I had mentioned that I saw logical problems with birth control. Someone asked me: “Chandler, what are your logical oppositions? I’ve only ever heard opposition stemming from religion?”
The question was interesting because I guess it is uncommon for people to argue against contraception without a belief in any gods. I have written about this subject before, but this is the first time someone specifically was interested. I will try to explain clearly why I tend to favor abstinence over contraception.
My strongest argument is that birth control costs money. Abstinence is free. The reason that this is the strongest case I can make is that it is independent of the beliefs of anyone. It is just a fact.
My second problem with birth control is that sometimes things go wrong. Women get pregnant and then claim that it was an “accident”. This sends the message that someone believed, falsely, that they could not get pregnant if they used whatever forms of contraception they were using. Abstinence is still superior because it never fails.
Another problem I have with birth control is one that applies only to hormones taken by women to reduce their fertility. I see hormonal birth control as anti-woman because men would never be willing to put that stuff in their bodies, but they expect women to. I am concerned about the health risks that come with any medication, especially one that is not necessary. Since there are no risks involved in not having sex, abstinence remains the most logical choice. Other forms of contraception, such as condoms, I don’t really see anything wrong other than my first two arguments that all contraception is a waste of money and is not 100% effective.
But the reason I even considered writing about this topic is because it is a very hotly debated topic between some of my pro-life friends and I think that this conflict also needs to end because it divides people.