A Deeper Look at Contraception and Abortion

You would probably guess that an increase in contraceptive use would decrease the number of abortions, Right?  Guess again.

Readership: All

The student campus organization, 1flesh.org, was founded in 2012 by a group of college students who felt compelled to introduce more people to natural methods of family planning through dynamic social media outreach and the tagline “Bring Sexy Back.”

1 Flesh received wild support from various groups, especially conservative Christian youth, pro-lifers, and those wary of the risks involved with hormonal birth control1 Flesh was demonized by organizations (i.e. the G@tes foundation) seeking to push widespread availability of abortion and contraception into developing countries.  1 Flesh was also unpopular with the Catholic church, which maintained that the purpose of Natural Family Planning (NFP) was no different from other forms of contraception – the prevention of pregnancy.

A Deeper Look at Contraception and Abortion was written by an author known only as “Marc”, and originally appeared on 1 Flesh on 2012 September 22.

The original 1flesh.org site is now shadow banned by the bandwidth bosses.  But the internet lives forever, you know.

google 1flesh

*     *     *     *     *     *     *

The claim that the widespread promotion of contraception reduces the incidence of abortion is a good one.  Its basic logic — that because abortions are the result of unplanned pregnancies, contraception, by reducing unplanned pregnancies, reduces abortions — is reasonable and lucid.

But it’s not true.

An honest look at the data shows that in virtually every country that increased the use of contraception, there was a simultaneous increase in the abortion rate.  In England (Rise in contraceptive usesimultaneous rise in abortions), France (Rise in contraceptive usesimultaneous rise in abortions), Australia, (Rise in contraceptive usesimultaneous rise in abortions), Portugal (whose abortion rate only began to rise after 1999, after oral contraceptive methods were made widely available), Canada (whose abortion rate only began to rise after the legalization of oral contraceptives in 1969), Singapore, Cuba, Denmark, the Netherlands, and South Korea — to name a few.  That these countries have periodically seen the abortion rate reduced by the use of contraception is good, but it must be taken with a firm grasp of the overall picture: These countries have never seen the abortion rate reduced to its place before the introduction and widespread use of contraception.  It is no victory of contraception that it partially reduces a problem it created in the first place.

But before we address why the introduction of contraception to a country is usually simultaneous with a rise in abortion, we need to address the Guttmacher Institute.

The Guttmacher Institute — previously the research arm of Planned Parenthood, now a recipient of their annual donations — is the authoritative source for the claim that contraception is not associated with increased abortion rates.  Their study “Relationships Between Contraception and Abortion: A Review of the Evidence” determined that contraception reduces abortion rates, and in countries where it doesn’t, “after fertility levels stabilized… contraceptive use continued to increase and abortion rates fell.”  This implies that contraception will eventually reduce the abortion rate in those countries as well.

Here’s the problem.  4 of the 7 countries the The Guttmacher Institute cites to make the claim that contraception reduces overall abortion rates are ex-communist countries: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Uzbekistan, and Bulgaria.


At the time contraception became widely used, the abortion culture in these countries was radically different from the abortion culture of the rest of the world.  In a 2002 article published in Studies in Family Planning, the point is made that in the Soviet Union “soon after it was re-legalized in 1955, abortion became the main form of birth control, available on request and free of charge (Popov 1991; Remennick 1991).  Little ideological or moral opposition to abortion existed.” This cannot be said of the vast majority of countries.

The fact that the introduction of contraception lowered the abortion rate in these countries — while laudable — can not be used as evidence to make the blanket claim that “contraception reduces abortion rates.”  Rather, it seems that the introduction of contraception helped to reduce abortion rates in certain countries in which abortion was already regarded as a moral form of contraception, a view restricted almost entirely to communist and ex-communist states.  The introduction of contraception, by reducing the overall number of conceptions, created a society in which there were far fewer children to abort.  It did not do away with abortion, it simply aided it in achieving its end.  (And quite successfully, as most of these countries are now experiencing drastic population decline.)  Thus, despite initial reductions, these communist and ex-communist countries still have some of the highest abortion rates in the world.  Contraception has not made abortion any less of a cultural need.

So, given that the Guttmacher Institute primarily use ex-communist countries as evidence, perhaps it would be wise to change the bold claim that “contraception reduces abortion rates” to “contraception reduces abortion rates primarily in countries who already view abortion as a moral or amoral means of family planning.”  But even this (considerably less hopeful) statement isn’t precisely true.

It is not always the case that contraception lowers the abortion rate, even in countries with an “abortion culture”.

The organization Family Health International often cites the fact that “the world’s lowest abortion rates are recorded in Belgium and the Netherlands, where contraception is used extensively, while the highest rates are found in Cuba and Vietnam, where clients have access to a limited range of contraceptive methods”, as evidence for contraception’s abortion-reducing effects.  A closer look at Cuba and Vietnam shows the same ignored problem.


In the article “The Persistence of Induced Abortion in Cuba: Exploring the Notion of an “Abortion Culture”” published in Studies in Family Planning, it was shown that in Cuba, like in other communist or ex-communist societies, “abortion is seen as a reasonable fertility-control option by itself, not just in cases of contraceptive failure or unprotected sexual intercourse that results in pregnancy.”

It is suggested that the reason for Cuba’s high abortion rate is that Cuba does not have enough access to contraception. If there is truth to this, it is not the whole truth.  Cuba has greater access to contraception than many countries with lower abortion rates, with approximately 73% of sexually active women “currently using” contraception.  The issue is actually threefold.

  1. First, there exists in Cuba that “abortion culture”, a culture that views abortion as amoral — or at the very least morally relative — and thus merely as another means of [birth control].
  2. Widespread poverty is described as a major driving factor in Cuba’s high abortion rate.
  3. Finally, there is a greater concern about the side-effects, health risks and the actual use-effectiveness of contraception in Cuba than in other countries, so while contraception is used, it is often used sporadically.

