Skip to content
Published: November 4, 2012 10:38 am to Opinion Column

Introducing Ziggy the Zygote in… Adventures in the Uterus!

Hi, kids!

NOTE: In her recent post “How I Lost Faith in the Pro-Life Movement,” blogger Libby Anne suggested that zygotes “flushed out” of women’s bodies naturally are not at all different from zygotes that cannot implant because of artificial birth control. Because she really does not seem to understand our very simple argument, I am going to approach the issue using small words and a kindly, loveable fictional character, Ziggy the Zygote.

Hey, boys and girls! I’m Ziggy, and I’m a zygote! Nice to meetcha!

According to SCIENCE!, I am a human being!

I know what yer thinkin’ – “Hey, I know what human beings look like, and you don’t look like me!” Hyuck, hyuck! Well, I sure don’t! But then again, neither does your grandma, or your baby cousin! Human beings look different at different stages of development. This is what you looked like, once upon a time. Pretty hard to believe, huh? Welp, it’s true!

When a lady gets pregnant – ask yer parents for more information on that! – I form in her belly. About a week later, I IMPLANT, which means I grab on to the wall of my special home, the UTERUS, and hold on tight so I can get bigger and eventually come on out into the world! Hyuck, hyuck!

But sometimes, I don’t grab on. I float away and don’t grow up into a full-grown person. It’s just one of those things!

Now, some ladies take pills called BIRTH CONTROL. These pills are supposed to keep Ziggy the Zygote from ever existing, but sometimes they don’t work quite right, and the zygote grows anyway. These pills can keep Ziggy the Zygote from being able to grab on to the uterus. Ziggy the Zygote can end up flushed away! Awwww!

Libby Anne says that ladies who don’t take birth control lose more zygotes than ladies who do, and if we’re really PRO-LIFE, we should WANT ladies to take birth control because it will SAVE ZYGOTES.

Well, golly, I’m just a dumb little zygote, but even I know the difference between a natural, very early miscarriage as intended by God or nature or whatever ya wanna call it, and taking a pill that INTENTIONALLY ends lives. Hyuck, hyuck!

I mean, if a lady never knows she’s pregnant and nature takes its course, that’s one thing. But if a lady knowingly takes a pill that might end a zygote’s life, that’s another. What if the zygote “flushed away” by that pill was one of the ones that God or nature (or whatever ya wanna call it!) intended to grab hold and grow up?

Makes you think, doesn’t it?

Boys and girls, there is a thing called INTENT. And it matters a lot! INTENT, in a court of law, can be the difference between life and death! Did you intend for someone to die? That’s an important MORAL question! (Link added for the benefit of pro-choicers.)

A lady who doesn’t take pills may lose zygotes, but that is the result of natural, biological processes that happen in every lady’s tummy. A lady who does take pills takes nature into her own hands, and a human being – even a little one like me – dies because of it. That’s very different from nature doing it! Don’t ya think?

Ziggy the Zygote trusts nature more than a pill that can be harmful to a lady and end a zygote’s life in the process!

Well, boys and girls, that’s it for today’s lesson! I hope this has helped some of you understand the MORAL difference between natural processes and artificial contraception. See ya real soon!

About Kristen Hatten

Kristen is a writer and comedian who makes people mad on the Internet. She is Vice President of New Wave Feminists and enjoys taxidermy, yachting, and 19th century French poetry. Stalk her relentlessly for fun and profit.
View all posts by Kristen Hatten

  • http://www.facebook.com/rox1smf Roxanne Brown

    Quite possibly the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen. We are all dumber for having read it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/indieobserver Karlie Mason

    Since Ziggy the Zygote doesn’t have a brain which would give it consciousness, it’s pretty obvious that this was written by someone who is not only undereducated about birth control but also suffers from logical blind spots.

    Consider a woman who wants a child tries to get pregnant with the full knowledge that many zygotes may die in the process–how is it any different from one who takes birth control knowing that some zygotes will die. Neither intend on such a thing happening. This question, of course, ignores that there is no evidence that the pill causes implantation failure nd the fact that zygotes cannot be “persons.”

    • Laura

      “Oral Contraceptive (estrogen/progestin): Taken daily by women to suppress ovulation and change the lining of the uterus to prevent implantation of a fertilized egg” http://www.americanpregnancy.org/preventingpregnancy/birthcontrolfailure.html

    • scragsmatemp

      Exactly. That’s why artificial means of conception are just as evil as artificial means of contraception. Both are forms of knowingly contributing to human deaths.

