Strollerderby

To be honest, they have a point. I'm atheistic, so by no means am I trying to back the Vatican up. There have been studies however, to show that the same hormones we women take to prevent unwanted pregnancies are passed from our bodies through our urine. It's causing plenty of effects in the environment; the one that stands out in my memory is something along the lines of species of fish being born nearly all female (it may have been infertile, I can't remember 100%) due to exposure to the hormones put into their water ways through our urine. However, I don't think a large enough percentage would be getting back into our drinking supply to cause this same effect in humans, fish LIVE in the water, we just drink it. An interesting point none-the-less.

My husband is Swedish and I remember him telling me something about there being a bunch of infertile fish somewhere in Norway and the pill was suspected.  Come to think of it there have been lots of studies finding all sorts of medication in water not only from people peeing it out, but also from the fact that a lot of people just flush the medication that they do not use.

Maybe everyone should just move onto IUDs or stick with condoms like in Japan...

You know, in a round about way, isn't this a GOOD thing?  Overpopulation being what it is.  I notice how they skipped over the fact that overpopulation is destroying our environment at probably a faster rate than anything else.  

Silly Catholics! I am agnostic. I do not practice in any given religion. However, I do spend a great deal of time laughing at Catholicism. This gives me another reason to chuckle today! :) My opinion... how many unmarried Catholic girls are out doing the big nasty, and popping a pill to prevent creation? Quite a few, I'm sure. So, rather than they go out and do the big nasty, without the pill popping, to bring an unholy bastard child into the world, I say let's make the fish infertile. haha. Keep the pill coming, this unholy, unCatholic pill-popping, had a kid-out-of-wedlock woman is going to keep taking them. Hell, I'd even take two a day, if it made a difference!

Jeanne... where do you find these crazy stories?!?!

The pill has many unintended, scientifically-proven, negative consequences.  You need not be Catholic to be aware of them (but it is impressive that the Church is).

I have written about them here:

http://tinyurl.com/7cy8z2

http://tinyurl.com/8pguu3

Trace -

Your statement that you laugh at Catholicism is incredibly insensitive. Many members that post comments in this community happen to be Catholic.  Though, like a majority of American Catholics, I don't agree with the church's stance on birth control, I resent the ignorance of your comments and willingness to brand an entire faith as "silly".

I read this article as well... and the part that's left out is:

The article was promptly dismissed by several organizations.

"Once metabolised, the hormones contained in oral contraceptives no longer have any of the characteristic effects of feminine hormones," said Gianbenedetto Melis, vice-president of a contraceptive research association.

Hormones in the pill, such as estrogen, "are present everywhere … in plastic, in disinfectants, in meat that we eat," said Flavia Franconi, of the Society of Italian Pharmacology.

Now, being an agnostic myself, I am totally open to the possibility that we don't know everything about science, the body and the natural world. Long-held beliefs are dis-proven and re-proven all the time :-) However, until/unless clear scientific data comes out saying that women taking birth control is causing male infertility, I'm not going to believe it, even if it "sounds like it makes sense."

It's just like the story I heard awhile ago talking about all kinds of medications being passed through the water supply. And, while technically that may be true, they are in such tiny, microscopic, insignificant amounts, as to prove absolutely harmless to the human body (to get even one dose worth, you'd have to drink so much water, you would die before even getting close to consuming one dose of any medication :-p).

The same goes for being paranoid about germs... yes, there are germs and viruses and all kinds of nasty things all over the place. But, that's what our immune systems are for :-) The problem with only knowing a little bit about a subject, is you can do more harm than you would if you knew nothing. So many people know about germs, that parents in particular go crazy on the anti-bacterial everything and now, we're not only breeding super-bugs (because as they said in Jurassic Park, "Life finds a way."), but now we also have kids with no immune systems to speak of.

That's why, unless I have the whole story, I'm not going to pretend to know what I'm talking about... because I don't :-)

Aren't the hormones in the pill hormones the body would naturally produce? So wouldn't we be excreting them anyway?

What type of article is this?  You roll your eyes because the Vatican talks about it . . . okay . . . but is it true?  Did you write and scoff when scientists addressed this at a conference regarding the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta?  What about the professional opinions of Dr. Norris physiology prof from University of Colorado?