Once again, the “abortion culture” matters, but is ignored in favor of easy answers.  (The same article lists Vietnam as a country considered to have an “abortion culture”, similar in its post-communist status to Cuba and the Soviet Union.)  We must again replace the confident phrase, “contraception reduces abortion rates”, with something like “contraception reduces abortion rates primarily in countries who already view abortion as an amoral means of family planning, providing these countries have no fear of the health risks and side effects of contraception.”  (A fear which will probably persist as long as the Pill continues to increase a woman’s risk of breast cancer, cervical cancer, and HIV infection, and a man’s risk of prostate cancer.)

To recap: Excepting countries with an already ingrained culture of abortion, the introduction of contraception to a country is associated with a simultaneous increase in abortions, an increase which tends to level and experience periodical decreases thanks to the improved use and availability of contraception, but which never decreases back to where it was before contraception was introduced to that country.

turkish girl

Funnily enough, this was seen in Turkey, one of the three countries the Guttmacher Institute cites to support their claims without an “abortion culture”.  In the study The Role of Contraceptive Changes in the Decline of Induced Abortion in Turkey — which Guttmacher cites — it is shown that in 1983, when contraception laws were liberalized, abortion ended 12.1% of all pregnancies.  As contraceptive used increased, the abortion rate increased, until 1988, when abortion ended 23.6% of pregnancies.  Thanks to the improved use and availability of contraception, the rate then began to decrease, until, by 1998, abortion ended 15.7% of all pregnancies.  Here the abortion rate dipped, rose, and leveled, and by 2007, abortion ended 17.0% of all pregnancies in Turkey.  The Guttmacher Institute see this as evidence of the success of contraception in reducing abortions.  We see it as evidence of the success of contraception in increasing abortions.

Obviously, more extensive research is needed, but the bold claim that contraception reduces abortion rates just doesn’t seem to hold up to the light of day.  But surely — one might ask — it’s best to promote and use contraception, now that there is this increase?  Isn’t some reduction better than none, even if contraception never causes the abortion rate to go down to where it was before contraception was ever popularized?

It’s important to recognize that, while contraception has been a factor in many of the relative decreases in abortion around the world, it is as often a factor in relative increases around the world.

In the 2011 study Trends in the use of contraceptive methods and voluntary interruption of pregnancy in the Spanish population during 1997-2007, surveys of about 2,000 Spanish women aged 15 to 49 were taken every two years from 1997 to 2007.  Over this period of time, the number of women using artificial contraceptives increased by about 60%.  In the exact same period, Spain’s abortion rate more than doubled, from 5.52 per 1,000 women to 11.49.

Similar results can be found in England.  The government implemented their Teenage Pregnancy Strategy in 1995, spending over $454 million promoting the use of contraception.  Teenage pregnancies and subsequent abortions continued to increase.

Here in the United States, according to The National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, the majority of women undergoing abortion were using some form of contraception when they conceived, with 55-60% of women who undergo abortion “reported that they “currently used” contraception during the month of their last menstrual period.”

So we come to the vital question: Why? Why would contraception create a need for abortion?

It’s very simple: According to Guttmacher Institute researcher Stanley K. Henshaw, “contraceptive users appear to have been more motivated to prevent births than were nonusers.” The use of contraception seeks to avoid pregnancy while still performing the act of sex.  When contraception fails, and a new life results from that act, there is an immediate difficulty: The couple would have to, by courage and strength, avoid continuing the mentality by which they practiced contraception — that a new child is to be avoided — into the mentality with which they view the actual, living, new child in the womb.  I have no doubt it can be done, but not without difficulty, and where there is difficulty, people fail.

america woman

This, after all, is the very reason why abortion is legal in the United States.  In the Supreme Court case Planned Parenthood vs. Casey, which confirmed the legalization of abortion, it was stated that:

[I]n some critical respects, the abortion decision is of the same character as the decision to use contraception […] For two decades of economic and social developments, [people] have organized intimate relationships and made choices that define their views of themselves and their places in society, in reliance on the availability of abortion in the event that contraception should fail.

The message is clear: Because we have come to use contraception, we have come to need abortion.  Luckily for the entire world, and all the babies, medical science has made it possible to effectively practice family planning without the use of contraception.  It’s called fertility awareness, and it’s all sort of awesome.

Noteworthy Comments

Joseph Jablonski (gaudiumdei.com) said…

Great post marc!  Your last line is confirmed by history: Contraception was legalized in 1970, and thus three years after, to make up for failures in the usage of contraception, they had to legalize abortion.

Lauren Kyfiuk said…

Amazing post Marc!
I (and I expect a good number of my colleagues) have been praying you write about this!  Your website is revolutionary.  Keep speaking shameless truth beautifully.
On behalf of the countless women and children who will benefit from this post, thank you.

Jeff Miller said…

Plus, add the further complication that some contraceptives are abortion-inducing themselves it seems to make that claim that throwing gasoline on the fire reduces the fire.  Of course they would deny that contraceptives can act in this manner in regards to “the pill”, but they don’t have the same case in regards to the IUD and other forms – but instead they move the goal posts to implantation to ignore the connection.

Matt said…

For me, the connection between abortion and contraception is pretty clear.  They both have the same purpose essentially: to prevent new life from developing.  They also both tend uphold the same good over life: convenience.  Most people who are pro-choice will not be able to see this connection.  For them, it is useful to point out that abortion is often used as back-up contraception.  That is, in case the condom breaks, there’s always the morning after pill or a more invasive form of abortion.  Although pro-choice people often like to bring up the scenario that involves a girl who was raped and now has to carry an illegitimate child to term, such situations are quite rare and the one that I described, in which a baby is killed so as to not be an inconvenience, is frighteningly common.

Beth Turner said…

It seems there are three ways to prevent the birth of a child: don’t have sex, have sex with contraception, or have an abortion after achieving pregnancy.  When you remove one option, you are bound to get an increase in rates of use of the other two.  In “abortion cultures,” abortion will sky-rocket when you remove contraception.  But I bet rates of abstinence, including periodic abstinence like NFP, increase too, especially in cultures that resist abortion.

Maria said…

Great article!!  Right now the Philippines wants to increase the use of contraception while abortion still remains legal.  I fear that it soon will become legal as the new Reproduction Health Bill is passed to allow easier access to contraception for the whole population.  I hope our government leaders read this and decide otherwise!

Wissen said…

Hi Marc! I have some issues with your post.  I won’t address every study or sentence, but I’ll try to get the main points:

I’ll preface this by saying that your entire “An honest look at the data shows that in virtually every country that increased the use of contraception, there was a simultaneous increase in the abortion rate,” paragraph is a correlation, and thus, causation cannot be surmised.  See the Guttmacher paper; there are much more confounding factors that can accompany these two phenomena.

For the Guttmacher study “Relationships Between Contraception and Abortion: A Review of the Evidence”, you seem to only address and criticize the data where contraception use rise and abortion rates decline at the same time (in communist countries).  However, you ignored similar results in non-communist Turkey, Tunisia and Switzerland.  You only gave a passing glance to the countries where contraceptives and abortion rise initially, but then abortion rates fall as contraception continues to increase.  The sentence, “This implies that contraception will eventually reduce the abortion rate in those countries as well,” is inaccurate.  We have observed this phenomenon in Denmark, United States, Netherlands, Singapore, and Korea.

“It’s important to recognize that, while contraception has been a factor in many of the relative decreases in abortion around the world, it is as often a factor in relative increases around the world.”

  • Spanish study just a correlation. Authors even write, “The factors responsible for the increased rate of elective abortion need further investigation.”
  • In regards to the English program, “The under 18 conception rate is now 13.3 per cent lower than in 1998. While behind the trajectory needed to achieve the target to halve the teenage pregnancy rate by 2010, conceptions and births are at their lowest level for over 20 years” (https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/00224-2010DOM-EN.pdf)
  • U.S.: “…however, their use of contraception might have been inconsistent or incorrect. In 1995, when the most recent NSFG was conducted, approximately 29% of sexually active U.S. women who used only oral contraceptives for birth control reported that they missed a birth-control pill one or more times during the 3 months before their NSFG interview.  In addition, approximately 33% of U.S. women who were using only coitus-dependent contraceptive methods** during the 3 months before the interview used these methods inconsistently.  At present, not all health insurance plans provide full contraceptive benefits.  Therefore, education regarding improved contraceptive use and practices as well as access to and education regarding safe, effective, and affordable contraception and family-planning services might help reduce the incidence of unintended pregnancy and, therefore, might reduce the use of legal induced abortion in the United States.”

“…family planning without the use of contraception.” Contraception, as defined by Google, “The deliberate use of artificial methods or other techniques to prevent pregnancy as a consequence of sexual intercourse.  “Fertility awareness would be still be considered a contraceptive method.

The whole rationale behind this piece seems to be this: Abortion rate increases with contraceptive use (even though abortion rates do decrease over time with increased contraceptive use but let’s ignore that for now), therefore contraceptive use causes increased abortions.

Jude Law Guardian said…

“The message is clear: Because we have come to use contraception, we have come to need abortion.”

WTF????????  HOW does this make ANY sense??  Unless you practice the ridiculous notion of sticking your head in the sand and pretending that people aren’t going to have sex, contraception is the ONLY thing that has a chance of stopping pregnancy without having an abortion.  Yeah.  Let’s all go back to the 1800’s and turn women back into breeder chattel/baby factories/third-class citizens and put them back in their place so they can spawn tons of babies like so many litters of rats.  Sounds like a plan–at least to the Religious Reich.

Bob said…

Apparently, it doesn’t make any sense to you because you didn’t take time to read the whole article or it’s many sources.  If you did, you would see that the article, at the VERY LEAST, makes some sense.

The only “ridiculous notion” here, as you say, is the one where you’re pretending and assuming that human beings don’t have any self-control to stop themselves from having sex with the first thing that moves at the end of the bar.



About Jack

Jack is a world traveling artist, skilled in trading ideas and information, none of which are considered too holy, too nerdy, nor too profane to hijack and twist into useful fashion. Sigma Frame Mindsets and methods for building and maintaining a masculine Frame
This entry was posted in Contraceptives, Culture Wars, Discerning Lies and Deception, International, Reviews and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

39 Responses to A Deeper Look at Contraception and Abortion

  1. larryzb says:

    As an aside, it is laughable that the US Supreme Court finds “a fundamental Constitutional right” to abortion while considering the infamous Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton cases. Such a right is based on a web of legal fictions.

    But, back to your thesis, we need to consider that women are demanding abortion. Supply side approaches (in the US) to reducing the numbers of abortions by going after the abortionists via various means has not worked out that well. Abortion is more ingrained in the Western world than ever before, or at least since the rise of Christianity which condemned ancient pagan infanticide and abortion. The simple fact is that demand creates its own supply, especially when the product or service is legal. How do we get through to women who are determined to abort so as to make them choose to respect their child in utero’s God-given right to life?

    There are other arguments here to consider. Why can people not wait for marriage to engage in sexual relations? Is limiting one’s family size, the number of children, morally licit? – By that, I mean is the end morally acceptable provided moral means to achieve that end are used? As well, as I noted previously on an earlier post with a comment, many so-called “contraceptives” are actually abortifacient in how they work. Is the purpose of human sexuality solely for procreation? If individuals choose to believe that, they are denying the bonding effects of sexual intimacy between the spouses.

    Sexual morality’s true purpose is to get people to keep their sexual activity within the covenant of marriage, it is not to desexualize us, or move us to ascetic renunciation as some would want. Sadly, sexual morality has been used to control people in Christian history, and there have been many abuses of Church authority in this area over the centuries. We now know how human reproduction actually works and we recognize that the non-seasonal sex drive is needed to bond spouses to each other for stable families.


