USA Today, an official organ of political correctness in North America, recently “celebrated” Mother’s Day with a front page puff piece celebrating the 5oth anniversary of the birth control pill and its progeny, the sexual revolution.  Here is the link to that article.

To be fair to the secular progressives at USA Today, they did try to separate the advent of oral contraceptives from sexual license, but fell short as they described all of the benefits that derived from, in the words of the Magisterium, the separating of the unitive from the procreative.  Here is the link to a prophetic document warning the world of the harms that can arise out of the post-modern lust for sexual license.

Here is the abbreviated take on the USA Today celebration:  Our cultural overlords led us into a Brave New World where Mother’s Day becomes cause to celebrate intentional sterility – what some would dub a very unmotherly status.

Beyond a sociological disconnect is this glaring error:   USA Today’s article failed to mention some of the most seriously disturbing social and environmental affects of the pill.

Last Fall I was invited to speak at Right to Life Kanasas’ state convention, thanks to my old friends Elmer and Audrey Feldkamp.   Elmer has been in pro-life leadership in Kansas since Roe v. Wade came down, plowing on, through thick and thin, victories and losses, ever since.  He and Audrey are good people.

They asked me to address the downside of oral contraceptives.  The result is a powerpoint presentation entitled “The Four Horsemen of a Chemical Apocalypse.”  (Presentation available upon request.)

Note:  Right to Life Kansas is not affiliated with the National Right to Life Committee.  The NRLC has no position on contraception or the pill.

Like USA  Today, I found the advent of the pill quite profound.  Unlike USA Today, I found this advent profoundly disturbing.  Both my research and the USA Today article argree that the introduction of the pill marked the ascendancy of the Culture of Death over Christian history.

Unlike USA Today, I find no cause to celebrate.

This is because the pill has disturbed male-female dynamics.  The pill has disturbed women’s mental health.  The pill has disturbed women’s physical health.  And the pill has disturbed – and this may be the most disturbing of all – the environment.

I am no chicken little — the sky really does appear to be falling.

On this 50^th anniversary I will focus the remainder of my Mother’s Day post on the final of these four — the great “unmothering” of our fresh water supplies.

Consider …

… that the pill is, in reality, an anabolic steriod.  While we decry the use of such substances by body builders, we have had no problem at all with our girlfriends, wives, sisters and mothers ingesting them for fifty years now.  This is because the separation of the unitive f rom the procreative is a first order goal of postmodernity.  This is why Humanae Vitae is the watershed for postmodernity.  If you have not yet read it then you have missed one of the best examples of the prophetic office in our age.  Click here to be enlightened.

Why have you never thought of the pill as a steroid before?  Because it is not that bad, artificial testosterone, oh no, that is the nasty stuff used by bodybuilders, you know, the illegal carcinogen that lodges in their livers and causes cancer.

No, the pill is a “good” anabolic steroid, very legal — even protected — that helped build the playboy culture and merely lodges in breast tissue causing … well we don’t talk about that in polite society.  (See She Raced for the Cure, down the page)

This has widespread implications on women’s health (see She Raced for the Cure), but even more disturbing on a macro level, it has widespread implications on our international ecosystem.

Why?

Because anabolic steroids are not water soluble.  That is huge.   That is not to say that they do not, in the main, escape the female body.  The kidneys and bladder play their roles well.  Most of the tens of thousands of daily doses of the pill taken by millions of modernized women across the northern hemisphere do leave the bodies of the women ingesting them … and end up in the local sewage treatment plants – the ones conveniently located on our rivers and waterways.

Most human waste, including the attending paperwork, is water soluble.   We, like our ancient Roman cousins, have designed waste water treatment facilities based upon the assumption that earth and water can dissolve and filter out anything bad in our effluence.

But then slouches in this rough beast to be born in treatment facilities:  the estrogen pill.  What does 50 years of urine containing intentional sterility do to an ecosystem?

A great question!  Merely google “estrogen, rivers, fish, sex change” to do your own research on this very relevant question.  You will find articles as recent as last month and as ancient as 1994 raising a politically incorrect alarm.  So politically incorrect, in fact, that few are willing to ring it.

But of late this problem is becoming so glaring that persons of good will simply cannot ignore it.  Consider this from an ecology website two years ago:

After an exhaustive seven-year research effort, Canadian biologists found that miniscule amounts of estrogen present in municipal wastewater discharges can decimate wild fish populations living downstream.

