Jump to content

Birth Control is not Natural


Freckles

Recommended Posts

I think that Birth Control should not be used because it is not natural.

 

Who knows what it is doing to peoples bodies

 

Women are supposed to get pregnant

 

Also women are supposed to give milk to thier baby

 

That gives the baby immunities from the mother.

 

That is why people take thier kids to the Dr every day of the week.

 

UnNatural is bad for you

 

Link to comment
  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply
If it was bad for you or caused any damage to our bodies, then I don't think it would be around.

 

I understand what you're trying to say, but NOTHING is really natural these days.

 

 

you cannot go on that. look at eggs. first they are good, then bad, now good again. what about asprin? bad, good. who decides? just like potatoes and onions, and most all foods, end up with some kind of spray for something on them, so we are ingesting what was sprayed on it..........

Link to comment

um there are a lot of things we do that aren't 'natural' as you say, in some cases it has been bad in a lot however it has saved lives and improved the quality of life. HOWEVER, birth control pills and pharmaceuticals are having a far more devastating environmental effect than they are on humans alone.

 

take my generation for example, if it wasn't for chemotherapy, which is wholly unnatural, I would have died 21 years ago, but now they're finding out that the generation of children who survived cancer all those years ago are now growing up and coming up with a whole new set of problems. which way would you have it, kids dying of cancer all those years ago instead of living as long as they have now just because it's 'unnatural'? I'd be careful when you make statements like this, it makes it sound like 'natural' = good and unnatural only = bad

Link to comment

Arguably having a baby every year for a decade or two could be considered normal (ie what happens when you have sex regularly and don't use birth control). However, this is not financially viable or socially desired by most people I think. It would increase female and infant mortality though methinks because constant pregnancy/childbirth/breastfeeding takes its toll on the mother's body eventually.

 

Alternatively you could plan on stopping to have sex once you've had an many children as you want, in which case birth control is indeed unnecessary.

 

Pregnancy nonwithstanding though - how would you protect yourself from STDs without birth control?

 

I am assuming you mean ALL forms of birth control here btw, hormonal and barrier.

 

I agree that birth control is not natural. But natural does not always equal best. Along similar lines to Pocket Rocket, imagine a modern world without antibiotics for instance.

Link to comment
I think that Birth Control should not be used because it is not natural.

 

Who knows what it is doing to peoples bodies

 

Women are supposed to get pregnant

 

Also women are supposed to give milk to thier baby

 

That gives the baby immunities from the mother.

 

That is why people take thier kids to the Dr every day of the week.

 

UnNatural is bad for you

 

 

 

Says who? Half the things we eat are unnatural. Why not just drink milk straight from the cow...that is more natural....headaches...just deal with it...pain relievers are just not natural...cars....who needs it...human beings have two feet, we were meant to walk....eyeglasses...hey, not natural either...pills to reduce high blood pressure...not natural....pills to reduce high cholesterol...not natural etc.

Link to comment
Just get pregnant and let nature take its course

 

That's a very wise statement considering the world is overpopulated as it is, consider Ireland as an example here too, birth control is not allowed because of religious reasons and THOUSANDS of women either fly over to the UK to get abortions or choose to use illegal methods, and in some cases die as a result. and you have to look no further than HIV to completely obliterate your statement - again, do you only mean the pill or condoms too?

Link to comment
Arguably having a baby every year could be considered normal (ie what happens when you have sex regularly and don't use birth control). However, this is not financially viable or socially desired by most people I think.

 

Alternatively you could plan on stopping to have sex once you've had an many children as you want, in which case birth control is indeed unnecessary.

 

Pregnancy nonwithstanding though - how would you protect yourself from STDs without birth control?

 

I am assuming you mean ALL forms of birth control here btw, hormonal and barrier.

 

I don't think people know what they want

 

So they should have as many kids as they happen to have

 

STDS - are here because of unnatural sex - in Africa they had sex with monkeys and that is what caused aids

Link to comment

ok, when he said birth control, i figured "birth control". cause if he was talking about condoms, he would of just said condoms.

 

birth control and autism is probably related. back before the 80's and early 80's there was no autism. (of course the fictitious diesese of ADHT (or whatever the name) wasnt around either. adht means your parents didnt try to keep you in line growing up, and let you do whatever so you cried till you got your way)

 

then early 80-90's birth control was in high demand. now comes "autism".... hmmmm. i wonder...........

Link to comment
Arguably having a baby every year for a decade or two could be considered normal (ie what happens when you have sex regularly and don't use birth control). However, this is not financially viable or socially desired by most people I think.

QUOTE]

 

Financially no one is ever ready to hve kids

 

All you have to do is * Add water to the gravy. to feed one more kid.

Link to comment
ok, when he said birth control, i figured "birth control". cause if he was talking about condoms, he would of just said condoms.

 

birth control and autism is probably related. back before the 80's and early 80's there was no autism. (of course the fictitious diesese of ADHT (or whatever the name) wasnt around either. adht means your parents didnt try to keep you in line growing up, and let you do whatever so you cried till you got your way)

 

then early 80-90's birth control was in high demand. now comes "autism".... hmmmm. i wonder...........

 

ADHD is caused by watching way to much TV

Link to comment

Freckles,

 

Having baby after baby is unnatural. Having a child actually damages the mother's body, and I am not referring to stretch marks, etc. A pregnancy depletes calcium and nutrients and causes blood sugar levels to change.

 

Having multiple children is a burden on limited recources. There is only so much one family can support and global recources are limited as well.

 

The Pill may be needed for medical reasons, or what about the cases where there is a genetic defect that the parents know about and don't want to bring a child into the world that would have problems?

Link to comment
\

birth control and autism is probably related. back before the 80's and early 80's there was no autism

 

I don't know where you're getting your information from but autism DID exist before the 80's, in fact in the 70's the rate was 1 in 2000 births, the only change has bee that the rate has grown but no one is sure why (it could also have to do with the fact the increased knowledge about the disease has resulted in more cases being diagnosed). For a long time people though vaccinations were related to autism, this is incorrect too, if you look at epidemiological data you'll find that these two things are completely unrelated.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...