  • http://www.facebook.com/steve.sanocki Steve Sanocki

    If “God” intended for the egg to attach, how can a puny little human-made pill override the will of an all powerful, all knowing deity?

    You’re so-called “Scientific Evidence’ you gave a link for was written by a Theologian and Philosopher, NOT someone with a degree in any form of Medical Science, and therefore does not constitute “Scientific Proof”.

    You’re not just bad at biology and writing fiction, you’re bad at lying and theology as well.

    • Laura

      That God allows things to happen isn’t the same as He not having the power to stop them.

      • http://twitter.com/DevFreethinker Matt Collins

        But if a god could save a life and didn’t, that would make this god either negligent or malicious. Take your pick.

        • Legomyeggo

          OR it would mean that such a God would have overriding moral concerns in place that, in His eyes, would justify the death of a life. Who are you to suggest that God is required to prolong the life of anyone or anything?

        • Sharron

          So you think that God is supposed to make everyone live for ever on earth, and if anyone dies naturally that He is negligent or malicious?

          And because people do die naturally at a specific stage of life, that means it’s OK to kill anyone at that stage in life?

        • scragsmatemp

          God being the author of life has the right to decide life or death – we don’t. God has full knowledge of the effects of permitting life or death – we don’t. And God gave all human beings free will; what we do about life or death is our choice, and He permits us to make those choices even if against His intent. He also permits that we suffer the result of not only our own choices, but others’ choices. No negligence here, nor malice.

        • abc

          … or loving us enough to let us choose, even when our choices end badly

          • abc

            Check out The Shack. It is a great story of the very real struggle of who does a good God let bad things happen?

      • Dakota

        Scientificly life does begin at conception. This Zygote is a human being. It is of the same species as the mother and when fertilization takes place and two gamets the sperm and the egg fuse. An entirely new genetically unique organism is created. That does not change at all from conception to birth. The same human being, the same genetic structure. The cells of that human being are dividing into the development that we are today.

  • Themroc

    No, really, this is too funny. Was that suposed to be an argument? Did you make voices in your head while you were writing this? How old are you for realz? You don’t even know how contraception works, what makes you think you have an educated enough opinion to write on the matter?

    • http://twitter.com/Astraspider Astraspider

      Because libtards.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=7011573 Beth Lott

    Comparing miscarriages at whatever stage to abortion is the same thing as comparing death from cancer to a shooting death. The only thing that is constant in these situations is that somebody died. But the fact that people die of cancer does not justify shooting them to death, even if they have cancer. Nor does the fact that unborn children die in miscarriages justify killing them via abortifacients or abortions.

    It’s not like this is a complicated concept.

    • Jason Dick

      I think you’re missing the point that the original post wasn’t talking about abortions. It was talking about birth control. The abortion argument is a separate argument (though it can also be made on entirely life-saving grounds). The point with regards to birth control is that:
      1. Birth control prevents ovulation, so that there is no egg to fertilize in the first place.
      2. Around half of all fertilized zygotes never implant and are flushed out of the uterus.
      3. Thus, when birth control is used, fewer zygotes die.

      Kristen didn’t present anything that contradicts this, and if we were to follow her analogy to cancer, then we should simply think of cancer as “god’s will” and do nothing about it.

      This simple analysis demonstrates very strongly that those in the pro-life movement that want to stop people using birth control really do not care one whit about zygotes. They only care about regulating sex.

  • Bubbalouwee

    Excellent article, Kristen, and halarious. Pope Paul released the encyclical Humanae Vitae in 1968 on the moral evil of artificial birth control. More lives are taken by women using contraceptives than lives lost by abortion and the pill causes breast cancer. The answer to this culture of death and the sewer pit of society we are living in is Jesus Christ. We should go to Our Lady of Guadalupe and seek the virtue of purity and she will lead us to Her Divine Son, Jesus Christ, the Great Physician.

    • http://twitter.com/pfcpremosgirl Aundria Premo

      Repeated tests have refuted the claim that BC pills cause breast cancer.

      • Julia

        What tests? Do you have any evidence? Contraceptive pills are ranked in goup 1 carcinogens, along with mustard gas and cigarettes.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IARC_Group_1_carcinogens

        Maybe we should raise raise taxes on contraception as a disincetive to use it (like tobacco) instead of forcing employers to provide it free to their employees.

