No Room for Contraception

UK: Parental Consent for Contraception to be Debated

2007-03-14T11:59:00.000-07:00

Our blog has moved to ContraceptionBlog.com.

Angela Watkinson, a Member of Parliament, is presenting a parental consent bill on contraception and abortion to the House of Commons.

Watkinson stated "The first thing they learn may be when their children are reported to have some form of sexually transmitted disease." She further stated "People constantly call on parents to take more responsibility for their young - but they can hardly be blamed if the Department of Health promotes a policy which deliberately exempts them from being able to protect their children."

Here are some excerpts from the article Inform parents if children want contraception, says MP:

David Paton of Nottingham University Business School said that evidence from regions with laws requiring parents to be informed before abortion on minors suggested a considerable decrease in conceptions, abortions and sexually transmitted infections. He added that there was no evidence that parental involvement laws would result in minors turning to back street abortionists.

Trevor Stammers, a senior tutor in general practice at St George's University of London, added: "Up to 80% of unplanned conceptions are due to failed contraception." "Over a 22-year period working as a GP, I had not seen a single case due to any other cause until the past year or so." "With a 15% condom failure rate, condoms can only be said to delay pregnancy, not prevent it, especially in teenagers."

It seems that we should be having this same debate here in the U.S. According to the study Analyzing the Effect of State Legislation on the Incidence of Abortion Among Minors, data indicates that parental involvement laws are effective in reducing the abortion rate for minors. (On that note, the author of this study, Professor Michael New, will be giving a lecture on this subject in DC this Thursday, the 15th of March).

I suspect that parental consent laws for contraception and abortion, coupled with abstinence-only eduction, can further reduce the pregnancy, abortion, and sexually transmitted disease infection rates among minors. But it has been difficult to enact parental involvement laws for abortion in the US, and it is probably going to be even harder to enact such laws for contraceptives.

As long as groups such as Planned Parenthood continue to receive federal funding under Title X, it is going to be hard to pass such measures in many states. Title X funding provides financial and operational stability for Planned Parenthood, allowing them to expand their efforts to include defeating parental consent initiatives.

Despite the potential difficulties in passing parental involvement laws, it's time to have this same debate here in the US.

Emergency Contraception: Study shows No Decrease in Pregnancy Rates..

2006-12-30T20:37:00.000-08:00

Please note that our blog has moved to Contraceptionblog.com !

Serge over at the Life Training Institute points out that another study shows that emergency contraception (EC) has not decreased pregnancy rates.

Pro-abortion advocates claimed that EC would prevent abortions, but it hasn't. They campaigned for EC on the basis of a false dilemena - that it was either emergency contraception or abortion. They accused the pro-life movement as contributing to abortions by opposing EC.

Obviously if EC hasn't reduced pregnancy rates, it hasn't reduced the abortion rates either.

The wishful thinking on the part of the EC advocates hasn't translated into results.

The report concludes that "This intensive strategy to enhance access to emergency contraceptive pills substantially increased use of the method and had no adverse impact on risk of sexually transmitted infections. However, it did not show benefit in decreasing pregnancy rates."

Intensive strategies, such as The The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' (ACOG) "ask me" campaign, have been a total flop. And these are the experts who the public is supposed to trust on these issues?

It's not too surprising though, since science takes a back seat when it comes to contraception and abortion for organizations like the ACOG. After all, they led the effort to redefine conception and pregnancy for nothing other than social reasons.

(On that note, here is a brochure from The No Room for Contraception Campaign: Pregnancy, Contraception, and Abortion: Frequently Asked Questions - Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view...)

In the debate over Plan B, the media bought into the arguments of the EC advocates without question. Maybe now they will start to question the credibilty of these "experts"???

The Contraceptive Mentality, Men, and Abortion

2006-12-15T09:45:00.000-08:00

(Our blog has moved to ContraceptionBlog.com)

It's no secret that men have been strong advocates of the contraceptive mentality, which holds that sex is for pleasure and not procreation. It's also no secret that when contraception fails, men pressure women to abort.

While abortion may "solve" the problem pregnancy in the short term, it doesn't resolve the problem of lost fatherhood in the long term. Regret and sorrow linger on for years and decades after a father's child is aborted.

"Happy Birthday", a rap song performed by Flipsyde, tells a tale of a father's regret about his aborted child. What's notable about this song is the following verse:

"if she don't love children then we can't party"

While Flipsyde misses the point that pre-marital sex is unhealthy, he is on to something here: Pregnancy is a very real possibility, and if a woman would abort an unexpected child, he wouldn't get sexually involved with them.

