PDA

View Full Version : 17-year-olds can now use Plan B


Black Mamba
03-24-2009, 12:27 AM
The Food and Drug Administration let politics cloud its judgment when it denied teenage girls over-the-counter access to the Plan B morning-after pill, a federal judge said Monday as he ordered the FDA to let 17-year-olds obtain the medication.

In a thorough denunciation of the Bush administration, U.S. District Judge Edward Korman blasted the FDA's handling of the issue, saying it had "repeatedly and unreasonably" delayed issuing a decision on the medication.

The morning-after pill is a source of tension for social conservatives who held great sway in the Bush administration and who believe the pill is tantamount to abortion.

The ruling said the FDA in several instances had delayed issuing a ruling for suspect reasons and on two occasions only took action to facilitate the confirmation of acting FDA commissioners whose confirmations had been held up by the repeated delays.

"These political considerations, delays, and implausible justifications for decision-making are not the only evidence of a lack of good faith and reasoned decision-making," Korman said. "Indeed, the record is clear that the FDA's course of conduct regarding Plan B departed in significant ways from the agency's normal procedures regarding similar applications to switch a drug product from prescription to non-prescription use."

The drug is marketed by Montvale, N.J.-based Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc. as Plan B. Korman ordered the FDA to permit Barr Pharmaceuticals to make Plan B available to 17-year-olds without a prescription under the same conditions as Plan B is now available to women over the age of 18. He said his order must be complied with within 30 days.

The FDA said it is reviewing the judge's decision. Women's groups said it's unlikely that the Obama administration would appeal. Social conservatives decried the ruling.

Susan Wood resigned as the top FDA official for women's health in 2005 to protest agency delays in issuing a decision on the morning-after pill. Now a professor at George Washington University's school of public health, Wood said the ruling represents a vote of confidence in the FDA's scientific staff.

"What happened with Plan B demonstrated that the agency was off track, and was not being allowed to do its job properly," Wood said. "This is telling the FDA to move forward with a focus on good science."

The conservative Family Research Council said the judge's decision bowed to ideological pressure from the left.

"Judge Korman has accepted lock, stock, and barrel all of the claims of a political ideology promoting sexual license for teens," said Chris Gacek, a regulation expert with the group.

"There is a real danger that Plan B may be given to women, especially sexually abused women and minors, under coercion or without their consent," Gacek added in a statement.

In February 2001, the Association of Reproductive Health Professionals and 65 other organizations petitioned the FDA to make Plan B available over the counter to all, regardless of age. The FDA did not respond for five years, announcing in 2006 that the petition was denied.

As part of his order, Korman vacated the petition's denial and required the FDA to reconsider its decisions regarding the Plan B switch to over-the-counter use.

The lawsuit was filed in 2005 by the Center for Reproductive Rights and others.

In his ruling, Korman noted that FDA officials as far back as June 2002 discussed the "political sensitivity" of making Plan B available over the counter.

And he said depositions by several FDA senior staff members revealed that political and ideological factors played an important role in the nomination and selection process of members of FDA committees that would recommend how the FDA should act on Plan B requests.

One doctor testified that the FDA commissioner's office appointed members to its advisory committee not for their expertise but to achieve a "balance of opinion," meaning they were very active in the anti-abortion movement, Korman said.

Still, the FDA's Advisory Committee voted 23 to 4 in 2003 to approve Plan B for over-the-counter status without age restrictions. However, out of nearly two dozen applications to move a prescription drug to over-the-counter status, the Plan B request was the only one not approved after the committee recommended it.

The judge said top FDA officials at a meeting in late 2003 or early 2004 told their subordinates that over-the-counter status for Plan B would not be approved at that time and that it was a decision that would be made at a higher level in the FDA than those decisions are usually made.

"Moreover, they were told that the White House had been involved in the decision on Plan B," he said.

"Today's ruling is a tremendous victory for all Americans who expect the government to safeguard public health," said Nancy Northup, president of the center.

Assistant U.S. Attorney F. Franklin Amanat, who argued the case for the government, said: "We're studying the decision and evaluating options."

"We need to discuss it with the agency and figure out what our next steps will be," he said.

The government in court papers has said politics played no role in the agency's decisions.

Plan B is a contraceptive that reduces the chance of pregnancy if taken within three days after sex. It contains a high dose of of birth control drugs. The drug works by preventing ovulation or by interfering with implantation of a fertilized egg. Opponents argue that is the equivalent of abortion.

In 2006, the FDA allowed Plan B to be sold without a prescription to adults, but only by pharmacies that checked photo ID before selling the pills. Girls 17 and younger were required to obtain a prescription.

Barr is now owned by Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, a global company headquartered in Israel.

Black Mamba
03-24-2009, 12:32 AM
I don't know what to think about this. I don't agree with this decision at all I can say that. What's preventing them from lowering the age limit? What's this showing the younger generations?

rearnakedchoke
03-24-2009, 01:14 AM
well, my stance on this probably will not be popular ... but i don't see a problem with this .... sure abstinence is the way to go, but probably our grandparents and great grandparents were having kids at 17 ... sure they weren't promiscuous, but it wasn't out of the norm ... i mean, everything these days are sexualized and sure it needs to be changed and toned down ... but at least kids have options ... i had a kid at a fairly young age, and most people wouldn't be able to handle it ... however, this is abortion (sort-of) so if you are against it, you will be against this ...

i did used to work for the company Teva named ... LOL

Chris F
03-24-2009, 01:50 AM
well, my stance on this probably will not be popular ... but i don't see a problem with this .... sure abstinence is the way to go, but probably our grandparents and great grandparents were having kids at 17 ... sure they weren't promiscuous, but it wasn't out of the norm ... i mean, everything these days are sexualized and sure it needs to be changed and toned down ... but at least kids have options ... i had a kid at a fairly young age, and most people wouldn't be able to handle it ... however, this is abortion (sort-of) so if you are against it, you will be against this ...

i did used to work for the company Teva named ... LOL

The problem here is not the result so much as this is a spit in the face of parental rights. At 17 parents are supposed to be the choice maker for their kids. This tells the parent their not needing in the baby killing decision.

rearnakedchoke
03-24-2009, 01:57 AM
The problem here is not the result so much as this is a spit in the face of parental rights. At 17 parents are supposed to be the choice maker for their kids. This tells the parent their not needing in the baby killing decision.
true, but maybe if the parents were better role models or better at educatiing their kids, their 17 year olds wouldn't need plan B ... not saying if your child at 17 is sexual active, then you are a bad parent ... but ... it may mean that ...

Moose
03-24-2009, 02:09 AM
17 year olds nowadays are adults. Lower it to 16.

NateR
03-24-2009, 02:13 AM
Sickening. Just more evidence of the decline of our culture.

Moose
03-24-2009, 02:19 AM
Sickening. Just more evidence of the decline of our culture.

Wrong. Higher imprisonment rates are more empirical evidence. This is just using technology to combat a problem that's been in cultures since before time. Just back then the young adult would have a baby, then that baby would given up for adoption or raised as a brother or sister of the true mother. Either way it's F'd up.

NateR
03-24-2009, 02:26 AM
Wrong. Higher imprisonment rates are more empirical evidence. This is just using technology to combat a problem that's been in cultures since before time. Just back then the young adult would have a baby, then that baby would given up for adoption or raised as a brother or sister of the true mother. Either way it's F'd up.

The ancient Scandinavians would toss babies they weren't able to feed off of cliffs or leave them outside in the wintertime to freeze to death.

In Jesus' day, Roman citizens would take unwanted babies and abandon them by the side of the road to be eaten by wild animals or vultures.

Regardless of how the child is killed (exposure to the elements, gravity, wild animals, doctors or pills) the result is the same. It's still murder.

Chris F
03-24-2009, 02:30 AM
If they are considered adult then parents should not be held accountable for what they do and they should be able to do business and so on. But they can;t so until then parents should still make those choices.

When life is an inconvenience you need no more evidence then that. Our culture is in the toilet.

NateR
03-24-2009, 02:47 AM
I like Mother Teresa's stance on abortion:
If we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill each other?... Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want.

Bonnie
03-24-2009, 05:04 AM
Are you guys opposed to this pill being given to a woman or child who has been raped?

I ask this ? in all seriousness, as a woman, because I want to know how you men, and any women who would like to share their views, feel about this particular situation.

atomdanger
03-24-2009, 05:13 AM
Our Country = Going to hell in a hand basket.


haha ok, maybe not that bad, but seriously.
I hate hate hate how over sexed kids are these days,
I can't stand seeing little girls in low rise jeans and mini skirts,
It makes me sick, I know 17 isn't exactly kids anymore, but it just brought up the subject in my mind because of a talk I was having with a friend the other day about kids and pop culture and sexyness with kids.

Chris F
03-24-2009, 05:33 AM
Are you guys opposed to this pill being given to a woman or child who has been raped?

I ask this ? in all seriousness, as a woman, because I want to know how you men, and any women who would like to share their views, feel about this particular situation.

Since when does murder need an excuse? Rape is a horrible crime why make it worse by adding the elimination of life as well. God alone should decide if a life should be born. BTW I have 2 young girls and if it were to happen to them the only life that will be taken would be the rapist. Who is to say we have not aborted the cure for cancer or some other great invention

Moose
03-24-2009, 05:36 AM
Since when does murder need an excuse? Rape is a horrible crime why make it worse by adding the elimination of life as well. God alone should decide if a life should be born. BTW I have 2 young girls and if it were to happen to them the only life that will be taken would be the rapist. Who is to say we have not aborted the cure for cancer or some other great invention

I see your point, but there's no way you can force a violated woman to carry that baby to term. No way. I can't justify that at all. Ever.

Chris F
03-24-2009, 05:41 AM
I see your point, but there's no way you can force a violated woman to carry that baby to term. No way. I can't justify that at all. Ever.

As a Christian I can't justify what I would do to the rapist but it is a part of life and yes a double standard. However every kid should have the right to life. Why should a child suffer from the sins of the father? So murder is not an option. The girl can give it up for adoption, but they should have no right to destory it via chemicals. Let God decide.

atomdanger
03-24-2009, 05:50 AM
As a Christian I can't justify what I would do to the rapist but it is a part of life and yes a double standard. However every kid should have the right to life. Why should a child suffer from the sins of the father? So murder is not an option. The girl can give it up for adoption, but they should have no right to destory it via chemicals. Let God decide.

and if your daughter / wife / mother were raped....

would you tell her to have the baby and give it up for adoption? Or keep it?
doubtful.

KENTUCKYREDBONE
03-24-2009, 06:51 AM
Lets break down the Liberal Government mentality! It goes like this, Parents YOU are responsible for your Kids but YOU have NO ATHOURITY over them! That is reserved for US! The almighty all knowing Gubment who is replacing your God!

NateR
03-24-2009, 06:52 AM
Are you guys opposed to this pill being given to a woman or child who has been raped?

I ask this ? in all seriousness, as a woman, because I want to know how you men, and any women who would like to share their views, feel about this particular situation.

Honestly, I don't believe abortion is justified under ANY circumstances, not even rape. The child simply did nothing to deserve the death penalty. So, why create two victims instead of just one?

Bonnie
03-24-2009, 08:09 AM
As a Christian I can't justify what I would do to the rapist but it is a part of life and yes a double standard. However every kid should have the right to life. Why should a child suffer from the sins of the father? So murder is not an option. The girl can give it up for adoption, but they should have no right to destory it via chemicals. Let God decide.

In your previous post, you say, "...the only life that will be taken is the rapist."

In this post, "...murder is not an option." You do admit to a "double standard".

And then, "Let God decide."

If only God were doing all the deciding, hmmm...and not man in all his wisdom. But, God did decide and chose to give man free will. Free will to choose the path of righteousness or not, right from wrong.