      • scragsmatemp

        A few studies failed to show a link between BC pills and breast cancer – but none actually said there was NO connection. On the other hand, nearly 50 studies since 1990 have demonstrated significant increased risk of breast cancer in those who have taken BC pills.

    • http://twitter.com/DevFreethinker Matt Collins

      I find myself unsure if you’re a poe or not…

      • Bubbalouwee

        No. Our Lady at Fatima revealed that more souls go to hell because of sins of the flesh than any other reason. In Genesis, God said be fruitful and multiply. In society today, people think they can bread like rabbits without even being married with several different partners take whatever chemicals they desire to prevent pregnancy or go get a vasectomy or have their tubes tied and think it is normal behavior. The family is the fabric of society, and it has been largely destoyed by a blantant disregard for the 5th and 6th commandments. Sexual reproduction is to be kept within the sacrament of marriage. The sexual act is procreative, the way God intended it for the continuation of the human race. Why is man playing God? Human actions have consequences.

  • Pingback: Refuting Libby Anne: No, pro-lifers aren’t making children too expensive to let live

  • http://twitter.com/pfcpremosgirl Aundria Premo

    Ummm….wow, where to begin. We are pro-life and believe babies should not be killed in utero. HOWEVER, some women who know they don’t want babies do the responsible thing and not get pregnant. LIsten, we can’t have it both ways. How do you stop women who don’t want babies from getting pregnant? I had to use birth control, as my third son could have killed us both. Getting pregnant is not safe for every woman, anyway. So if you don’t believe in the use of birth control, and you don’t believe in abortion (I don’t either!!), then by all means, how can we prevent unwanted pregnancies? As pro-life as I am, this is ridiculous. I DO believe once a zygote attaches it shouldn’t be killed. But this anti-pill stance just makes zero sense to those of us actually trying to save the lives of unborn children. SMH…:(

    • Joann

      Don’t want to get pregnant? don’t do the act that creates babies. It’s as simple as that.

      • Mickey

        Which pretty much goes to Libby Anne’s point that you just want to control people’s sex lives and don’t care at all for zygotes.

      • Timmehh

        So couples who are married should not have sex either? Sex isn’t all about babies you know, humans are not like other mammals. Sex for us, can bring a couple together, becoming one.

        • Julia

          Sex has two purposes – to bring a couple together and to bring forth new life.
          Neither of those purpose should be separated from the act. If a woman has a serious problem so that it is extremely dangerous to have a baby, she has two options – refrain from sex or use a timing method.
          Contraception should not be an option because it often kills a newly-formed human life. It makes no difference how many die naturally in the womb. Saying “many of them die anyway, so it’s ok to kill them” is an illogical arguement. Just because many die naturally at a specific stage in life does not mean that it’s OK to kill them. Following that logic, it would be OK to walk into a rest home, and shoot all the elderly people, because, you know, “many of them die anyway” at their stage of life. That is ludicrous.

          • Timmehh

            “Contraception should not be an option because it often kills a newly-formed human life.”

            Actually, many studies have shown that most contraceptives do NOT kill a newly formed life. For those that do, I agree with you; couples should not take abortive contraceptives. However, there are many contraceptives that are not abortive at all, hence why I have no problem with them.

          • scragsmatemp

            Not to mention that all forms of artificial contraception are damaging to the woman’s health.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=807845190 Cheryl Hopper

            So condoms are harmful? Right, then. I’ll keep that in mind. I’m not sexually active, by the way. Waiting until I marry.

    • Bruce Roeder

      So then when did I begin to exist? I’m certainly a human being, an individual member of the species homo sapiens; and so when I began to exist a human being began to exist. Alright then: When do human beings—when do people—begin to exist?

      • AntieQ

        The honest answer is that we don’t know with any certainty.

  • Kimberly Wedel

    Kristin, I see you are gaining more hating trolls. You are really pissing off the pro-aborts. Keep up the good work. Pro-aborts really hate the truth. It looks like you are really getting to them. You may just accidently educate one of them.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=807845190 Cheryl Hopper

      No, we love the truth. We hate condescending garbage and lies, like when Kristin lies and says the Pill affects the zygote’s ability to implant in the uterus. Not true. The Pill suppresses ovulation. Period, end of story. That’s the kind of thing we don’t like.

