|
|
| morning after pill |
| good |
|
23% |
[ 3 ] |
| bad |
|
76% |
[ 10 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 11:11 pm
you know what really bugs me? the fact that there are so many people who oppose the morning after pill, when it can help stop abortions!
it keeps the sperm from getting to the egg, so there is no conception, thus, no fetus! no life!
there wouldn't be anything to abort!
think of how many less un-wanted pregnancys there would be if people embrassed these things?
the problem is my fellow pro-life advocates who know nothing about how it works, so they assume it's another abortion pill!
my cousin STILL thinks that it's an abortion pill!
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 11:23 pm
It's true there's no conception, but if many people who are religious and prolife feel that it should be up to God whether a kid is conceived. Which actually...mm I don't agree just because...it's so complicated. I can't use the argument I was about to use, it's so easily against....well, I can use it anyway, since religion has nothing to do with law.
What if the morning after pill is a tool to carry out God's will? That can be easily flipped. What if abortion is. So I won't really expound on that. I think that's a word. Like, life support? May be God's answer to keeping your prayer for life. But I think that's the only real objection there is to it....maybe I'm wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2004 7:47 am
That's only half true. The morning after pill, which I used to feel was okay, is only okay about 50% of the time. A percent which no one here has control over.
The morning after pill works in 2 ways, it prevents the sperm from penetrating the egg. This however doesn't always work, when it doesn't work the morning after pill also thins out the uterus lining so that the now fertalized egg can't attach and is rejected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2004 9:34 am
toxic_lollipop That's only half true. The morning after pill, which I used to feel was okay, is only okay about 50% of the time. A percent which no one here has control over.
The morning after pill works in 2 ways, it prevents the sperm from penetrating the egg. This however doesn't always work, when it doesn't work the morning after pill also thins out the uterus lining so that the now fertalized egg can't attach and is rejected. I don't like the morning after pill. There is only a small chance that the girl will get pregnant to begin with, so you have to only include situations where she's at a point in her cycle where a live sperm can get to the egg. From what I've read, the morning-after pill tends to lean more towards the latter part of what Toxic described, not quite a 50-50 split in chance, at least once you take out the times when nothing would have happened anyways. All it really is is an overdose on birthcontrol pills, with the stuff from almost a weeks worth of pills crammed into one. I think the morning after pill is just a convenient way out for people who go and "accidentally" have unprotected sex (yes, some of these girls are rape victims, but the large majority of them were just not thinking). I see it as an abortion before it gets far enough along to be referred to a standard "abortion" practice. This was probably a little incoherent; my mind's not putting words together very well at the moment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2004 11:55 am
I don't really approve of contraception. Even after marriage. Course I don't think there should be sex before marriage anyway but that's another beast.
The reason why it's being fought (to answer the first post) is that it prevents a natural occurence from happening. What if that egg did come in contact with a sperm but was unable to be fertilized because of the pill? I know that sounds like a total longshot but a potential life that would have occured was just cut short. To me that seems very parallel to an abortion. It still prevents a life from being born.
A women should be responsible and be aware of her cycle. There is a period of time where she is very likely to get pregnant and a period of time in which she is not.
The only time I can really say any contraceptive medication okay is for medical reasons and the regulation of a woman's cycle. I once went for six months without a period. That's pretty scary since I've never even had sex so pregnancy was ruled out. I almost went on the Pill (not the abortion pill of course) to get myself back to normal. But then I lost some weight and that seemed to do it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2004 12:43 pm
Personally, I don't care if other people use contraception. That's their thing, and it's better to have a bunch of people using protection, and keeping abortions/teen/single mothers down in occurence.
For the day after pill, however, I think it is too high risk of being an abortive.
As for myself, I agree with Cyanna. My religion doesn't believe in unnatural birth control, and it's kinda like trying to block God even though you can't. It's defiance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2004 1:45 pm
I don't think that birth control is wrong, but the morning after pill is, because of what toxic said. The pill not only prevents fertilization, but in case the egg does get fertilized (which is more likely, considering the average amount of time between sex and whenever you wake up), it thins out the lining, preventing the fertilized egg from growing. Which, technically, is a type of abortion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2004 4:06 pm
toxic_lollipop That's only half true. The morning after pill, which I used to feel was okay, is only okay about 50% of the time. A percent which no one here has control over.
