Peter Baklinski


Dear pro-lifer: Is there any way to prove that contraception is wrong?

Peter Baklinski
Peter Baklinski

February 21, 2013, ( – Dear pro-lifer: My friend asked if it is okay to use contraception. A girl responded by saying ‘no’ because it's the same as killing, the same as abortion. A guy came in the conversation saying that we could use it because there's nothing living in there yet.

My question is this: Is there any way to prove that contraception is wrong? I know it's wrong, but I also want to be able to prove it.

Let's begin by making a few things clear. Contraception artificially blocks the life-creating potential of the sexual act between a man and woman. There are many ways contraception can do this. A condom blocks fertility by keeping the man's sperm from entering the woman's body. The pill chemically blocks fertility by keeping the woman's body from ovulating. There are many forms of chemicals (spermicides, implants such as the IUD) that either kill sperm or impede a woman's natural fertility cycle. There is also vasectomy that unnaturally blocks tubes that are designed to carry sperm out of a man’s body.

Contraceptive drugs are unhealthy to the human body and are known to cause such problems as weight gain, heart attacks, cancer, and even death. It’s only common sense that taking a drug to suppress a naturally occurring healthy function of a woman’s body, namely her fertility, can only mess up her health. Vasectomy also has its problems, with many men experiencing increased sensitivity and even chronic pain in their testicles after the procedure. Some find their sexual drive dwindles after the procedure.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

There is also the Plan B morning-after pill, which, when taken by the woman after having sex from which a new life has been created, can cause the death of that life. The makers of the drug admit that Plan B “may inhibit implantation by altering the endometrium [i.e., the lining of the womb].” In other words, Plan B may cause a newly conceived embryo to die and be expelled because it cannot implant itself in the lining of the woman’s womb.

It is easy to see why taking Plan B is wrong. The purpose of the drug is to kill the fragile, new life that has just been created. Killing the innocent is always a crime. 

It is more complex to explain why any form of contracepted sex is wrong.

Sex is a deeply personal act where you give yourself — your entire heart, soul, and body — to another person. Even the removal of clothing indicates an unreserved giving of self. Cleaving to one another in deep love and affection, it's as if the lovers are saying with their bodies: "I am yours and you are mine". Their actions and reactions proclaim, "I give you all my heart, soul, and body for you to treasure, and I take as treasure your entire heart, soul, and body."

When contraception is brought into the picture, suddenly a wrench is thrown into the self-giving meaning of the act. Now, the lover gives “almost” everything to his/her beloved, except his/her fertility. Sexual love now turns into a conditional love. And a wrench is thrown into the very purpose of the act, which is to unite the lovers and create new life. 

Hence with contraception, the sexual act suddenly loses its deeply personal meaning of total self-giving and its natural purpose of creating new life. 

With this loss of meaning and purpose, many contracepting couples have eventually discovered that contraception feeds a creeping selfishness that makes the man and woman focus almost exclusively on their own pleasure in sex, and not on one another. Contraception makes one person suddenly become for the other a sexual object to be used for pleasure and no longer a cherished and honored beloved. 

The resulting mutual sexual exploitation can devastate true love. 

By putting fertility under lock and key and thereby closing the sexual act to the possibility of new life, the contracepting couple no longer is able to give themselves completely and totally to each other. It is true that with contraception, the lovers caught up in the sexual act still act and react in much the same fashion as without, but the inner life of the person suffers rejection and compromise. Contraception degrades and violates the person.

This is why contraception turns sex into a big fat lie. It makes the lover say, "I love you, but not your fertility. I don't want that part of you. Lock it up." It truly poisons love between a husband and wife since nobody ever wants to be loved only conditionally. 

A holy prophet once wrote 45 years ago that a man practicing contraception would "finally lose respect for the woman, and no longer caring for her physical and psychological equilibrium, may come to the point of considering her as a mere instrument of selfish enjoyment, and no longer as his respected and beloved companion."

With rampant use of pornography, the explosion of the hook-up culture, and sex-sex-sex without commitment or responsibility screamed from every corner of the media and entertainment world, it is easy to see that this prediction has sadly come to pass. 

So you see, using contraception is morally wrong since it destroys the meaning and purpose of the sexual act. Plan B is doubly wrong since it potentially adds murder to the above by seeking to destroy a newly created human life. 

If you are Catholic, using contraception is a mortal sin that cuts off your life of grace with God (with the conditions of knowing that it’s gravely wrong and deciding to do it anyway). The Church teaches that "each and every marriage act must remain open to the transmission of life." If you die unrepentant in the sin of contraception, you risk losing heaven forever. If you are contracepting and want to regain the state of grace, you must confess your sin to a priest and cease using contraception.

The Church stands firm in this teaching because she loves her own dearly and wants a husband and wife to have the best conjugal life possible. 

You see, fertility is a most beautiful and precious part of a person. It must be treasured, valued, and treated with the utmost respect and responsibility.