  • Julia

    You might as well say,”Well, everyone is going to die eventually, so why not shoot ‘em now!”

    • scragsmatemp

      Or at least, “why should it be wrong to shoot them now?”

  • Pingback: No, pro-lifers aren’t making children too expensive to let live - Foundation Life

  • kendallpeak

    A compromise on the abortion issue. Allow the abortion but with the requirement that the woman be permanantly sterilized. While this would allow the one murder, it would stop serial murders and stop the obviously unfit person from being in a position of trust with another child.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=553145445 Gordon Duffy

      a compromise: nobody should be forced to have an abortion against their will and nobody should be forced not to have one against their will.

      • kendallpeak

        Still not a very good solution for the murdered baby.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=553145445 Gordon Duffy

          there is no murdered baby

          • kendallpeak

            Let’s put it this way. In abortion a living organism is destroyed, thus ending the future of that organism. That organism’s DNA is human. The “they aren’t human argument” has been used before. Nazis used it for Jews, slaveholders used it for blacks. You and your argument are akin to theirs. You are the same as them.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=553145445 Gordon Duffy

            nice jump to the Nazis. By official internet rules that means you lose the argument.

          • kendallpeak

            Real men fight for the lives of babies, liberals prattle on about “internet rules”. Being a real man/woman means having the wisdom to see the light when one has been of an erroneous opinion and the humility to admit it. I’ve done the same. Now that you have been enlightened, use your obvious energy to fight for the right cause. Life.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=553145445 Gordon Duffy

            Words have meanings. There’s no wisdom on your side, nor facts, nor compassion. I’ll stick on the side of decency thanks all the same. I could never be “pro life” because I have a conscience.

          • kendallpeak

            Decency and conscience to you is scraping a baby from the womb, sticking forceps through it’s little body, and throwing it in the trash. You are the lost and the damned. Goodbye.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=553145445 Gordon Duffy

            see? no facts on your side, just emotional appeals, word play, and misinformation. (and false machismo). Goodbye.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1737770702 Katherine Stimpson

    Ok, I can figure out what “welp” means” but what one earth is the “hyuck, hyuck” thing? Other than that, pretty amusing.

  • Not funny.

    This is a dishonest way to present the argument. The fact is that your body naturally emits a hormone that stops a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterine wall. The fact that this happens less often when a woman is taking birth control means more zygotes are saved from death. So if you want more zygotes to live then you need to take birth control.

    • Ingrid Heimark

      Both positions are wrong. Birth control prevents more zygotes from coming into being.Pro-life phycisians have also wriitten about contraceptive pills, how the uterine lining changes are connected with a non-ovulatory cycle, and that should such a thinning occur in an ovulatory cycle the corpus luteum and its hormones will override the effects of the pill and create a receptive environment anyway. It shows that combi-pills does not have an abortifacient effect, whilst Progeston-only pills might

  • chrissy

    This article is condescending and rude- the exact opposite of Libby’s gracious and thoughtful post. Congrats.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=553145445 Gordon Duffy

    Is this a joke? Because you cannot be serious!

  • Pingback: The Adventures of Ziggy the Zygote

  • Scotlyn

    My grandmother, who you say is identical to a zygote, was nearly flushed away by nature the other day. God, seemingly, intended her to die of a heart attack, and, perhaps, we should have let nature take its course as God intended. Fortunately, the doctors took the artificial route, and inserted four man-made stents in her coronary arteries, and she is still living, not flushed away as nature intended.

    I think you should be more concerned about what nature “flushes away” and not just accept it as what God intends. God gave us brains, so we could train doctors and scientists who to research why that happens and perhaps prevent it.

  • Baby_Raptor

    Science doesn’t prove that life starts at conception. If it did, then doctors and medical groups would say so. You may choose to believe your heartstrings or your interpretation of a religious book over ponies vastly smarter than you who’ve actually studied the matter, but rational ponies don’t.

    Also, way to totally lie about your science. It’s been proven that the pill does NOT stop implantation in ponies. It stops implantation in mice who have unnaturally high estrogen levels. But, hay. Since when has your side ever cared about anything but forcing your goal on ponies?

    Seriously. This is just sick. And I’m not even going to touch your questionable ethics.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=807845190 Cheryl Hopper

    The Pill suppresses ovulation. It has nothing to do with preventing implantation. Brava on using completely incorrect information to make your point.