Plan B: B for bad idea
Shell Game/credit: The Hamptons
New York Times reporter Gardiner Harris reported this morning, with the help of St. Louis Post-Dispatch medical writer Blythe Bernhard, Wednesday’s news concerning the FDA decision to make available Plan B morning-after pills to seventeen-year-olds.
There are arguments against this FDA decision, of course, some of them outlined in the story. Harris soon reminds us, for instance, that “[s]ince November 2006, when it became widely available to women 18 and older without a prescription, Plan B has had no measurable effect on the nation’s abortion or teenage pregnancy rates.”
So, one wonders, why would seventeen-year-olds go to the trouble of getting Plan B when the eighteen-and-older crowd can’t be bothered?
Sam Lee finds it disturbing that no parental consent is needed, nor is there a prescription. No oversight, in other words. Wendy Wright (Concerned Women for America) agrees, concerned about the “safety of minors”. Minors left all alone with their rights, I might add.
The morning-after pill is more problematic than this, however. A little P-D sidebar whispers that “it also may prevent the egg from implanting into the uterus.” Surely what the politically correct writer means to say is “the fertilized egg”, the preferred term used by the pro-choice crowd when they describe the living, developing human embryo.
In other words, the morning-after pill can kill the human embryo.
We’ve discussed on these pages the decades-long attempt to redefine pregnancy (See Definition of pregnancy: a history from the June 4, 2008 Civil Religion blog site.) Decades ago the definition of pregnancy used to be cut and dried: the period of time from fertilization (then also known as conception) i.e., the joining of the sperm and ovum until expulsion from the uterus.
But, for some time now, in more than some quarters, pregnancy has morphed into a second definition: implantation.
The word conception, too, once synonymous with fertilization, can now masquerade as implantation.
Here’s a sampling of what I found today in the OneLook online dictionary service which compiles answers from scores of online dictionaries. All are definitions of conception:
First, Onelook’s Quick Definition:
noun: the act of becoming pregnant; fertilization of an ovum by a spermatozoon
For contrast, Mondofacto, an online medical dictionary:
The onset of pregnancy, marked by implantation of the blastocyst, the formation of a viable zygote.
But Medicinenet, also a medical dictionary tries to have it both ways:
Conception: 1. The union of the sperm and the ovum. Synonymous with fertilization.
2. The onset of pregnancy, marked by implantation of the blastocyst into the endometrium.
And then there’s Merck’s Dorland’s:
conception (kәn-sep´shәn) an imprecise term denoting the formation of a viable zygote.
The point is this: the pro-choice crowd wants to convince us to accept their redefinition of pregnancy and conception. It would be so practical: we could dispatch a crisis pregnancy without ever uttering that ugly word abortion.
They don’t want us thinking about that tumbling, blossoming, unrepeatable embryo who is simply searching for a home in his mother’s womb.
They’re betting our perceived self interest will keep us from looking too closely at this wordplay that is nothing more than verbal sleight-of-hand, a confidence trick, a shell game.
Sherry Tyree, 66, a graduate of John Burroughs School and Washington University, is a founding member (1984) and Vice President of Women for Faith & Family, a national Catholic women's organization that supports and defends traditional church teachings. Sherry is married to Dr. Donald A. Tyree, professor emeritus, School of Business, St. Louis University. 
Blah Blah Blah, Abortion…. just let it go already. Not everyone has the same belief system that you have and they should be free to practice just as you are. No one complains about the vast amount of Catholics being born around the world due to their belief that “every sperm is sacred”. Others may think that is an incredibly wreckless, selfish and out-dated belief…but no one is trying to stop you. If you don’t like the destruction of an “embryo” (whatever you definition of one is) than don’t destroy them, but let the rest of the masses do as they wish. Really, there are more than enough humans already…most of which are morons (even me)and all of which are taking up valuable resources.
Wow, Sherry, it’s hard to argue with the Theology of Monty Python that the Bard delivers with such eloquence.