  2. Robert Bremner says:

    For Millenials, abortion on demand is just part of the background noise. They cannot imagine a time when abortion was not legal. Many of them don’t like abortion, but they cannot imagine it being illegal. Voting is not going to change that, new justices on the courts will not change that, legislation will not roll back the abortion mentality. Boomers women are past their reproductive age. All but the youngest GenX’ers are past their reproductive age. The older millenials are moving out of their reproductive age. Gen-Z is just entering their reproductive age. Our best chance of eliminating or reducing the the abortion mentality is to kick the Overton window right off it’s sash.

    State firmly, “Higher education is 60% female. Liberal arts do not prepare a young man to take on the social duties, the financial and career duties, and the emotional duties of marriage and fatherhood. Despite MGTOW there are still some young men who would like to have a wife and children, to build their own little family, their kingdom. For those Gen-Z women who insist on marrying only a man with similar credential, one third will NEVER marry. Many of their male peers do not want to marry, further reducing the available pool of men. Once they decide they would like to marry, they will find competition for the men they would be willing to marry will be fierce.

    “Abortion messes with a woman’s head. It causes a great deal of cognitive dissonance, it turns her womb into a butcher shop. There are still young men who dream of having a wife and children, of creating new immortal souls, enjoying their childhood, watching them grow up, and to grow old with the wife of their youth.

    “NOT ONE of these young men dream of having their potential future children gestated in a SLAUGHTERHOUSE.”

    Expect hysterical pushback especially from Boomer women with guilty consciences. Stay firm. I realize that not all men are sufficiently financially and socially secure to say this out loud..

    Liked by 1 person

    • Robert Bremner says:


      A lot of men including me resent the man bashing advertising. It is useless to complain, because no one respects a whiny man. Instead let’s call them woman bashing advertisements.

      “I am sick of these women bashing commercials that make every American woman look like a disrespectful, contemptuous, castrating termagant, that no man with self respect would want to marry.”

      The advertisers will stop once the women are offended. .

      Liked by 1 person

      • Jack says:

        Robert, thanks for your comment. I’ve written a few posts that attempt to amplify the man bashing above the threshold of acceptability, and to elucidate the true source of the problem.


  3. lastmod says:

    Met many a Christian family that only has 2.5 children. I find it funny that in California If I had a teenage daughter, she could get an abortion because without parental consent “that’s between her and her doctor and its her body, and her choice” but the man who fathered that child could be arrested for “rape” with no evidence if she decides she suddenly was.

    Abortion is never going to be made illegal again. That pandoras box is never closing.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Lexet Blog says:

      “post-birth” abortion became a serious discussion over 7 years ago. next on the scene will be cloning and artificial wombs. We are heading into some very dark times

      Liked by 1 person

      • lastmod says:

        and Christians again will stand around looking at each other, like they do with all ‘culture war’ issues. Afraid to speak. Then someone will link it to ‘chivalry’ and the high fives, back slapping and “here here” all around will be made, and all the talk of how “bold” they are will be done……it will be like a gnawed bone thrown to the pew warmers “see, see…we stood up for jesus / men / the faith / what is right”

        and the christian masses will shrug knowing anything they say will be met with “I know greek / I am smarter than you / I have the wife n kids with nice teeth / the bible says we can’t judge”

        Hence the appeal and inspiration to fight by the Christian masses will be squelched by the “real men” in the room.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Lexet Blog says:

        I don’t interact with the pro life movement anymore for several reasons.

        1- I believe murder should result in the death penalty. The pro life movement pretends that abortion isn’t a crime, and that the mothers are victims. They aren’t, and they should be put to death.

        2- I support forced sterilization for recipients of abortions, and any policies that advance this principle (such as restrictions on welfare benefits).


      • ramman3000 says:


        “The pro life movement pretends that abortion isn’t a crime, and that the mothers are victims. They aren’t, and they should be put to death.”

        Not all. For example: Babies Are Still Murdered Here.

        Here is a quote from BAMH that I have started to cite whenever I run into someone pretending it isn’t murder.

        “I used to think that people [..] were mislead, that they were lied to, that they didn’t know [..] Everyone knows it’s a baby [..] even by those who are pro-choice, publicly, in print: ‘We know it’s a baby, but we still ought to be able to kill it.'” — R.C. Sproul Jr.


      • Lexet Blog says:

        All of the organizations leading the movement view the women as victims, and are silent as on abortion being murdered. That is not to say there aren’t people like me. However, my view is the minority, and its not represented by any group worth mentioning. I think abortion should be prosecuted as premeditated murder. I do not think that current permissions for the procedure are enough to warrant a defense to prosecution.

        Liked by 1 person

      • larryzb says:

        As to the many pro-life groups out there – yes, many do act as co-dependents and enablers of women in getting abortions. I have tried to point out in correspondence with these groups that demand creates its own supply, and that they need to work to reduce the demand for abortions (women are the ones who demand abortion). Instead, these groups keep trying to limit the access to abortion by going after the abortionists while ignoring the demand side of the equation. Women are not victims. You have one person ordering the death of the unborn child, and you have another person doing the killing. Both are culpable by any sane, rational moral code.

        Abortion is more ingrained in the culture than ever before, sorry to say.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Ame says:

        Abortion is more ingrained in the culture than ever before, sorry to say.

        it’s so much easier to keep the ‘out’ than to honor God, or so it seems. Satan is the Great Deceiver, and wow, are we as a culture ever deceived when it comes to abortion, including in the church and private christian lives.

        we want to honor God … as long as it doesn’t inconvenience us … or as long as it doesn’t highlight our own weaknesses and sin … or as long as we get to be happy and culturally prosperous, etc.

        as a group, christians see those who suffer as those who have not honored God in some way … and those christians who are culturally successful believe they are so because of their own great abilities that they gave themselves. very few will acknowledge that it is God who gives them their talent and ability.


