hislittleflower-throughconcrete:
Plan b creates a hostile uterine lining that prevents an already fertilized zygote (human life) from implanting into the uterus – this is abortion.
The official statement from the Vatican:
Not really. Just that if used before ovulation, it doesn’t harm human life that is already fertilized and growing. I may be fuzzy on the details though.
It is clear, therefore, that the proven “anti-implantation” action of the morning-after pill is really nothing other than a chemically induced abortion. It is neither intellectually consistent nor scientifically justifiable to say that we are not dealing with the same thing.
Moreover, it seems sufficiently clear that those who ask for or offer this pill are seeking the direct termination of a possible pregnancy already in progress, just as in the case of abortion. Pregnancy, in fact, begins with fertilization and not with the implantation of the blastocyst in the uterine wall, which is what is being implicitly suggested.
4. Consequently, from the ethical standpoint the same absolute unlawfulness of abortifacient procedures also applies to distributing, prescribing and taking the morning-after pill. All who, whether sharing the intention or not, directly co-operate with this procedure are also morally responsible for it. (source)
Reblog to save a (literal) life!
Leviticus 17:13-14 says that “the life of every creature is its blood”. A zygote, that hasn’t yet implanted, doesn’t have blood, so it doesn’t have life. Yeah it has DNA but so do people’s skin cells.
But, I mean, the Catholic Catechism forbids contraception in general, even before a zygote is conceived, so that wouldn’t matter to it.
Those passages refer to dietary laws of the Isrealites. We don’t eat pre-implanted human beings, nor do we refer to our own young as animals for either eating or sacrifice, so that discounts that to begin with.
It’s referring to dietary laws, and yeah, we don’t eat pre-implanted human beings (or any human beings), but isn’t the statement still relevant? Why is “a creature’s life is in its blood” only in regards to consumption of the creature?
Because that’s the context of the Scripture. It’s dietary law relating to animals, not human beings.
Someone else will have to jump in with theological definitions of life and such because I am busy atm
different anon: can you elaborate on the church and using plan b to prevent pregnancy?
Published
Obscure Fandoms 