I know it isn't your intent to make it all sound so "simple" as to "the girl can give it up for adoption" (at least I hope you realize it isn't that simple). Should a child have the right to life and not suffer for the sins of it's father--yes and yes, in a perfect world. But, the world isn't perfect because man isn't perfect.

In a way, it wasn't fair to ask the ? of you men because you are men. And even though men can be raped and suffer all the mental/emotional anguish a woman can from the act, he can't, however, get pregnant from rape and suffer the even greater emotional turmoil and mental anguish of all that entails for a woman let alone a child of rape.

I don't agree with them giving this pill to girls as a means of birth control, but I have to say, as a woman, I am torn when it comes to rape and/or incest. Torn because I know God would not approve of abortion no matter how it came about, and a child should have the right to life. On the other hand, my "human" person, the woman, wants their to be mercy and compassion for the woman put in such a predicament.

NateR
03-24-2009, 08:48 AM
I don't agree with them giving this pill to girls as a means of birth control, but I have to say, as a woman, I am torn when it comes to rape and/or incest. Torn because I know God would not approve of abortion no matter how it came about, and a child should have the right to life. On the other hand, my "human" person, the woman, wants their to be mercy and compassion for the woman put in such a predicament.

I understand how you would sympathize with the woman, but why not sympathize with the unborn child? What exactly did the baby do to deserve being put to death?

A woman is not completely helpless in the crime of rape. She can take self-defense courses, carry a gun or just be careful where she goes at night. However, that unborn baby is 100% completely helpless. It can't defend itself, can't speak on it's own behalf and that child's "freedom of choice" isn't even considered in the matter of abortion (which is what makes the phrase "freedom of choice" such a sick joke when applied to abortion).

So I would default towards protecting the GOD-given rights of the one person in this situation would cannot protect themselves: the unborn baby.

Sure, having to carry a baby conceived in rape would be traumatic, but it's not a guarantee of an unhappy life. Pat Robertson, the founder of the 700 Club, was conceived when his mother was raped. So the child has just as much potential for success as any human being born under different circumstances.

Primadawn
03-24-2009, 10:42 AM
Bonnie, I believe life begins at conception. Therefore, yes--even if I was BRUTALLY raped and got pregnant, I would have the baby. I've had this discussion with my oldest daughter and she agrees as well. If you believe that life begins at conception, but that there are valid reasons to END that life, then what's the difference between that and going and killing a rapist's 3 year old?
Would it be traumatic for the mother? Absolutely. Why does nobody care about the trauma to the unborn child?

mikthehick
03-24-2009, 12:36 PM
That really is too bad--if only kids would realize that abstinence goes far and prevents a ton of problems that teen parents face.

rearnakedchoke
03-24-2009, 12:47 PM
Since when does murder need an excuse? Rape is a horrible crime why make it worse by adding the elimination of life as well. God alone should decide if a life should be born. BTW I have 2 young girls and if it were to happen to them the only life that will be taken would be the rapist. Who is to say we have not aborted the cure for cancer or some other great invention

Easy for a man to say ..

Man = rape = horrible crime = bad person
Woman = murder = worst crime = worst person
GTFO

Seem to me if you just get rid of men, we wouldn't have a problem .. just leave me and my son and County Mike to continue human kind ...

County Mike
03-24-2009, 01:24 PM
Seem to me if you just get rid of men, we wouldn't have a problem .. just leave me and my son and County Mike to continue human kind ...

That's a tall order, but I'm up for the challenge.

Better get started now. We have a lot of work to do.

Miss Foxy
03-24-2009, 01:55 PM
The ancient Scandinavians would toss babies they weren't able to feed off of cliffs or leave them outside in the wintertime to freeze to death.

In Jesus' day, Roman citizens would take unwanted babies and abandon them by the side of the road to be eaten by wild animals or vultures.

Regardless of how the child is killed (exposure to the elements, gravity, wild animals, doctors or pills) the result is the same. It's still murder.
I agree Nate. It makes me sick and disgusted any thought or story of a baby being murdered. It makes me cry literally. uggg :sad:

Miss Foxy
03-24-2009, 01:57 PM
Bonnie, I believe life begins at conception. Therefore, yes--even if I was BRUTALLY raped and got pregnant, I would have the baby. I've had this discussion with my oldest daughter and she agrees as well. If you believe that life begins at conception, but that there are valid reasons to END that life, then what's the difference between that and going and killing a rapist's 3 year old?
Would it be traumatic for the mother? Absolutely. Why does nobody care about the trauma to the unborn child? I care.... And I agree with you at the worst case if the mother was too traumatized people would adopt a newborn. I would.

Miss Foxy
03-24-2009, 01:59 PM
I understand how you would sympathize with the woman, but why not sympathize with the unborn child? What exactly did the baby do to deserve being put to death?

A woman is not completely helpless in the crime of rape. She can take self-defense courses, carry a gun or just be careful where she goes at night. However, that unborn baby is 100% completely helpless. It can't defend itself, can't speak on it's own behalf and that child's "freedom of choice" isn't even considered in the matter of abortion (which is what makes the phrase "freedom of choice" such a sick joke when applied to abortion).

So I would default towards protecting the GOD-given rights of the one person in this situation would cannot protect themselves: the unborn baby.

Sure, having to carry a baby conceived in rape would be traumatic, but it's not a guarantee of an unhappy life. Pat Robertson, the founder of the 700 Club, was conceived when his mother was raped. So the child has just as much potential for success as any human being born under different circumstances. I disagree with a woman being completely helpless. I was a victim of a sexual assault. I was not full fledge raped thank God, however I was assaulted and this was by a US service man. I think if I was drunk in a club and rode home with strange men that would make sense that I contributed to careless behavior, but I wasnt. Some women are victims.

Primadawn
03-24-2009, 02:26 PM
I disagree with a woman being completely helpless. I was a victim of a sexual assault. I was not full fledge raped thank God, however I was assaulted and this was by a US service man. I think if I was drunk in a club and rode home with strange men that would make sense that I contributed to careless behavior, but I wasnt. Some women are victims.

I don't think that's what Nate was saying. I thing he just meant that the woman at least has a CHANCE to fight back, where an unborn baby does not.

Miss Foxy
03-24-2009, 02:52 PM
I don't think that's what Nate was saying. I thing he just meant that the woman at least has a CHANCE to fight back, where an unborn baby does not.
I know what he is saying and I agree 100%.. I was just saying in some cases yes women make themselves vulnerable, however sometimes they are helpless. I wasn't attacking him or anything like that just giving a real life example. I personally think abortion/plan B/ anything that stops a babys life from the moment it was conceived is pure MURDER....

Moose
03-24-2009, 03:36 PM
I personally think abortion/plan B/ anything that stops a babys life from the moment it was conceived is pure MURDER....

Fertilized eggs often don't implant, for many different reasons. I realize it's a touchy subject but I try to look at it subjectively.

Bonnie
03-24-2009, 04:10 PM
I understand how you would sympathize with the woman, but why not sympathize with the unborn child? What exactly did the baby do to deserve being put to death?

A woman is not completely helpless in the crime of rape. She can take self-defense courses, carry a gun or just be careful where she goes at night. However, that unborn baby is 100% completely helpless. It can't defend itself, can't speak on it's own behalf and that child's "freedom of choice" isn't even considered in the matter of abortion (which is what makes the phrase "freedom of choice" such a sick joke when applied to abortion).

So I would default towards protecting the GOD-given rights of the one person in this situation would cannot protect themselves: the unborn baby.

Sure, having to carry a baby conceived in rape would be traumatic, but it's not a guarantee of an unhappy life. Pat Robertson, the founder of the 700 Club, was conceived when his mother was raped. So the child has just as much potential for success as any human being born under different circumstances.

Nathan, Dawn and Chris, I agree that life begins at conception and babies cannot protect themselves so we have to protect them. God tells us there are only two paths, the broad and the narrow. We choose which path we follow.

I'm not arguing or debating the issue of abortion, for or against. When I said if only God did all the deciding, as opposed to man, I meant this would not be an issue because there would be no rape, therefore, no abortion, no loss of life. But God lets us choose which path we take and it's obvious which path the rapist takes.

When I said, "my human person", I meant human as in this earth, born into sin, you know, of the flesh that makes us weak... And, by mercy and compassion, I was not saying, kill the child to spare the woman. I was saying, as a human, with my human heart and mind, I wish there was a way to spare the woman as well as the child.

I asked the ? and wanted to know how y'all felt and I appreciate your honesty. Thank you! :)

Chris F
03-24-2009, 04:45 PM
and if your daughter / wife / mother were raped....

would you tell her to have the baby and give it up for adoption? Or keep it?
doubtful.

I already answered that in an earlier post. We would keep the baby and raise it for our own. In fact we are helping a very close friend do that now. She was raped and we encouraged her to keep it and she is not glad she did.

Chris F
03-24-2009, 04:49 PM
In your previous post, you say, "...the only life that will be taken is the rapist."

In this post, "...murder is not an option." You do admit to a "double standard".

And then, "Let God decide."

If only God were doing all the deciding, hmmm...and not man in all his wisdom. But, God did decide and chose to give man free will. Free will to choose the path of righteousness or not, right from wrong.

I know it isn't your intent to make it all sound so "simple" as to "the girl can give it up for adoption" (at least I hope you realize it isn't that simple). Should a child have the right to life and not suffer for the sins of it's father--yes and yes, in a perfect world. But, the world isn't perfect because man isn't perfect.

In a way, it wasn't fair to ask the ? of you men because you are men. And even though men can be raped and suffer all the mental/emotional anguish a woman can from the act, he can't, however, get pregnant from rape and suffer the even greater emotional turmoil and mental anguish of all that entails for a woman let alone a child of rape.

I don't agree with them giving this pill to girls as a means of birth control, but I have to say, as a woman, I am torn when it comes to rape and/or incest. Torn because I know God would not approve of abortion no matter how it came about, and a child should have the right to life. On the other hand, my "human" person, the woman, wants their to be mercy and compassion for the woman put in such a predicament.

Just because we cna;t get pregnant does not mean we have no feelings in the issues. Especially when it is a person close to us. As i have said I have 2 daughters. I have also had some close friends who has gone through it as well so I am not dealing in hypotheticals. No child deserves to die because of the sins of the father. And no child should be given pills w/o parents involvement.

Chris F
03-24-2009, 04:54 PM
Nathan, Dawn and Chris, I agree that life begins at conception and babies cannot protect themselves so we have to protect them. God tells us there are only two paths, the broad and the narrow. We choose which path we follow.

I'm not arguing or debating the issue of abortion, for or against. When I said if only God did all the deciding, as opposed to man, I meant this would not be an issue because there would be no rape, therefore, no abortion, no loss of life. But God lets us choose which path we take and it's obvious which path the rapist takes.

When I said, "my human person", I meant human as in this earth, born into sin, you know, of the flesh that makes us weak... And, by mercy and compassion, I was not saying, kill the child to spare the woman. I was saying, as a human, with my human heart and mind, I wish there was a way to spare the woman as well as the child.

I asked the ? and wanted to know how y'all felt and I appreciate your honesty. Thank you! :)

Sadly because of sin we cannot stop rape, but we should not compund the problem by adding murder. Scripture has guidenece on this and other similar issues and this is why I feel so strongly. In fact I have even help in my old state the squashing of the mandatroy Gardisl shots to girls because that takes away a parents rights. The typical excuse is what if your daughter is raped. I say I do nto deal in what if but in the relaity that I sere an awesome God who does not get off the throne because mankinf is faliable. As long as we are in the flesh bad things will happen. Our job is to try an avoid being a part of it.

Bonnie
03-24-2009, 04:56 PM
I already answered that in an earlier post. We would keep the baby and raise it for our own. In fact we are helping a very close friend do that now. She was raped and we encouraged her to keep it and she is not glad she did.

Is this Pastor Chris?

How are you counseling her to see her through this. Has she had the baby yet? What about adoption?