Flipsyde's recognition of the possibility of contraceptive failure, pregnancy, and abortion resulted in a mental and behavioral change on his part. This appears to be a weakening of the contraceptive mentality that has had a grip on our society for over four decades.

I wonder if Flipsyde is alone here, or is this a growing trend among men?

"Happy Birthday" can be viewed on youtube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5A5sh8IMeQ

Campus Psychiatrist Reveals harms of ‘Sexual Choices’

2006-12-14T16:27:00.000-08:00

Today’s Wall Street Opinion Journal discusses the book "Unprotected: A Campus Psychiatrist Reveals How Political Correctness in Her Profession Endangers Every Student"

In today's opinion piece, Danielle Crittenden describes how 'Unprotected' details the negative effects of the sexual choices made by young women, and how professionals are unwilling to acknowledge them.

“Unfortunately, the young women described in ‘Unprotected’ have fallen victim to one of the few personal troubles that our caring professions refuse to treat or even acknowledge: They have been made miserable by their ‘sexual choices.’ And on that subject, few modern doctors dare express a word of judgment”

This is so true – I wonder how many doctors ask their young patients if they should be having sex in the first place? How many women feel guilty and experience depression as a result of their ‘sexual choices’?
Crittenden concludes the article by pointing out the author chose to remain anonymous, for obvious reasons.

“The author of this vivid and urgent book has published it anonymously precisely because she fears that if her employers and colleagues heard her unwelcome views, they would judge her negatively--and punish her, personally and professionally. The anonymity, however understandable, is a shame: Her cause could use a visible and vocal crusader.”

I haven't read the book, but it does sound interesting. Take a look at the publisher's notes:

Publisher’s Notes:

“Radical social agendas have taken over campus health and counseling, and it’s making students sick. Dr Anonymous should know: she’s treated over 2000 students at a prestigious university and seen first hand how the anything-goes, women-are-just like- men, “safer-sex” agenda harms our sons and daughters. After years of hesitation, she’s speaking up.”

“In Unprotected you will learn: About an Ivy League university’s health website that okays risky behaviors including S&M, “swinging”, and bestiality. How campus health centers hound students to stop smoking, eat right, get enough sleep, and wear sunscreen, but tacitly approve of promiscuity, and whitewash the consequences of sexually transmitted infections”

“Parents, educators, and health providers are all disturbed and mystified by the epidemic of sexually transmitted infections on our college campuses, as well as the rampant depression, suicidal behavior, eating disorders, and cutting. Dr Anonymous has seen it all. The solution, she contends, is not Zoloft or condoms. Instead, she urges her colleagues to stop feeding students platitudes about diet and exercise and misinformation about “protection”. What campus counselors and health providers must do, she argues, is tell uncomfortable, politically-incorrect truths, especially to young patients in their most vulnerable and confusing moments.”

Birth Control is Harmful Billboards Revisited - again

2006-11-28T14:22:00.000-08:00

It seems that there is some confusion about who placed the "Birth Control is Harmful" billboards around the Diocese of Tulsa.
The Respect Life office of the Tulsa diocese placed these billboards and sponsored the website respectlifetulsa.org .

If you look closely at the bilboard, notice the site listed is not BirthControlisHarmful.com

We like the concept here at NRFC so we decided to launch our own secular version, separate and distinct from the effort in Tulsa. We secured the domain name BirthControlisHarmful.com and put our own material up there.

Bloggers should be sure to check their facts first -- after all, they could have contacted NRFC to find out what the scoop is..

Clinic Photos Incriminate Child Rapist - Rapists Will Now Resort to "Plan B"

2006-11-24T09:31:00.000-08:00

Here at NRFC, we've maintained that emergency contraception will allow child rapists to cover up their crimes. Though this man used an abortion clinic to cover up his crime, in the future people like him will use "Plan B" instead.

A 41 year old man accused of rape by an underage teen has been arrested after photos placed his car at an abortion clinic.

Members of a Christian ministry which has been photographing clinic workers, physicians, and clients for 14 years provided the evidence of a cover-up of the rape to a police detective.

Angela Long, a member of this ministry, said the following in a WorldNetDaily article:

"I remembered how upset she was, and pleading with him (the suspect) not to make her go in," she said. "The detective asked, 'Do you have the car?' 'Yes.' 'Do you have the plate?' 'Yes.' And I read it to him."