The research, led by Dr. Karen Kidd, an NSERC-funded biology professor at the University of New Brunswick (Saint John) and the Canadian Rivers Institute, confirms that synthetic estrogen used in birth control pills can wreak havoc on the sex lives of fish. Small amounts of estrogen are excreted naturally by women whether or not they are taking birth control pills.

Note the above in blue – a politically correct fig leaf.  They do not note that natural estogen is water soluble.  Artificial estrogen is not.  These Canadians continue …

Male fish exposed to estrogen become feminized, producing egg protein normally synthesized by females. In female fish, estrogen often retards normal sexual maturation, including egg production.

“We’ve known for some time that estrogen can adversely affect the reproductive health of fish, but ours was the first study to show the long-term impact on the sustainability of wild fish populations,” explains Kidd. “What we demonstrated is that estrogen can wipe out entire populations of small fish — a key food source for larger fish whose survival could in turn be threatened over the longer term.” Read more: http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/fish-sex-change-47021801#ixzz0nRJ3EiED

Now, just in case you have pictured Canadian Mounties eyedropping estrogen onto waterways, think again.  Consider this more recent alarm from a technological website tracking this environmental threat:

Water Treatment Systems Unable to Remove Estrogen from Drinking Water

Estrogen and estrogen-like compounds enter water rivers, steams and reservoirs from many sources and remain there even after passing through water treatment plants. About 80% of 139 U.S. rivers are contaminated with trace [estrogen] compounds.  …  Existing water treatment processes, which often involve naturally occurring bacteria in sewage sludge, can only remove as much as 94% of estrogen from untreated water, but what remains is still potent enough to cause  [harm]. Although harmful estrogens often remain in water after treatment, this performance is not surprising, says Texas A&M Zachery Department of Civil Engineering Assistant Professor Kung-Hui (Bella) Chu, because conventional water treatment processes weren’t designed to deal with estrogens.

So it is a problem.  How big?  Very big.  Here is a recent academic paper on the subject, complete with molecular explanations.  One sentence, following the most recent (and alarming) fish sex studies in Europe, leaps off the page: “In fish, the observed effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals clearly have high ecological relevance as impairment of reproductive system have consequences at all ecological levels.”

This same alarming phenonemon has been documented all over the United States. Catfish, Bass, Trout — all feminized, all filled to the brim with synthetic estrogen.

How alarming is this?  Not very if you merely listen to the mainstream media.  Even most Christian media are ignoring this story.  Powerful social forces demand that it be ignored.  Big pharma, big feminists, big one worlders (Fabian socialists like Planned Parenthood and their useful idiots in elected office and the media).

Thanks  be to God for the Catholic media, for they have at least given it some columns -  although few inches in the past years.

Consider this from Catholic Register a few years back:

Contracepting the Environment: Environmentalists Mum on Poisoned Streams 

 BY WAYNE LAUGESENREGISTER CORRESPONDENT•July 15-21, 2007 Issue | Posted 7/10/07 at 1:25 PM •BOULDER, Colo. — When EPA-funded scientists at the University of Colorado studied fish in a pristine mountain stream known as Boulder Creek two years ago, they were shocked. Randomly netting 123 trout and other fish downstream from the city’s sewer plant, they found that 101 were female, 12 were male, and 10 were strange “intersex” fish with male and female features. •It’s “the first thing that I’ve seen as a scientist that really scared me,” said then 59-year-old University of Colorado biologist John Woodling, speaking to the Denver Post in 2005.

So a biologist was really scared five years ago.  Nothing has been done since then except denial.

Five years ago, when the sex bending was found throughout the United States,  University of Colorado physiology professor David Norris scratched his head and said:    “Nobody is getting passionately concerned about it.   It makes no sense to me at all that people aren’t more concerned.”

Norris has probably since learned that this particular steroid is the Holy Grail of the culture of death.  Contraception and abortion are sacraments in their system.  They played the flute, we danced to their tune.  We then opened Pandora’s Box 50 years ago.   We have now sowed to the wind for half a century.

Will we soon reap the whirlwind?

The scientists say yes.  (But only in hushed tones,  since it is politically incorrect to so speak.)

p.s.  The above is available as a presentation upon request.

This entry was posted on Sunday, May 9th, 2010 at 9:03 pm and is filed under Gabriel, Pro-life is not enough, The whirlwinds. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.