iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
David Morris

GET UPDATES FROM David Morris
 

Pro Life or Pro Sperm

Posted: 03/14/2012 7:40 pm

Recent events make clear the need for a new language to describe the raging debate about sex and birth. Consider the problematic word that dominates our conversation: pro-life.

Most pro-life organizations more accurately should be labeled pro-sperm. For they insist the sperm has the inalienable, indeed the God-given right to pursue the egg without human enabled interference. Joseph M. Scheidler, the National Director of the Pro-Life Action League memorably declared, "I think contraception is disgusting-people using each other for pleasure." Judith Brown, President of The American Life Lobby asserts its opposition "to all forms of birth control with the exception of natural family planning."

The Catholic Church is fervently pro-sperm. Decades before the Church mobilized against abortion it mobilized against contraception. As late as 1960, many states outlawed sales of contraceptives. The Catholic Church was the driving force behind these laws. In the 1940s, Connecticut legislators introduced bills allowing physicians to prescribe contraceptives only for married couples if a pregnancy would be life threatening. The Catholic Church swung into action. One historian describes the process; "priests became heavily involved... Their efforts were not confined to anti-birth control sermons on Sundays. They engaged in voter registration drives, they encouraged parishioners to support anti-birth control candidates for the legislature, and they actively campaigned to defeat any changes in the birth control laws". The bills failed.

Prior to 1930, all Christian denominations held that contraception was contrary to God's will. Then one by one, beginning with the Church of England they began to accept birth control.

Many expected the Catholic Church to follow suit. In the mid 1960's Pope Paul VI appointed a commission on birth control to advise him on the issue. An overwhelming majority of its members favored lifting the ban. In his 1968 Encyclical, Humanae Vitae (Of Human Life) the Pope summarized the argument of the majority.

world population is going to grow faster than available resources, with the consequences that many families and developing countries would be faced with greater hardships... not only working and housing conditions but the greater demands made both in the economic and educational field pose a living situation in which it is frequently difficult these days to provide properly for a large family... (we need to take into account) a new understanding of the dignity of woman and her place in society, or the value of conjugal love in marriage and the relationship of conjugal acts to this love...


... if one were to apply here the so-called principle of totality, could it not be accepted that the intention to have a less prolific but more rationally planned family might transform an action which renders natural processes infertile into a licit and provident control of birth? Could it not be admitted, in other words, that procreative finality applies to the totality of married life rather than to each single act? A further question is whether, because people are more conscious today of their responsibilities, the time has not come when the transmission of life should be regulated by their intelligence and will rather than through the specific rhythms of their bodies...

Pope Paul VI decided that the rights of the sperm transcended any and all of these arguments. The use of contraception, he concluded results in "an act of mutual love which impairs the capacity to transmit life which God the Creator, through specific laws, has built into it, frustrates His design."

But the biological facts make God's design less than clear. Consider that when artificial birth control or abortion is not used, more often than not God chooses death, not life. A third to a half of fertilized eggs do not implant. Some doctors believe this figure could be as high as 80 percent. A third of those that do implant end up in spontaneous miscarriages. Does the pro-life movement believe this makes God a mass murderer?

In 1965 the Supreme Court overturned state laws that prohibited married couples from buying contraceptives. In 1972 it extended this ruling to cover unmarried individuals. A few months later, in Roe v. Wade, it determined that states could not prohibit women from intervening in the reproductive process after the egg is fertilized.

Every year pro-life organizations gather to condemn Roe v. Wade, but it may be instructive to point out that the typology used by the Court was very close to that which guided the Catholic Church and many other major religions for thousands of years.

The early Christians adopted Aristotle's framework that embryos pass through three distinct stages and only become fully human in the last stage. Saint Augustine, one of the most influential Catholic theologians, proposed that abortion in the first trimester should not be regarded "as homicide, for there cannot be a living soul in a body that lacks sensation due to its not yet being formed."

At the beginning of the 13th century Pope Innocent II declared that "quickening" (the time when the woman first feels the fetus move within her) was the moment at which abortion became homicide. In 1591, Pope Gregory XIV proclaimed that quickening occurred after 116 days, that is, into the second trimester. That guidance remained Church policy until 1869 when Pope Pius IX eliminated the distinction between the animated and non-animated fetus and required excommunication for abortions at any stage of pregnancy.

In Roe v. Wade the Supreme Court took a page from Aristotle and permitted increasingly severe restrictions by the state depending on the age of the fetus. In the first 12 weeks the Court prohibited states from imposing any restrictions on a woman's right to an abortion. In the second trimester, states may regulate abortion procedures to protect the health of the woman. In the third trimester (after 27 weeks), when fetuses may be viable outside of the womb, states may restrict abortions.

Nearly 90 percent of all abortions occur in the first trimester. Six in ten are undertaken in the first 8 weeks of pregnancy. About 9 percent occur in the second trimester, but many of these are a result of a delay caused by a lack of financial resources or state enacted stalling laws. About .01 percent of abortions are performed after the 20th week.

For many Republicans, it is often said, life begins at conception and ends at birth, although I might amend this perspective given the recent evidence that for many life begins before conception. Consider that all but one of 47 Republican Senators voted in favor of a bill allowing any employer to deny coverage of birth control in the company's insurance policies. In any event, it is clear that pro-life Republicans seem remarkably unconcerned with the health of newborns. A comprehensive review of abortion and child welfare policies in all 50 states found that states with the most restrictive abortion laws spend the least on education, on facilitating adoption and on nurturing poor children. They also have fewer mandates requiring insurance providers to cover minimum hospital stays after childbirth.

A recent case in point. The Texas legislature has slashed its family planning budget from $111 million to $38 million, cuts that would eliminate services for nearly 284,000 women.

All four current Republican presidential candidates would eliminate Title X created in 1970 with Republican support from President Nixon and the elder George Bush, then a congressman. Title X does not pay for abortions. Only some of it covers birth control.

It appears that today's Republican Party will pull out all the stops to protect the rights of the sperm but all but turn its back on the rights and needs of babies. This is what the term pro-life has come to mean in 2012. And why we need to change the language we use when we talk about the issues surrounding reproduction.

 
Recent events make clear the need for a new language to describe the raging debate about sex and birth. Consider the problematic word that dominates our conversation: pro-life. Most pro-life organi...
Recent events make clear the need for a new language to describe the raging debate about sex and birth. Consider the problematic word that dominates our conversation: pro-life. Most pro-life organi...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 89
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
05:44 PM on 03/17/2012
Pro-sperm is right!

This past week, a pro-abortion article of mine was published on www.RHRealityCheck.org and shared among various anti-choice sites. The responses were clearly anything BUT pro-life - in fact, many said that I should have been aborted and some went so far as to suggest the type of bullets they'd like to use on me. These people may find fetuses precious, but they certainly don't feel that way about the rest of us!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Carla van der Meer
in scientia opportunatis
08:57 PM on 03/15/2012
It makes no sense to be both against birth control AND abortion. And who will pay for all these new little (unwanted) people?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ultima thule
05:17 PM on 03/15/2012
Joseph M. Scheidler: "I think contraception is disgusting-people using each other for pleasure."

I'm so glad I'm not his wife.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hiitsjoan
03:24 PM on 03/15/2012
How about not calling it anything and strangers butting the hell out of MY sex life and MY body?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kara Kramer
02:34 PM on 03/15/2012
I agree entirely.
Their policies cause death, not life.
01:22 PM on 03/15/2012
I never understood why some people believe that politics belong in a woman's uterus? My body, my choice! This country finally got it right with Roe vs Wade. Ladies, we cannot let ANYBODY take away our personal decisions about our personal property (our bodies).
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
scorpions5
Facts do not cease to exist when ignored.
11:03 AM on 03/15/2012
I have said this all along while arguing about prolifers. They care NOTHING about the child that is born. They only care about the fetus. Once the baby is born, their caring stops. They do nothing to help the mother, child for the next 18years. They feel their work is done, that they saved the baby. It is almost like they don't see the child born as a human, but only in the womb. Where are these prolife people once the baby is born? They are all out making posters for the next march against abortion, forgetting about the millions of babies they "so called" saved. They forget that most of these children that are not adopted grow up in poverty or abusive homes. The mothers have to go on welfare because they cannot find any child care. These prolife people create more problems for women, our country, and our government spending because of their moral issues. Do they thing that God will love them more? I would hope that on their final day, God will ask them "what happened to all those babies you saved, did you help them through their life, or did you just abandon them"?
korbendal
Bringing Common Sense Back To America.
01:55 PM on 03/15/2012
I heard George Carlin (RIP) discuss this hypocrisy many times in his specials..
and I use his specials as a litmus test to see how times have changed in ideological America.. and it didn't since the 80's..
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kara Kramer
02:35 PM on 03/15/2012
They're not prolifers, they're antichoicers. We need to start calling them what they are.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
scorpions5
Facts do not cease to exist when ignored.
06:27 PM on 03/15/2012
Bravo!!
06:20 PM on 03/17/2012
Yes! Anti-choice, anti-abortion. There is nothing pro-life about them.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
WryAwry
Hating haters since '55
10:59 AM on 03/15/2012
I gave up in disgust when I saw the words 'dignity' and 'pope' in the same sentence.

Maybe I'll turn xtian -- I've suffered enormous guilt for all of the billions of sperm cells that I've commited to a withering death by mis-directing them from their holy mission with a detour into the wasteland of my abdominal cavity since I had my Doctor interrupt their conduit to glory 35 years ago .....
10:59 AM on 03/15/2012
Rick Perry executed 234 viable human beings as Gov of Texas, 'nuff said.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
OutToLunch
all hail the French & the Saunders...
10:33 AM on 03/15/2012
also, in honor of Monty Python:

"Every sperm is sacred
Every sperm is great
If a sperm gets wasted
God gets quite irate"
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
OutToLunch
all hail the French & the Saunders...
10:29 AM on 03/15/2012
Instead of "pro-lifers," the more accurate term would be "forced breeders."
photo
DoubleYellowLines
Left of the Right, and Right of the Left
09:17 AM on 03/15/2012
I'd be much more in favor of the whole 'pro-life' movement if they were marshalling resources around the actual root causes of abortion, and not just trying to put a block on the end of the game.

What stops abortion is stopping unintended pregnancies. So start supporting Planned Parenthood's family planning, push for education on family planning for at-risk populations, etc. If you can significantly reduce the root causes, you see a huge drop in the number of abotions. Then abortion would end up being that rare, 'save-the-life-of-the-mother' situation.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alafonse
It's definitely a crap-shoot.
06:38 AM on 03/15/2012
The republican party protects sperm only to facilitate enough cannon fodder being born to satisfy their future war needs. If a few women suffer or die in the process, then it was the honorable price for them to pay to further the ongoing war effort.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
oldwhitefemdem
Oldy for marriage equality
03:09 AM on 03/15/2012
When Rick Perry runs again in 2016, he's not going to be so happy that he implimented programs to defund Planned Parenthood and mandated doctor rape of women who need an abortion. What an absolute monster. And he is sooooo self-satisfied. If there is justice in the world, he'll have a lot of time to set up his 2016 campaign because he won't be re-elected in TX. Of course, he'll have the Koch brothers to finance his presidential compaign. Meantime, he's using every single bit of legislation that ALEC has written. Did I say, What a Monster?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Izzy66
Agree to Disagree
11:03 AM on 03/15/2012
Obama will win and women will vote in droves also in State and local elections. We recognize now that it is literally a danger to our quality of life in this country for ANY Republican to hold office. November 2012 election will be historic in its backlash against conservatives.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
oldwhitefemdem
Oldy for marriage equality
04:05 PM on 03/15/2012
I live in a state - heaven help me - that is one of the worst offenders - VA. Our state officials are elected on the odd years so we are stuck with Bob VP McDonnell and this legislature is in office until January 2014. As I say, heaven help us. Bob VP McDonnell strikes me as a particularly spiteful piece of work and he would be happy to reinstate the intrusive part of the ultrasound he wanted if his VP aspirations are thwarted by the backlash here.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
oldwhitefemdem
Oldy for marriage equality
02:53 AM on 03/15/2012
These same noble lawmaers neither want to participate in the raising the child nor supporting the woman and child created in an extra-marital affair. The men I know who are pro-life have said to me that women who get pregnant during an affair shouldn't be able to get an abortion without the father's permission AND the women who chose to have the child shouldn't expect support for a child the father didn't want to have. They see nothing wrong with this contradiction. They all went to Rick Perry U. (When I lived in Texas I met a graduate of U Tx @ Austin. She asked me where I'd been born. I said Delaware. She said, "Oh, that's in Maryland, isn't it?" And this was 35 years before Perry.)