"And in the background I heard the clicking of the handcuffs," Angela Michael said, along with the comment "We've got him." The suspect now is being held on $75,000 bond on counts being developed in two counties, authorities said.

This man used a forced abortion to cover up his crime and got caught. Unfortunately for many young girls, over the counter access to Plan B emergency contraception will provide child rapists with "get out of jail" tickets.

With Plan B being available over the counter, these men will resort to their own "Plan B" to prevent getting caught. They won't have to force underage girls into abortion clinics or drive across state lines to avoid parental consent laws any more -- they can just force the victims to take Plan B emergency contraception (>and possibly cause an early abortion). No evidence, no remains of a dead baby to test for DNA, nothing.

In the future, it won't be surprising if Plan B becomes known as the "child rape" drug.
----------------------------
Our blog has moved! Our blog is now located at www.ContraceptionBlog.com

Technorati claim

2006-11-19T20:17:00.001-08:00

Technorati Profile

Plan B gives new meaning to "pick your poison"

2006-11-15T18:23:00.000-08:00

Well, girls - if you're 18 or older you no longer have to get a prescription to pump tons of hormones into your body as a back-up plan for irresponsible sex. Oh wait - Plan B IS (supposedly) the responsible thing to do after having irresponsible sex. Silly me...

According to the Boston Herald, Plan B is now available over-the-counter for use among those who are 18 or older. It's really frightening to think about women using such high doses of hormones willy-nilly without knowing the long-term effects. My suspicion is that any risky side effects of regular oral contraceptives (increased risk of blood clots, stroke, exacerbation of diabetic conditions, not to mention the breast cancer link) are exponentiated by Plan B. Seriously, are they going to regulate the frequency with which women use this potentially toxic drug?? And this says nothing of the other consequences, such as potential abortion if conception has occurred....

Contraception and Society: Evangelicals and Contraception

2006-11-14T14:43:00.000-08:00

Over the past decades, contraception has had a tremendous impact on society, especially on the various Christian Churches.

For quite some time the Catholic Church has been the only denomination that takes a strong stance against contraception. It wasn’t always that way - prior to the Lambeth conference, mainline denominations were united in the rejection of contraception. Lambeth unlocked the door to contraceptive use, and the advent of the pill opened the floodgates to the eventual acceptance of contraception by non-Catholic denominations.

Since the late 50s, most of the non-Catholic denominations have approved the use of contraception. While some Churches do not outright approve of contraception, they tolerate its use. This may be changing, due to a shift among young evangelicals – more and more are realizing that something isn’t quite right with contraception.

Evangelicals are discovering that contraception fuels the demand for abortion, harms women’s health, and has had a negative impact on society.

Unlike Catholics, evangelicals tend to believe that the bible does not condemn contraception. If nothing else, they believe that the bible discourages it by the teaching that large families are a blessing, a ‘full quiver’.

In covering this issue, the media has focused on the ‘full quiver’ aspect, but have largely missed the boat -- the reason for the evangelical shift on has to do with the relationship between abortion and contraception.

Evangelicals have seen, after three decades of legalized abortion, how contraception has both led to an increase in and a sustained demand for abortion.

An article in Newsweek attributes this change in attitude to “cross pollination” with Catholics in the pro-life movement:

“One possible explanation for the shift in thinking: the alignment between evangelicals and Catholics on some social issues, says Brad Wilcox, assistant professor of sociology at the University of Virginia. ‘The increasing cooperation of Catholic and evangelical leaders on abortion and same sex marriage has allowed some cross-pollination where evangelical leaders are starting to become familiar with Catholic thinking on the family.’ “

It will be interesting to see how far the rejection of contraception will spread through the various denominations.

Author's note: For those who think merely presenting an issue regarding contraception and religion makes NRFC a religious effort or group, just consider that the secular media is also presenting this issue. Does that make the secular media religious? No, and neither does it make NRFC religious either.

Goodbye Norplant, Hello Implanon

2006-11-14T11:47:00.000-08:00

By Genevieve Parker, posted at ContraceptionBlog.com

Greetings to all! First off, I'd like to thank the No Room for Contraception campaign for the cordial welcome as I begin my blogging efforts here. I really look forward to participating in this work!