How would you answer the invarible ?s from a child regarding his/her conception/birth so that it doesn't suffer the "sin" of the father?

I know these are tough ?s I'm asking, but it's a tough issue all the way around.

Miss Foxy
03-24-2009, 05:14 PM
Lets break down the Liberal Government mentality! It goes like this, Parents YOU are responsible for your Kids but YOU have NO ATHOURITY over them! That is reserved for US! The almighty all knowing Gubment who is replacing your God!
Your kidding me right?

NateR
03-24-2009, 05:17 PM
Fertilized eggs often don't implant, for many different reasons. I realize it's a touchy subject but I try to look at it subjectively.

Well, when you look at it subjectively, then you should see that not teaching children to be responsible for their actions is the root of the problem. Giving them yet another "easy out" is not going to just suddenly make them more responsible in the area of pre-marital sex. In fact, it will make sex more consequence free and kids will become more irresponsible than ever.

Finding easier ways for mothers to murder their babies is not the answer to this problem.

Bonnie
03-24-2009, 05:26 PM
Sadly because of sin we cannot stop rape, but we should not compund the problem by adding murder. Scripture has guidenece on this and other similar issues and this is why I feel so strongly. In fact I have even help in my old state the squashing of the mandatroy Gardisl shots to girls because that takes away a parents rights. The typical excuse is what if your daughter is raped. I say I do nto deal in what if but in the relaity that I sere an awesome God who does not get off the throne because mankinf is faliable. As long as we are in the flesh bad things will happen. Our job is to try an avoid being a part of it.

You sounded so "hard" when you first responded to my ?; I didn't see any regard or compassion for the "woman". I know abortion is not the answer, but my heart still weeps for the woman who has suffered rape and then finds she is pregnant not through any act of love but one born of violence against her.

I have all the respect for you in helping women who have been through this. I pray for God to give you strength and courage, patience and compassion in guiding these women to make the right decisions for themselves and the babies. I think the problem is these women are going to have a hard time disassociating and separating their feelings of anger and grief over what happened to them from the baby which is a direct result of that.

God Bless!

bradwright
03-24-2009, 05:33 PM
a plan B pill can not terminate a pregnancy,
it will only stop fertilization from occurring,
so to say this is a murder of an unborn child is a bit of a stretch,

if you truly believe that, then you must also give consideration that masturbation is a form of murder,unless your at a fertility clinic that is.

Miss Foxy
03-24-2009, 05:33 PM
I just want to hug my children right now. I feel so deeply saddened that a life is sometimes looked at as an embryo like its nothing. Its something precious and fragile. To look in your babys eyes and to know and hear his/her heart beating is the best feeling in the world. I know I was given the gift of being a mother and no matter where my life takes me I feel so closer to God by looking/holding my children.
I feel so bad for our youth that must face these moral decisions with no clear guided help from anyone. It seems parents take them for abortions out of embarrassment, or the burden of another mouth to feed its awful. I am not trying to put anyone down believe me I have my faults..

Miss Foxy
03-24-2009, 05:41 PM
a plan B pill can not terminate a pregnancy,
it will only stop fertilization from occurring,
so to say this is a murder of an unborn child is a bit of a stretch,

if you truly believe that, then you must also give consideration that masturbation is a form of murder,unless your at a fertility clinic that is.
Stopping it from being fertilized with lots of different chemicals combined in a lil pill.. Wow and thats a stretch...?!
Oh and as far as masturbation if there was no egg/semen contact how is that considered murder?

Crisco
03-24-2009, 05:42 PM
Edit

Bonnie
03-24-2009, 05:56 PM
When my sister became pregnant, there was some concern for her and the baby. So one day, she has a talk with me and her husband about if something were to happen to her, she wanted to know that we would be okay.

I looked at my brother-in-law, hard and said to him, "If you have to choose between her and the baby, what will you choose?" He said he would choose my sister. And I said, "Good!" That was the answer I wanted to hear from him. Both our thinking was that if forced to make that decision, she could try and get pregnant again.

Plus, and I'm not sure some of you would understand this, this was my twin, the other side of my heart, the person I've literally shared life with since the moment of conception. So, of course, my emotions and feelings would be strong that I would want her to live.

However, after Caleb's birth (which I was blessed to be a part of), I reminded my sister and brother-in-law of that conversation we had months prior. I said, "If you asked me now to choose whose life to save, I wouldn't be able to so easily make that choice." :wink:

NateR
03-24-2009, 06:04 PM
a plan B pill can not terminate a pregnancy,
it will only stop fertilization from occurring,
so to say this is a murder of an unborn child is a bit of a stretch,

if you truly believe that, then you must also give consideration that masturbation is a form of murder,unless your at a fertility clinic that is.

Well, actually that's a different story. If it's just stopping fertilization, then it's not terminating an existing human being. How long after intercourse can this pill be taken? And does it cease to be effective once the egg has been fertilized? If it's preventing fertilization, then it's birth control. If it's terminating a fertilized egg, then it's abortion. The transition from two haploid cells to one diploid cell is the key turning point between birth control and murder.

HOWEVER, the argument about making sex consequence free still stands. That's not going to lead to more responsible behavior among teenagers, it's going to exponentially increase promiscuity and sexual activity in children.

If we were to truly look at the issue of abortion subjectively and scientifically, not politically, then there is no doubt whatsoever that abortion is murder and life as we know it begins at conception:

1. An egg and a sperm are known as haploid gametes. In plain english, they are cells that contain only one chromosome (half a DNA strand), instead of two. Thus they only become complete cells when they pair with a compatible gamete in the process that we refer to as sexual reproduction.

2. Once fertilization occurs, those two single strands are "stitched" together to create a full double helix strand of DNA. Once that occurs, then the embryo contains 100% of the DNA information that it will need to develop and live out its entire life from birth to old age.

3. When I was a single cell, I had exactly the same amount of DNA information in my body as I do now. In fact, maybe more back then, because environment, age, illnesses and lifestyle all serve to create mutations in our DNA. However, we have only observed mutations removing information from a DNA strand. New information being added to a DNA strand, through natural mutation, has NEVER been observed or documented. So, in scientific terms, there is no proof that it ever actually happens.

4. Going by a subjective, materialistic, and scientific standpoint, there is absolutely no way to distinguish a one-celled embryo from a full grown human on a purely genetic basis. The DNA information remains essentially the same (taking into account the loss of information that mutations cause), the only materialistic difference is the number of copies of that information and the increased mass of the organism's body.

Thus, the statement that life, as we understand it, begins at conception no longer becomes some fluffy religious or political ideal, it can be established as a proven, scientific fact.

Miss Foxy
03-24-2009, 06:09 PM
Well, actually that's a different story. If it's just stopping fertilization, then it's not terminating an existing human being. How long after intercourse can this pill be taken? And does it cease to be effective once the egg has been fertilized? If it's preventing fertilization, then it's birth control. If it's terminating a fertilized egg, then it's abortion. The transition from two haploid cells to one diploid cell is the key turning point between birth control and murder.

HOWEVER, the argument about making sex consequence free still stands. That's not going to lead to more responsible behavior among teenagers, it's going to exponentially increase promiscuity and sexual activity in children.

If we were to truly look at the issue of abortion subjectively and scientifically, not politically, then there is no doubt whatsoever that abortion is murder and life as we know it begins at conception:

1. An egg and a sperm are known as haploid gametes. In plain english, they are cells that contain only one chromosome (half a DNA strand), instead of two. Thus they only become complete cells when they pair with a compatible gamete in the process that we refer to as sexual reproduction.

2. Once fertilization occurs, those two single strands are "stitched" together to create a full double helix strand of DNA. Once that occurs, then the embryo contains 100% of the DNA information that it will need to develop and live out its entire life from birth to old age.

3. When I was a single cell, I had exactly the same amount of DNA information in my body as I do now. In fact, maybe more back then, because environment, age, illnesses and lifestyle all serve to create mutations in our DNA. However, we have only observed mutations removing information from a DNA strand. New information being added to a DNA strand, through natural mutation, has NEVER been observed or documented. So, in scientific terms, there is no proof that it ever actually happens.

4. Going by a subjective, materialistic, and scientific standpoint, there is absolutely no way to distinguish a one-celled embryo from a full grown human on a purely genetic basis. The DNA information remains essentially the same (taking into account the loss of information that mutations cause), the only materialistic difference is the number of copies of that information and the increased mass of the organism's body.

Thus, the statement that life, as we understand it, begins at conception no longer becomes some fluffy religious or political ideal, it can be established as a proven, scientific fact.
It can be effective up to 5 days after fertilization it just drops the percentage of accuracy, but it can be taken up to 5 days after unprotected intercourse..:sad:

NateR
03-24-2009, 06:18 PM
It can be effective up to 5 days after fertilization it just drops the percentage of accuracy, but it can be taken up to 5 days after unprotected intercourse..:sad:

Okay, if it's destroying a fertilized egg, then it's murder. Nothing else.

Miss Foxy
03-24-2009, 06:34 PM
Okay, if it's destroying a fertilized egg, then it's murder. Nothing else.
Exactly!! However for whatever reasons its supposed to stop fertilization so go figure it can last 5 days and when semen travels to the womans uterus the life is 3 days.. So is the pill sitting at a toll booth telling the semen to swim back down? :huh:

matthughesfan21
03-24-2009, 06:37 PM
Okay, if it's destroying a fertilized egg, then it's murder. Nothing else.
what about those fertilized eggs that never even make it to the uterus? The egg doesn't start to develop into a child until it plants itself in the uterus....I don't agree with abortion, but Plan B, although not my favorite thing, I don't consider it murder

NateR
03-24-2009, 06:43 PM
what about those fertilized eggs that never even make it to the uterus? The egg doesn't start to develop into a child until it plants itself in the uterus....I don't agree with abortion, but Plan B, although not my favorite thing, I don't consider it murder

That's a natural process and if the process malfunctions on its own accord, then there is nothing we can do about that. It doesn't make it okay to intentionally terminate a fertilized egg.

The fact that some people die of unexplained natural causes doesn't make murder acceptable. The same principle applies here.

Bonnie
03-24-2009, 07:03 PM
I was interested, after reading Nathan's info and Melissa's, exactly when the egg is fertilized--how long does it take the sperm to reach the egg in order to fertilize.

Here's some info I found so I'm quoting:

"During ovulation, one of the woman's ovaries releases a tiny egg that begins to travel down her fallopian tube. During sexual intercourse, a man ejaculates millions of sperm that travel up the vagina, through the uterus and into the fallopian tube where the egg meets the sperm. When the egg and sperm fuse, it is called fertilization."

"In a normal pregnancy, the fertilized egg travels down the fallopian tube. On about the third day of travel, the fertilized egg begins to implant in the uterine lining. Upon implantation, a pregnancy occurs. If the lining is rich enough with maternal blood, it will continue to grow there and will become an embryo, then a fetus. After approximately 38 weeks, the fetus is ready to be born."

************

I read conflicting "numbers" on how long it takes the sperm to reach the egg for fertilization; it could take a few minutes or a few days. But fertilization itself is instantaneous once the sperm breaches the egg wall.

I thought this (below) was kinda humorous:

************

"If no egg is available to fertilize, the sperm swim around patiently waiting to bump into one. Because there is no chemical or physical attraction of the sperm for the egg, the sperm literally must bump into the egg." :laugh:

Maybe Amy can shed some/more light on some of this for people who are interested. :)

Crisco
03-24-2009, 07:10 PM
I thought the plan b was only effect up till three days? going down to about 25% on the third day..

Crisco
03-24-2009, 07:12 PM
All the pill really is, is a super dose of Birth Control.

