Eight independent Texas-based pregnancy centers merged earlier this year to form a chain called The Source. With Christian women’s health centers in Houston, Dallas, San Antonio and Austin, the nonprofit organization plans to offer a full array of medical services, to include testing for sexually transmitted diseases, first-trimester prenatal care and contraception choices….
“Even within the pro-life community, there’s a lot of nuance in what we think we should be offering to women,” said Ingrid Skop, an obstetrician-gynecologist who joined the Source board. “It helps to show that not every pro-life activist says, ‘Put an aspirin between your legs and don’t have sex.’ ”
….Several large pregnancy-center networks recently banned their affiliated centers from providing contraception, because of the belief that it encourages sex outside marriage. By contrast, the Source centers will all offer pills; injections; intrauterine devices, or IUDs; and other contraceptive methods beginning in March, a move that Source chief executive Andy Schoonover said will help reduce unwanted pregnancies by preventing them before they take place.
The above comes from a Nov. 7 story in the Washington Post.
So there is to be a merger of some “independent pregnancy care centers” (not actually identified here as pro-life pregnancy care centers) into a chain called The Source, a non-profit that will work with “Christian health centers” (not named) Apparently some of the “large” pregnancy centers had recently banned their staffs from providing contraception on the grounds that it might encourage sex outside of marriage. With the merger, these centers are all in for contraception, including the abortifacient kind. Though it is not stated in the report, the “pregnancy centers” referred to are almost certainly not Catholic but Protestant, perhaps Evangelical, in origin. This type of Christian (I was a non-Catholic Christian until age 21, now a Catholic) has no problem with contraception, and never suspects it is at the heart of the anti-life, anti-woman secularism that guides todays medical philosophy. They fall for the lie that contraception reduces pregnancies, hence reducing abortions. The lack of respect for women implied in the contraceptive mentality is evident in Dr. Ingrid Skop’s crude, disrespectful caricature of (by implication Catholic) pro-life advice regarding the avoidance of pregnancy as “put an aspirin between your legs and don’t have sex.” Protestants tend to see sexual morality as unrelated to the reproductive process and confined to the saving of sex for marriage (one marriage at a time, of course.) It is from this thinking that their unquestioning approval of contraception arises. It is from this belief incidentally that the growing approval of homosexual unions is occurring in Protestant churches. Thus their one objection to contraception, moving them to ban distribution of it for a time, was its possible encouragement of extra-marital sex. While this effect is sociologically confirmed, Catholics see the problem as the far more fundamental one of respect for the natural structure and act of reproduction.
Full range of medical services, but only first tri-mester pre-natal care? Something seems missing here.
Contraception and abortion are poison fruit from the same rotted tree. Protestants often say they are pro-life but will not accept the teaching of the Catholic Church on sexual morality. The contraception they will dispense at these clinics will indeed fail, and their clients will in fact increase the business of the local abortuaries.
Contraception=Abortion=Death. Truth matters.
So ….. the Source is against
surgical abortions but NOT against
chemical/hormonal abortions … huh ?