hands off my ovaries, part one million: contraception does not kill babies!

ChurchGal: the other shoe drops: anti-choicers don't want you to have contraception!

i'm bumping this thread up to the top because i think it's a conversation we should start having in public now that groups are starting to target our legal right to contraception.

yes, our LEGAL right to use medically safe contraception and devices.

i want people to start thinking about the frakking consequences of their arguments, the frakking legal and social impact of their arguments. it's one thing to advocate and wish for the government to lay its hands on all aspects of one's intimate life but it's another to actually think about what this would look like in real life.

so, what would life really look like if fertilized eggs were declared 'people' (with separate, legal status) and how would this impact a woman's already legalized ability to use any kind of contraception?
...

this is an article, too, that one should read, written by pro-life Christian OB/GYNs about the Pill. in particular, for those who say that the Pill is an abortifacient, pay attention to what they say about how the Pill actually works:

"Most hormone contraceptives are noted to work by 3 methods of action:
1)Primarily, they inhibit ovulation by suppression of the pituitary/ovarian axis, mediated through suppression of gonadotrophin releasing hormone from the hypothalamus.
2)Secondarily, they inhibit transport of sperm through the cervix by thickening the cervical mucous.
3)They cause changes in the uterine lining (endometrium) which have historically been assumed to decrease the possibility of implantation, should fertilization occur. This presumption is commonly known as the "hostile endometrium" theory.

A thorough review of the medical literature uncovers ample data to support the first two methods of action, which are contraceptive actions. (Appropriate references will be found in the sections discussing each type of hormone contraceptive.) However, there is no direct evidence in the literature to support the third proposed method of action. This conclusion is shared by the respected Gynecologic Endocrinology textbook authors Yen and Jaffe." [emphasis mine]

further, the article goes on to say "An extensive review of pertinent scientific writings indicates that there is no credible evidence to validate a mechanism of pre-implantation abortion as a part of the action of hormone contraceptives. On the contrary, the existing evidence indicates that "on pill" conceptions are handled by the reproductive system with the same results seen with "off pill" conceptions, with the exception of increased ectopic rates seen with POPs and Norplant."

in other words, what happens when you conceive off the Pill happens when you conceive on the Pill. nothing's aborted - you're pregnant. so yeah...there goes that argument.

[feministing has another post from another OB/GYN that says pretty much the same thing here. it also mentions this thing called to 'right to privacy' that i think is at the heart of this push to make legal contraception suddenly illegal and harmful. i'll be writing on that later, i think. and, of course, my favorite OB/BYN blog, The Well Timed Period, has lots of useful and medically accurate information here.]

so if nothing's being killed, then why do these groups get their panties in a bunch about women using a Pill, an IUD or Norplant?

i will leave you to speculate.