22

As I noted in the beginning, RU 486 is known overwhelmingly as an "abortion pill." But Etienne-Emile Baulieu, one of the main developers of the drug, strongly questions that terminology. Many methods of birth control, he points out, "are not strictly 'contraception' in the commonest sense of the term;" these include the IUD and hormonal contraception based on progestin only, such as the recently approved Norplant capsules. ³ He calls these methods, as well as RU 486, "contragestives," "derived from contra-gestation just as contraception was derived from contra-conception." One science reporter says this is not just newspeak but:

a genuine attempt to point out that popular attitudes about when life begins were formed at a time when not much was known about the process. He sees gestation as a continuum, from the meiosis that generates the eggs and sperm to the birth of a baby. All steps are essential, and none is sufficient by itself. But "for society's sake" it has become vitally necessary to find better ways to control gestation. ¹⁸

We now possess a wide range of scientific knowledge which is "more sophisticated, subtle, and complete than ever before" — and which has been "notably missing from most public discussions of abortion and from all the legal decisions that have created so much recent publicity." ¹¹

Granted, no information or exercise of logic, however compelling, is likely to sway the opinion of people like Joseph Scheidler of the Pro-Life Action League, who brands the use of contraceptives as "disgusting, people using each other for pleasure," and proclaims, "We're opposed to all methods of birth control." ¹⁵

But for the majority of Americans, who are hopefully a little less narrow-minded and a little more compassionate, perhaps the information provided here can help to provide a bridge or two across the gap between "pro-choice" and "pro-life." RU 486 is the best and most promising of those bridges, and well deserving of support, no matter which side you are standing on.