So, I just thought I'd bring up a little media blurb on Science Daily about an implantable form of birth control - called Implanon - that has recently hit the U.S. and is currently being used in the Cincinatti area. According to Science Daily, this new birth control option works as follows:

"The implant is injected underneath the skin of the upper arm during an in-office procedure that takes about one minute. The implant, the size of a matchstick, releases a steady stream of the female hormone etonogestrel (Implanon) over a three-year period...Etonogestrel works by thickening the cervical mucus, which prevents sperm from fertilizing an egg and also stops any egg that does get fertilized from implanting itself in the uterine wall. Etonogestrel completely inhibits the release of eggs from the ovaries during the first two years. In the third year, it begins to lose its effectiveness."

Sooo, does this mean that women on this drug don't ovulate for the first two years ? (Sounds real healthy, eh?) Then, once ovulation begins to take place in the 3rd year, birth control is effected by inhibiting sperm or else causing early abortion.

What's going on here? Clearly, the purpose of the contraceptive is to prevent a woman's body from acting like a woman's body; in short, the intent is to cause the woman's body to act like a man's body. When that mechanism fails (and she begins to ovulate & possibly conceive a child) the "back-up" plan is early abortion. This is what happens when the fertilized egg (a.k.a. embryo/newly conceived child) is not allowed to attach from the uterine lining.

Hmmm, Implanon sounds a lot like Norplant, which also works by preventing ovulation with a secondary mechanism of preventing implantation. Incidentally, Norplant was taken off the market circa 2004 after more than 50,000 lawsuit claims were brought against its distributor for harmful side effects.

Why is it acceptable to put women at high risk for deleterious side effects all for the purpose of making her body function like a man's body?

Visit www.ContraceptionBlog.com for daily updates on issues concerning contraception and its impact on society, marriage, and women's health.

Ortho Evra Birth Control Patch - Over 1,000 Claimants..

2006-11-12T19:09:00.000-08:00

Hormonal contraception is safe, right?

Not so for 23 women who have allegedly died as a result of using the Ortho Evra birth control patch. This article, published by the No Room for Contraception Campaign, provides an update to the ongoing issue of lawsuits over Ortho Evra:

"Serious health problems have been associated with Ortho Evra including fatal and non-fatal blood clots, strokes, heart attacks, and death. From April 2002 to December 2004, over 27,974 'adverse effects' were reported by users of Ortho Evra. Many of the complaints are serious, and the patch is alleged to be responsible for over 23 deaths, including the death of 14 year old Alycia Brown."

The full article can be found at: http://www.noroomforcontraception.com/Articles/Ortho-Evra-Birth-Control-Patch-Lawsuits.htm

It's interesting to find out that the FDA, "big pharma", and medical professionals consider non-fatal and fatal blood clots as 'acceptable risks' of oral contraception.

If you or anyone you know has suffered ill effects from the patch, contact one of the law firms:

John David Heart: http://www.hartlaw.com/Forms/ContactUs
Monheit Law: http://www.monheit.com/ortho-evra/case.asp
Parker & Waichman, LLP: http://www.yourlawyer.com/contact/form/15
Swartzapfel & Novick: http://www.fightingforyou.com/contactus-300.html

The No Room for Contraception Campaign Welcomes Genevieve Parker!

2006-11-12T19:01:00.000-08:00

Genevieve joins the effort as a featured author on the campaign's blog, located at http://www.contraceptionblog.com

Genevieve hails from Louisiana and currently resides in the metro Washington, D.C. area, where she has worked as a registered nurse for the past three years. Her experiences as a woman growing up in the post-Roe, radical feminist era have led her to the conclusion that a recovery of authentic womanhood is in order. Genevieve hopes to be a part of that recovery by exposing the way in which women have been deceived by the false "liberation" of contraception.

We look forward to her efforts in this campaign as we continue to work toward a culture free of dependency on contraception.

Catholic Bishops Prepare Document on Married Love

2006-11-09T06:12:00.000-08:00

"Bishops Prepare Brochure on Married Love", an article to be published in the upcoming issue of the National Catholic Register, describes the development of the document Married Love and the Gift of Life. The document is intended to provide guidance on marriage and why Catholic couples aren't supposed to use contraception.

The article, written by Barb Ernster, also includes comments from various groups on how contraception is being discussed in the pro-life community. "

Many pro-life leaders, especially evangelicals, have maintained that contraception is not their issue, but they’re coming to see that it leads to abortion," said Ruben Obregon, co-founder of No Room for Contraception, a website that addresses the personal and cultural consequences of contraception.

