TribLIVE

| Opinion/The Review


 
Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

Contraception rejection II

Letters home ...

Traveling abroad for personal, educational or professional reasons?

Why not share your impressions — and those of residents of foreign countries about the United States — with Trib readers in 150 words?

The world's a big place. Bring it home with Letters Home.

Contact Colin McNickle (412-320-7836 or cmcnickle@tribweb.com).

Daily Photo Galleries

Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013, 8:55 p.m.
 

Perhaps obstetrician/gynecologist Rachel B. Rapkin, writer of the letter “Contraception confusion,” is too young to remember that until 1965, the medical profession knew enough about biology that it defined conception as “the union of the sperm and ovum ... fertilization,” and that moment marked the onset of pregnancy.

That year, the American Medical Association, in its almighty wisdom, changed the definition of the onset of pregnancy to “implantation.” Nothing was different. Nothing changed but the words. But now the drug companies, the medical societies and the abortion industry can say emergency contraception does not cause an abortion.

But it does. And changing words does not change facts.

Helen Cindrich

The writer is executive director of the Pittsburgh-based group People Concerned for the Unborn Child (pcuc.org).

Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.

 

 


Show commenting policy

Most-Read Letters

  1. Still bad decision
  2. Deer-culling alternatives I
  3. ‘Annie’ terrific
  4. Manage cat colonies
  5. Deer-culling alternatives II
  6. Jesus’ resurrection
  7. Stop red light cameras
  8. Scholastic thought police
  9. Vitriolic opinion
  10. Pay up, bicyclists
  11. Council & UPMC workers