If you need to postpone pregnancy, there’s Natural Family Planning (NFP) whereby a couple foregoes sexual acts during the fertile time. When done properly, it is just as if not more effective than any form of contraception, totally safe (no drugs or chemicals polluting the body), and completely in line with God's plan for marriage. 


Your pro-life friend Pete Baklinski from

LifeSiteNews journalist Pete Baklinski has a B.A. in liberal arts and a masters in theology (STM). He is married to Erin and together they have five children. 

Share this article

Featured Image
John Jalsevac John Jalsevac Follow John

BREAKING: Planned Parenthood shooting suspect surrenders, is in custody: police

John Jalsevac John Jalsevac Follow John
By John Jalsevac

Nov. 27, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) - Five hours after a single male shooter reportedly opened fire at a Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood, chatter on police radio is indicating that the suspect has now been "detained."

"We have our suspect and he says he is alone," said police on the police radio channel. 

Colorado Springs Mayor John Suthers also confirmed via Twitter shortly after 7:00 pm EST that the suspect was in custody.

The news comes almost exactly an hour after the start of a 6:00 pm. press conference in which Lt. Catherine Buckley had confirmed that a single shooter was still at large, and had exchanged gunfire with police moments before.

According to Lt. Buckley, four, and possibly five police officers have been shot since the first 911 call was received at 11:38 am local time today. An unknown number of civilians have also been shot.

Although initial reports had suggested that the shooting began outside the Planned Parenthood, possibly outside a nearby bank, Lt. Buckley said that in fact the incident began at the Planned Parenthood itself.

She said that the suspect had also brought unknown "items" with him to the Planned Parenthood. 

Pro-life groups have started responding to the news, urging caution in jumping to conclusions about the motivations of the shooter, while also condemning the use of violence in promoting the pro-life cause. 

"Information is very sketchy about the currently active shooting situation in Colorado Springs," said Pavone. "The Planned Parenthood was the address given in the initial call to the police, but we still do not know what connection, if any, the shooting has to do with Planned Parenthood or abortion.

"As leaders in the pro-life movement, we call for calm and pray for a peaceful resolution of this situation."

Troy Newman of Operation Rescue and Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, also issued statements.

"Operation Rescue unequivocally deplores and denounces all violence at abortion clinics and has a long history of working through peaceful channels to advocate on behalf of women and their babies," said Newman. "We express deep concern for everyone involved and are praying for the safety of those at the Planned Parenthood office and for law enforcement personnel. We pray this tragic situation can be quickly resolved without further injury to anyone."

"Although we don't know the reasons for the shooting near the Planned Parenthood in Colorado Springs today, the pro-life movement is praying for the safety of all involved and as a movement we have always unequivocally condemned all forms of violence at abortion clinics. We must continually as a nation stand against violence on all levels," said Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, based in Washington, D.C.


Share this article

Featured Image
Wikimedia Commons
Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin

, , , ,

Rubio says SCOTUS didn’t ‘settle’ marriage issue: ‘God’s rules always win’

Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin
By Dustin Siggins

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 27, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) -- Surging GOP presidential candidate Sen. Marco Rubio, R-FL, says that "God's law" trumps the U.S. Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision imposing same-sex “marriage” nationwide.

The senator also told Christian Broadcast Network's David Brody that the Supreme Court's redefinition of marriage is not "settled," but instead "current law."

“No law is settled,” said Rubio. “Roe v. Wade is current law, but it doesn’t mean that we don’t continue to aspire to fix it, because we think it’s wrong.”

“If you live in a society where the government creates an avenue and a way for you to peacefully change the law, then you’re called to participate in that process to try to change it,” he explained, and "the proper place for that to be defined is at the state level, where marriage has always been regulated — not by the Supreme Court and not by the federal government.”

However, when laws conflict with religious beliefs, "God's rules always win," said Rubio.

“In essence, if we are ever ordered by a government authority to personally violate and sin — violate God’s law and sin — if we’re ordered to stop preaching the Gospel, if we’re ordered to perform a same-sex marriage as someone presiding over it, we are called to ignore that,” Rubio expounded. “We cannot abide by that because government is compelling us to sin.”

“I continue to believe that marriage law should be between one man and one woman," said the senator, who earlier in the fall was backed by billionaire GOP donor and same-sex "marriage" supporter Paul Singer.

Singer, who also backs looser immigration laws and a strong U.S.-Israel alliance, has long pushed for the GOP to change its position on marriage in part due to the sexual orientation of his son.

Despite Singer's support, Rubio's marriage stance has largely been consistent. He told Brody earlier in the year that "there isn't such a right" to same-sex "marriage."

"You have to have a ridiculous reading of the U.S. Constitution to reach the conclusion that people have a right to marry someone of the same sex."

Rubio also said religious liberty should be defended against LGBT activists he says "want to stigmatize, they want to ostracize anyone who disagrees with them as haters."