Pharmaceutical companies may use this info to create more eco-friendly birth control pills.  Scientists are using the info to keep a close watch on the fish in Washington State's rivers.  The Catholic church will use this info to confirm their stance on artificial birth control. That's what they do.  But this article seems to suggest that _how_ an organization uses the info affects whether the findings are credible or not.

Was the purpose of this piece was to inform everyone that Jeanne Sager doesn't trust the Vatican in matters of birth control? If so, mission accomplished. However, this leaves the question conveniently avoided, is it true? Is synthetic estrogen harmful to our environment?

lovedannygansle:

I didn't mean to be offensive towards any one person or idea, sorry you feel offended.

Isn't the Pill made up of the same hormones our bodies have nautrally when we are pregnant, just a bit more of them so our bodies think they are already pregnant so we cant get pregnant?  If so, then pregnant women are making men infertile since we all pee, those on the Pill and those that are pregnant.    

This is Hogwash designed by the church using our environmental paranoia against us.  They are criminally clever.

There are many different types of hormones in different forms of hormonal birth control; there are many different types of estrogen.  So, no the pill with synthetic hormones aren't just "the same" as some people here have wondered. Similar, but not the same.  In fact even in our bodies we have different types of estrogen. There is no 1 type found universally in humans, pills, animals, plants etc.

This is why this article is dangerous.  It minimizes a real debate about a medicine's effect. The effect may be negligible, perhaps a complete non-issue, but why not ask the question to be sure?

I wouldn't use the Vatican's opinion to introduce a scientific debate, and I certainly wouldn't make it the only cited source as in this article . . . unless maybe I was a priest in the pulpit.

Look up different estrogens in our environment:

www.nwhealth.edu/.../estro2.html

This is one of the most negatively biased articles I've ever read on this website, and honestly it's very discouraging.  Jeanne, if you really think being a Catholic is all about "ducking your head in shame" when the Church speaks out on controversial issues, then maybe you should reconsider your religious viewpoint; you're doing more harm to the religion by being a "casual Catholic" than if you weren't a Catholic at all.

Nevermind the fact that you didn't even consider that there might actually be some validity to the Vatican's study because you apparently consider the Church to be sexist and misogynistic; what troubles me more is that as a Catholic, you don't seem to understand anything about the Church's teachings on having children.

The Church doesn't discourage the use of birth control simply because it has some hidden agenda to force women to "make more Catholic babies."  The ability to bring another life into this world is a gift and a blessing, and it's one that we should not abuse or take for granted.  As both a woman and a Catholic, you should be ashamed of yourself for not understanding that better.

Now that I've had a minute to reflect on this, let me clarify one thing--it was wrong of me to state that you should reconsider being a Catholic because you haven't fully committed to the Church.  That's not the message I want to send.  

However, I do want to say that by being generally disbelieving of and misinformed about the Church's teachings on family life--and then spreading those falsehoods around publicly--you are doing a great disservice to the Church.  Truly devoted Catholics understand that life is the most important thing that we have been given on this Earth, and it should be cherished.  The Church's position on birth control serves only to spread that message, if you honestly take the time to understand it.

I would not wish for any Catholic--casual or not--to reconsider being Catholic.  I would only hope that you could reconsider what being Catholic actually means, and learn to look more objectively at what the Church teaches and why.  Maybe from there, you could reconnect more with your own Catholic identity.  

I do genuinely hope that for you, despite how it may have sounded in my earlier post.  Best wishes and God bless.

Jeanne-

As a Catholic (and a socially liberal one, at that), I'm struggling with the tone of your piece. I find that Catholoicism is the last religion around that people feel confortable kicking around without reservation or sensitivity to members of the faith. There doesn't seem to be the same stigma attached to disparraging Catholics (or the Church) as there is to other religions.

I made this statement to another commenter, but the tone seems to make harsh crisicisms and accusations that reflect on the entire religion and it's members.  I could never imagine writing a piece about another Church's leadership the way you have.

I agree with Sarah that the tone of this piece departs from the original argument, and has a very negative tone at the Church and takes very uncalled-for cheap shots.  The "making more Caholic babies" statement got me in the gut.

Jeanne-

Of course you have the right to question the Church's teaching, particularly as a Catholic. I also have critcisms (not far off from yours - conctraception and role of women among others) of the church and do not stand by blindly and accept everything from the Vatican. Like me, there are many Obama-loving, left-wing Catholics.