  4. lastmod says:

    I know I am speaking to the sanctimonious minority here who have never done a thing wrong…….I honestly believe in most cases. Women who indeed have had an abortion when they are young do regret it. I think many are mentally / emotionally damaged, end up having “trust” issues with men and have intense guilt for what they did…but don’t know how to channel it, they don’t have anyone to talk to about it………even if they did find a “good” man later…….confessing this is frightening. It could scare one off. In a church setting, it could get out (which it will in many of todays churches) and will mark her as a “ruined” woman in those circles. It kind of forces her back into that vicious circle of men that are indeed “no good / trouble”

    If my past drug addiction was held upon me forever. I’d would have never gotten well. I mean, it still is by many……and I know first hand the psychological damage it has done to me. There are times at night and I just stare at the ceiling wondering what would my life be like if indeed I never took that first line of cocaine…….or had the “gonads” to say in 1991 “LSD, no thanks.”

    I can say this: I would be much further ahead than I am now financially and I probably would have eventually met a half-decent woman to marry. I also would have spared many people pain, heartache, and the wreckage I did to my parents would not have happened.

    Sure, I am not that man. I have changed, my life is better but the world in general will “never forgive” and no matter what I do. I will still be to most “that addict / that thief / that liar / that a-hole”

    I cannot escape that. I imagine many women who did have an abortion probably feel at times the same way. The guilt at times must be very amplified in that situation. I cannot relate.

    But if there is no redemption in Jesus in the church. A tight confidentiality between women who counsel women who have gone through this ordeal and yes…..”bad choice” well……..to me, and many others…the christian faith is a sham. Redemption is only for the few and again falls into “it depends who you are” (from a good family, are popular, good looking, etc)

    It’s wrong. It’s a bad choice. It hurts women. It hurts others. It’s murdering the life in you……..and yet, if a woman cannot find redemption, and the ability to heal……esp in a church……..well, the faith really does deserve to die, and the pews deserve to be empty.


    • ramman3000 says:

      Watch the video at the link that I gave above. In the first part of the video the executives in the National Right to Life organization—who have personally had abortions—call those who have abortions victims. A victim, by definition, is the person harmed by something or someone else. This cannot be moral culpability, nor repentance.

      Why do they feel regret if they are victims?

      Anyone can regret their actions. Those who murder their children will feel shame and regret, even if they they don’t repent. There is a difference between having a conscience and repentance. Everyone has the former, but not everyone does the latter. They knew it was human life when they chose to end it. This is proven by the fact that they can’t even say that abortion is murder because of what it implies for them. That’s not the mark of one who has repented, been saved by grace, forgiven, and redeemed. The sin must be confronted, not just the consequences. Christians confront both.

      They truly believe that abortion is just a mistake, on the same consequential level as being unable to conceive because you are too old. Both are deeply unfortunate and worthy of regret, but ultimately nobody’s fault.

      What Lexet is saying is that these leaders of the pro-life movement are not after repentance, nor calling sin ‘sin’. They are doing penance by leading the pro-life movement, that is, trying to get redemption through works. But you can’t be saved if you don’t repent.

      The church does not—and cannot—offer redemption on its own. We offer Jesus. Always through repentance and faith in Jesus, redemption comes from God. The church accepts the redeemed and gives them a place to heal. However, the reality is that we Christians graciously accept the genuine seekers into our churches before they repent, but when it comes to the wolves leading people astray (like the pro-life movement’s hypocritical leaders), we have the same level of hostility that Jesus had towards the Pharisee leaders.


  5. lastmod says:

    Well, rammann…many of them are victims. Victims of a culture that cheapens life, says it’s okay to do this without looking at the psychological / emotional and heart damage this causes a woman. They make it into a very easy choice. They even make it free in many cases. They even make it confidential for a minor to get one. “It’s a right!” and “It isn’t a baby!” and of course the aftermath of having this horrid procedure done….the scars. The guilt. The shame. The baggage…..the sudden awareness maybe years later of “Oh no!!!!! What did I do!!!”

    So christians don’t need fellowship, or church, or place of gathering….no one to talk to. These women should on their own “conviction” just start reading the bible, and “jesus will make them whole” and it will be okay…but while in this world……we’ll shame, slam, shame them to the grave for a very tragic and terrible past choice. cast them to the wolves, but they have “jesus” now, and everything will be okay.

    this is reinforcing my point further.

    We don’t need mens blogs, nor conferences…..”jesus” will convict our hearts and minds and we’ll be whole again. Easy. What is the point of fellowship then? What is the point in living? What is the point in having a collection plate? We don’t need bible studies, jesus will just make it all clear and it will be okay.

    christian service? that’s for the birds. if the homeless, the addict, the thief, the wrongdoer, the sinner just reads the bible….accepts jesus…poof…..all will be well. Well, not really……but it will be when you die.

    Prosecuting women for murder because they have an abortion is about as far fetched as repealing the 19th Amendment today. In fact, we should prosecute and jail any doctor for murder than has ever done one. While we’re at it, since a man fathered that child, and had sex out of wedlock, or fornicated and helped create that life…….and didn’t marry the woman immediately should be stoned to death as well.

    Abortion is a horrible thing, but if someone cannot repent and change and with honest heartfelt sorrow for a past mistake, and vow to speak against it, and perhaps help other women who indeed made this choice as well…………..and not be welcomed in church, and in greater society……

    the christian faith is useless.

    Paul stoned, and killed early believers. None of what he says should have zero merit. He should have been killed himself for his acts.

    Anyone involved in the US military should stand trial as well….for all of our wars of late over national interest….many innocent people were murdered. Strip them all of their pensions, throw them in jail

    This is just plain outrageous.


    • ramman3000 says:

      “many of them are victims”

      Sure, that is true, but is her victimhood greater than the victimhood of the child that perished? Recently Amber Guyger was convicted of murder because she thought she was defending her apartment. That she was a victim of a misunderstanding is beyond question, but she will still spend years in prison because her victim was the greater victim.

      While justice was served her, the Christ-like outpouring of love and forgiveness after the trial ended should serve as an illustrative example here of how a Christian balanced justice with love and mercy.

      “So christians don’t need fellowship, or church, or place of gathering….no one to talk to.”

      I said: “…the reality is that we Christians graciously accept the genuine seekers into our churches before they repent.” By “into our churches” I mean it in the biblical sense: “into our congregation; into our group.” This is the opposite of what you implied about what I said. The church is, first and foremost, a hospital for the sick and broken.