As an example, Obregon posted an article on the website by Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, called “Can Christians Use Birth Control?”

In the coming months, the discussion about contraception in the pro-life community is bound to intensify. Married Love and the Gift of Life is sure to add much to the debate, even for secular organizations like the No Room for Contraception Campaign

Visit the No Room For Contraception home page at http://www.NoRoomforContraception.com

"Birth Control is Harmful" Billboards

2006-11-06T09:41:00.000-08:00

Apparently, the Respect Life office of the Diocese of Tulsa has put up billboards around the diocese with the message that states "Birth Control is Harmful". Along with these billboards, the office created a website loaded with great information regarding the harms of contraception. Here is an excerpt from the site:

"So, how is birth control harmful? Our proposal to you is, that birth control is harmful at every level of our being, physical, emotional, psychological, and spiritual. Because we are people made for communion, birth control has a negative effect on our personal relationships and on society as a whole. "

Though NRFC is a secular campaign, we applaud efforts like these. It is encouraging to see a Diocesan Family Life office publicly tackling this issue. Hopefully more Diocesan Family Life and Respect Life offices will join this effort.

The site is located at: http://www.respectlifetulsa.org

Breast Cancer and Oral Contraception

2006-10-28T14:47:00.000-07:00

October is Breast Cancer Awareness month, which is an annual campaign to build public awareness about the disease as well as to raise funds for research.

What does this educational campaign have to do with contraception? It has to do with the fact that many types of oral contraceptives contain synthetic estrogen, a steroid believed to have a role in the development of breast cancer.[1]

Excerpt: View the article at http://www.noroomforcontraception.com/Articles/Contraception-Breast-Cancer.htm

Anti-contraception Group Calls FDA's Plan B Decision Irresponsible

2006-09-02T19:29:00.000-07:00

NEW YORK, Aug. 24 /Christian Newswire/ -- The No Room for Contraception campaign issued the following statement regarding today’s Plan B decision by the FDA.

Ruben Obregon, President of the campaign, said “This scheme is irresponsible at best – as it is, untold numbers of minors buy cigarettes and alcohol using fake or borrowed identification. Now they will do the same with Plan B emergency contraception, putting their health at risk. In addition, this pill can easily be obtained by adult friends and siblings and given to minors without knowledge or consent of their parents.”

“Over the counter access to emergency contraception will make minors more vulnerable to sexual abuse. Easy access to Plan B will allow sexual predators to cover up their crimes by making a simple trip to the pharmacy.”

“Plan B is also thought to be capable of preventing implantation, which means that it is capable of interfering with an existing pregnancy despite denials that it can’t. The long held medical view of pregnancy, contrary to the claims of Plan B advocates, is that pregnancy begins at fertilization (or just after), and not implantation. A fertilized egg is, in fact, an existing pregnancy.”

“Make no mistake about it – this drug has the potential to cause abortions and interfere with existing pregnancies. Contrary to the claims of Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc, the National Institutes of Health, and the FDA, pregnancy begins prior to implantation.”

“Medical dictionaries attest to the fact that pregnancy begins before implantation.” Obregon continued, “For example, the 28th edition of Stedman’s and the 7th edition of Mosby’s Medical Dictionaries do not support the claim that implantation is the start of pregnancy. Rather, these highly respected medical dictionaries define pregnancy as beginning before implantation – either at fertilization or just after fertilization -- which occurs several days before implantation.”

The campaign has a dedicated a section of its website to addressing the myth that Plan B does not cause abortions or interfere with existing pregnancies. This informative section can be found at: http://www.NoRoomforContraception.com/pregnancy

No Room for Contraception is a campaign to expose the potential problems of contraception on marriage, society and women's health. The campaign's website is located at www.NoRoomforContraception.com

Physicians, Petri dishes, and Pregnancy

2006-08-17T20:46:00.000-07:00

In response to the articles "Contraception Deception" and "Medical Dictionaries Prove Plan B Advocates Wrong", many readers (including physicians) defended the position that fertilization isn't the start of pregnancy. More often than not, they responding with one or more of the following arguments:

1. The definitions used by physicians are different than the ones used by nurses and other medical professionals.
2. An embryo must be implanted in the uterus for a woman to be pregnant.
3. Petri dishes can't be pregnant; therefore a woman isn't pregnant at fertilization.
4. Pregnancy begins at implantation due to the fact that is the earliest point it can be detected.

