A question I was asked recently elicited this reply.
It is not a sin to use birth control pills BUT if that use prevents a viable zygote (embryo) implanting in the womb, doesn’t that constitute an abortion?
Since a zygote is a potential human being, hasn’t a human being been killed?
Whereas once there was a support system that (I know it wasn’t ideal) enabled young girls to say ‘no’ and identified the ‘easy’ girls from the ‘good’ girls, there isn’t even a sisterhood of peers today that will support a girl’s higher moral stance.
The pill has not liberated girls and women – it has removed from them the ability to create a mystery and desire in the man of their dreams by showing that she has the qualities (loyalty, honour, prudence, virtue and self respect) that he is looking for.
Divorce is rife today NOT because it is easier but because men no longer feel it is necessary to capture and nurture a mate.
The pill has freed men from a monogamous existence because they can now have virtually risk free sex with any willing female leaving his wife with no weapons to fight for him (if she still wants to keep him).
“Females in general, tend to think that sex is the only way to get or keep a guy” – what a sad reflection of the times we live in. In my day, the with-holdiing of sex ensured that the female could judge the value of the man by his attitude towards her virtue – and her virtue made her of much more value to the man.
The medicinal use of oestrogen has been well established and it is only the multiple choices of pill configuration that makes it easier for doctors, today, to prescribe a proprietory product to ease period pains, hormonal imbalances or simply stop the menstrual cycle temporarily.
Abortion is not a means of birth control that should be seen as the first resort but is the pill much better from a moral stand point? Mechanical means of contraception may not have the ease of the pill, nor the spontaneity but therein lies the first line of defence of the unwilling female.