      Under no circumstances can I fail to criticize leaders that hand out forgiveness for sins.

      “Prosecuting women for murder”

      Lexet thinks that they should all be executed. I’m Anabaptist Christian: I will not use the sword. I will show mercy and grace. Government is appointed by God to be the sword. It would be logical for abortion cases to be handled the same way any other accusation of murder is handled by the justice system, along with the presumption of innocence. Why should it be otherwise?

      “Anyone involved in the US military should stand trial as well”

      Do you think that “I was just following orders” is a valid ethical argument?

      It’s the Anabaptist position that all violence by Christians is wrong, which includes war. It’s not our place to cause anyone to stand trial. Moreover, we are enjoined against using the courts to resolve our conflicts.


    • ramman3000 says:


      Put another way, if you thought abortion was actually murder, you’d have to treat it like murder. If you don’t treat abortion like murder, you can’t really think that it is murder. If you want to make the argument that abortion is not murder, go for it. But don’t get upset at those of us who do. Moreover, treating it as murder doesn’t mean you have to prosecute. It is the purpose of the criminal justice system to weigh justice and mercy and act accordingly.


      • lastmod says:

        You’re still forgetting something…….it’s legal……when it is made illegal again and a crime (which it will never be, unless SHTF happens) then that can be debated, until then sadly, it’s a choice……and you cannot prosecute someone for murder when the law states that it is not.


      • lastmod says:

        and you are assuming the criminal justice system acts accordingly……….for some it does. Money. Family connections. Being a female………I have no faith in it, or lawyers to act a”accordingly” look at the nonsense right now in Washington. Look at our circuit courts, our supreme court. They make laws they are “exempt” from

        Liked by 1 person

      • ramman3000 says:


        “You’re still forgetting something…….it’s legal”

        This is highly misleading and it is instructive as to why legislation from the bench is so potentially damaging. Abortion is ‘legal’ only because of judicial precedent, not because of laws passed. Indeed, by law, it is still illegal in some states. If the judicial precedent were overturned (as it should be, since Roe v Wade is illogical judicial overreach), then the existing laws would become enforceable again.


      • lastmod says:

        Wait…wait……wait….abortion was already “legal” in at least 25 states before Re V Wade, so that point is moot. All that case did was force states to accept it. Most states that had not made it lega…..if that case did not go to the supreme court……were already on the road to making it legal or passing legislation. Again, what did the “bold” christians do in the country all through the summer of 1973 and into the spring of 1974 do?????

        Nothing. They waiting for the decision to get handed down, and then “cried” about how its murder….forgetting that for the prior ten years years 25 states had already made it legal with zero fight.


  6. lastmod says:

    Funny you threw the word “ethical” in that sentence as in : Do you think that “I was just following orders” is a valid ethical argument?

    I am no moral guidance on what is “ethical” for the fact whatever stance I take…it will be “wrong”
    You men with the high IQ’s can debate that, and still won’t come up a solution either. It’s death, shunning….but accept jesus and you have eternal life……..and living confounded and confronted forever for and by a mistake. This is why most people….even ones with ‘sympathies’ towards christianity don’t want it in their lives. It’s a cold, harsh, faith of drudgerey, rules, rules, rules, rules for some….and others…ahhhhhhh….well, you know….god created some people just ‘better’ than others.

    My personal opinion? I at one time respected men and women who served this country. I still get tears in my eyes for the few remaining men of WWII. They came through the Depression…had little to fight for, many were one generation removed from their mother / native country…….and yet, they served. Many died. Most were between the ages of 18-24. In Korea and Vietnam, a bunch of men who could not afford college / deferment had to go to defend national interests. I feel bad for those who had no choice (refusal meant serious jail / prison time, and a ruined life). Over 58,000 US lives lost, and another few million ruined by drugs, agent orange, the VA, and their fellow citizens for just “doing what they were told / had no real choice”

    Today? Since 1973 we have had a volunteer military. Anyone who joins it is on their own volition. No one drafted. No recruiter putting a gun to the head “if you don’t enlist, I’ll blow your brains out / rape your daughter / kill your girlfriend(s)” I don’t “owe” anyone who has served post 1973 a “thank you” or benefits, or a pension, or gratitude, or life long health care, or low mortgage rates for home loans (vets get a huge benefit from this in California anyway), or free college.

    You joined up for this. It was a job. You may have gotten some skills. Great. Happy for you. But for a post 1973 vet…I don’t “owe” a “thank you” for serving. That was your own choice to put your ass on the line. Not mine.


    • ramman3000 says:

      “still won’t come up a solution either”

      The Anabaptist Christians found the only solution. No Christian should serve in the military. You cannot serve two masters. You will love one and hate the other. If you join the military, you will inevitably fail to serve God. The only logically possible solution is to only serve God. If you follow God, then “I was just following orders” is ethically valid.


  7. lastmod says:

    Lol….just like “orthodoxy” has all of our current problems with “feminism” solved. Get out of here. You shouldn’t work either. God will provide your food, clothing and anything else you need. You just have to “ask” for it right?

    What a crock


  8. Ame says:

    i have a few friends on the front line of the abortion war, defending the innocent babies.

    the most shocking part? it’s the christians that keep abortion legal. they publicly are against it but privately vote for it, just in case … just in case it’s their daughter, or their sister, or their girlfriend, or the woman gets pregnant from an affair. many a christian woman has taken her daughter to get an abortion … or got one herself when she had an affair.

    do we need compassion? absolutely. compassion included calling things as they are.

    but, sheesh … when people who call themselves ‘God’s people,’ vote for freedom of choice, and use it … for all those ‘oops’ … then turn around and treat those who are known to have had abortions with disdain … whoa to them when they meet their Maker.

    abortion causes untold emotional and mental and spiritual, life-long, issues for those who make that choice.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Ame says:

    i think one of the things that we christians are terrible with is appropriate compassion. we are also terrible about allowing God to work over a long period of time in and through people to bring them to Him and to bring them to repentance. we think that they should know what we know right now … and that they should be where we are right now. but God doesn’t work that way.

