The Drumbeat of Deception

Details: 16 March 2012

There is a saying (not sure of its origin) that "verbal engineering always precedes social engineering." Even a casual observer of our society and culture should be able to recognize the truth in this saying. And no one has mastered verbal engineering (aka verbal deception or euphemism) better than the apologists of the culture of death.

"Choice" or "reproductive rights" is substituted for "abortion." "Fetus," "product of conception" or "clump of cells" is substituted for "unborn baby." "Death with dignity" is substituted for "euthanasia" or "assisted suicide."

Even the organizational names reflect verbal deception. The American Birth Control League became Planned Parenthood. The Hemlock Society (which advocates for euthanasia and assisted suicide) now calls itself Compassion and Choices.

According to feminist author Pamela Haag, who supports President Obama’s contraceptive mandate, "The phrase ‘women’s health’ in the birth control dispute is the latest nimble euphemism." In a Feb. 17 essay published on the "Marriage 3.0" blog, Ms. Haag went on to say that access to contraception "isn’t really about my ‘health.’ It’s not principally about the management of ovarian cysts or the regulation of periods.

"Birth control isn’t about my health unless by ‘health’ you mean, my capacity to get it on, to have a happy, joyous sex life that involves an actual male partner," wrote Haag, criticizing White House supporters for discussing contraceptives mainly as "preventing services" for women’s health.

"The point of birth control," Haag continued, "is to have sex that’s recreational and non-procreative. It’s to permit women to exercise their desires without the ‘sword of Damocles’ of unwanted pregnancy hanging gloomily over their heads."

Although this feminist’s candor about the "point of birth control" is refreshing, she still seems to look at contraception’s impact on women and society through rose-colored lenses. First, the assertion that widespread availability of contraception reduces unintended pregnancies has little more than intuitive appeal to back it up. Studies proving my point are available online at www.nebcathcon.org (under pro-life, printed materials). How can this be? A well-documented fact sheet produced by the U.S. Bishops’ Pro Life office provides this explanation: "Contraceptive effectiveness is often estimated on a misleading per-use basis, or as failure rates over 12 months of typical use for all women of reproductive age. This greatly understates failure rates among teens, and fails to account for cumulative risk from more frequent sexual activity."

"Numerous studies examining sexual behavior and STD transmission have demonstrated risk compensation behavior, i.e., a greater willingness to engage in potentially risky behavior when one believes risk has been reduced through technology. Increasing access to contraception gives teens a false sense of security, leading to earlier onset of sexual activity and more sexual partners, which counteracts any reduction in unintended pregnancies."

Second, Ms. Haag makes no mention of the explosion of sexually-transmitted diseases that has occurred since contraception has become ubiquitous. In the 1960s, there were two or three "venereal diseases." Today, there are more than two dozen "sexually-transmitted diseases" (STDs). Contraception provides no protection from STDs and even condoms provide little protection from many STDs. Undoubtedly, this is why there are 19 million new cases of STDs in the United States each year.

Third, hormonal contraceptives pose many health problems themselves. Hormonal contraceptives (HCs) do not cure a disease, they are powerful steroids intended to disrupt a normal, functioning reproductive system. There is ample evidence that HCs can cause fatal blood clots, heart attacks and strokes.

Furthermore, how many women know that the World Health Organization has identified estrogen in combined oral contraceptive pills (COCs) as carcinogenic? In the article "Contraception: The Fine Print," Susan Wills points out that "women who began taking COCs before age 20 increased their risk of dying from breast cancer by 820%. Evidence of increased heart attack and breast cancer risk halted a trial of women taking hormone replacement therapy (HRT) halfway through its five-year trial period. Note that the dose of estrogen in HRT is 4-8 times lower than in many COCs."

So the next time you hear someone refer to birth control as "women’s healthcare," expose the term for what it is: verbal—and cruel—deception.

You can contact Greg at The Nebraska Catholic Conference, 215 Centennial Mall South Suite 310, Lincoln, NE 68508; This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.