The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Is contraception entirely seperable from abortion, on a moral scale?

Before you just judge the title, let me explain. Whichever side you stand on abortion, it is a morally sensitive issue, that we all agree on. My question is, contraception is portrayed as entirely separate, a routine thing that everybody should do without guilt, a signed and sealed conclusion according to received wisdom, even in many, perhaps most people, who have trouble with abortion.
But, and again I would ask this to people whatever side of the abortion debate you are on, regardless of your view of contraception, is it entirely morally separable from abortion? With the abortion, the argument is how far you've gone and that you are now ceasing something right to live, which is either a life or too close to being one to stop it. Couldn't this very logic, which causes the debate about how early abortions should be allowed, be applied to sex and contraception? If you have gotten that far to intimacy and want to ejaculate between a womans legs, are you then not stopping the union of that sperm and egg in a way that could be deemed equally complex and problematic as an issue, as abortion? That could spark a debate about the ceasing of a life and a natural process. If the very people who opposed abortion were happy to have the higher birth rates that ensue, should they not also be consistent in opposing contraception?

Scroll to see replies

I'm pro choice, but contraception and abortion are very separate. Comparing sperm cells to fertilised eggs is also stupid.
Original post by minor bun engine
I'm pro choice, but contraception and abortion are very separate. Comparing sperm cells to fertilised eggs is also stupid.


Ok let me ask you another question. Is there something unnatural about getting as far as shoving your penis into a woman, trying hard to create pleasure, ejaculating right into her as hard as you can and yet doing all of this with a latex device on you only invented a blip of time ago in terms of human history, in order to stop that sperm doing what it previously would have done for all of human history?
Original post by SaucissonSecCy
Ok let me ask you another question. Is there something unnatural about getting as far as shoving your penis into a woman, trying hard to create pleasure, ejaculating right into her as hard as you can and yet doing all of this with a latex device on you only invented a blip of time ago in terms of human history, in order to stop that sperm doing what it previously would have done for all of human history?


Well yes, by any reasonable definition it is "unnatural", but until it has actually fertilised an egg and created a unique and distinct set of human DNA which will grow into a baby, it can't logically be compared to an abortion.
Original post by SaucissonSecCy
Ok let me ask you another question. Is there something unnatural about getting as far as shoving your penis into a woman, trying hard to create pleasure, ejaculating right into her as hard as you can and yet doing all of this with a latex device on you only invented a blip of time ago in terms of human history, in order to stop that sperm doing what it previously would have done for all of human history?


By that argument you might as well ask about the moral issues involved in taking antibiotics to cure an infection (artificially preventing an organism from living its natural life), cutting your hair and fingernails, wearing spectacles, or having a blood transfusion.
Original post by Good bloke
By that argument you might as well ask about the moral issues involved in taking antibiotics to cure an infection (artificially preventing an organism from living its natural life), cutting your hair and fingernails, wearing spectacles, or having a blood transfusion.


It's not quite the same. I'm comparing it to abortion, with regard to a human life.
Of course you could extend it to all 'natural' processes, we could get into animal and insect rights then, and enter a whole new debate. I'm talking about this from the perspective of a human life being the priority, and asking a question regarding contraception's assumed separateness from abortion. Let's not stray endlessly from the premise of the thread.
I would say they're separate morally.

I'm on the pill and will be until I'm ready to have children. Using contraception doesn't just prevent pregnancy, the use of condoms also prevents the spread of STIs, both of which I'd rather prevent. By choosing to use contraception, a person is protecting themselves and the other person from unwanted pregnancies or STIs. Personally, I'd say that's being morally responsible and is something most people would not have an issue with.

However, abortion is an option available to those who either have not used contraception or it is has been used but not worked (split condom, forgotten pill).

Abortion is something a lot of people would not consider if they have an unplanned pregnancy, but many people consider contraception in order to prevent a situation where abortion would be discussed.



Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Sophi12
I would say they're separate morally.

I'm on the pill and will be until I'm ready to have children. Using contraception doesn't just prevent pregnancy, the use of condoms also prevents the spread of STIs, both of which I'd rather prevent. By choosing to use contraception, a person is protecting themselves and the other person from unwanted pregnancies or STIs. Personally, I'd say that's being morally responsible and is something most people would not have an issue with.

However, abortion is an option available to those who either have not used contraception or it is has been used but not worked (split condom, forgotten pill).

Abortion is something a lot of people would not consider if they have an unplanned pregnancy, but many people consider contraception in order to prevent a situation where abortion would be discussed.



Posted from TSR Mobile


Isn't the pill kind of a very early stage abortive process?
I think it's a continuum between late to early stages of abortion, and then forms of contraception. They are not discrete categories.
Original post by SaucissonSecCy
It's not quite the same. I'm comparing it to abortion,


You asked the second question, which is unrelated to abortion, and I answered it. If you didn't want an answer you shouldn't have asked it.
Original post by Good bloke
You asked the second question, which is unrelated to abortion, and I answered it. If you didn't want an answer you shouldn't have asked it.


I didn't ask it to you, did I, I asked it specifically to him. Oh don't want a bitchfight by the way, so let's get back on topic.
Original post by SaucissonSecCy
Isn't the pill kind of a very early stage abortive process?
I think it's a continuum between late to early stages of abortion, and then forms of contraception. They are not discrete categories.


No!!
The pill tricks your body into thinking you are pregnant so that you don't release an egg, so an egg can't be fertilised so you can't get pregnant. Definitely different from abortion.

Abortion is getting rid of a fertilised egg that could become a fetus then a baby. The pill doesn't do this!!


Posted from TSR Mobile
OP, how much do you actually know about how all the methods of contraception work and how abortions work?

Also, what is your stance on the morning after pill?

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Moonstruck16
OP, how much do you actually know about how all the methods of contraception work and how abortions work?

Also, what is your stance on the morning after pill?

Posted from TSR Mobile


I don't think the OP knows how hormonal contraception works seeing as he is comparing the pill to abortions?!?


Posted from TSR Mobile
Yes.
Original post by SaucissonSecCy
Isn't the pill kind of a very early stage abortive process?
I think it's a continuum between late to early stages of abortion, and then forms of contraception. They are not discrete categories.


So you start a thread about contraception, yet you don't even know how it works.

You have reached new levels of stupidity.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by DiddyDec
So you start a thread about contraception, yet you don't even know how it works.

You have reached new levels of stupidity.

Posted from TSR Mobile


Don't forget the asking of questions to which he doesn't want the answer.
Original post by Sophi12
No!!
The pill tricks your body into thinking you are pregnant so that you don't release an egg, so an egg can't be fertilised so you can't get pregnant. Definitely different from abortion.

Abortion is getting rid of a fertilised egg that could become a fetus then a baby. The pill doesn't do this!!


Posted from TSR Mobile


Ok, but do you feel totally comfortable with your body being 'tricked' from it's natural responses like that?
Original post by Moonstruck16
OP, how much do you actually know about how all the methods of contraception work and how abortions work?

Also, what is your stance on the morning after pill?

Posted from TSR Mobile


I'm a bit uneasy with it. Someone used it with me one time. And it makes me uneasy how casual attitudes are to this in general, uncaring I think.
Original post by SaucissonSecCy
Ok, but do you feel totally comfortable with your body being 'tricked' from it's natural responses like that?


Why wouldn't they? Many medicinal drugs make changes in the body that wouldn't naturally occur...
Original post by SaucissonSecCy
Ok, but do you feel totally comfortable with your body being 'tricked' from it's natural responses like that?


The body's natural response to a bacterial infection might be to die. Are you saying that you would refuse antibiotics if you suffered from one as you don't want to trick your body into coping with the infection? Would you decline vaccinations which, again, trick your body into immunity?

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you