I simply take great offense to your dismissiveness and tone when referring to the church leadership as the "boys who don't have sex".  I was raised a Catholic, and probably have a more impressive resume with regards to my church participation etc...and I have never been told I need to make babies to be a "good Catholic girl". Further, simply identifying yourself as a Catholic doesn't make you more entitled to attack the church (based on this issue) than a non-Catholic.  I'm afraid your own experience and attitudes feed stereotypes that many, unfortunately, hold about Catholics - (see comment from Trace).  Also, check out the link for this book:

www.amazon.com/.../0195154800

This has nothing to do with my "steadfast faith" - I struggle with is as much as anyone. I never said you don't have the right to question the church.  It has more to do with respect and tolerance for a church that is much much more than it's views on contraception.

I appreciate your responses - and certainly contraception in the Church is an issue worth discussing - including the obvious hypocricy on the part of the church.  I think, in the end, I am bothered by the TONE that allows for a "piling on" and a dismissiveness than rational discussion. Many of the comments reflect that, and I feel were guided by your post. Pointing out inconsistencies between value systems and the church differs greatly from the slant of your post.

I'm still shaking my head at your stance that as Catholics, we deserve to be "picked on" and that we deserve it based on "real fact". More than other religions? And for the life of me, I can't see why anyone of any relgion wouldn't be completely offended by Trace's comments, sarcasm or no.

So your point really was to bash the church. But why not put some meat on your criticism?  Then I think people will see it as constructive criticism instead of just nasty jabs.

You've grown up Catholic? CYO? Married?  You admit that that hardly makes you a theologian. And "baby-making" homilies?  Come on.  Every American Catholic church I have ever been to has been far too chicken (or too sensitive, or too dissident, who knows) to talk about these controversial issues from the pulpit.  I guess you had different experiences; maybe I've had the aberrant experiences . . . or maybe you have.

You chose to use Yahoo! news as your source of info.  What is that?  Third hand reporting?  Jeanne read, that Yahoo said, that the Vatican wrote, about some studies someone else conducted . . . .

What about citing "Love and Responsibiliy" or "Theology of the Body" or, the actual encyclical Yahoo was referring to or the actual studies that the referred encyclical referred to?

I disagree when you said, "I am not poking fun at someone else's religion, I'm highlighting major concerns I have with MY OWN religion." I found little thought in this piece, only vitriol--who cares if it is your religion or not.

Since you are curious, I'll bite:  yes, I have. Have you ever read dissenting comments before?  What's wrong with commenting on an author's opinion in the "comment" section. I argue that you have a (maybe spot-on, but nevertheless . . .) poorly supported, poorly articulated opinion--on both the issue of synthetic estrogens' effects on our environment, and on the Catholic church's reasonings behind their beliefs.

Whether I agree or disagree with an opinion hardly matters to me if it gives me something to ponder, challenge, or discover; I just suggested that more research would, on both issues, would make a more impactful written opinion.

It's funny when it comes to religion people start to freak.  I love it.  Me?  Sure I was raised baptist, southern baptist no less.  But now?  Screw it.  I've seen too much and read too much to believe that anyone on Earth can be so holy.  

I know this is a soap box, but who are we to tell other humans what to do to go to "heaven?"  I believe we make our own heaven and hell and deal with the consequences of our actions.  

I still want to know, after a guy scores a touchdown in a football game he praises God, does the guy who throws the interception that let to the touchdown praise God?  I know I'm going to catch flack for that, but hey listen, we've always said there's a separation of church and state but it's never been true.  What does it say on our money?  In God We Trust?  And we wonder why muslims distrust us.  Hmm...  

As for this story, I think only one or two people seem to bring up a real valid point.  Overpopulation is dooming this planet.  The resources on this Earth are strained at best, look at the demand on oil, the warming of the climate and the shrinking of forests.  Slowly we are killing the things we feed off of.  So we should bring in more catholic children to form the vatican's own holy army.  Woo hoo, let's gear up the crusades, and we'll go conquer some infidel's land.  Nothing like pushing religion in people's faces.  All at the expense of natural resources.  Well I guess who needs oil when you have horses and chariots to zoom on up to heaven after converting some Middle Eastern muslim into a catholic.

If a woman wants to use birth control, who is a bunch of non-sexual men to say what she can do?  If I was told to stop playing video games or i'd be left out of the line to heaven, well i guess there'd be some gaming in hell, if it does exist.  

ballsmoduff -

No disrespect, but you do not have the slightest grasp of Catholicism. In fact, your ideas about conversion could not be further from the truth. The Crusades are ancient history (attempts at widespread postylization are defunct in Catholicism - there are NO attempts to seek out and convert people of other faiths, NONE) and there is no agenda from the Vatican to incresase the Catholic population (by advocating against birth control) as you allege.

You are certainly free to express an opinion here - heck, this is what this forum is for, but I find it upsetting that people seem to think they know, and therefore, can dump on Catholicism.

FYI - over 90% of American Catholics use artifical birth control.  We are not going to hell because of it, no Catholic believes that.  Stop spreading false information.

The Conquistadores de Catholicism have spoken! ;) Ballsy... Right on man, right on!

Trace-

Spreading hate by the use of false stereotypes is dangerous for all religions.  Exposing how these stereotypes are both false and damaging is necessary to productive dialogue in a respectful community.  Based on your responses to me (mocking and namecalling included), however, sounds like you do not agree.

Check out this link to see where some of your prejudices about Catholicism may be rooted.  Good read.

www.amazon.com/.../ref=si3_rdr_bb_product

What irritates me the most about the idea that the Pill is such a terrible thing is that at least for a long time, the hormones for the Pill were obtained from pregnant mare urine - implying that pregnant animals naturally secrete these hormones.  So if we take the hormones excreted from horses, and don't become pregnant, how much more or less is being released from our bodies than if we didn't take the hormones, became pregnant, and naturally became hormone factories?  Perhaps that question could lead to some more enlightening research.

It is interesting to me, and somewhat ironic, that many who claim to be environmentally friendly (questioning every possible ingredient that is in their products) are quick to dismiss contraceptives as safe.  Perhaps it is because population control is thought to be achieved through the use of contraceptives and perhaps this outweighs the potential dangers that contraceptives might pose (coincidentally, many European countries are not producing enough children to account for deaths).  All of this is quite theoretical and the data are confusing and confounding at best.  I would like to say that issues such as contraception and its long term effects is extremely complicated and is not a black and white issue as some have flamboyantly suggested.  I am not naïve enough to believe that the pill is entirely good or entirely bad just as I believe there is a balance between being environmentally friendly and promoting human development.    

The Catholic Church has been around for some time and its teachings on contraception are not idiotic or impulsive but meticulously developed and well supported.  From a completely cynical viewpoint, it is unlikely that any organization of such power would jeopardize its position by releasing ridiculous teachings that are so obviously counter-cultural.      

To those who claim that the Catholic Church wants to raise "more Catholic babies" this is a bit silly considering that the Church's standpoint on contraception was written to be relevant to whole societies and populations, not only Catholics.  The Church is attempting to combat the popular yet subtle notion that life is dispensable based on individual convenience.  While you may disagree with its methods or call it hypocritical, the Church is attempting to promote self-sacrificial love and altruism among couples while preserving the dignity of procreation.  Additionally, the Church offers many services to women and families who both choose to abort unplanned pregnancies and keep unplanned pregnancies.  I am not longer a practicing Catholic but I recognize that the teachings of the Church, even primitive teachings regarding love for neighbor and the importance of human dignity, are an excellent way to construct a society.  There are many excellent components of the Catholic Church that are not negated by human hypocrisy and error.  If we conducted our political decisions this way none of us would vote (yes, even for Obama).    

Finally, I find it a little frustrating that people who call themselves ‘liberal’ and ‘open-minded’ are being quite close-minded to many conservative arguments that have merit and are at least worth listening to.  Every argument is an argument for a reason, based on some type of evidence.  These social issues are not easily resolved and discussion based on polarization of opinions leads to a lack of compromise and accomplishment.   Perhaps being liberal involves adopting a set of policies and mindsets that are considered liberal.  In the end, aren’t they doing the same things they accuse the conservatives of doing?    

Additionally, I would like to point out that the author based her entire attitude of the Catholic Church on her limited experience.  It is an individual responsibility to seek out information to augment personal experience, as it are often biased.  I have had terrible experiences with a variety of churches but have retained respect for the philosophies of many of them.  The teachings of the Catholic Church do discuss children as a blessing and do not command compulsive procreation.  Perhaps more time invested in research would have revealed a more balanced view.    

I think this is ridiculous.  Whose views are they exactly?  something seems to be misunderstood.

-Martin