[mugs99]

Okay, natural vs forced is the deciding factor. Then...Does that mean that birth control is abortion?

[Im4LifeandLiberty]

Birth control that works after conception--most hormonal methods and the IUD often do this--is, by definition, abortion. Only birth control methods that prevent the union of sperm and egg can properly be referred to as contraception; regardless of their trade names, birth control methods that end unborn lives after they have begun are not contraception, they are abortifacients.

[klossg]

Then...Does that mean that birth control is abortion?

NFP is Birth Control ... but it is based on abstinence. There is no union of sperm and egg with abstinence. So, Birth Control by definition is not abortion. I know you know and agree with that. Who wouldn't? Abortion is not possible without union of egg and sperm - either is birth. Simple.

Note: NFP is not the Rhythm Method. The Rhythm method does not work, never has worked as effective birth control. But today's NFP (unlike Rhythm) is as effective as the Pill, better than the IUD and way better than condoms. And there are no side effects or any potential for forced rejection of an egg-sperm union.

You can see post #28 for definition of the potential for contraceptives to be abortificient. Some specifics on the morning after pill (MAP). The MAP is designed to be an abortificient - after the union of sperm and egg. The MAP does not always cause an abortion because:

1. the woman's egg may not have been any where near ovulation point and so the MAP may actually stop the woman from ovulating,

2. even if sexual intercourse had occurred at the time of ovulation - a sperm may not have reached it in time

3. or the egg-sperm union may be able to survive and implant in the harmful-environment the MAP creates in the woman's womb.

[AliVeritas]

Is birth control natural by outside means?