Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies

The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States. Please give as you are able, and help support our work for a brighter future.

Search the IEET
Subscribe and Contribute to:

Technoprogressive? BioConservative? Huh?
Quick overview of biopolitical points of view

whats new at ieet

Desiderata for a Model of Human Values

Should You Sign Up for Cryonics?

Blue Origin Defeats SpaceX In Landing Reusable Rocket

The Emperor Has No Clothes: Socrates Deconstructs Singularity University

The Future of News? Virtual Reality

Future Fiction: To an Antique Land

ieet books

The Brain: The Story of You
David Eagleman


Giulio Prisco on 'The Emperor Has No Clothes: Socrates Deconstructs Singularity University' (Nov 30, 2015)

dobermanmac on 'The Emperor Has No Clothes: Socrates Deconstructs Singularity University' (Nov 30, 2015)

balom on 'Obfuscation: protect privacy by destroying the Web!' (Nov 29, 2015)

instamatic on 'Christians Should Support Scientists and Technologists' (Nov 28, 2015)

spud100 on 'Viewpoints on Modern Cosmism' (Nov 28, 2015)

spud100 on 'Christians Should Support Scientists and Technologists' (Nov 28, 2015)

Giulio Prisco on 'Viewpoints on Modern Cosmism' (Nov 28, 2015)

Subscribe to IEET News Lists

Daily News Feed

Longevity Dividend List

Catastrophic Risks List

Biopolitics of Popular Culture List

Technoprogressive List

Trans-Spirit List


Enframing the Flesh: Heidegger, Transhumanism, and the Body as “Standing Reserve”

Moral Enhancement and Political Realism

Intelligent Technologies and Lost Life

Hottest Articles of the Last Month

Why it matters that you realize you’re in a computer simulation
Nov 14, 2015
(68053) Hits
(14) Comments

The Future Business of Body Shops
Nov 15, 2015
(8089) Hits
(0) Comments

Crypto Enlightenment: A Social Theory of Blockchains
Nov 1, 2015
(7177) Hits
(0) Comments

Artificial Intelligence is Already Here—Artificial Consciousness is What Eludes Us - See more
Nov 19, 2015
(4178) Hits
(1) Comments

Comment on this entry

The Big Lie about Plan B–What You Really Should Be Telling Your Friends.

Valerie Tarico

Ethical Technology

December 13, 2012

It’s time, once and for all, to clear up the confusion about Plan B on progressive message boards, Facebook pages, forums and comment threads. Tweet this: Plan B doesn’t cause abortion. It stops or delays ovulation. No egg, no fertilization, no pregnancy – no abortion. It’s that simple.


Complete entry


Posted by Henry Bowers  on  12/14  at  10:45 AM

This is an informative distinction, between Plan B and Mifeprex, but considering the Plan B website says:  “it may inhibit implantation,” we can’t pretend its use is innocuous.

Retreating a step:  I don’t see how the abortifacient likelihood (or lack thereof) of Plan B has anything to do with Mr. Santorum’s claim.  What is wicked about contraceptive use?  Does its wickedness derive from a subjective and arbitrary interperetation of God’s will, or does its wickedness derive from its opposition to what is fulfilling and perfective of man?

No god who tests his puppets with arbitrary commands would be worth following, but the God who respects human freedom, and acts with unspeakable generosity to inform man of what is good for man, is owed nothing less than one’s entire life — and that joyfully, naturally.

It is neither perfective nor fulfilling of human powers to decouple another’s sexuality from their personality (which contraception does).  It is unreasonable and blithesomely arrogant to propose that I can see into the future and declare another person’s life not worthy of coming-to-be.  Such arrogance, in turn, becomes a habit of mine, which increases the likelihood of future arrogance; and indeed, a contraceptive mentality links arms with abortion, euthenasia, and gay marriage for this very reason:  entrenched arrogance.

And so, contraception is just plain bad for men and women, regardless of their creed.

Posted by Michael Bone  on  12/14  at  04:03 PM

The perception that choosing not to have a child is arrogant is entirely subjective. It is logically sound to hold the opposite view: choosing to have a child is arrogant. In making that decision an individual is implicitly suggesting that they believe that they are capable of performing the incredibly challenging task of raising a happy and healthy child all the way to adulthood (followed by a more hands-off approach to support for the rest of their lives).

Posted by Henry Bowers  on  12/14  at  05:12 PM

  You seem to beg the question by asserting that children are “chosen” at all.  Only the process is chosen; the incidences of conception are random.  Choosing to undergo the baby-making process _can_ be a humble choice, but _a priori_ decisions that no person is worth the pleasure of that process are never humble.

Also, there is a difference between simply not willing to attempt pregnancy, and actively willing against pregnancy.

Posted by Michael Bone  on  12/14  at  06:30 PM

I use ‘choose’ in the normal sense of actively deciding to take action(s) that are believed to result in a (greatly) increased chance of the chosen result occurring. The previously stated view is logical under this normal use of ‘choose’.

The only reason I stated it was to point out that the labeling of those who choose to have greater control over their pregnancy as arrogant is inherently subjective. Any attempt to control or plan anything can be framed as arrogant.

Add your comment here:




Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?


RSSIEET Blog | email list | newsletter |
The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States.

East Coast Contact: Executive Director, Dr. James J. Hughes,
56 Daleville School Rd., Willington CT 06279 USA 
Email: director @     phone: 860-428-1837

West Coast Contact: Managing Director, Hank Pellissier
425 Moraga Avenue, Piedmont, CA 94611
Email: hank @