View the rest of the article at http://www.noroomforcontraception.com/pregnancy/Physicians-Pregnancy-Petri-Dish.htm

"Birth Control Is Selfish" ... The Message Society Doesn't Want To Hear

2006-05-25T20:53:00.000-07:00

By Ruben Obregon

This past weekend graduates of Saint Thomas University were treated to a surprising speech by 21-year-old graduating student Ben Kessler. Some graduates walked out, many jeered, and others spewed profanities in response to his speech.

Just what did he speak of which caused such an outcry? The War in Iraq? Border control? NSA spying? None of the above.

So, what exactly did Mr. Kessler do wrong? He touched society's third rail: contraception. Mr. Kessler had the audacity to call the use of birth control "an act of selfishness."

View the rest of the article at: http://www.noroomforcontraception.com/Articles/Graduation-Speech-Selfish-contraception-020.htm

Anniversary of the FDA's approval of the Pill

2006-05-09T09:46:00.000-07:00

Forty-six years ago on May 9, 1960, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Enovid as the first prescription oral contraceptive. "The Pill" has proved to jeopardize women's health in addition to marriage and family. The Pill has even been called an assault on women's health experts and even by those involved in developing and testing the drug.

As we examined in yesterday's post, the Pill has certainly not lived up to its promise of worry-free marital relations. On the other hand, it opened up the floodgates for promiscuity and extramarital affairs.

The development of the Pill was funded by the birth control advocates who created the Planned Parenthood with hopes of the perfect drug to cure the world of inferior races and stop the (unfounded) fears of an overpopulated world. In their 1991 book Blessed are the Barren, Robert Marshall and Charles Donovan provide thorough research on the history of the Planned Parenthood and their agenda against fertility and family. Chapter eight is dedicated to examining the Pill from its origin.

It had been well-known since the early 20th century that artificial hormones could be used to interfere with fertility, but it was considered far too dangerous. In the early 1950s, many prominent people who supported the Planned Parenthood's agenda flooded them with over a million dollars in donations, and serious development of a new drug began.

A simple memo from assistant chief of the FDA's New Drug Branch stating that the Pill was approved for use in May 1960. Yet, women had died during the trials, and even Alan Guttmacher, a champion for contraceptives and Planned Parenthood board member, said "It is our opinion that the oral tablet has not yet been proved medically safe or highly effective... [S]teroid drugs are aimed at the wrong target organ. To attempt to inhibit the pituitary, which has so many functions besides stimulating the ovary, is fraught with dangers." Donovan and Marshall note that even "such warnings did not impede approval." [1]

It wasn't until five years later that it became legal for these drugs to be distributed to the general public through Griswold v. Connecticut (381 U.S. 479) United States Supreme Court decision.

Women continued to died from the drug, but that is not all. Women's healthcare has been weakened by the ideology that is behind such a lethal Pill. It is now given without hesitation for every ailment from irregular periods to acne without consideration of any alternative regimen or the serious side effects. In her 1994 book Sexual Chemistry: Understanding Our Hormones, the Pill and HRT, Dr. Ellen Grant even points out the contradiction in how acne is treated in teen guys and girls. "[P]rogestogen is in pills prescribed for adolescent girls' acne, but not for boys who are more likely to suffer from acne. It is simpler and safer to treat acne in either sex with zinc supplementation, fish oils and a low-allergy diet." [2]

Although No Room for Contraception is a non-religious organization, please take time to join our friends at OR Boston in a day of prayer for God's mercy on our world for the use of medicine for such destruction- click [here]

ENDNOTES
[1] Robert Marshall and Charles Donovan, Blessed are the Barren, San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1991. p. 213-214, emphasis added.
[2] Grant, Dr. Ellen, Sexual Chemistry: Understanding Our Hormones, the Pill and HRT, London: Cedar Paperbacks, 1995. p. 122

"Contra-Contraception..." and for a Good Reason: You Don't Have to be Christian to be Against Birth Control

2006-05-08T09:33:00.000-07:00

A recent New York Times Magazine article, "Contra-Contraception" by Russell Shorto [1], highlighted the growing trend against the use of artificial contraception by Christians and the growing number of anti-abortion (pro-life) groups that are addressing the issue. Though he brought to light many aspects of negative impacts of contraception, Shorto's article avoided many important points regarding the harms of artificial birth control on marriage, society and women's health. It served more as a forum to mock the anti-contraception movement.

Opposition to contraception is certainly not a new idea. When Margaret Sanger began her crusade for social acceptance of birth control and abortion in the early twenty century, most individuals in our country opposed her ideals. As acceptance of birth control grew, so did the need for and acceptance of abortion, and abortion was determined to be the bigger, more morally offensive issue. Time and energy from those who opposed contraception shifted to opposing abortion, and the fight against contraception fell by the wayside. But, the social acceptance of contraception remained the problem regarding abortion.

But, even before the legalization of abortion in 1973, there were many who considered the new hormonal contraceptives that hit the market in May 1960 to be a step backwards for women's health. First published in 1969, Barbara Seaman wrote in The Doctors' Case Against the Pill of horror stories concerning the destroyed health and of women who used oral contraceptives; she also reports on deaths directly caused from use of the drug. Doctors were starting to recognize the danger in this potent drug, and many stopped prescribing it. Many women immediately rejected chemical forms because of these adverse effects.

Dr. Ellen Grant, a Scottish physician who was a part of the Pill trials in the late 50s later wrote several books and articles for medical journals highlighting the dangers of hormonal contraceptives. In her 1994 book, Sexual Chemistry: Understanding Our Hormones, the Pill and HRT, she outlines the short- and long-term adverse effects of the use of artificial hormones for birth control and HRT in detail. Though she maintains that barrier methods ought to be promoted for family planning and population control, her book is enough to make anyone question the bad science that the Pill is. "The Pill was greeted with such enthusiasm in the 1960s because barrier methods of contraception were unpopular. The cap (diaphragm) was mostly used by married women in stable relationships but the introduction of the Pill has been accompanied by increasing sexual promiscuity. No only has the age when men or women first have sexual intercourse fallen from twenties to early teens, but the number of sexual partners has escalated." [2]

In the next chapter, she goes on to question the sex education that has evolved since the advent of artificial hormones.

In the 1990s, sex education telling the real facts is almost non-existent. How many sexually active young women know that they have a one in three chance of being contaminated with the wart virus (human papilloma virus or HPV) which can eventually lead to cervical cancer? So much government-sponsored sex education is verging on irresponsible sex promotion. Films and television reinforce these views while young children are automatically indoctrinated. It seems that the right of men to use women as if they were merely public conveniences must be protected! The implication is neither males or females must put off sex. When individuals belatedly discover the real facts of life it is often too late. Never in all history has so much been known and so little communicated effectively... Society needs to condemn the rape of its young as the crime against the future that it really is. [3]

Dr. Grant's words are even more true today than they were in 1994. We now have the internet, which is the primary hub of information for persons of all ages. The internet is littered with faulty information as well as pornographic images. The lives and well-being of children and young people is even more at stake, yet so many cling to the ideology of eugenics and population control that first started the birth control movement.

Since the mid 1990s, the over population myth has been debunked quite effectively as Mr. Shorto addressed in his article. The birth rate of most of Europe and the United States is far below replacement rate. The economy is only sustained by immigration, especially by Muslims whose religion also prohibits contraception and abortion.

We at the No Room for Contraception campaign encourage you to find the facts for yourself regarding the harms of contraception. That's why this website was created. Explore our articles, resources and action items. Visit the sites that we link to. Pick up a few of the recommended books.

Let's help to build a society where there is "No Room for Contraception!"

ENDNOTES
[1] Shorto Russell, New York Times Magazine, "Contra-Contraception." May 7, 2006. found online at: www.nytimes.com/2006/05/07/magazine/07contraception.html
[2] Grant, Dr. Ellen, Sexual Chemistry: Understanding Our Hormones, the Pill and HRT, London: Cedar Paparbacks, 1995. p. 189
[3] ibid, p. 209, 267

Anti-contraception Group Decries Statement of Sens. Clinton and Reid

2006-04-20T09:22:00.000-07:00

NEW YORK, April 20 -- The No Room for Contraception Campaign issued the following statement today in response to Senators Harry Reid and Hillary Clinton's joint statement in support of the Prevention First Act. The campaign called their actions a "failed attempt at common ground" between pro-choice and pro-life forces.

"Throwing more money at the failed social policies of the past won't lead to a reduction in abortions or unintended pregnancies," said Mary Worthington, co-founder of the campaign. "The past few decades have highlighted the failure of these policies and programs. For example, in 2005, the Guttmacher Institute stated that '54% of women having abortions used a contraceptive method during the month they became pregnant.' Whether this is due to usage failure or method failure, it shows that artificial contraception is largely ineffective in preventing abortion."

"Although contraception is perceived as being able to reduce the demand for abortion, it actually leads to an increase in demand," said Ruben Obregon, co-founder of the campaign. "Contraception has given a false sense of security to millions of people who would have never engaged in sex due to fear of pregnancy and disease. Naturally, this has led to tens of millions of unplanned pregnancies and abortions over the past three decades."

"If the Senators truly want to find common ground, then they first have to admit that government funding of contraception has only led to a negative cultural shift in attitudes about sex, increased pregnancy, and increased abortion," continued Obregon. "If they are willing to be honest about contraception, only then we can all move forward to find common ground. The Prevention First Act is certainly a failed attempt at doing so."

"Promotion of Plan B presents many problems with women's health regarding over-dosage and abuse,” stated Worthington. “Plan B is a powerful drug whose dose consists of 12 to 15 times that of a typical oral contraceptive pill. Promoting this regimen is especially dangerous because teens are at a great risk of overdosing."

No Room for Contraception is a campaign to expose the potential problems of contraception on marriage, society and women's health. The campaign's website is located at www.noroomforcontraception.com.

Anti-Contraception Campaign Decries Actions of Illinois Governor

2006-03-29T19:44:00.000-08:00

New York City-- March 29, 2006 -- The No Room for Contraception Campaign issued the following statement today in response to the restrictions announced by Governor Blagojevich of Illinois on Monday regarding regulations to govern pharmacists in filling prescriptions that some pharmacists find morally objectionable such as contraceptive pills and devices. Mary Worthington, spokeswoman for the campaign, decried Gov. Blagojevich's actions as an "irresponsible display of power."

"Governor Blagojevich has complete disregard for the conscientious objections of pharmacists," said Worthington. "These new restrictions and penalties for pharmacists demonstrate an irresponsible display of power. He will in fact force many pharmacists out of business because of their own religious or moral convictions, and this is not fair."

"Furthermore," said Worthington, "access to Plan B emergency contraception does no service to women's health; this is a dangerous and powerful drug. Easy access to emergency contraception will make women more vulnerable to sexual abuse. Sexual abuse and incest are often revealed only when pregnancy happens. With greater access to and use of emergency contraception, women will be expected to further cover up instances of sexual abuse by taking emergency contraceptives perhaps even placing her own health and fertility at risk."

"Governor Blagojevich's efforts should focus on funding initiatives that will help women and families find alternatives to contraception, provide educational information on the harms of contraception, and teach natural family planning methods."

No Room for Contraception is a campaign to expose the potential problems of contraception on marriage, society and women's health. The campaign's website is located at www.noroomforcontraception.com.

Welcome to our blog!

2006-03-27T10:54:00.000-08:00

To give you an idea of what the No Room for Contraception campaign is about, here is a copy of our first press release:

Website Exposes Dangers of Contraception to Marriage and Society

NEW YORK CITY, Feb. 27, 2006 -- A national campaign to expose the negative aspects of contraception launched today. The web-based campaign, originating out of New York, is called "No Room for Contraception."

Issues surrounding so-called emergency contraception have brought the issue of birth control to the political forefront. In order to contribute to this ongoing debate, the No Room for Contraception team has launched a website to point out the often under-exposed negative effects of widespread contraception use.

"For decades, very few people of reproductive age were aware of negative effects of birth control," said Ruben Obregon, co-founder of the campaign. "The campaign will highlight the negative effects of contraception, including emergency contraception."

On the issue of emergency contraception, Obregon said, "Pharmacies should not be forced to fill prescriptions for so-called emergency contraception, especially since these drugs potentially prevent the implantation of a newly created human being. Companies like Wal-Mart need to think twice before caving into the pressure of the abortion rights movement to stock these drugs."

The issue of emergency contraception is just one aspect of a larger campaign to change society's dependence on contraception.

"More and more women are coming forward with stories of regret for the use of artificial contraception and surgical sterilization, stating that it had negative effects on their marriage." said Mary Worthington, the other co-founder of the campaign "No Room for Contraception is dedicated to exposing these stories along with the growing amount of scientific and sociological research showing contraception's adverse side effects."

The campaign's website can be found at http://www.noroomforcontraception.com/.