"I believe, as do a significant percentage of Americans, that the institution of marriage, an institution that existed before government, that existed before laws, that institution should remain in our laws recognized as the union of one man and one woman," he said.

Rubio also hired social conservative leader Eric Teetsel as his director of faith outreach this month.

However, things have not been entirely smooth for Rubio on marriage. Social conservatives were concerned when the executive director of the LGBT-focused Log Cabin Republicans told Reuters in the spring that the Catholic senator is "not as adamantly opposed to all things LGBT as some of his statements suggest."

The LGBT activist group had meetings with Rubio's office "going back some time," though the senator himself never attended those meetings. Rubio has publicly said that he would attend the homosexual "wedding" of a gay loved one, and also that he believed "that sexual preference is something that people are born with," as opposed to being a choice.

Additionally, days after the Supreme Court redefined marriage, Rubio said that he disagreed with the decision but that "we live in a republic and must abide by the law."

"I believe that marriage, as the key to strong family life, is the most important institution in our society and should be between one man and one woman," he said. "People who disagree with the traditional definition of marriage have the right to change their state laws. That is the right of our people, not the right of the unelected judges or justices of the Supreme Court. This decision short-circuits the political process that has been underway on the state level for years.

Rubio also said at the time that "it must be a priority of the next president to nominate judges and justices committed to applying the Constitution as written and originally understood…"

“I firmly believe the question of same sex marriage is a question of the definition of an institution, not the dignity of a human being. Every American has the right to pursue happiness as they see fit. Not every American has to agree on every issue, but all of us do have to share our country. A large number of Americans will continue to believe in traditional marriage, and a large number of Americans will be pleased with the Court’s decision today. In the years ahead, it is my hope that each side will respect the dignity of the other.”

The Florida senator said in July that he opposed a constitutional marriage amendment to the U.S. Constitution to leave marriage up to the states because that would involve the federal government in state marriage policies.

Featured Image
Former The View star Sherri Shepherd and then-husband Lamar Sally in 2010 s_bukley /
Steve Weatherbe

Court orders Sherri Shepherd to pay child support for surrogate son she abandoned

Steve Weatherbe
By Steve Weatherbe

November 27, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) -- Sherri Shepherd, a Hollywood celebrity who co-hosted the popular talk show The View for seven years, has lost a maternity suit launched by her ex-husband Lamar Sally, forcing her to pay him alimony and child support for their one-year surrogate son LJ. The decision follows an unseemly fight which pro-life blogger Cassy Fiano says has exposed how surrogacy results in “commodifying” the unborn.

Shepherd, a co-host of the View from 2007 to 2014, met Sally, a screenwriter, in 2010 and they married a year later. Because her eggs were not viable, they arranged a surrogate mother in Pennsylvania to bear them a baby conceived in vitro using Sally’s sperm and a donated egg.

But the marriage soured in mid-term about the time Shepherd lost her job with The View. According to one tabloid explanation, she was worried he would contribute little to parenting responsibilities.  Sally filed for separation in 2014, Shepherd filed for divorce a few days, then Sally sued for sole custody, then alimony and child support.

Earlier this year she told PEOPLE she had gone along with the surrogacy to prevent the breakup of the marriage and had not really wanted the child.

Shepherd, an avowed Christian who once denied evolution on The View and a successful comic actor on Broadway, TV, and in film since the mid-90s, didn’t want anything to do with LJ, as Lamar named the boy, who after all carried none of her genes. She refused to be at bedside for the birth, and refused to let her name be put on the birth certificate and to shoulder any responsibility for LJ’s support.

But in April the Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, and now the state’s Superior Court, ruled that Shepherd’s name must go on the birth certificate and she must pay Sally alimony and child support.

“The ultimate outcome is that this baby has two parents and the parents are Lamar Sally and Sherri Shepherd,” Shepherd’s lawyer Tiffany Palmer said.

As for the father, Sally told PEOPLE, “I'm glad it's finally over. I'm glad the judges saw through all the lies that she put out there, and the negative media attention. If she won't be there for L.J. emotionally, I'll be parent enough for the both of us.”

But Shepherd said, “I am appealing the ruling that happened,” though in the meantime, Sally will “get his settlement every month. There’s nothing I can do.”

Commented Fiano in Live Action News, “What’s so sickening about this case is that this little boy, whose life was created in a test tube, was treated as nothing more than a commodity…Saying that you don’t want a baby but will engineer one to get something you want is horrific.” As for trying to get out from child support payments now that the marriage had failed, that was “despicable.”

Fiano went on to characterize the Shepherd-Sally affair as a “notable example” of commodification of children, and “by no means an anomaly.” She cited a British report than over the past five years 123 babies conceived in vitro were callously aborted when they turned out to have Down Syndrome.

“When we’re not ready for babies, we have an abortion,” she added. “But then when we decide we are ready we manufacture them in a laboratory and destroy any extras. Children exist when we want them to exist, to fill the holes in us that we want them to fill, instead of being independent lives with their own inherent value and dignity.”

Share this article


Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook