Political Crossfire Forums

[AllAmericanMan]

Depending on your views of when life begins. IMO, preventing implantation is an abortion, and the mother is pregnant as soon as conception occurs. I know many zygotes fail to implant, I dont see how that makes the successful ones dead or sub-human. Birth control pills can stop successful zygotes from implanting therefor I believe using the pill is an act of violence on an innocent human life. I think too many people are going to abuse this drug now that it is going to be over the counter. Its not like using a condom, it can cause harm to the conceived product of human reproduction, our offspring. Any harm done unnaturally to the unborn should be a crime unless the unborn represent a serious threat to the mother.

[Ek0nomik]

"If a woman takes Plan B within 72 hours of unprotected sex, she can lower the risk of pregnancy by up to 89 percent. Plan B is different from the abortion pill: If a woman already is pregnant, Plan B has no effect."

[AllAmericanMan]

Ek0nomik wrote: "If a woman takes Plan B within 72 hours of unprotected sex, she can lower the risk of pregnancy by up to 89 percent. Plan B is different from the abortion pill: If a woman already is pregnant, Plan B has no effect."

According to the definition of implantation being the start of pregnancy, something that has little basis in biology.

[MeiCelestial]

I agree that using a condom is safer and more logical than the morning after pill, but not everyone is going to use a condom every time they have sex. Wouldn't you rather have them prevent pregnancies this way than risking it and then getting an abortion when they find out that they are pregnant?

[AllAmericanMan]

MeiCelestial wrote: I agree that using a condom is safer and more logical than the morning after pill, but not everyone is going to use a condom every time they have sex. Wouldn't you rather have them prevent pregnancies this way than risking it and then getting an abortion when they find out that they are pregnant?

What I am saying is that this pill causes abortions, I would rather them use a condom. This pill has a chance of preventing a zygote from implanting in the uterus wall. That action is in essence a violent removal of a living human organism (a human being) from his or her natural habitat (the womb). I can not condone this drug because of this chance. It can prevent conception and I don't have a problem with that. I do have a problem that this drug also makes it so the human zygote can not implant in the uterus wall.

A woman has an 8 percent chance of getting pregnant off the pill, and a 1 percent chance on it. In essence, you are aborting 7 out of 8 successful zygotes that nature would have selected to develop further.

The zygote didn't ask to be created, its parents forced this unique human life into existence. Were smart enough to chemically kill these unborn humans, but should we be careful or careless in our use of this ability?
Abortion on demand, at any time, for any reason is not a choice I can support. Zygote or 9 month old fetus, or 90 year old man, it makes no difference to me. Humans are humans, and I am glad I wasn't aborted. I wouldn't want to be aborted, so how can I allow others to be killed?

I don't care that a zygote can not feel, it is a human anyways. Every pregnancy is unique and brings about a unique result. It seems obvious to me that when one of these products has their life ended a human being is dieing. Something obviously happens at conception that makes each of these pregnancies unique. We should respect this awesome power nature has given us, the power to create more life and more of ourselves. Conception is something that we should worship as a true miracle, for the result of this event brings about the most advanced life we know of.

[Cal-Pak]

According to your logic then, every time a woman goes to a fertility clinic and an egg is fertilized.
And a doctor implants this in the women, and it does not take, and is expelled.
Those people have performed an abortion.
Plus every time an egg is fertilized naturally and for whatever natural reason does not implant.
That is also an abortion.

[gemma]

Cal-Pak wrote: According to your logic then, every time a woman goes to a fertility clinic and an egg is fertilized.
And a doctor implants this in the women, and it does not take, and is expelled.
Those people have performed an abortion.
Plus every time an egg is fertilized naturally and for whatever natural reason does not implant.
That is also an abortion.

I think AllAmericanMan would say that "nature would not have selected those to develop further." I apologize if I'm putting words in your mouth though, AAM.


From my perspective, HURRAH for the FDA!! :dance: Only took, what, 10, 15 years?

I imagine that taking the morning after pills would be none too comfortable. Big doses of hormones, yuck, like PMS. Hopefully if a woman has to use these once, she'll decide that getting on birth control pills or Depo is a better (and possibly cheaper!) solution.

My husband did bring up a worst-case scenario, however much we both laud this FDA decision: Hot-and-heavy, no condom, girl resists, sleazy guy breaks her down by pulling a pill (any pill) out of his pocket and ignorant girl is convinced everything will be OK after....

[AllAmericanMan]

gemma wrote: Cal-Pak wrote: According to your logic then, every time a woman goes to a fertility clinic and an egg is fertilized.
And a doctor implants this in the women, and it does not take, and is expelled.
Those people have performed an abortion.
Plus every time an egg is fertilized naturally and for whatever natural reason does not implant.
That is also an abortion.

I think AllAmericanMan would say that "nature would not have selected those to develop further." I apologize if I'm putting words in your mouth though, AAM.


No problem at all thats pretty much what my response would be.

[Ek0nomik]

gemma wrote: My husband did bring up a worst-case scenario, however much we both laud this FDA decision: Hot-and-heavy, no condom, girl resists, sleazy guy breaks her down by pulling a pill (any pill) out of his pocket and ignorant girl is convinced everything will be OK after....

Yeah and people were scared of the same thing when condoms first came out opposing the "pull out" method.

[CommiepinkoLefty]

AllAmericanMan wrote:

What I am saying is that this pill causes abortions, I would rather them use a condom.





Condoms don't work 100% of the time. Morning after is ocasionally a backup for the 1 or 2 % of the time the condom fails.

Too many people in the world anyways, this pill is much needed... It's a shame the FDA didn't address it sooner.

Also, any pharmacist who thinks he/she is entitled to refuse to sell morning after pills because it's against their "morals" needs to die in a fire.

[Lumina]

Does anyone else remember the official FDA warning about RU 486 just a couple of years ago--that several deaths had been reported?

Have these dangers (excessive bleeding, failure to expel all of the fetus, maternal conditions such as diabetes, coagulation deficiences, etc.) been eliminated in new formulations of the "morning-after" pill?

http://www.ru486facts.org/index.cfm?page=news

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=40607

[AllAmericanMan]

CommiepinkoLefty wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote:

What I am saying is that this pill causes abortions, I would rather them use a condom.





Condoms don't work 100% of the time. Morning after is ocasionally a backup for the 1 or 2 % of the time the condom fails.

Too many people in the world anyways, this pill is much needed... It's a shame the FDA didn't address it sooner.

Also, any pharmacist who thinks he/she is entitled to refuse to sell morning after pills because it's against their "morals" needs to die in a fire.

No condoms don't work 100% of the time, which is why more education and widespread availability of contraceptives should be our highest priorities. In order to stop having abortions, we have to limit the demand for the action first.

Plan B "the morning after" will only make abortions faster, cheaper, and easier. I want to get rid of abortions altogether (with the exception of a serious threat to the mother.) It's not some great thing at all, and its a terrible defeat for the fight to respect young human life.

[CommiepinkoLefty]

AllAmericanMan wrote:

No condoms don't work 100% of the time, which is why more education and widespread availability of contraceptives should be our highest priorities. In order to stop having abortions, we have to limit the demand for the action first.

Plan B "the morning after" will only make abortions faster, cheaper, and easier. I want to get rid of abortions altogether (with the exception of a serious threat to the mother.) It's not some great thing at all, and its a terrible defeat for the fight to respect young human life.


Hmm last time I checked, the current administration will have none of that. Bush believes pre-marital sex is wrong, and pretends it doesn't happen. He'll never allow more widespread availability of or education about contraceptives. I would agree with you that reducing the number of abortions should be something we as a people aim to do, but until we create birth control that works 100% of the time, I think abortion should be legal. To me, it's an acceptable means of birth control. No one wants an abortion, it's a last resort to prevent an unwanted child from being born. I see things differently than you do, as you believe human life begins at conception, and I believe it begins around 5 months later. Obviously, because of this, we are bound to disagree on the morality of abortion.

Be that as it may, I'm glad to see that you are putting forward a positive solution rather then pretending people don't have sex for non-procreational purposes out of wedlock.

[Lumina]

The "morning-after" pill, particularly if it's available without a prescription, is going to cost women their lives. They may have existing medical conditions of which they're unaware--renal problems, clotting problems, and etc. Already, several deaths have been reported following the taking of RU486.

[AllAmericanMan]

CommiepinkoLefty wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote:

No condoms don't work 100% of the time, which is why more education and widespread availability of contraceptives should be our highest priorities. In order to stop having abortions, we have to limit the demand for the action first.

Plan B "the morning after" will only make abortions faster, cheaper, and easier. I want to get rid of abortions altogether (with the exception of a serious threat to the mother.) It's not some great thing at all, and its a terrible defeat for the fight to respect young human life.


Hmm last time I checked, the current administration will have none of that. Bush believes pre-marital sex is wrong, and pretends it doesn't happen. He'll never allow more widespread availability of or education about contraceptives. I would agree with you that reducing the number of abortions should be something we as a people aim to do, but until we create birth control that works 100% of the time, I think abortion should be legal. To me, it's an acceptable means of birth control. No one wants an abortion, it's a last resort to prevent an unwanted child from being born. I see things differently than you do, as you believe human life begins at conception, and I believe it begins around 5 months later. Obviously, because of this, we are bound to disagree on the morality of abortion.

Be that as it may, I'm glad to see that you are putting forward a positive solution rather then pretending people don't have sex for non-procreational purposes out of wedlock.

You can be pro life and still enjoy sex every day and not be religious at all, im living proof.

[Atlas Bergeron]

AllAmericanMan wrote: Depending on your views of when life begins. IMO, preventing implantation is an abortion, and the mother is pregnant as soon as conception occurs. I know many zygotes fail to implant, I dont see how that makes the successful ones dead or sub-human. Birth control pills can stop successful zygotes from implanting therefor I believe using the pill is an act of violence on an innocent human life. I think too many people are going to abuse this drug now that it is going to be over the counter. Its not like using a condom, it can cause harm to the conceived product of human reproduction, our offspring. Any harm done unnaturally to the unborn should be a crime unless the unborn represent a serious threat to the mother.

I do not believe abortion is justified--but on what grounds do you have against killing the sperm or the egg by itself (as in not implanted)
It would be the same ethics as removing a woman's ovaries or severing a man's testicals (surgically and voluntarily). Isn't this what 'Plan B' does?

(if you were to argue against it on these grounds, you would also have to be against condoms--since eventually they will cause the sperm and the egg to die)

[Ek0nomik]

Atlas Bergeron wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote: Depending on your views of when life begins. IMO, preventing implantation is an abortion, and the mother is pregnant as soon as conception occurs. I know many zygotes fail to implant, I dont see how that makes the successful ones dead or sub-human. Birth control pills can stop successful zygotes from implanting therefor I believe using the pill is an act of violence on an innocent human life. I think too many people are going to abuse this drug now that it is going to be over the counter. Its not like using a condom, it can cause harm to the conceived product of human reproduction, our offspring. Any harm done unnaturally to the unborn should be a crime unless the unborn represent a serious threat to the mother.

I do not believe abortion is justified--but on what grounds do you have against killing the sperm or the egg by itself (as in not implanted)
It would be the same ethics as removing a woman's ovaries or severing a man's testicals (surgically and voluntarily). Isn't this what 'Plan B' does?

(if you were to argue against it on these grounds, you would also have to be against condoms--since eventually they will cause the sperm and the egg to die)

If I am not mistaken, AllAmericanMan is arguing that life begins when the sperm and egg meet. The sperm and egg itself are two seperate entities, but when they meet, it's something more than just a sperm and egg. It's life. (Correct me if I am wrong AAM)

CommiepinkoLefty wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote:

Hmm last time I checked, the current administration will have none of that. Bush believes pre-marital sex is wrong, and pretends it doesn't happen. He'll never allow more widespread availability of or education about contraceptives. I would agree with you that reducing the number of abortions should be something we as a people aim to do, but until we create birth control that works 100% of the time, I think abortion should be legal. To me, it's an acceptable means of birth control. No one wants an abortion, it's a last resort to prevent an unwanted child from being born. I see things differently than you do, as you believe human life begins at conception, and I believe it begins around 5 months later. Obviously, because of this, we are bound to disagree on the morality of abortion.

Be that as it may, I'm glad to see that you are putting forward a positive solution rather then pretending people don't have sex for non-procreational purposes out of wedlock.

You can be pro life and still enjoy sex every day and not be religious at all, im living proof.

Are you outside of wedlock AllAmericanMan? Truthfully, did you have sex before you were married? What do you mean when you say that you're "not be religious at all"? Are you an Atheist or Agnostic? I must say, I enjoy a secular individual debating /pro-life/ values rather than a religious nut. The validity of the argument is significantly increased. I loved it when last semester there was a pro-life group protesting on campus. They all had Bibles and were shouting at students, including myself as we walked by. As if that's any way to make an argument.

[AllAmericanMan]

Quote: If I am not mistaken, AllAmericanMan is arguing that life begins when the sperm and egg meet. The sperm and egg itself are two seperate entities, but when they meet, it's something more than just a sperm and egg. It's life. (Correct me if I am wrong AAM)

Sperms and eggs are life, they are living cells just like the zygote is. The key factor here is conception. When the egg and the sperm fuse they form a unique human organism. The sperm or egg will never grow into an adult, but we know that when they fuse they create a unique product every time. We are all different, and when one of these products gets aborted, a certain individual that would have experienced life doesn't. I can't think of an act of violence harsher than such, not even rape. At least the rape victim gets a chance to make the best of life.

Quote: Are you outside of wedlock AllAmericanMan? Truthfully, did you have sex before you were married? What do you mean when you say that you're "not be religious at all"? Are you an Atheist or Agnostic? I must say, I enjoy a secular individual debating /pro-life/ values rather than a religious nut. The validity of the argument is significantly increased. I loved it when last semester there was a pro-life group protesting on campus. They all had Bibles and were shouting at students, including myself as we walked by. As if that's any way to make an argument.

No I'm not married. Hey ladies! :wink:

:P

I am an Atheist. The whole concept of souls and a beginning to time just doesn't make sense to me. The Universe certainly is magical, but I just think it is impossible to have nothing without something, so everything exists. That's my theory anyways, I could be very wrong. There are many things just so amazing about the diversity of the known Universe. God just seems to be the fill in the gaps of what we don't understand yet.
Organized religion seems like a pure scam to me, and magnets for power hungry megalomaniacs. I really hate it when other pro lifers use the bible as a source, and I was raised Roman Catholic, went to church every week. It never made any sense to me though, I was never an "accepting" person of what I was told. I still do things "my way." :lol:

My disbelief in souls and everything else that is mystical is what hardens my stance on abortion and equality for all human beings. We only get 1 life, and no one should be left behind.

I find it ironic that we as people are capable of feeling compassion for a murderer on death row, a mother who aborts her child, and a soldier that goes to fight a war, but not the child who has done nothing and did not ask to be created. It's amazing how powerful human perception is. Our perception that a single cell is not capable of having value. How it has to look like us, in order for us to love it.

[Selfish_Meme]

You find it amazing that others seem to place so little value on a zygote/fetus because you attribute more to it than others do. If you want to convince others that your view is right then you will have to explain what makes a zygote/fetus inherently more valuable than a woman's right to be pregnant or not and do it in a way that people can understand and take on board.

[Ek0nomik]

Selfish_Meme wrote: You find it amazing that others seem to place so little value on a zygote/fetus because you attribute more to it than others do. If you want to convince others that your view is right then you will have to explain what makes a zygote/fetus inherently more valuable than a woman's right to be pregnant or not and do it in a way that people can understand and take on board.

That's exactly what I was going to reply with. I want him to go through it all.