Bonnie
03-24-2009, 07:15 PM
I bet the reason doctors want victims of rape to come in immediately is so they can administer the pill hopefully before fertilization occurs. I read where it can be effective 75-99% of the time. Sounds like even that's not a guarantee the woman wouldn't get pregnant.

bradwright
03-24-2009, 07:19 PM
I bet the reason doctors want victims of rape to come in immediately is so they can administer the pill hopefully before fertilization occurs. I read where it can be effective 75-99% of the time. Sounds like even that's not a guarantee the woman wouldn't get pregnant.
it will not work for roughly one out of every eight,

Miss Foxy
03-24-2009, 07:27 PM
The drug maker states it can be used up until the 3rd day, however I asked a Health Professional (RN) we work with and she stated something different. So I guess that ones in the air?...In my opinion whos to say they can play GOD and intercept the conception. Thats just my opinion. Kinda like someone playing Dr. Kevorkian "they were gonna die anyway." Just doesnt sit well with me.. Also we don't have the long term side effects of this little magic pill that critics are boasting!

Moose
03-24-2009, 08:52 PM
Well, when you look at it subjectively, then you should see that not teaching children to be responsible for their actions is the root of the problem. Giving them yet another "easy out" is not going to just suddenly make them more responsible in the area of pre-marital sex. In fact, it will make sex more consequence free and kids will become more irresponsible than ever.

Finding easier ways for mothers to murder their babies is not the answer to this problem.

I'll teach my kids the right thing, as I was taught. Not everyone gets this kind of guidance.

Bonnie
03-24-2009, 09:45 PM
I'll teach my kids the right thing, as I was taught. Not everyone gets this kind of guidance.

Too true! :sad:

Not counting the kids that are growing up in foster homes, orphanages, living with relatives who don't want them or those literally living on the street, the kids who do have a parent or parents lots of times get "no" parenting.

Chris F
03-25-2009, 01:13 AM
Is this Pastor Chris?

How are you counseling her to see her through this. Has she had the baby yet? What about adoption?

How would you answer the invarible ?s from a child regarding his/her conception/birth so that it doesn't suffer the "sin" of the father?

I know these are tough ?s I'm asking, but it's a tough issue all the way around.

Yes it is me. I stopped pastoring so i dropped the name.

We just helped her all we could. There really is not much you call tell someone when you have not ever been in her shoes. I was never raped so I could nto tell her anything. They key is letting them talk. She had the baby a year ago and she kept it and is raising her, herself. The father (rapist) was not convicted and has bugged her. But now the state is riding him hard and forcing him to work to pay her child support.

She has siad she will tell hewr daughter the truth. She is a very blunt women and I have no doubt she won;t sugar coat it. It was sad but she is doing really well considering.

Chris F
03-25-2009, 01:14 AM
a plan B pill can not terminate a pregnancy,
it will only stop fertilization from occurring,
so to say this is a murder of an unborn child is a bit of a stretch,

if you truly believe that, then you must also give consideration that masturbation is a form of murder,unless your at a fertility clinic that is.

There is no guarentee often that the pill is not taken on time and it does in fact terminate. The time table is very short.

mscomc
03-25-2009, 05:11 AM
Hi guys, I am new to the forums… but I have been reading this topic for a day or so and I think some excellent points have been made…. If it ok, id like to throw my two cents in.

I’d just like to start by saying that I am not a physician, however I am doing my masters in Biochemistry and molecular medicine: with focus in metabolic pathways. So I was hoping I could add some info from a science point of view, because my politics suck :laugh:

Plan B, or “the morning after pill” as it is commonly referred to as, is not actually a drug that terminates pregnancy. The active reagent in this drug is Levonorgestrel, which is a type of synthetic Progesterone, one of the key hormones involved in menstruation regulation. Now the drug contains a MASSIVE amount of Levonorgestrel (more so then birth control pills), and the goal by taking this is to prevent ovulation from ever happening to being with. This is because prior to ovulation, progesterone is typically low, so by giving a huge dose, it tricks the body into thinking that ovulation is not necessary. Thus, fertilization can’t happen. Now, if you are already pregnant (fetus attached to uterine wall), then this drug DOES NOTHING. Also, there is no current evidence that the drug causes harm to the developing fetus. Now, normally this drug is encouraged to be taken within 24 hrs of sex to prevent ovulation and to ensure that any sperm present in the cervical mucus die within 3-4 days, especially if a woman is worried that she is very close to her period. Anything oral intake after 3 days, and the effectiveness drops to below 30%. BUT….. Suppose you took the drug to late and you did ovulate and the egg was fertilized…then this drug can also prevent attachment to the uterine wall. I suppose a key debate point would be: Does “life” really exist at this point?

( PLEASE READ MY NEXT POST BELOW)

mscomc
03-25-2009, 05:11 AM
Now, I have kind of noticed that the terms Plan B and abortion pill are being used quite synonymously. In fact, the mechanism of action between Plan B and a conventional abortion pill is very different. I think you will see that the latter causes much more controversy. For example, the “Mifepristone and Misoprostol” cocktail can be taken by women who are actually 8 WEEKS pregnant. This drug works by: shedding the uterine lining, the cervix begins to soften and bleeding may occur, and the uterus contracts very rapidly and “violently”, until the fetus is eventually expelled (sorry for the choice of words). As Im sure, we can all imagine, this cause a great commotion not only in the US, but all over the globe. This cocktail was only FDA approved about a decade ago I believe (not sure about the status now), but drugs like Plan B were made as an alternative, with the hope that it woudnt be classified in the same bout as drugs like Mifepristone and Misoprostol (I think these are examples of drugs people have been quoting numbers for).

Anyways, sorry for the rant, I just feel like this is a really important topic.

OOOOOO by the way, I am malcom, nice to meet you all…:)

J.B.
03-25-2009, 05:25 AM
I agree with what Nate said about not handing people an easy out. People should be responsible for their actions, and I am adamantly opposed to abortion of any kind.

HOWEVER...

I believe that birth control pills are a GOOD thing. Even as conservatives, we need to be REALISTIC. People are not going to stop having sex. It's just not gonna happen. If we did not have birth control pills, we would be in a whole heap of trouble in today's society. We live in a world that is so sexually permissive that I believe we would have a an even bigger problem with overpopulation if we did not have birth control. I actually think using birth control is a responsible action if the person using it knows they are not capable of taking care of a child.

Bonnie
03-25-2009, 05:42 AM
Hi, Malcom, that was very informative. Thank you for explaining the difference in the drugs and what they do.

Welcome to Matt's site! :)

NateR
03-25-2009, 05:54 AM
I believe that birth control pills are a GOOD thing. Even as conservatives, we need to be REALISTIC. People are not going to stop having sex. It's just not gonna happen. If we did not have birth control pills, we would be in a whole heap of trouble in today's society. We live in a world that is so sexually permissive that I believe we would have a an even bigger problem with overpopulation if we did not have birth control. I actually think using birth control is a responsible action if the person using it knows they are not capable of taking care of a child.

I agree with most of your points, but I should point out that overpopulation is a myth. The earth is not overpopulated. In fact, you could take all 7 billion people on this planet right now and put them in the state of Texas and it would still be less crowded than New York City.

So the problem is not population, the problem is congestion. People just crowd too much into cities and areas that simply cannot handle large numbers of human beings. There are still plenty of areas in the United States where you can drive for miles and miles without seeing a single person (that's almost the entire state of New Mexico).

J.B.
03-25-2009, 07:44 AM
I agree with most of your points, but I should point out that overpopulation is a myth. The earth is not overpopulated. In fact, you could take all 7 billion people on this planet right now and put them in the state of Texas and it would still be less crowded than New York City.

So the problem is not population, the problem is congestion. People just crowd too much into cities and areas that simply cannot handle large numbers of human beings. There are still plenty of areas in the United States where you can drive for miles and miles without seeing a single person (that's almost the entire state of New Mexico).

Somehow I actually knew you would raise that point, I think it came up before. I agree, the problem is congestion in major cities. However, many of the suburbs and rural areas have started to fill up too. Then you have the areas that are just uninhabitable, like some of the mountain and desert regions of the southwest. Sure, you can drive for miles without seeing anybody, but that is because there is no water or electricity in those areas.

I guess my larger point was that we have enough problems with the 7 billion people we already have on this planet, furthermore the 320 million here in America. We don't need the rate of growth skyrocketing, especially when so many of the children are not properly raised as it is.

KENTUCKYREDBONE
03-25-2009, 08:15 AM
Your kidding me right?


I wish I was but that's the mind set behind giving under age Girls Abortions and such like without Parental consent. That's just another thing I resent about the far left! If given a chance they will strip Parental Authority!

Moose
03-25-2009, 01:06 PM
I wish I was but that's the mind set behind giving under age Girls Abortions and such like without Parental consent. That's just another thing I resent about the far left! If given a chance they will strip Parental Authority!

Don't forget they'll also outlaw trailer parks and bollo ties!

Crisco
03-25-2009, 02:05 PM
I wish I was but that's the mind set behind giving under age Girls Abortions and such like without Parental consent. That's just another thing I resent about the far left! If given a chance they will strip Parental Authority!

It shouldn't be the parents choice whether a child keeps her baby or not.

Granted Children should not be having sex, but parents shouldn't have a say in the matter. They are not raising this child... They are not carrying it for 9 months.

I don't believe in abortion but on the same token I struggle with the topic in a scriptual sense.

The bible to my knowledge doesn't address abortion directly. God commands death for muder however I remember previously it was discussed that ina certain verse God says that should a man cause the miscarriage of another mans wife that that man is subject to whatever punishment the man see fit...

So if God considered an unborn person a full fledged person why does he not command the death of the other man?

I've toiled with this for quite some time... Does anyone have any other bibilical evidence regarding the subject?

I'll do more research after work today hard to do while I'm here.

Neezar
03-25-2009, 02:12 PM
It shouldn't be the parents choice whether a child keeps her baby or not.

Wow! That is a loaded statement.

Anyway, he didn't say the parent's are making the choice but he was talking about parental consent. Big difference.

Neezar
03-25-2009, 02:17 PM
It shouldn't be the parents choice whether a child keeps her baby or not.

Granted Children should not be having sex, but parents shouldn't have a say in the matter. They are not raising this child... They are not carrying it for 9 months.



If a 13 yoa girl is pregnant, who in the world do you think is going to raise the baby? :huh:

Crisco
03-25-2009, 02:22 PM
Wow! That is a loaded statement.

Anyway, he didn't say the parent's are making the choice but he was talking about parental consent. Big difference.

Neezar consent is making the choice.

If they don't consent to the abortion does it take place?

No it is making the choice.

As far as your other question it all depends on the parents. I personally would take the child as my own. However, there are plenty of parents who would just easily cast out their child. We live in a sick and fallen world.

I'll make it clear again I personally don't believe in abortion, you should take responsbility for your actions.

Neezar
03-25-2009, 02:22 PM
The bible to my knowledge doesn't address abortion directly. God commands death for muder however I remember previously it was discussed that ina certain verse God says that should a man cause the miscarriage of another mans wife that that man is subject to whatever punishment the man see fit...

So if God considered an unborn person a full fledged person why does he not command the death of the other man?



Crisco, seriously now, do you think that this scenario can be applied to abortion? Do you think this is referring to a man INTENTIONALLY causing the miscarriage of a man's baby? Or do you think it may be talking about a man causing the miscarriage inadvertantly by other actions? Is the Bible implying that even if you cause a miscarriage accidentally then you should be punished? Or do you seriously think this could be applied in a situation where a woman goes to a man for the sole purpose of him killing a man's child within her?

Neezar
03-25-2009, 02:32 PM
Neezar consent is making the choice.

If they don't consent to the abortion does it take place?

No it is making the choice.

As far as your other question it all depends on the parents. I personally would take the child as my own. However, there are plenty of parents who would just easily cast out their child. We live in a sick and fallen world.

I'll make it clear again I personally don't believe in abortion, you should take responsbility for your actions.

So, with your reasoning though, the parent is only making the choice themselves if they refuse to consent? Or is consenting forcing them to have it also?

If consenting is making the choice to have an abortion? So then wouldn't putting a girl on the BC pill be consenting for her to have sex? Would providing the Plan B pill be consenting for her to get pregnant and change her mind whenever?


btw, the child doesn't have to raise it either if they don't want to; they can give it up for adoption. But if you use the argument that they are the ones that have to raise the baby if they are forced to keep it then you can also argue that they are also the ones that will have to live with the fact that they murdered their own child (esp when they get older and more mature and realize what they have done).

Crisco
03-25-2009, 02:32 PM
Crisco, seriously now, do you think that this scenario can be applied to abortion? Do you think this is referring to a man INTENTIONALLY causing the miscarriage of a man's baby? Or do you think it may be talking about a man causing the miscarriage inadvertantly by other actions? Is the Bible implying that even if you cause a miscarriage accidentally then you should be punished? Or do you seriously think this could be applied in a situation where a woman goes to a man for the sole purpose of him killing a man's child within her?

I'm not saying I believe anything. I'm saying I'd like to get to know the scriptual stance bette. I want to better understand the bible.

The point of the statement I made was to see if this indicates that God views unborn and born life differently.

I'm not trying to ruffle feathers I'm just trying to better understand God's point of view. I personally feel abortion is wrong however, my question becomes does God infact view unborn and born life differently.

I have no choice but to take other areas of scripture to try and get my answer because he never directly dives into the subject.

Crisco
03-25-2009, 02:38 PM
So, with your reasoning though, the parent is only making the choice themselves if they refuse to consent? Or is consenting forcing them to have it also?

If consenting is making the choice to have an abortion? So then wouldn't putting a girl on the BC pill be consenting for her to have sex? Would providing the Plan B pill be consenting for her to get pregnant and change her mind whenever?


btw, the child doesn't have to raise it either if they don't want to; they can give it up for adoption. But if you use the argument that they are the ones that have to raise the baby if they are forced to keep it then you can also argue that they are also the ones that will have to live with the fact that they murdered their own child (esp when they get older and more mature and realize what they have done).

I'm only trying to understand scripture better.

I had a bit of trouble following what you said... You want to ban Birth control and condoms too?

Neezar
03-25-2009, 02:47 PM
I'm only trying to understand scripture better.

I had a bit of trouble following what you said... You want to ban Birth control and condoms too?


Oh, hell NO! :punch:

:laugh:

No, I am saying that if you view consent as making the choice for them then all those other things could be viewed as consenting (aka making the choice) for them, too. Where would the line be drawn?

I think the parent's should ALWAYS have a say in the matter. The older the girl then I think the more their wants should be considered but, yes, the parent's should have say in it.

Everyone has no problems these days blaming any bad kids (i.e. gang bangers) on bad parenting but want to pull the parents out when it is of convenience.

Neezar
03-25-2009, 02:55 PM
Sorry, if anyone is offended here but does anyone know a teenage mother? Is she a good parent? Seriously?

(note: I am not trying to be mean here. I'm not sure that I could have even been a good mother in my early 20's.)

Crisco, If you are thinking about it from a Christian standpoint then consider this. A child is mostly taught by society that it is 'okay' to have an abortion but what about that little girl growing up and then finding Christ. I have to say that I don't know of ANY woman who claims to be a Christian and thinks it isn't a sin to have an abortion. And when she finds Christ what do you about that? She can't change her mind about the murder then. Then she is left with knowing in her heart that she murdered her own child. I know women who have had abortions when they were young and regret it terribly. I do not know ONE that doesn't regret it (although I am sure they are out there). But I have never heard a woman say, "I should have had an abortion."

Crisco
03-25-2009, 02:56 PM
Oh, hell NO! :punch:

:laugh:

No, I am saying that if you view consent as making the choice for them then all those other things could be viewed as consenting (aka making the choice) for them, too. Where would the line be drawn?

I think the parent's should ALWAYS have a say in the matter. The older the girl then I think the more their wants should be considered but, yes, the parent's should have say in it.

Everyone has no problems these days blaming any bad kids (i.e. gang bangers) on bad parenting but want to pull the parents out when it is of convenience.

But if you require parental consent to get the pill isn't it giving them the choice? If your parent doesn't consent you can't do it...

Me saying ok a condom is for sale at this store it's up to you if you want to buy it is a little different then you can't get the pill unless I say it's ok...

Or am I wrong I don't know?

The gap between 17 and 18 isn't all that big maturity wise.

Crisco
03-25-2009, 03:00 PM
Sorry, if anyone is offended here but does anyone know a teenage mother? Is she a good parent? Seriously?

(note: I am not trying to be mean here. I'm not sure that I could have even been a good mother in my early 20's.)

Crisco, If you are thinking about it from a Christian standpoint then consider this. A child is mostly taught by society that it is 'okay' to have an abortion but what about that little girl growing up and then finding Christ. I have to say that I don't know of ANY woman who claims to be a Christian and thinks it isn't a sin to have an abortion. And when she finds Christ what do you about that? She can't change her mind about the murder then. Then she is left with knowing in her heart that she murdered her own child. I know women who have had abortions when they were young and regret it terribly. I do not know ONE that doesn't regret it (although I am sure they are out there). But I have never heard a woman say, "I should have had an abortion."

I understand what your saying and I agree with a lot of what you say...

From a Christian standpoint I want to know how God feels about it.. I want to know what the difference is between an unborn child and born one.. What made the punishment different and so on and so fourth.

I don't agree with abortion I think it is wrong..

I'm hungry for knowledge on the subject more then anything to be honest.

Neezar
03-25-2009, 03:01 PM
But if you require parental consent to get the pill isn't it giving them the choice? If your parent doesn't consent you can't do it...

Me saying ok a condom is for sale at this store it's up to you if you want to buy it is a little different then you can't get the pill unless I say it's ok...

Or am I wrong I don't know?

The gap between 17 and 18 isn't all that big maturity wise.

Neither is it between 16 and 17. Why stop there?

Crisco
03-25-2009, 03:02 PM
Sorry, if anyone is offended here but does anyone know a teenage mother? Is she a good parent? Seriously?

(note: I am not trying to be mean here. I'm not sure that I could have even been a good mother in my early 20's.)

Crisco, If you are thinking about it from a Christian standpoint then consider this. A child is mostly taught by society that it is 'okay' to have an abortion but what about that little girl growing up and then finding Christ. I have to say that I don't know of ANY woman who claims to be a Christian and thinks it isn't a sin to have an abortion. And when she finds Christ what do you about that? She can't change her mind about the murder then. Then she is left with knowing in her heart that she murdered her own child. I know women who have had abortions when they were young and regret it terribly. I do not know ONE that doesn't regret it (although I am sure they are out there). But I have never heard a woman say, "I should have had an abortion."

My mother was 16 when she gave birth to me... I love her dearly and she has given every ounce of sweat and blood to me since the day I was born. My grandmother tells me stories of what she went through to take care of me and how hard my father and her worked to get us the life we have now...

My mother in my experience is indeed a rarity I'll be honest about that much.

Crisco
03-25-2009, 03:04 PM
Neither is it between 16 and 17. Why stop there?

because the difference between 15 and 18 is huge =) Early sixteen and early 17 is big too. Atleast is was for me. That wasn't too long ago so I can remember it fairly well :tongue0011:

Miss Foxy
03-25-2009, 03:04 PM
Neezar no worries about offending anyone lately its been sensitive around here :)
You and Crisco both have such good points. I got pregnant at 18 which to me is very young. I graduated with a little belly. I came from a strict Catholic home and a German mother so imagine that.. Anyways I think my parents tried as best as they could to teach me right from wrong and to try to make clear decisions however I fell in love and made myself vulnerable... . Anyhow my parents both wanted me to get an abortion. I prayed on it and felt a comfort that I never felt before. It was the comfort in having my child. After giving birth to a healthy baby girl. I had felt for a few years pain and anger at my parents for even approaching me with the Abortion talk. I felt rejected from them. Since then I have forgave them and we have repaired the relationship. They are both active in my childs life. I am fortunate that I did'nt have to struggle too much. We got married, I went to college, I am successful.
On the flip side I know girls who were in the same situation who had abortions in high school and I run into them occasionally some of them are still emotionally scarred one girl has tried to conceive and she was told she can't have a child. She aborted at age 16...

Neezar
03-25-2009, 03:04 PM
Well, when you look at it subjectively, then you should see that not teaching children to be responsible for their actions is the root of the problem. Giving them yet another "easy out" is not going to just suddenly make them more responsible in the area of pre-marital sex. In fact, it will make sex more consequence free and kids will become more irresponsible than ever.

Finding easier ways for mothers to murder their babies is not the answer to this problem.


:cool:

rearnakedchoke
03-25-2009, 03:08 PM
Sorry, if anyone is offended here but does anyone know a teenage mother? Is she a good parent? Seriously?

(note: I am not trying to be mean here. I'm not sure that I could have even been a good mother in my early 20's.)

Crisco, If you are thinking about it from a Christian standpoint then consider this. A child is mostly taught by society that it is 'okay' to have an abortion but what about that little girl growing up and then finding Christ. I have to say that I don't know of ANY woman who claims to be a Christian and thinks it isn't a sin to have an abortion. And when she finds Christ what do you about that? She can't change her mind about the murder then. Then she is left with knowing in her heart that she murdered her own child. I know women who have had abortions when they were young and regret it terribly. I do not know ONE that doesn't regret it (although I am sure they are out there). But I have never heard a woman say, "I should have had an abortion."

like i said in an earlier post, some of our parents and grandparents were having kids at 17 ... so i don't think it is an age thing .. sure times are different .. i was a dad a month after i turned 22, that is not a teenager, but i'd like to think i have been a good parent .. and i know there are people on here who have had kids at young ages and i am sure they would consider themselves good parents ... i also know people that no matter how old they are, i probably wouldn't consider them parent material EVER .. LOL .. so, i don't think you can just dismiss someone because they are 17 ... it has nothing to do with the parents of the teen .. they just have to support their child based on what they want to do ...

Crisco
03-25-2009, 03:08 PM
:cool:

I don't know if it is possible to make sex more risk free in the society we live in to be honest...

Food for thought btw If your a 17 year old girl and you can't get the bill because of your age you just ask your 18 year old friend to pick it up for you and the law becomes impotent.

County Mike
03-25-2009, 03:08 PM
Durex FTW. If you think you're old enough to play - wrap it up. Otherwise, deal with the results.

Crisco
03-25-2009, 03:11 PM
Durex FTW. If you think you're old enough to play - wrap it up. Otherwise, deal with the results.

truth

Neezar
03-25-2009, 03:13 PM
I don't know if it is possible to make sex more risk free in the society we live in to be honest...

Food for thought btw If your a 17 year old girl and you can't get the bill because of your age you just ask your 18 year old friend to pick it up for you and the law becomes impotent.

Exactly. And if you use the argument that it should be used in the case of rape then you still haven't justified the 'being available over the counter' thing, IMO.

Over the counter can only mean that it is intended for use as BIRTH CONTROL and not a defense against pregnancy by rape.

(note: In the case of pregnancy by rape the doctor has a choice of administering medications without parental consent at an earlier age.)

Neezar
03-25-2009, 03:19 PM
like i said in an earlier post, some of our parents and grandparents were having kids at 17 ... so i don't think it is an age thing .. sure times are different .. i was a dad a month after i turned 22, that is not a teenager, but i'd like to think i have been a good parent .. and i know there are people on here who have had kids at young ages and i am sure they would consider themselves good parents ... i also know people that no matter how old they are, i probably wouldn't consider them parent material EVER .. LOL .. so, i don't think you can just dismiss someone because they are 17 ... it has nothing to do with the parents of the teen .. they just have to support their child based on what they want to do ...

17? Your parents waited a long time. :laugh: My grandmother was married off and having babies at 15. lol

That question wasn't really meant to question anyone's parenting ability but to show that MOST people don't think a teen is responsible enough to be a good parent. But they usually think they are responsible enough to make life-changing decisions like about abortion.

Chris F
03-25-2009, 04:47 PM
I don't know if it is possible to make sex more risk free in the society we live in to be honest...

Food for thought btw If your a 17 year old girl and you can't get the bill because of your age you just ask your 18 year old friend to pick it up for you and the law becomes impotent.

If the parents find out they can have the 18 year old arrested for contributing to the delinquency of a minor and the parent can sue in 9 states.

Chris F
03-25-2009, 04:53 PM
But if you require parental consent to get the pill isn't it giving them the choice? If your parent doesn't consent you can't do it...

Me saying ok a condom is for sale at this store it's up to you if you want to buy it is a little different then you can't get the pill unless I say it's ok...

Or am I wrong I don't know?

The gap between 17 and 18 isn't all that big maturity wise.

In most state one cannot get BC w/o consent. It is often prescribed to treat acne so more teens are on BC then ever before. As for condoms, well if one needed to get them that is not hard but there is no way they should be handed out by the school nurse as is the case this day and age. Before I took my kids out of the public indoctrination centers (schools) I was a PTA VP and the elementary, yes I said elementary, handed out condoms. The school had 3 5th graders pregnant. Schools have no right being your child's moral compass. The NEA is the last place anyone should go for morals and values.

CAVEMAN
03-25-2009, 05:00 PM
Forgive me, I'm a little ignorant on the Plan B pill? Does it kill the fetus or the mothers egg? I hear this pill refered to as the "morning after" pill. How do they even know if they're pregnant the morning after?

Either way this will teach women and young girls to be even more irresponsible!

mscomc
03-25-2009, 05:07 PM
Forgive me, I'm a little ignorant on the Plan B pill? Does it kill the fetus or the mothers egg? I hear this pill refered to as the "morning after" pill. How do they even know if they're pregnant the morning after?

Either way this will teach women and young girls to be even more irresponsible!

Hey man hows it going? names malcom, im new to the forums, nice to meet you. I posted this on page 7 but i guess it couldnt hurt to post again...happy reading :)

I’d just like to start by saying that I am not a physician, however I am doing my masters in Biochemistry and molecular medicine: with focus in metabolic pathways. So I was hoping I could add some info from a science point of view, because my politics suck. :)

Plan B, or “the morning after pill” as it is commonly referred to as, is not actually a drug that terminates pregnancy. The active reagent in this drug is Levonorgestrel, which is a type of synthetic Progesterone, one of the key hormones involved in menstruation regulation. Now the drug contains a MASSIVE amount of Levonorgestrel (more so then birth control pills), and the goal by taking this is to prevent ovulation from ever happening to being with. This is because prior to ovulation, progesterone is typically low, so by giving a huge dose, it tricks the body into thinking that ovulation is not necessary. Thus, fertilization can’t happen. Now, if you are already pregnant (fetus attached to uterine wall), then this drug DOES NOTHING. Also, there is no current evidence that the drug causes harm to the developing fetus. Now, normally this drug is encouraged to be taken within 24 hrs of sex to prevent ovulation and to ensure that any sperm present in the cervical mucus die within 3-4 days, especially if a woman is worried that she is very close to her period. Any oral intake after 3 days, and the effectiveness drops to below 30%. BUT….. Suppose you took the drug to late and you did ovulate and the egg was fertilized…then this drug can also prevent attachment to the uterine wall. I suppose a key debate point would be: Does “life” really exist at this point?

( I have some more info in my next post right after this)

mscomc
03-25-2009, 05:09 PM
Now, I have kind of noticed that the terms Plan B and abortion pill are being used quite synonymously. In fact, the mechanism of action between Plan B and a conventional abortion pill is very different. I think you will see that the latter causes much more controversy. For example, the “Mifepristone and Misoprostol” cocktail can be taken by women who are actually 8 WEEKS pregnant. This drug works by: shedding the uterine lining, the cervix begins to soften and bleeding may occur, and the uterus contracts very rapidly and “violently”, until the fetus is eventually expelled (sorry for the choice of words). As Im sure, we can all imagine, this caused a great commotion not only in the US, but all over the globe. This cocktail was only FDA approved about a decade ago I believe (not sure about the status now), but drugs like Plan B were made as an alternative, with the hope that it woudnt be classified in the same boat as drugs like Mifepristone and Misoprostol (I think these are examples of drugs people have been quoting numbers for).

Hope this helps......:wink:

Chris F
03-25-2009, 05:14 PM
Now, I have kind of noticed that the terms Plan B and abortion pill are being used quite synonymously. In fact, the mechanism of action between Plan B and a conventional abortion pill is very different. I think you will see that the latter causes much more controversy. For example, the “Mifepristone and Misoprostol” cocktail can be taken by women who are actually 8 WEEKS pregnant. This drug works by: shedding the uterine lining, the cervix begins to soften and bleeding may occur, and the uterus contracts very rapidly and “violently”, until the fetus is eventually expelled (sorry for the choice of words). As Im sure, we can all imagine, this caused a great commotion not only in the US, but all over the globe. This cocktail was only FDA approved about a decade ago I believe (not sure about the status now), but drugs like Plan B were made as an alternative, with the hope that it woudnt be classified in the same boat as drugs like Mifepristone and Misoprostol (I think these are examples of drugs people have been quoting numbers for).

Hope this helps......:wink:

In an ideal world with ideal outcomes this may be true but we do not live in a vacuum and this is not always the case. SO there is a chance the chemicals kill the fertilized egg. This mumbo jumbo is right out of Planned Parenthood's play book. You have way to much faith in the drug industry. They do not have a great track record of telling the truth.

mscomc
03-25-2009, 05:27 PM
In an ideal world with ideal outcomes this may be true but we do not live in a vacuum and this is not always the case. SO there is a chance the chemicals kill the fertilized egg. This mumbo jumbo is right out of Planned Parenthood's play book. You have way to much faith in the drug industry. They do not have a great track record of telling the truth.


Hey I'm malcom, nice to meet you.

when you say the "chemicals can kill the fertilized egg", which drug are you reffering to Plan B or second set of ones i listed? Because the second one actually induces contraction to expel a developing fetus, while the first one doesnt. Just to clarify (probably my fault for not mentioning this), the drugs doesnt actually "interact" with the fetus in way that an acid may burn your skin. The drugs work by altering the body chemistry so that it illicts a physiological change, and the consequence of that well..unfortunately leads to fetal death.

In terms of being straight out of the "planned parenthoods" playbook...Im sorry i didnt mean to upset you (if infact your upset). Im just giving my knowledge on the subject from my education as a science student, I DIDNT read some published "mommys" book....in fact one of my old medicinal chemistry professors was on the board at health canada that helped do the clinical trials of plan B in canada.

In terms of having faith in the drug industry, welll i guess i am a little biased, fair enough, after all this is why im studying...and your right, they have done ALOT of bad things, but they have done alot of good thing too.... just to clarify...i personally dont agree with plan B OR any other pill, i was trying to offer whatever knowledge i had on the subject of the drugs for people who wanted to know more about it.

Anyway, take care...

NateR
03-25-2009, 05:30 PM
It shouldn't be the parents choice whether a child keeps her baby or not.

Granted Children should not be having sex, but parents shouldn't have a say in the matter. They are not raising this child... They are not carrying it for 9 months.

I don't believe in abortion but on the same token I struggle with the topic in a scriptual sense.

The bible to my knowledge doesn't address abortion directly. God commands death for muder however I remember previously it was discussed that ina certain verse God says that should a man cause the miscarriage of another mans wife that that man is subject to whatever punishment the man see fit...

So if God considered an unborn person a full fledged person why does he not command the death of the other man?

I've toiled with this for quite some time... Does anyone have any other bibilical evidence regarding the subject?

I'll do more research after work today hard to do while I'm here.


I've heard of that verse, but I just can't seem to find it right now. However, IIRC, it only vaguely applies to the issue of abortion and even then must be twisted a little bit in its meaning to make that happen.

But that's just one verse, there are more verses that would seem to imply that abortion is murder:

Jeremiah 1:5 -
"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
before you were born I set you apart;
I appointed you as a prophet to the nations."

This verses clearly implies that GOD's plan for our lives doesn't start at birth. GOD's purpose for us even predates our conception.

Psalms 139:13-16 -
For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother's womb.

I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful,
I know that full well.

My frame was not hidden from you
when I was made in the secret place.
When I was woven together in the depths of the earth,

your eyes saw my unformed body.
All the days ordained for me
were written in your book
before one of them came to be.

This just reinforces the statement in Jeremiah.

Luke 1:41 -
When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.


Elizabeth was the mother of John the Baptist and, of course, Mary was the mother of Jesus. When Mary and Elizabeth meet in this verse, John and Jesus are still in the womb. However, Jesus is still the Son of GOD even before His birth and the unborn John the Baptist still recognizes that he is in the presence of GOD and leaps in the womb. This pretty much disproves the notion that unborn babies are simply unliving globs of cells.

On the issue of rape, these verses would seem to apply:
Deuteronomy 24:16 -
Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29
If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

So, if she is required to marry her rapist and live with him the rest of her life, then I highly doubt she would be allowed to terminate any pregnancy resulting from that rape.

mscomc
03-25-2009, 05:32 PM
In an ideal world with ideal outcomes this may be true but we do not live in a vacuum and this is not always the case. SO there is a chance the chemicals kill the fertilized egg. This mumbo jumbo is right out of Planned Parenthood's play book. You have way to much faith in the drug industry. They do not have a great track record of telling the truth.


oooo one more thing, did u read both parts of my original posting.....there was 2 parts to it.. i just split them into 2 so it might be easier to read. the first one was entirley dedicatd to info on plan B while the second was more abortion meds....just in case that clarifies anything..

take care...

Crisco
03-25-2009, 05:35 PM
I've heard of that verse, but I just can't seem to find it right now. However, IIRC, it only vaguely applies to the issue of abortion and even then must be twisted a little bit in its meaning to make that happen.

But that's just one verse, there are more verses that would seem to imply that abortion is murder:

Jeremiah 1:5 -


This verses clearly implies that GOD's plan for our lives doesn't start at birth. GOD's purpose for us even predates our conception.

Psalms 139:13-16 -


This just reinforces the statement in Jeremiah.

Luke 1:41 -


Elizabeth was the mother of John the Baptist and, of course, Mary was the mother of Jesus. When Mary and Elizabeth meet in this verse, John and Jesus are still in the womb. However, Jesus is still the Son of GOD even before His birth and the unborn John the Baptist still recognizes that he is in the presence of GOD and leaps in the womb. This pretty much disproves the notion that unborn babies are simply unliving globs of cells.

On the issue of rape, these verses would seem to apply:
Deuteronomy 24:16 -


Deuteronomy 22:28-29


So, if she is required to marry her rapist and live with him the rest of her life, then I highly doubt she would be allowed to terminate any pregnancy resulting from that rape.

Thank you Nate, I appreciate the clarification. As always your knowledge of the bible is greatly appreciated =)

I have plenty of reading left to do but I definately learn something new everytime I open the book :)

bradwright
03-25-2009, 05:36 PM
Hey I'm malcom, nice to meet you.

when you say the "chemicals can kill the fertilized egg", which drug are you reffering to Plan B or second set of ones i listed? Because the second one actually induces contraction to expel a developing fetus, while the first one doesnt. Just to clarify (probably my fault for not mentioning this), the drugs doesnt actually "interact" with the fetus in way that an acid may burn your skin. The drugs work by altering the body chemistry so that it illicts a physiological change, and the consequence of that well..unfortunately leads to fetal death.

In terms of being straight out of the "planned parenthoods" playbook...Im sorry i didnt mean to upset you (if infact your upset). Im just giving my knowledge on the subject from my education as a science student, I DIDNT read some published "mommys" book....in fact one of my old medicinal chemistry professors was on the board at health canada that helped do the clinical trials of plan B in canada.

In terms of having faith in the drug industry, welll i guess i am a little biased, fair enough, after all this is why im studying...and your right, they have done ALOT of bad things, but they have done alot of good thing too.... just to clarify...i personally dont agree with plan B OR any other pill, i was trying to offer whatever knowledge i had on the subject of the drugs for people who wanted to know more about it.

Anyway, take care...
i like you,:) you ability to use proper punctuation is very pleasing indeed.
and no i wasn't being sarcastic,i was paying you a compliment,:cool:
hope to see you around,
have a nice day.:)

Primadawn
03-25-2009, 05:38 PM
i like you,:) you ability to use proper punctuation is very pleasing indeed.
and no i wasn't being sarcastic,i was paying you a compliment,:cool:
hope to see you around,
have a nice day.:)

Brad has grammar envy! :laugh:

mscomc
03-25-2009, 05:41 PM
i like you,:) you ability to use proper punctuation is very pleasing indeed.
and no i wasn't being sarcastic,i was paying you a compliment,:cool:
hope to see you around,
have a nice day.:)



Hey thanks man...I appreciate it. Remember, us Canadians need to stick together, lol. Who else is going to recognize that we spell: Doughnuts and not Donuts? ..ha ha just kidding ( man i hope i dont get burned for that one):)

Take care....

NateR
03-25-2009, 05:44 PM
Hey thanks man...I appreciate it. Remember, us Canadians need to stick together, lol. Who else is going to recognize that we spell: Doughnuts and not Donuts? ..ha ha just kidding ( man i hope i dont get burned for that one):)

Take care....

:laugh:

Do you guys spell color as "colour"? How about blue, do you spell it "bleu"?

bradwright
03-25-2009, 05:47 PM
Hey thanks man...I appreciate it. Remember, us Canadians need to stick together, lol. Who else is going to recognize that we spell: Doughnuts and not Donuts? ..ha ha just kidding ( man i hope i dont get burned for that one):)

Take care....
YOUR CANADIAN?
sorry buddy but i cant be seen hanging out with you,
all my new American friends on here wouldn't put up with it.:wink:

(the english guys wouldn't care though,they"re cool.)

Crisco
03-25-2009, 05:50 PM
YOUR CANADIAN?
sorry buddy but i cant be seen hanging out with you,
all my new American friends on here wouldn't put up with it.:wink:

(the english guys wouldn't care though,they"re cool.)


PFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFTTTT

bradwright
03-25-2009, 05:56 PM
:laugh:

Do you guys spell color as "colour"? How about blue, do you spell it "bleu"?
only when i'm eating Cordon,:laugh:

mscomc
03-25-2009, 06:07 PM
:laugh:

Do you guys spell color as "colour"? How about blue, do you spell it "bleu"?


HA ha, touche....actually its true, color would be spelt COLOUR and a word like Honor, would be spelt honours, we seem to have a need to include extra "U's"... having been all over the states, I would say that our countries grammar and "dictionary" are about 99% the same....plus I live in the provinc of Ontario, so I'm an english canadian....last time i took french was the 9th grade. English was the only national language until the 1980's when they made french the second offical language of Canada...to be honest, it really only applies in the province of Quebec ( where GSP is from), where all the french settlers landed, thats the only reason we introduced the second language. 60% of Canada speak english as their first language, and of the 40% who are french canadians, reportedly 65% of them also speak english...... So in a long story... Blue is still spelt as BLUE , :laugh:

Take care....

bradwright
03-25-2009, 06:12 PM
HA ha, touche....actually its true, color would be spelt COLOUR and a word like Honor, would be spelt honours, we seem to have a need to include extra "U's"... having been all over the states, I would say that our countries grammar and "dictionary" are about 99% the same....plus I live in the provinc of Ontario, so I'm an english canadian....last time i took french was the 9th grade. English was the only national language until the 1980's when they made french the second offical language of Canada...to be honest, it really only applies in the province of Quebec ( where GSP is from), where all the french settlers landed, thats the only reason we introduced the second language. 60% of Canada speak english as their first language, and of the 40% who are french canadians, reportedly 65% of them also speak english...... So in a long story... Blue is still spelt as BLUE , :laugh:

Take care....
your telling me he is a Canadian ?
Man,no wonder they hate me around here,
what a day this is turning out to be.:sad:

KENTUCKYREDBONE
03-25-2009, 06:20 PM
It shouldn't be the parents choice whether a child keeps her baby or not.

Granted Children should not be having sex, but parents shouldn't have a say in the matter. .

If someone is under 18 and living with their parents their parents are responsible for them! So as like I tell my Kids as long as your my responsibility its MY rules!

Miss Foxy
03-25-2009, 06:24 PM
If someone is under 18 and living with their parents their parents are responsible for them! So as like I tell my Kids as long as your my responsibility its MY rules!
Yikes you sound like my mutter.....:laugh:

County Mike
03-25-2009, 06:26 PM
Yikes you sound like my mutter.....:laugh:

Quit back talking and go clean your room!

matthughesfan21
03-25-2009, 06:28 PM
:laugh:

Do you guys spell color as "colour"? How about blue, do you spell it "bleu"?
and spell about as "aboot"

matthughesfan21
03-25-2009, 06:29 PM
Quit back talking and go clean your room!and make me a sammich while you're at it

rearnakedchoke
03-25-2009, 06:33 PM
:laugh:

Do you guys spell color as "colour"? How about blue, do you spell it "bleu"?

yes, colour is colour and flavour .. which were the first spellings in english .. blue, is blue but bleu in french ... some of the way we spell things, i don't agree with the 'english' way, but the american way, like the use of Z, or zed .. LOL .. i think the US spells things like summarize and we are supposed to spell it summarise, i think .. i like the z one better ..

mscomc
03-25-2009, 06:37 PM
and spell about as "aboot"


Hey Im malcom, hows it going?:)

Umm, we spell about just like you ...ABOUT. Just to throw it out there, I know when you watch TV, like southpark,family guy, or the simpsons or other satire shows, we are shown as having these really weird accents and we always say "aaaay".... I can assure you this is not true. Like I said, I have been all over the states, no has even been able to tell im from "Canada" based on how I talk, I assure, most of us sound like any american. Now there are expcetions, in Newfoundland and Labrador (a province), they have these really thick scottish accents (I think its scottish), and they have a bit of a reputation for being hard to understand, but thats a small, small...SMALL population, like the population of Rhode Island versus the entire population of the U.S.A. In terms of saying "AAAAY", thats 90% true. But we dont say it incredibly slow, like the way you hear it on comedy shows...it ends up being said so fast it sounds more like ...."eh".... as in "eh , what are you doing?". Any we dont say it at the end of every sentence, just like some southerners dont always say "ya'll".


Oh and if you were just joking about the "aboot" part, my bad..im an idiot, what i can i say...:laugh:

Take care...

rearnakedchoke
03-25-2009, 06:42 PM
Hey Im malcom, hows it going?:)

Umm, we spell about just like you ...ABOUT. Just to throw it out there, I know when you watch TV, like southpark,family guy, or the simpsons or other satire shows, we are shown as having these really weird accents and we always say "aaaay".... I can assure you this is not true. Like I said, I have been all over the states, no has even been able to tell im from "Canada" based on how I talk, I assure, most of us sound like any american. Now there are expcetions, in Newfoundland and Labrador (a province), they have these really thick scottish accents (I think its scottish), and they have a bit of a reputation for being hard to understand, but thats a small, small...SMALL population, like the population of Rhode Island versus the entire population of the U.S.A. In terms of saying "AAAAY", thats 90% true. But we dont say it incredibly slow, like the way you hear it on comedy shows...it ends up being said so fast it sounds more like ...."eh".... as in "eh , what are you doing?". Any we dont say it at the end of every sentence, just like some southerners dont always say "ya'll".


Oh and if you were just joking about the "aboot" part, my bad..im an idiot, what i can i say...:laugh:

Take care...
hey .. you must not be from the rock ... but yes we do speak with an accent .. i have lived in toronto for my whole life and when i am in the states, people know i am from canada .. LOL ...

bradwright
03-25-2009, 06:44 PM
Hey Im malcom, hows it going?:)

Umm, we spell about just like you ...ABOUT. Just to throw it out there, I know when you watch TV, like southpark,family guy, or the simpsons or other satire shows, we are shown as having these really weird accents and we always say "aaaay".... I can assure you this is not true. Like I said, I have been all over the states, no has even been able to tell im from "Canada" based on how I talk, I assure, most of us sound like any american. Now there are expcetions, in Newfoundland and Labrador (a province), they have these really thick scottish accents (I think its scottish), and they have a bit of a reputation for being hard to understand, but thats a small, small...SMALL population, like the population of Rhode Island versus the entire population of the U.S.A. In terms of saying "AAAAY", thats 90% true. But we dont say it incredibly slow way you hear it on comedy shows...it ends up being said so fast it sounds more like ...."eh".... as in "eh , what are you doing".


Oh and if you were just joking about the "aboot" part, my bad..im an idiot, what i can i say...:laugh:

Take care...

hey,psst,over here,


if your going to make it around here your going to have to toughen up a bit,
these guys can be very mean,(except for the english guys,they're cool),:)

oh oh,gotta go,somebody's coming,
BTW,we never had this conversation.COMPRENDY?:ninja:

matthughesfan21
03-25-2009, 06:45 PM
Hey Im malcom, hows it going?:)

Umm, we spell about just like you ...ABOUT. Just to throw it out there, I know when you watch TV, like southpark,family guy, or the simpsons or other satire shows, we are shown as having these really weird accents and we always say "aaaay".... I can assure you this is not true. Like I said, I have been all over the states, no has even been able to tell im from "Canada" based on how I talk, I assure, most of us sound like any american. Now there are expcetions, in Newfoundland and Labrador (a province), they have these really thick scottish accents (I think its scottish), and they have a bit of a reputation for being hard to understand, but thats a small, small...SMALL population, like the population of Rhode Island versus the entire population of the U.S.A. In terms of saying "AAAAY", thats 90% true. But we dont say it incredibly slow, like the way you hear it on comedy shows...it ends up being said so fast it sounds more like ...."eh".... as in "eh , what are you doing?". Any we dont say it at the end of every sentence, just like some southerners dont always say "ya'll".


Oh and if you were just joking about the "aboot" part, my bad..im an idiot, what i can i say...:laugh:

Take care...
I was just joking lol

CAVEMAN
03-25-2009, 06:47 PM
Hey man hows it going? names malcom, im new to the forums, nice to meet you. I posted this on page 7 but i guess it couldnt hurt to post again...happy reading :)

I’d just like to start by saying that I am not a physician, however I am doing my masters in Biochemistry and molecular medicine: with focus in metabolic pathways. So I was hoping I could add some info from a science point of view, because my politics suck. :)

Plan B, or “the morning after pill” as it is commonly referred to as, is not actually a drug that terminates pregnancy. The active reagent in this drug is Levonorgestrel, which is a type of synthetic Progesterone, one of the key hormones involved in menstruation regulation. Now the drug contains a MASSIVE amount of Levonorgestrel (more so then birth control pills), and the goal by taking this is to prevent ovulation from ever happening to being with. This is because prior to ovulation, progesterone is typically low, so by giving a huge dose, it tricks the body into thinking that ovulation is not necessary. Thus, fertilization can’t happen. Now, if you are already pregnant (fetus attached to uterine wall), then this drug DOES NOTHING. Also, there is no current evidence that the drug causes harm to the developing fetus. Now, normally this drug is encouraged to be taken within 24 hrs of sex to prevent ovulation and to ensure that any sperm present in the cervical mucus die within 3-4 days, especially if a woman is worried that she is very close to her period. Any oral intake after 3 days, and the effectiveness drops to below 30%. BUT….. Suppose you took the drug to late and you did ovulate and the egg was fertilized…then this drug can also prevent attachment to the uterine wall. I suppose a key debate point would be: Does “life” really exist at this point?

( I have some more info in my next post right after this)

Hi Malcom! Nice to meet you. Thanks for info.

Primadawn
03-25-2009, 06:48 PM
hey,psst,over here,


if your going to make it around here your going to have to toughen up a bit,
these guys can be very mean,(except for the english guys,they're cool),:)

oh oh,gotta go,somebody's coming,
BTW,we never had this conversation.COMPRENDY?:ninja:


That word is not spelled correctly. :laugh:

bradwright
03-25-2009, 06:59 PM
That word is not spelled correctly. :laugh:
thats very cruel on your part to point out all my spelling and grammar
mistakes i make on here,:sad:
you dont see me following you around the site pointing out to everybody that you have
one leg shorter then the other do you?:blink:
i think you should have a chat with Neezar before you get to carried away.:ninja:

now i hope you have a nice day.:)

mscomc
03-25-2009, 07:33 PM
hey .. you must not be from the rock ... but yes we do speak with an accent .. i have lived in toronto for my whole life and when i am in the states, people know i am from canada .. LOL ...


You are from Toronto? hey sick, what part? like the inner city or the GTA? Im just saying because i lived in Missassgua for like 3 years, and then I lived in Brampton for like 15 years. People really know you have an accent when you go to the states? wow! It's probably all the american tv i watched as a kid, i mean come on, on Candian cable, only like 8 channel out of like 55 are authentic canadian, the rest is all NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, FOX etc etc etc.

Take it ez.. GO LEAFS GO:)

rearnakedchoke
03-25-2009, 07:37 PM
You are from Toronto? hey sick, what part? like the inner city or the GTA? Im just saying because i lived in Missassgua for like 3 years, and then I lived in Brampton for like 15 years. People really know you have an accent when you go to the states? wow! It's probably all the american tv i watched as a kid, i mean come on, on Candian cable, only like 8 channel out of like 55 are authentic canadian, the rest is all NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, FOX etc etc etc.

Take it ez.. GO LEAFS GO:)

I grew up in the burbs, but now live in the city .. not quite downtown, but about 10 mins from there ... yeah, if it weren't for the CRTC, we would have all american channels ...

Tyburn
03-25-2009, 07:42 PM
Since when does murder need an excuse? Rape is a horrible crime why make it worse by adding the elimination of life as well. God alone should decide if a life should be born. BTW I have 2 young girls and if it were to happen to them the only life that will be taken would be the rapist. Who is to say we have not aborted the cure for cancer or some other great invention
Like GOD alone permits the rape in the first place?

Next you will be blaming misscariages on the Mother aswell. Is that murder too?

Lets not be foolish. There is a big difference between unwanted pregnancies and rape. I believe that the only time a Women should ever be permitted by law to consider abortion is in the case of rape...even then, it would be up to her.

Now as for those who use this pill as an excuse to cover promescuity. I say take the drug from them, and let them live with their promescuity...but lets not cloud the issue and pretend Rape can be something with a silver lining, it is a complete violation, it has nothing GODly about it. Sure, if the woman can cope with carrying the child then fine...but if she can not...the blood should not fall on her head, but on the man who raped her...he is responsible for the murder, just as he is responsible for the violation

Crisco
03-25-2009, 07:44 PM
I grew up in the burbs, but now live in the city .. not quite downtown, but about 10 mins from there ... yeah, if it weren't for the CRTC, we would have all american channels ...

Are there gangs in Canada?

Tyburn
03-25-2009, 07:47 PM
As a Christian I can't justify what I would do to the rapist but it is a part of life and yes a double standard. However every kid should have the right to life. Why should a child suffer from the sins of the father? So murder is not an option. The girl can give it up for adoption, but they should have no right to destory it via chemicals. Let God decide.
As a Christian, I would hope you do nothing to the rapist.

You want to talk about the child in this? What sort of trauma do you think might come from knowing that you were the result of a violation? what do you tell the child of his Father?

Its all very well assuming that being alive he would rejoyce, but if that were the case, you wouldnt have people wanting to die all the time, that have lived for decades.

Perhaps the child would suffer more living? You just dont know what torment something like that might bring to the Child, you dont know what heartbreak and identity confusion it might bring. Dont assume that the Child will automatically accept things the way you have.

bradwright
03-25-2009, 07:48 PM
Are there gangs in Canada?

no,no gangs,we are a peace loving Country and we all get along very well.
our young folks all have jobs and there is no time for gang activity.:)

Tyburn
03-25-2009, 07:49 PM
A woman is not completely helpless in the crime of rape.

:huh: so now its the womans fault for being raped?

Crisco
03-25-2009, 07:49 PM
no,no gangs,we are a peace loving Country and we all get along very well.
our young folks all have jobs and there is no time for gang activity.:)

lol

mscomc
03-25-2009, 07:51 PM
ooooo my heavens yes..... granted you have to standardize this when you compare to other areas/countries like: brazil, el salvador, certain cities in the states.... the murder rate is not so high, but activity is..mostly in the form of drugs, prositution and other "imports". Because of the cultural diversity in canada, particularily in its major cities (its no uncomon to hear 15 different languages spoken on a day, i counted one time :) ), alot of gang activity is fueld by racial tension. For example, you have the "skinheads" who hate coloured, the hells angels, crip and blood sets, and the one that scares me the most is MS-13.....if you havent seen the "gangland" video on youtube for MS-13 watch that damn thing, these guys scare the hell outta me. like 20 were arrested like 2 years ago in my old city.

Tyburn
03-25-2009, 07:55 PM
Stopping it from being fertilized with lots of different chemicals combined in a lil pill.. Wow and thats a stretch...?!
Oh and as far as masturbation if there was no egg/semen contact how is that considered murder?
is contraceptive murder?

The prevention of what could be/would be/should be...but never actually was.

You cant kill something before it is alive, but you can prevent it from becoming alive...is that prevention murder...???

I dont think so...but if you ask me, morning after pills are not contraceptives. They are excuses to have unprotected sex and then hope with a chemical cocktail you beat the possibility or kill the embryo.

I'm alright with protection...but that doesnt extend as far as any pills AFTER the intercourse...:ninja:

Tyburn
03-25-2009, 07:56 PM
Well, actually that's a different story. If it's just stopping fertilization, then it's not terminating an existing human being. How long after intercourse can this pill be taken? And does it cease to be effective once the egg has been fertilized? If it's preventing fertilization, then it's birth control. If it's terminating a fertilized egg, then it's abortion. The transition from two haploid cells to one diploid cell is the key turning point between birth control and murder.

HOWEVER, the argument about making sex consequence free still stands. That's not going to lead to more responsible behavior among teenagers, it's going to exponentially increase promiscuity and sexual activity in children.

If we were to truly look at the issue of abortion subjectively and scientifically, not politically, then there is no doubt whatsoever that abortion is murder and life as we know it begins at conception:

1. An egg and a sperm are known as haploid gametes. In plain english, they are cells that contain only one chromosome (half a DNA strand), instead of two. Thus they only become complete cells when they pair with a compatible gamete in the process that we refer to as sexual reproduction.

2. Once fertilization occurs, those two single strands are "stitched" together to create a full double helix strand of DNA. Once that occurs, then the embryo contains 100% of the DNA information that it will need to develop and live out its entire life from birth to old age.

3. When I was a single cell, I had exactly the same amount of DNA information in my body as I do now. In fact, maybe more back then, because environment, age, illnesses and lifestyle all serve to create mutations in our DNA. However, we have only observed mutations removing information from a DNA strand. New information being added to a DNA strand, through natural mutation, has NEVER been observed or documented. So, in scientific terms, there is no proof that it ever actually happens.

4. Going by a subjective, materialistic, and scientific standpoint, there is absolutely no way to distinguish a one-celled embryo from a full grown human on a purely genetic basis. The DNA information remains essentially the same (taking into account the loss of information that mutations cause), the only materialistic difference is the number of copies of that information and the increased mass of the organism's body.

Thus, the statement that life, as we understand it, begins at conception no longer becomes some fluffy religious or political ideal, it can be established as a proven, scientific fact.

I aggree

Tyburn
03-25-2009, 07:59 PM
I agree with most of your points, but I should point out that overpopulation is a myth. The earth is not overpopulated. In fact, you could take all 7 billion people on this planet right now and put them in the state of Texas and it would still be less crowded than New York City.

So the problem is not population, the problem is congestion. People just crowd too much into cities and areas that simply cannot handle large numbers of human beings. There are still plenty of areas in the United States where you can drive for miles and miles without seeing a single person (that's almost the entire state of New Mexico).
Are you offering a home for 2 billion Chinese in Hillsboro Illinois Nathan :huh:

:laugh: :laugh:

bradwright
03-25-2009, 08:01 PM
is contraceptive murder?

The prevention of what could be/would be/should be...but never actually was.

You cant kill something before it is alive, but you can prevent it from becoming alive...is that prevention murder...???

I dont think so...but if you ask me, morning after pills are not contraceptives. They are excuses to have unprotected sex and then hope with a chemical cocktail you beat the possibility or kill the embryo.

I'm alright with protection...but that doesnt extend as far as any pills AFTER the intercourse...:ninja:
evening Dave,
i dont suppose you could take a few seconds out of your rant
to say hello to mscomc,a new forum member here from Canada?
thanks Dave,if i can ever help you out in someway just remember,
i'm always here for you,
http://i719.photobucket.com/albums/ww196/bradwright/36_6_12.gif

Tyburn
03-25-2009, 08:05 PM
In an ideal world with ideal outcomes this may be true but we do not live in a vacuum and this is not always the case. SO there is a chance the chemicals kill the fertilized egg. This mumbo jumbo is right out of Planned Parenthood's play book. You have way to much faith in the drug industry. They do not have a great track record of telling the truth.
You have no proof it doesnt act exactly how Malcom said. Its not mumbo jumbo, you just refuse to believe that science tells you its safe...because it would mean you had no leg to stand on in regards to murder...since no murder is taking place. :laugh:

Tyburn
03-25-2009, 08:08 PM
:laugh:

Do you guys spell color as "colour"? How about blue, do you spell it "bleu"?
Colour...is how the word is spelt in English.... :huh:

Tyburn
03-25-2009, 08:11 PM
evening Dave,
i dont suppose you could take a few seconds out of your rant
to say hello to mscomc,a new forum member here from Canada?
thanks Dave,if i can ever help you out in someway just remember,
i'm always here for you,
http://i719.photobucket.com/albums/ww196/bradwright/36_6_12.gif
:laugh:

Hello mscomc :)

Miss Foxy
03-25-2009, 08:16 PM
is contraceptive murder?

The prevention of what could be/would be/should be...but never actually was.

You cant kill something before it is alive, but you can prevent it from becoming alive...is that prevention murder...???

I dont think so...but if you ask me, morning after pills are not contraceptives. They are excuses to have unprotected sex and then hope with a chemical cocktail you beat the possibility or kill the embryo.

I'm alright with protection...but that doesnt extend as far as any pills AFTER the intercourse...:ninja:
Read my previous posts regarding this subject. In this post I was being sarcastic just an FYI...

mscomc
03-25-2009, 08:18 PM
:laugh:

Hello mscomc :)

Hey, hows it going? nice to meet you. Where in England are you from? my cousins live in sussex...you any where near there?

take it ez....:)

Tyburn
03-25-2009, 08:40 PM
Hey, hows it going? nice to meet you. Where in England are you from? my cousins live in sussex...you any where near there?

take it ez....:)
:laugh: No, I'm afraid not. Sussex is on the South coast area...I'm right up North near York :)