Killing the Seed: How Hormonal Birth Control Violates the Sixth Commandment

In my previous post I talked about how I don't believe sperm by itself is a "seed" and therefore I don't believe that birth control methods which block sperm are immoral in and of themselves. Today I'd like to talk about how a fertilized egg is a seed.

If we continue the analogy of conception being like sowing seeds in a garden, the fertilized egg is what is “planted” in the uterus. The fertilized egg (zygote), unlike a sperm, has a very real potential of growing into an adult.

Most "pro-choice" people will argue that life does not begin until some magic moment such as the first breath or even later. But logic concludes that two living cells do not come together to form a non-living blob of tissue. The sperm is alive, the egg is alive, therefore the fertilized egg is alive as well. Not only is it alive, it contains its own unique strand of DNA. It is not identical to its mother or its father. Nor is it a mutation like cancer. Thus the zygote is a living person and under the requirements of the Sixth commandment, should be protected as such.

Unlike sperm, the fertilized egg is not just a potential life, it is a life. And without the next step of implantation that life will end. Blocking the zygote from implantation ends that life.

Most birth control pills and the IUD work primarily through preventing ovulation or fertilization, but in the rare instance that these mechanisms fail they also have the effect of making the uterine walls inhospitable to implantation by the fertilized egg. (
https://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/tc/how-birth-control-methods-prevent-pregnancy-topic-overview)

In recent times, politically charged "science" has called into question (https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2012/12/the-pill-contraceptive-or-abortifacient/266725/) whether this is actually one of the mechanisms of hormonal birth control. We actually know very little about how the pill works, we know it prevents ovulation, we know it prevents sperm from reaching egg, and we know it thins the uterine lining or changes the chemical environment of the uterus. Given the third one it makes sense to err on the side of caution and assume that it also prevents implantation of the "seed".

And even if we consider it a slim possibility that the egg will be released, then fertilized and then make it to the uterus, this slim possibility that one will be responsible for the death of another human being should be enough to persuade us to avoid these methods.

Many will argue that if we reach my conclusion we will also have to assume that natural miscarriages are sinful too. What makes the elective abortion different from the natural miscarriage?

This should be obvious, one is willful, the other is not. A woman who naturally miscarries cannot be help morally culpable for the death of her child, she was most likely not in control of the situation that led to the miscarriage.

Stay tuned next week for an analysis of side effects...

*I realized after I was almost done writing this that one could conclude that I am calling all users of hormonal birth control sinners. Please be assured that you are not a part of this category if you are abstaining from sex and taking birth control for reasons other than contraception.