertility management so women can choose how many children to have, the spacing of the children.”

“You have to lift child survival rates so that parents feel comfortable having small families and most important — you have to educate girls and empower women,” he continued. “And that’s the most powerful leveraging factor, and when that happens, then the population begins to stabilize and societies begin to make better choices and more balanced choices.”

Get the rest of Gore’s story here.

Lost in all of this is the truth of the human person, the truth of who we are. The stigma of abortion will never be programmed out of the human soul. At best, all that will be accomplished is that the researchers will add to people’s confusion, but in the end, the pieces just won’t fit together. We are either integrated, or disintegrated as humans. These folks will add to the disintegration, but will never kill the conscience.

They can’t. We’re made in the image and likeness of God.

Thoughts?

Read Full Post »

The Catholic Church has certainly taken its lumps for speaking out consistently against contraception and where it naturally leads. Today we contrast two quotes. They speak to very different visions of the same human reality, and point to a validation of Rome’s visionaries.. The first is from the Church’s Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The second is from the Alan Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood’s statistician. Both excerpts speak for themselves.

SACRED CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

DECLARATION ON PROCURED ABORTION

15. The movement for the emancipation of women, insofar as it seeks essentially to free them from all unjust discrimination, is on perfectly sound ground.[22] In the different forms of cultural background there is a great deal to be done in this regard. But one cannot change nature. Nor can one exempt women, any more than men, from what nature demands of them. Furthermore, all publicly recognized freedom is always limited by the certain rights of others.

16. The same must be said of the claim to sexual freedom. If by this expression one is to understand the mastery progressively acquired by reason and by authentic love over instinctive impulse, without diminishing pleasure but keeping it in its proper place – and in this sphere this is the only authentic freedom – then there is nothing to object to. But this kind of freedom will always be careful not to violate justice. If; on the contrary, one is to understand that men and women are “free” to seek sexual pleasure to the point of satiety, without taking into account any law or the essential orientation of sexual life to its fruits of fertility,[23] then this idea has nothing Christian in it. It is even unworthy of man. In any case it does not confer any right to dispose of human life – even if embryonic- or to suppress it on the pretext that it is burdensome.

18. We know what seriousness the problem of birth control can assume for some families and for some countries. That is why the last Council and subsequently the encyclical “Humanae Vitae” of July 25, 1968, spoke of “responsible parenthood.”[24] What we wish to say again with emphasis, as was pointed out in the conciliar constitution “Gaudium et Spes,” in the encyclical “Populorum Progressio” and in other papal documents, is that never, under any pretext, may abortion be resorted to, either by a family or by the political authority, as a legitimate means of regulating births.[25] The damage to moral values is always a greater evil for the common good than any disadvantage in the economic or demographic order.

{The Bishops warned us that contraception took us one long walk down the road to abortion. They were ridiculed as clueless old celibates.}

Then, there is this from Guttmacher:

Contraceptive use is a key predictor of women’s recourse to abortion. The very small group of American women who are at risk of experiencing an unintended pregnancy but are not using contraceptives account for almost half of all abortions. Many of these women did not think they would get pregnant or had concerns about contraceptive methods. The remainder of abortions occur among the much larger group of women who were using contraceptives in the month they became pregnant. Many of these women report difficulty using contraceptives consistently.

This is quite an admission by Guttmacher. The people who hand out the birth control pills like candy indicate elsewhere that 54% of all women presenting for abortion were using contraception in the month in which they became pregnant. In the face of their colossal failure, they claim that what is needed is more contraception.

I love my Bishops.

Read Full Post »

We’ve been discussing it here for weeks (click ‘Breast Cancer’ in the Categories sidebar). Now the National Cancer Institute Admits the link between Breast Cancer, abortion and the pill.

Update and Correction: A commenter in the comboxes rightly points out that NCI has not changed its position. I should have stated that this same researcher who led the charge against a link by prematurely pronouncing on two longitudinal studies now finds herself betrayed by her own data.

From Lifesite News:

WASHINGTON, DC, January 7, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – U.S. National Cancer Institute researcher Dr. Louise Brinton, who was the chief organizer of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) workshop in 2003 that persuaded women that it was “well established” that “abortion is not associated with increased breast cancer risk,” has reversed her position and now admits that abortion and oral contraceptives raise breast cancer risks.

An April 2009 study by Jessica Dolle et al. of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center examining the relationship between oral contraceptives (OCs) and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), an aggressive form of breast cancer associated with high mortality, in women under age 45, contained an admission from Dr. Brinton and her colleagues that abortion raises breast cancer risk by 40%.

The study found that “a statistically significant 40% increased risk for women who have abortions” exists, and that a ” 270% increased risk of triple negative breast cancer (an aggressive form of breast cancer associated with high mortality) among those who used oral contraceptives while under age 18 and a 320% increased risk of triple negative breast cancer among recent users (within 1-5 years) of oral contraceptives,” also exists.

This is good news and bad news. It’s bad news for women who have swallowed the lie that abortion and contraceptive sex are perfectly acceptable choices, without consequences.

It’s good news because women need to understand who stands for truth, who stands for their best interests. It isn’t the Democrat Party.

It’s also good news because we can begin to exert some significant leverage in restoring a Culture of Life and a Civilization of Love.

Follow the other articles on this by clicking ‘Breast Cancer’ in the “Categories” sidebar panel.

Read Full Post »

Read about it in the New York Times, October 22, 1913.

Read Full Post »

The Fallen Comrade Table

“For you deal here above all with human life, and human life is sacred; no one may dare make an attempt upon it. Respect for life, even with regard to the great problem of the birth rate, must find here in your Assembly its highest affirmation and its most rational defence. Your task is to ensure that there is enough bread on the tables of mankind, and not to encourage an artificial control of births, which would be irrational, in order to diminish the number of guests at the banquet of life.”

-Pope Paul VI to the UN General Assembly, 4 October 1965

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: