View Single Post
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 06-24-2008, 02:30 PM
Pergamum's Avatar
Pergamum Pergamum is offline.
The MacDaddy
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 6,383
Thanks: 1,180
Thanked 1,233 Times in 699 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by SRoper View Post
I was surprised to learn recently that it is difficult to find a pro-life physician who also refuses to prescribe chemical contraceptives as birth control. My initial thought was that this is a no-brainer. Chemical contraceptives can cause an abortion (let's not debate that here), doctors should strive to prevent abortion, so doctors should not prescribe chemical contraceptives as birth control. Where is the difficulty here?

I then thought about the argument that the doctor is just giving the patient access to pharmaceuticals, and the patient's autonomy in making her own healthcare decisions removes any culpability from the physician. Can this situation be likened to, say, an employee at a book store? Is the sales clerk culpable when he rings up a patron's purchase of pornography? What about a sale of the latest Joel Osteen?

Let's not debate that here?

That issue is THE vital issue. If the Pill causes abortions then there is one answer. If the Pill is merely contraceptive and not an abortive pill than the answer is different.

But that question is the crux of the whole issue.




Are you assuming that all forms of contraception for all reasons are sinful?
__________________
Pergamum


"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone

Last edited by Pergamum; 06-24-2008 at 02:49 PM..