    however, boundaries and Truth are also critical … mercy and grace and compassion do not exclude Truth, and, in fact, cannot be pure without Truth.

    sin has long tentacles and long-lasting consequences. after David’s sin was brought before him, he grieved deeply, acknowledging his ‘blood guilt.’ also, the far reaching consequences of his great sin are seen in the before and after telling of his story. was he forgiven? absolutely. was a price paid? absolutely. but were the consequences erased with the forgiveness? no.

    and that’s the hard part that we struggle with, i think; i know i do.

    those who have not experienced the huge amount of grace and mercy and forgiveness for ‘big’ sins often cannot comprehend any part of it. not saying that’s good of bad; simply it is. our arrogance in not having committed the ‘big’ sins, though, is also sin … it’s just more accepted.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. lastmod says:

    Know a very devout Catholic woman here in Santa Rosa. Church every Sunday. Every Wednesday. Confession. Communion…….she’s more Catholic than the the Pope…….gently berates protestants for “having crackers and grape juice” for communion (communion doesn’t make one holy). Prays to a Saint of the “Americas” and talks about that…never heard her say the word jesus mind you…..She has a daughter. Daughter just got married. Her stance on family planning????????????

    “Well, she’s on the pill right now so they can get financially stable so they can support a family, and if the church thinks that is wrong, well, they can sell some of that gold they have in the Vatican to help pay to support and raise her family…”

    Mind you they were living together before they got married. So living in sin, getting rewarded for that and blessed by the church proper…..getting married and waiting until they are financially able to raise a family, calling out other christians as heathens…..believes that marriage is a “gift” from god. Is a sacrament.

    So why should I be convinced to come to church with her and “get right with the church” when exceptions are made. This isn’t limited to Catholics. Picking on them for the moment. She’s going to heaven “100% convinced” and then tells me “You’re not married because you have to pray, say these prayers…pray to this saint, that saint and get favor from god”

    So god now has favorites? Was told he loves us all. Guess I was wrong.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ame says:

      i think we are all a paradox, are we not. we don’t think we are … then God illuminates a part of our soul we didn’t see before, and we realize, ‘but for the grace of God go i.’

      one of my concerns with the catholic church and many other churches is that the focus is on the church rather than on Jesus. we want to invite people to church rather than invite them to Jesus.

      my therapist from all those years ago was huge on Celebrate Recovery set up with a large group worship time and then small groups. he often said that that’s where the real church happens … where people are able to be their real selves, open and honest, held accountable, and loved. i did love CR but it’s a hard place for me to stay … i tend to absorb other people’s stories rather than let them bounce off 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

      • lastmod says:

        CR never did anything for me. Most of the time was spent in modern praise (like any church service does today, or the young people won’t come….) and then “groups” porn addicted men in room three, co dependent women in room four. drug and alcohol men room five, and women who feel they-may-have-been-raped-but-are-not-sure-but-want-affirmation-about-this to stay here. No cross talking, or questions either…..hence CR being a place where your addictions / problems are “celebrated” and no recovery. Some meetings they would combine the men, so now you have co-dependent men in the same room with porn addicted men……and the moderators…….(rolls eyes)

        In NA (narcotics anonymous) I liked the cross talking, and questions asked by fellow members int he meetings. Why? Because someone who is fighting the same problem as you can ask you something. The cross talking by a fellow addict can teach you to “get to the point” and when you are challenged….many times in addiction, that is what the addict needs. A slap of reality of “what you did” and perhaps can teach you to “grow up”
        The smoking meetings seemed to bring out the “real” people who were actually trying to get better.

        After almost 15 years, I still go to NA…..not because I “need” it. Been clean now just about that long, but a new person needs to see that there is life beyond getting clean. CR will tell you “its all ‘his’ timing” and enable you and make you spineless to not face your problem. CR does EXACTLY like every other thing of the world, and decides to make “christian” by slapping “jesus” somewhere in it, and now “its christian” whereas to the world it looks and is fake. CR could be a deep place to really confront, challenge and actually fix that broken spirt and bring people to faith…but it won’t. That takes work. Something I witnessed that the church NEVER wants to do.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Ame says:


        I liked the cross talking, and questions asked by fellow members int he meetings. Why? Because someone who is fighting the same problem as you can ask you something. The cross talking by a fellow addict can teach you to “get to the point” and when you are challenged….many times in addiction, that is what the addict needs. A slap of reality of “what you did” and perhaps can teach you to “grow up”

        i like that – cross-talking. we all need people in our lives who will give us that ‘slap of reality,’ do we not?!

        That takes work. Something I witnessed that the church NEVER wants to do.

        true dat, with very rare exception. i do know those who are willing to do the work, but they are very few. guess that follows scripture … narrow the road and wide the path.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Stephanie says:

      Half my extended family is Catholic, as well as my husbands, and BOTH sides are very very proud of being Catholic. But when you look at how they live their lives, they’re basically Atheists, and the cognitive dissonance is amazing to watch in real time.

      When we went to a wedding last year, one of the cousins (who hates we’re not Catholic) kept praising the newly weds for what great Christians they were, and how they put the family above their relationship, and that they had Jesus at the center of the relationship and on and on.

      We kind of gave each other the side-eye… this couple had been having pre-marital sex for nearly a decade, lived together for several years, and definitely did not have, “Jesus at the center of their relationship,” they never even attended church barring the usual holidays! But everyone there in the family seemed to agree 😀 Was kind of hilarious in a way. This family has rejected us, been openly hostile to us on past holidays, and just pretty cruel mostly (we guess) because we aren’t Catholic, and even though the newly wed couple are our kids’ Aunt and Uncle, they ignored our kids and family the entire time, excluded me and the kids their formal pictures (they only wanted my husband lol). They never send our kids cards or anything for their birthdays/Christmas… just really unpleasant, “Christians.”

      Something sad about Catholicism, too, is that from what my husband told me growing up (and my mom), they don’t teach you to read your Bible. Some of their churches even discourage it, since historically they believed the common people weren’t able to understand God’s Word (and we know the Bible says the opposite!!!!).