The morning after pill works in 2 ways, it prevents the sperm from penetrating the egg. This however doesn't always work, when it doesn't work the morning after pill also thins out the uterus lining so that the now fertalized egg can't attach and is rejected. Wow, didn't know that. eek so it'd have to be a miracle baby to attach. Guess it's happened but...yeah, change my mind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2004 5:33 pm
Whoa! I changed someone's mind! eek xd
I was for the Morning After Pill as well until I read up on it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2004 5:36 pm
toxic_lollipop Whoa! I changed someone's mind! eek xd
I was for the Morning After Pill as well until I read up on it. teaches me to be lazy and not research something. then again, after a year of no intellectual stimulation further than star trek, why should I? But yeah, you change minds all the time probably. Darn you debators! *shakes fist* Oh wait, I'm on your side, so that's a good thing....heh....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2004 5:42 pm
I've heard the arguments... and I would still support the morning after pill. True, there might be a small chance that the egg gets fertilized even after taking it, but if its going to stop someone who really doesnt want to have a baby anyway- then why not? That came out wrong, damn- made me sound like a pro-choicer. What I am trying to say is that the chances are if this person is taking a morning after pill its probably because they don't want a child, and might end up getting an abortion. Stamping out life is wrong, true, but I would rather it be stamped out right away then 4 months into a pregnancy. Imagine how much the abortion rate would increase without the pill- and this is after they have a heart beat.
Of course something like this is going to be controversial. I support safe sex, and yes, that means using protection. I, personally, find it stupid not to. I know, there are religions out there that look down on using protection- and thats great, terriffic, really gosh-darned dandy...if you are monogamous. Most people, I'm afraid, are not. And not only is protection good for stopping young parents- and therefore stopping abortions- but it also prevents sexual diseases. If you dont want to wear a condom, do things the safe way, thats fine I suppose- if that's your religion. Otherwise, I suggest you slip one on there ace- unless you want to see your manhood rot off...or your womanhood.
*shivers*
Thats where I stand on this particular subject, and quite adamently too. Safe sex prevents abortions, safe sex prevents children's death. *shrugs*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2004 5:54 pm
I support birth control because...people are gonna have sex. The more children conceived while abortions exist, the more abortion will be used as birth control. So condoms and hormones I support. I'd only use them for medical reasons, but if other people use them, eh. I personally think premarital sex is a bad idea. But people will do it, and with birth control available, at least there's one less argument choicers can use.
I dunno. I'm a bit biased....when I found out about the uterus thing I changed.....my mom was one of those miracle babies I mentioned. Nana had this thing wrong with her where the uterus lining wouldn't support an egg or something and even fertilized eggs would get passed. But my mom clung to that wall! lol. And I'm a product of failed birth control. "No honey, you weren't an accident...you were a surprise!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2004 5:57 pm
I'm very much for birth control, that doesn't mean I'm for the Morning After Pill. As many people have said it's more likely that it works like an abortion, which I tend to agree with. If there's already an egg than unless you take the pill right after sex it's more likely to act as an abortive.
How is the age of the fetus/embryo anymore okay for them to be aborted? It is still being aborted, just not by a medical team. It doesn't reduce abortions it reduces the number of medical abortions performed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2004 6:07 pm
toxic_lollipop I'm very much for birth control, that doesn't mean I'm for the Morning After Pill. As many people have said it's more likely that it works like an abortion, which I tend to agree with. If there's already an egg than unless you take the pill right after sex it's more likely to act as an abortive.
How is the age of the fetus/embryo anymore okay for them to be aborted? It is still being aborted, just not by a medical team. It doesn't reduce abortions it reduces the number of medical abortions performed. I think she's going off the argument that life begins at the heartbeat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2004 6:28 pm
No no no, you got me all wrong. Life doesnt begin at a heart beat.
I'm just saying that without the morning afterpill, there would be more abortions at older ages, where the fetus is more developed. Now, that might not matter to you- but it does to me.
If they are going to abort it- then I would rather it be before it develops- BEFORE it has a heartbeat. That makes it, to me, less cruel- less personal. It doesnt make it right, true, but it makes it less heart breaking. And it DOES reduce the amount of abortions- you are talking about when the egg gets fertilized and the lining thins so that the egg cant cling to it. You completly by pass the number of those eggs that dont get fertilized due to the pill.
Also, I think that there are many women out there that dont know exactly what the pill does- or how it works (AKA the thinning of the lining- which you say is like an abortion...is and abortion) and there probably a lot of women who would stop taking the pill if they knew that it was like an abortion. One way to prevent these morning after pill "abortions" is to get that information out there. That would also reduce the amount of these non medical abortions from happening.
I still support the pill whole heartedly, I may not like the result of it, but I still do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
