tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1995978809185173431.post1747820087817065110..comments2022-10-23T00:32:21.496-07:00Comments on JGBernasSJ Blogs: LEVELS OF DISCOURSE IN RH DEBATEFather Bernas Blogshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06485358661393132559noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1995978809185173431.post-86498451876274009552011-06-08T11:50:34.309-07:002011-06-08T11:50:34.309-07:00Willy J, I agree with your comment 100%.
Fr Ber...Willy J, I agree with your comment 100%. <br /><br />Fr Bernas, with all due respect, modern birth control pills (and IUD) do cause abortion, and this fact is backed by numerous scientific studies. <br /><br />A birth control pill does three things. First, it prevents the egg cell from being released in order to avoid fertilization. Second, it thickens the mucus in the uterus to make it difficult for the sperm cell to swim to the egg cell, again preventing fertilization. And third, it thins out the uterine wall to keep the blastocyst (an early form of the embryo) from implanting itself. The first two mechanisms prevent fertilization. The third mechanism prevents implantation of the early embryo and is therefore abortifacient. There is no choosing which mechanism one would like to prefer because the pill does all three actions on the woman's body. <br /><br />Most people are familiar only with the first mechanism of the birth control pill because that's what it was known for when it first became available on the market. Unfortunately, with all the advancement in technology, birth control pills are now formulated to be more "effective" in preventing pregnancy. If you go to the drug manufacturers' websites or even read the inserts in the birth control pills' packaging, you will see it there. However, those without knowledge on these things do not understand what the insert says (if they ever bother to read it), so they think it's OK to use contraceptives. <br /><br />There are some contraceptives that can be used as a "morning after pill" (owing to the birth control pill's third mechanism) by simply increasing the dosage. I think we'll both agree that the "morning after pill" is abortifacient. These contraceptives are available OTC here in the Philippines, believe it or not.<br /><br />Let's remember that just because FDA considers these drugs as legal and medically safe, we have to take what the FDA said at face value. The information about contraceptives is out there. It is my hope that you (and other RH Bill supporters) would take the time to make your own research and verify if what I said about contraceptives is true.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1995978809185173431.post-81575499467921301872011-06-03T00:42:49.260-07:002011-06-03T00:42:49.260-07:00"There are claims, for instance, that there a...<i>"There are claims, for instance, that there are contraceptive drugs in the market that cause abortion or are carcinogenic. What I would like to see is an authoritative identification of the drugs that are said to be abortifacient or carcinogenic so that they can be withdrawn from the market or their use subjected to medical regulation. So far I have seen only one drug identified as abortifacient, namely postinor. This was withdrawn from the market by the Food and Drug and Administration. But the identification of drugs claimed to be abortifacient or carcinogenic should be authoritative in a manner that is fair to drug manufacturers and to those who rely on them for legitimate medical purposes." </i><br /><br />Dear Fr Bernas,<br /><br />I am aware that you have asserted time and again that life starts at fertilization, both from the Catholic as well as from the Constitutional standpoint. So it is not a Catholic position alone as it also has a firm basis in the Constitution. As far as "authoritative indentification" of abortifacients are concerned, it is obvious that you are referring to the FDA. I believe delagating the issue to the judgment of the FDA should not give us any comfort with respect to its relevance to the RH bill. May I respectfully point out that HB 4244 contains a repealing clause: <i> SEC. 31. Repealing Clause. All other laws, decrees, orders, issuances, rules and regulations which are inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, amended or modified accordingly.</i><br /><br />Therefore it is evident that the bill intends to dictate the parameters of FDA's contraceptive regulatory guidelines. We all know that contrary to faith and science, the RH sponsors have insisted on implantation as the start of life, rather than fertilization. The very premise of the RH bill opens the floodgates to abortifacients fo all natures, but with a twisted definition that is dictated by the RH bill, with the expected blessings of FDA to which you would rather delegate the authority over life and death if I read your piece right. FDA does not have the authority over the life and death of the human at its earliest stage. That belongs to God alone, and FDA is not God.WillyJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12887272682669742570noreply@blogger.com