In spite of the moral questions raised by this, I have a different question.
Why are 17 year olds allowed to make medical decisions on their own? Should they now be allowed to get tattoos on demand? How about signing their own permission slips? Can they now enter into legal contracts? How about criminally charging all 17 year olds as adults? Can they now buy cigarettes and pornography?
The reasoning that their parents should not know their sex lives is not compelling enough a reason to permit this. Either 17 year olds are legally adults or they are not.
Wowee, I disagree with Sherry on Plan B in general, but I’m with you on the definition of a legal adult.
Now, in most states, a minor CAH make their own doctor appointments, buy plane tickets to anywhere, and many other things. It has always bothered me that a minor needs parental permission for an ear piercing but not for an abortion. That’s been a twist that I’ve never really understood.
What the heck, let’s lift the cigarette and alcohol sales bans to minors as well. Of course, we could also put 12 year olds in adult prison for life. (oh, we do that already).
bard,
So if I don’t think slavery is wrong, but you do, I can have one and you can’t?
Glad you don’t run the country. I can’t take this beligerant illogical argument that people try to make.
Actually, Sherry, it’s only been the last 50 years or less that medical people have actually been able to look at the whole situation and try to define the terms.
For centuries “conceived” meant the entire process from intercourse through the first 6 weeks of pregnancy. Women didn’t (couldn’t) know that they WERE pregnant until several weeks had passed.
Now, we know what the whole process is, and specific terms had to be developed to define the various discreet events. It’s not a nefarious plot, it’s the development of language to describe in discrete terms what was historically a mystery.
If anyone on this space is game, I’d like to propose a serious conversation about two things that are really in the background of this whole debate: What is it that makes a human, human? And, when does this living thing we call at various times a blastocyst, an embryo, a fetus, an infant, a child, an adolescent, an adult BECOME human? Can we do this without slamming each other for differing opinions? Can we find historical references to thinkers who have struggled with these questions?
I think that the answer to the dilemma lies truly in the answer to those difficult questions.
I’m going to start with this statement: LIFE began once on the earth. The spermatazoa and the ovum are, by all definitions, living things. To be precise in our language, then, “life” does NOT begin at conception. Two living things join at conception to form another living thing. That is not open for debate. The questions, again, are, what does it mean to be human, and when does that happen?
Bard, I respect your opinion because I understand that not everyone is religious and many are atheists and of course to not respect the pro-life position nor value all life in the same way that religious people do and think people have the right to a choice.
But what upsets me is when Claire McCaskill and other Democrats vote against the Coburn Amendment to FOCA NOT giving a CHOICE to Catholic or Christian hospitals to opt out of performing abortions on the basis of their religious conscience.
Apparently she and others don’t believe that the abortion providers should also be allowed a choice. That is hypocritcal and very sad.
Excellent post Sherry. I appreciate your vigilance is rooting out the abortionists and their tactics in our culture. Please continue to expose these babykilling murderers for what they are.
For us, life is what we say it is. God’s view is God’s view. I believe the creator of life has the highest regard and commitment to life.
I am inspired by the Catholic church’s commitment to life.
I am not inspired by the use of it to condemn others.
The Billings Method: Controlling Fertility without Drugs or Devices
“The Billings Method will be recognized in medical history as one of the greatest discoveries of the century” –Thomas W. Hilgers, Professor of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Omaha, NE
The method fosters communication and harmony between a husband and wife, strengthens the family, the basic unit of society. It is becoming more and more popular as women realise the side effects of contraception and are returning to nature to look for the answers!
This book is targeted towards Catholics and is based on research from the 1950’s. It does not include the basal temperature method, one of the most important methods for tracking fertility patterns. Unless you are Catholic, I recommend getting another book on this topic.
PS.. I did get pregnant during the time of practicing this method but it is because we chose to cheat on my most fertile day. An Anniversary and a few drinks will impair judgement like that so be careful…lol