      Please don’t allow people like this to affect your own faith. I look on people like that with a mixture of pity and compassion (and some real worry about whether or not they DO have a relationship with Christ!). But I’d never let it affect my personal relationship with God because I know who He is. You have to hold strong to Him, and Him alone. People are nuts.

      And… don’t take this the wrong way, Jason, but there are others out there (in my family personally, too) who have SUPER good reasons in their minds, to stay away from God because of the church. Think of all the sexual abuse the priests do, and how the Church’s attitude is to humiliate and blame the child victims (and protect the evil doer priests). That happens way more often than it should, it’s almost their, “norm,” in how they operate in keeping those priests/bishops working (and raping kids), and to me those sexually abused have even greater reason to be angry and confused. Not trying to be rude or minimize anything you’ve personally been though, but it helps me to see how others have gone through way way worse regarding false Christians, when I’m tempted to feel resentful.


      • lastmod says:

        Thank you for your kind and respectful admonishment. I have made my choice and no, life didn’t suddenly become better but I am sleeping much better at night. I have better things to do with my personal anxieties than worry about who’s / who in the pecking order at church…..and I no longer worry about who is more right………because they themselves cannot agree about the bible and what “jesus really meant”

        You all can have it. I have stated before that I don’t want christians killed. I don’t want them banned. I don’t think they are silly or stupid. I just know its a place and a system setup to make many people believe they are indeed hopeless, while few get to revel in their Ego….and lord it over the rest of us.

        I am not saying “here’s why men and people are leaving the church today in droves…or not even coming, let’s implement my ideas right now.” No. My thing is if people really do believe this, and want to convince others……well, they are actually going to have to start living like it. 99.999999999999999999999999999999 never will.

        The few who do, learn quickly that its made up and get frustrated and some a trite angry that they were a fool. I am trying to stay off that. It was a mistake of mine, I made it…..and if its working for someone, well, that’s up to them to decide.


  11. lastmod says:

    That is why NA and AA when the person wants to get well DOES have a decent success rate. Court mandated NA / AA doesn’t work…..and co-ed meetings don’t work. NA /AA works best when the sexes are separated. Been to many a meeting over the decade and a half……tears, breakthroughs, anger….yelling……several where men have almost come to blows. The cross-talking and questions force the addict to face things, and remember….it’s a fellow addict…not a therapist, or a priest, the pastor, his gossipy wife or a counselor. I also like how when a meeting closes….here in California anyway…..you have young, old, black, white, immigrant, rich, poor, gay, straight……the one thing is that we all want to get well and stop using. There are a billion jokes about AA / NA people…and yeah….many of them are true, but it really helped me. I check in now about once a month. When I first got clean? sometimes it was four or five a day.

    CR could be more. Much more……..on the mens side of things if it was modeled like AA / NA……cross talking and all……some serious conviction could happen, but who am I kidding.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ame says:

      i’m really, really glad you got out and are around to talk about it. so many don’t, and it often feels so hopeless. my first husband was an addict, and it was often overwhelming … living on the roller coaster of his addiction cycles … not knowing what it was or what they were for many years … finally finding out the truth.

      i’m sorry the church has been so hard. been out of the church for many, many years until just recently … found this itty bitty church a couple months ago. seems good so far. our pastor is very compassionate … shared with me that his 35 year old son died of a drug od. those things either make you more compassionate or bitter, thankfully, it’s made him and his wife more compassionate.

      have you found any kind of spiritual support group, bible study, etc? all i hear about california is bad.

      Liked by 1 person

  12. lastmod says:

    well……the only christians in the USA live in Texas or The South right? (sarcasm)

    I still go to NA, but that is just to be a presence for a newer guy. Newer people in NA must see people who got through. It was important to me when I first started going. Very important.

    I am too far gone I suppose. I can’t be taught anymore, because what people teach me or try to tell me is big words, very confusing scenarios, words that seem to change meaning when it fits them, or their narrative. I despise it, probably because I have been always talked down to in anything I have done. The church and professing christians were the worst culprit……..

    I can’t get real life answers from church or christianity “trust god” and “god has an amazing plan for my life” (tell that to the disciples, all murdered / martyred / exiled). If he is real in the christian sense so to speak……..he just likes some people and hates others. He’s loving and amazing when you’re on the side of his love I suppose…….but if you’re on the other side…….no hope for you. Your purpose is to listen to the side that is loved tell you how “much they are loved”

    I was a paying audience for over a decade. Got even more depressed, messed up and stunted. So, I don’t need that.

    California is okay. San Francisco, LA and the coast seem to be what’s insane out here…the rest of the state people wise is rather nice.


    • Ame says:

      well……the only christians in the USA live in Texas or The South right? (sarcasm)

      i’m a bit offended you think that’s sarcasm 😉 lol!

      when my first husband left us, the church turned very ugly toward my two little girls and me. very ugly. it got to where one of us or all of us were crying on the way home from church every sunday, and i decided one day that was enough. i did not want my girls to equate God with people like that … seen too many horror stories for that. so, i pulled us out of church, but not away from God.

      when their dad did some really terrible things to them in middle school, all in the name of God, my girls never lost their faith.

      that we’re even considering attending church, much less actually attending, is … well, a miracle.

      i do get so.very.tired. of that concept that if things are good, it’s b/c God loves us … if things are bad, it’s b/c God is punishing us. it’s over-simplistic, and God is anything but over-simplistic.

      outside of church … outside of church people … outside of all of that … there is a place where God can and will meet us, where we are, as we are, and love us right there. He doesn’t magically make everything all better, but He does something deep inside our souls that is often is completely inexplicable yet it permeates every fiber of our beings and changes everything. may you find that place, that God. not the one you’ve seen in church or in other people, but the One who cannot be explained by our limited vocabulary.

      Liked by 2 people

  13. Pingback: Contraception Correlations | Σ Frame

  14. Pingback: 2019 Sigma Frame Performance Report | Σ Frame

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s