actuaklly, it is entirely dependent on your perspective...and also dependent on just how much you infer and what was the OP's actul intent. me, i think it was simply meant to spur discussion/thought....and most especially to realize what a TOTAL abortion ban would entail. i personally do believe waaaayyyy too many people look at abortion as a 'convenience' and a way to avoid responsibility, and this ban clearly demonstrates that for many, that is NOT the case at all. you may personally not be for a total ban, but i sure as shit hear enough people in this country clamoring for one. so i think this thread is very relevant and does not hurt the dicsussion in the least. it IS important to realize, imo anyway, that abortion IS quite necessary for many women and girls.....and it's not all avoidance of responsibility (tho as ever, pov, b/c i believe abortion IS a responsible choice as well as any other).
Fair enough. Personally, I htink discussing the fringes of issues is non-productive. The middle is where the meat of the matter is (or tofu depending on how you swing).
It'b be like us discussing only the cases when women have received 3+ abortions. The fringe.
But the fringes are where you get all of the arguments when you offer a position that is directed to the middle. That's why I likely won't post too much more in this thread. It just goes around in circles.
The majority of people getting abortions were not pregnant because of rape, yet that is where people point as soon as you oppose it.
That
again, entirely untrue.
i always admit that there are all sorts of reasons why a girl or woman may choose abortion and that yes, i believe it is her right to do so. i don't 'make excuses' b/c i feel and think none are necessary.
i discuss rape in THIS thread, b/c for this topic...it IS important imo. it is the idea of a "total ban"....and i do believe, rightly or wrongly, that even those against 'abortions for other reasons'....thus think abortion should be illegal....do not realize ALL a total ban would encompass. thus this thread is excellent food for thought for those who might be of the persuasion of wanting a 100% ban, to realize there ARE many reasons for abortions, and not all a matter of 'convenience' as some believe. whether most are or aren't is irrelevant imo when discussing a total ban. one wants to entertain a partial ban, entirely different discussion, tho again, my personal views remain unchanged.
and know1, on the other abortion thread...i would be curious and interested on your pov in regards to BC, the morning after pill, etc. i think it's a side of this discussion many of us have not addressed much here, at least that i am unaware, in any case. contrary to popular belief, many of us amongst the pro-choice persuauasion DO want to gain a better understanding of those with vastly different perspectives on the issue.
again, entirely untrue.
i always admit that there are all sorts of reasons why a girl or woman may choose abortion and that yes, i believe it is her right to do so. i don't 'make excuses' b/c i feel and think none are necessary.
i discuss rape in THIS thread, b/c for this topic...it IS important imo. it is the idea of a "total ban"....and i do believe, rightly or wrongly, that even those against 'abortions for other reasons'....thus think abortion should be illegal....do not realize ALL a total ban would encompass. thus this thread is excellent food for thought for those who might be of the persuasion of wanting a 100% ban, to realize there ARE many reasons for abortions, and not all a matter of 'convenience' as some believe. whether most are or aren't is irrelevant imo when discussing a total ban. one wants to entertain a partial ban, entirely different discussion, tho again, my personal views remain unchanged.
and know1, on the other abortion thread...i would be curious and interested on your pov in regards to BC, the morning after pill, etc. i think it's a side of this discussion many of us have not addressed much here, at least that i am unaware, in any case. contrary to popular belief, many of us amongst the pro-choice persuauasion DO want to gain a better understanding of those with vastly different perspectives on the issue.
Kind of like what I was saying about more than one reason for opposing abortion.
Regarding BC, I'm totally for it except for the morning after pill. I think that starts to tread on abortion grounds.
And you're right, there are situations where an abortion seems MORE acceptable to me than others - I already said I wouldn't support letting the mother die if the doctor had to choose between her and the child or her and both dying. Rape is another one where it's more difficult to oppose it but since I do believe it's a child, I still have to. (I know I said I'm anti-abortion for other reasons besides my belief that it is murder, but those other reasons probably wouldn't have me to oppose it in a situation of rape).
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
again, entirely untrue.
i always admit that there are all sorts of reasons why a girl or woman may choose abortion and that yes, i believe it is her right to do so. i don't 'make excuses' b/c i feel and think none are necessary.
i discuss rape in THIS thread, b/c for this topic...it IS important imo. it is the idea of a "total ban"....and i do believe, rightly or wrongly, that even those against 'abortions for other reasons'....thus think abortion should be illegal....do not realize ALL a total ban would encompass. thus this thread is excellent food for thought for those who might be of the persuasion of wanting a 100% ban, to realize there ARE many reasons for abortions, and not all a matter of 'convenience' as some believe. whether most are or aren't is irrelevant imo when discussing a total ban. one wants to entertain a partial ban, entirely different discussion, tho again, my personal views remain unchanged.
and know1, on the other abortion thread...i would be curious and interested on your pov in regards to BC, the morning after pill, etc. i think it's a side of this discussion many of us have not addressed much here, at least that i am unaware, in any case. contrary to popular belief, many of us amongst the pro-choice persuauasion DO want to gain a better understanding of those with vastly different perspectives on the issue.
Kind of like what I was saying about more than one reason for opposing abortion.
Regarding BC, I'm totally for it except for the morning after pill. I think that starts to tread on abortion grounds.
And you're right, there are situations where an abortion seems MORE acceptable to me than others - I already said I wouldn't support letting the mother die if the doctor had to choose between her and the child or her and both dying. Rape is another one where it's more difficult to oppose it but since I do believe it's a child, I still have to. (I know I said I'm anti-abortion for other reasons besides my belief that it is murder, but those other reasons probably wouldn't have me to oppose it in a situation of rape).
if you would take a peek in the last page of the other abortion thread, i would really love to know why you are ok with Bc pills and not the morning after pill. i appreciate you being candid, and i am not trying to put you on the spot...i am genuinely curious as to the "whys" of that.....since the BC pill and the morning after pill are essentially one and the same, the morning after pill merely being a high dose of regular BC pill, and both can esssentially do the same thing. and yes, you may already know that.....idk.....but it just makes me wonder why all the more then.
and i know you clearly stated you were not for a 100% ban, i understood that and accept that. i do realize that everyone who is labelled 'pro-life' is not 100% anti-abortion.
if you would take a peek in the last page of the other abortion thread, i would really love to know why you are ok with Bc pills and not the morning after pill. i appreciate you being candid, and i am not trying to put you on the spot...i am genuinely curious as to the "whys" of that.....since the BC pill and the morning after pill are essentially one and the same, the morning after pill merely being a high dose of regular BC pill, and both can esssentially do the same thing. and yes, you may already know that.....idk.....but it just makes me wonder why all the more then.
and i know you clearly stated you were not for a 100% ban, i understood that and accept that. i do realize that everyone who is labelled 'pro-life' is not 100% anti-abortion.
I'll probably pass on the other thread, but my opposition to the morning after pill has to do with timing and not with mechanism of action.
I actually stated that I am for a 100% ban with provisions that in medical situations where the life of the mother and child are in jeopardy that the doctor do whatever necessary to save as much life as possible.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
if you would take a peek in the last page of the other abortion thread, i would really love to know why you are ok with Bc pills and not the morning after pill. i appreciate you being candid, and i am not trying to put you on the spot...i am genuinely curious as to the "whys" of that.....since the BC pill and the morning after pill are essentially one and the same, the morning after pill merely being a high dose of regular BC pill, and both can esssentially do the same thing. and yes, you may already know that.....idk.....but it just makes me wonder why all the more then.
and i know you clearly stated you were not for a 100% ban, i understood that and accept that. i do realize that everyone who is labelled 'pro-life' is not 100% anti-abortion.
I'll probably pass on the other thread, but my opposition to the morning after pill has to do with timing and not with mechanism of action.
I actually stated that I am for a 100% ban with provisions that in medical situations where the life of the mother and child are in jeopardy that the doctor do whatever necessary to save as much life as possible.
so it is based on a judgement of the action rather than the mechanism. gotcha. however, wouldn't you far prefer that action rather than an abortion? honestly, that's the part i don't understand.
i am pro-choice, and i would far rather more girls/women choose the morning after pill - if they can/are aware - than to wait it out and choose abortion. i think it is a far better way to go when possible. if reducing abortion is the goal, why not?
again, if one accepts hormonal BC methods, why is the TIMING of such....such a sticking point? seriously, one may well use another method of BC, say a condom, and the condom breaks, realize there is a tear, whatever....after intercourse...isn't it wiser to choose the morning after pill (high dose BC pill) rather than take the chance? i mean, otherwise, it's quite the assumption that everyone who chooses the morning after pill was 'irresponsible'...and beyond that, if BC pills are a-ok beforehand, it simply doesn't make logisitical sense to say no to it afterwards, from a BC/preventative stance. obviously it may make sense to some from a moral standpoint, but again, the results are the same. the morning after pill is no more 'abortion' than any form of hormonal BC.
it reads to me, in any case.....that this is more about judging the actions than actual avoidance of abortion per se. thank you for clarifying your position.
btw - you cannot be in for a 100% ban, with provisons...b/c then it is not a 100% ban. you obviously support a partial ban then, even if the 'partial' portion is very miniscule in your scenario.
Fair enough. Personally, I htink discussing the fringes of issues is non-productive. The middle is where the meat of the matter is (or tofu depending on how you swing).
It'b be like us discussing only the cases when women have received 3+ abortions. The fringe.
I've been thinking about how these conversations so frequently revert to the fringes. I think this happens when people make absolute statements, e.g. "I support a total ban on abortion" or "Women who have abortions are irresponsible" or "Women should not have abortions." For me anyway, these generalizations are problematic.
So, for instance, if someone says we should have a total abortion ban, I would also be inclined to post an article that illustrates the atrocities that occur when such a ban exists. Point being: This is how a total abortion ban would impact these women and children. Although these examples may be on the fringe, they are still reason enough not to impose such an extreme measure.
Statements about abortions (or the women who have them) necessarily being irresponsible or about what women "should" and "should not" do are similarly irresponsible, ignorant, and short-sighted, in my opinion.
Regarding BC, I'm totally for it except for the morning after pill. I think that starts to tread on abortion grounds.
:? :? :?
How so?
Maybe I'm just ignorant of how it works and not really against it. My assumption when I said that I was against it was that it was terminating an egg that was likely fertilized at that point. If there is NO question that it is NOT fertilized, then I do not oppose it (even though I'm not necessarily a fan of it either).
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Regarding BC, I'm totally for it except for the morning after pill. I think that starts to tread on abortion grounds.
:? :? :?
How so?
Maybe I'm just ignorant of how it works and not really against it. My assumption when I said that I was against it was that it was terminating an egg that was likely fertilized at that point. If there is NO question that it is NOT fertilized, then I do not oppose it (even though I'm not necessarily a fan of it either).
It can keep a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus - and so can regular birth control pills.
Along with the total abortion ban, let's ban IQs above 40. We could criminalize both--anyone having an abortion would receive capital punishment and anyone displaying an iota of intelligence above 40 would also also receive capital punishment. Oh, and Obama wasn't born in the US. I think I'm ready to become a right wing Republican wingnut.
Regarding BC, I'm totally for it except for the morning after pill. I think that starts to tread on abortion grounds.
:? :? :?
How so?
Maybe I'm just ignorant of how it works and not really against it. My assumption when I said that I was against it was that it was terminating an egg that was likely fertilized at that point. If there is NO question that it is NOT fertilized, then I do not oppose it (even though I'm not necessarily a fan of it either).
sadly, i think FAR too many are 'ignorant of how it works' and yet, are STILL against it, and that is the problem. given that it works as BC pills work, and other hormonal methods (as i explained in the other thread you don't want to look at, and i may've here too...i don't recall) work....no one who is in support of these methods of BC really should have a problem with the morning after pill.
it may or may not be fertilized, just like it may or may not be fertilized when using any of the other hormonal forms of BC....that's the point. you just don't know....it all depends on where in the menstrual cycle the woman may be, when intercourse occurred, etc. one may well opt to use the morning after pill 'just in case' and not even be pregnant!
however, if you are ok with the BC pill that may prevent fertiization OR implantation of a fertilized egg, why differeniate for the morning after pill? that was my Q. they are the same treatment, just a larger dosage. above you said it's not the metod, but the timing....so that would lead me to think it's more on judgements and not about actual fertilization. if i am incorrect tho, do please clarify.
Maybe I'm just ignorant of how it works and not really against it. My assumption when I said that I was against it was that it was terminating an egg that was likely fertilized at that point. If there is NO question that it is NOT fertilized, then I do not oppose it (even though I'm not necessarily a fan of it either).
sadly, i think FAR too many are 'ignorant of how it works' and yet, are STILL against it, and that is the problem. given that it works as BC pills work, and other hormonal methods (as i explained in the other thread you don't want to look at, and i may've here too...i don't recall) work....no one who is in support of these methods of BC really should have a problem with the morning after pill.
it may or may not be fertilized, just like it may or may not be fertilized when using any of the other hormonal forms of BC....that's the point. you just don't know....it all depends on where in the menstrual cycle the woman may be, when intercourse occurred, etc. one may well opt to use the morning after pill 'just in case' and not even be pregnant!
however, if you are ok with the BC pill that may prevent fertiization OR implantation of a fertilized egg, why differeniate for the morning after pill? that was my Q. they are the same treatment, just a larger dosage. above you said it's not the metod, but the timing....so that would lead me to think it's more on judgements and not about actual fertilization. if i am incorrect tho, do please clarify.
Then I guess I don't oppose it and never have. I can't remember ever in my life having been asked whether I opposed it or not until today and I made a statement based upon an ignorant assumption.
I will say that I'm not a big fan of it either from the standpoint that I think these "safety nets" diminish the responsibility that people need to demonstrate to have responsible adult sexual lives (let the blasting begin on this one, but I don't have the time to elaborate). That is another example of why I oppose abortion. I think people should have communication about their sex lives and a long term (i.e. married) committed relationship and be in agreement on their stance on birth control, abortion, children, etc. BEFORE they have sex with someone. And yes, I know, someone's going to say that's not realistic for everyone, blah, blah, blah...
The tie-in to BC (not the morning after) is that someone on birth control has obviously thought about the consequences of their actions and made a decision. The use of the morning after pill (not for rape) implies they did something they consider a mistake.
I truly feel - and recognize this is an extremely minority position that will encourage people to bash me - that having easily available outlets to avoid the consequences of bad decisions leads to more bad decisions.
(and I'm not talking about rape here. I'm talking about people who were not raped who either took the morning after pill or had an abortion because they made what they later decided was a bad decision)
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Maybe I'm just ignorant of how it works and not really against it. My assumption when I said that I was against it was that it was terminating an egg that was likely fertilized at that point. If there is NO question that it is NOT fertilized, then I do not oppose it (even though I'm not necessarily a fan of it either).
sadly, i think FAR too many are 'ignorant of how it works' and yet, are STILL against it, and that is the problem. given that it works as BC pills work, and other hormonal methods (as i explained in the other thread you don't want to look at, and i may've here too...i don't recall) work....no one who is in support of these methods of BC really should have a problem with the morning after pill.
it may or may not be fertilized, just like it may or may not be fertilized when using any of the other hormonal forms of BC....that's the point. you just don't know....it all depends on where in the menstrual cycle the woman may be, when intercourse occurred, etc. one may well opt to use the morning after pill 'just in case' and not even be pregnant!
however, if you are ok with the BC pill that may prevent fertiization OR implantation of a fertilized egg, why differeniate for the morning after pill? that was my Q. they are the same treatment, just a larger dosage. above you said it's not the metod, but the timing....so that would lead me to think it's more on judgements and not about actual fertilization. if i am incorrect tho, do please clarify.
Then I guess I don't oppose it and never have. I can't remember ever in my life having been asked whether I opposed it or not until today and I made a statement based upon an ignorant assumption.
I will say that I'm not a big fan of it either from the standpoint that I think these "safety nets" diminish the responsibility that people need to demonstrate to have responsible adult sexual lives (let the blasting begin on this one, but I don't have the time to elaborate). That is another example of why I oppose abortion. I think people should have communication about their sex lives and a long term (i.e. married) committed relationship and be in agreement on their stance on birth control, abortion, children, etc. BEFORE they have sex with someone. And yes, I know, someone's going to say that's not realistic for everyone, blah, blah, blah...
i understand your personal pov, against sex before marriage and all that, and i respect that as a choice....for YOU. i DO agree people should have communication about BC and abortion, especially in long-term relationships....and i think BC should ALWAYS be utilized when pregnancy is not desired.....tho you're right, i will say....we don't live in a perfect world #1, and #2...many do not share your same morality in regards to sex, and i am a-ok with that.
and me, i am all FOR safety nets...b/c i think they help rectify 'mistakes'...and can also lead to more responsible choices after such an experience/scare, etc. however, we have VERY different views on intercourse in general, and i certainly do not expect you or anyone to share my pov on it.
The tie-in to BC (not the morning after) is that someone on birth control has obviously thought about the consequences of their actions and made a decision. The use of the morning after pill (not for rape) implies they did something they consider a mistake.
and the use of the morning after pill can imply a LOT of things, not just the one you mention. i gave a VERy likely scenario above...a condom break. failure of BC is a common reason for the use of the morning after pill and of abortion. and sure, others may use it as their only means. however, to imply that all are casual and/or irresponsible, is just wrong imo....and beyond that, again, we are imperfect and we all make bad judgements and mistakes. ihow we believe one should choose to deal with those consequences are where we most differ. don't we all want to correct our mistkes if/when we can? so i see no difference there in regards to the morning after pill.
and i also would think if someone's main objective is to limit abortion (not merely push their morality on others) than support of BC INCLUDING the morning after pill would be viewed as a GOOD thing, b/c ultimately, with ease of access, education AND removal of stigmas...perhaps more would utilize this choice, and thus greatly reduce the amount of abortions. all good things imo...
I truly feel - and recognize this is an extremely minority position that will encourage people to bash me - that having easily available outlets to avoid the consequences of bad decisions leads to more bad decisions.
(and I'm not talking about rape here. I'm talking about people who were not raped who either took the morning after pill or had an abortion because they made what they later decided was a bad decision)
and...no bashing. i can absolutely disagree with someone, and yet offer respect for their opion and pov, especially when explained so well. i appreciate your candor. again, i disagree with much of it...but i do always like to gain more understanding for various perspectives, especially when they are so outside my own pov.
[ their opion and pov, especially when explained so well. when they are so outside my own pov.
omg, idk ur pov.
Man, I found myself cringing reading your text speak. I'd like to abort it.
cringe and abort away! remember, i am about choice. :P
funny, i try and be respectful...and yet you still can't help yourself but find 'fault' with something...;)
also, i rarely....as in almost never.....text. so it's not my 'text-speak'...it's merely 'posting-speak.'
glad you pulled something of value from the discussion tho.
I already said what I thought. But if you must see it again, I'm not for a total ban. And I think the OP was trying to sensationalize what anti-abortion people think , which, in my opinion, really hurts discussion on the matter.
DAMN!
I thought I'd better weigh in, since I was the OP ...
I really didn't intend to "sensationalize what anti-abortion people think," and it sure doesn't seem to have hurt this "discussion on the matter" very much, nor did I mean to post and run, but I am just now being able to get back on line and see what a shit storm this post caused ... I think, after going through all of these responses, that I have learned something, and I thank this intelligent and passionate group of people for such an important and informative dialogue ... at least we agree on one thing: Pearl Jam is great!!! But, seriously, I now see how counter productive ANY absolute rule is, whether it's against abortion or smoking marijuana ... I think the really intelligent, and most effective approach might be to make abortion almost completely legal while working towards making it as rare as possible. If you're right about why a woman shouldn't abort that baby she is pregnant with because her father or her kidnapper raped her, or because she knows it will be born brain dead, then you have a right to attempt to convince her of that. If you're successful, then you've made a difference.
I was alone and far away when I heard the band start playing!
...I was always a DeadHead, but when I first heard Winston Rodney, aka the Burning Spear, sing, I became a SpearHead too!
Comments
again, entirely untrue.
i always admit that there are all sorts of reasons why a girl or woman may choose abortion and that yes, i believe it is her right to do so. i don't 'make excuses' b/c i feel and think none are necessary.
i discuss rape in THIS thread, b/c for this topic...it IS important imo. it is the idea of a "total ban"....and i do believe, rightly or wrongly, that even those against 'abortions for other reasons'....thus think abortion should be illegal....do not realize ALL a total ban would encompass. thus this thread is excellent food for thought for those who might be of the persuasion of wanting a 100% ban, to realize there ARE many reasons for abortions, and not all a matter of 'convenience' as some believe. whether most are or aren't is irrelevant imo when discussing a total ban. one wants to entertain a partial ban, entirely different discussion, tho again, my personal views remain unchanged.
and know1, on the other abortion thread...i would be curious and interested on your pov in regards to BC, the morning after pill, etc. i think it's a side of this discussion many of us have not addressed much here, at least that i am unaware, in any case. contrary to popular belief, many of us amongst the pro-choice persuauasion DO want to gain a better understanding of those with vastly different perspectives on the issue.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
Hail, Hail!!!
Kind of like what I was saying about more than one reason for opposing abortion.
Regarding BC, I'm totally for it except for the morning after pill. I think that starts to tread on abortion grounds.
And you're right, there are situations where an abortion seems MORE acceptable to me than others - I already said I wouldn't support letting the mother die if the doctor had to choose between her and the child or her and both dying. Rape is another one where it's more difficult to oppose it but since I do believe it's a child, I still have to. (I know I said I'm anti-abortion for other reasons besides my belief that it is murder, but those other reasons probably wouldn't have me to oppose it in a situation of rape).
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
if you would take a peek in the last page of the other abortion thread, i would really love to know why you are ok with Bc pills and not the morning after pill. i appreciate you being candid, and i am not trying to put you on the spot...i am genuinely curious as to the "whys" of that.....since the BC pill and the morning after pill are essentially one and the same, the morning after pill merely being a high dose of regular BC pill, and both can esssentially do the same thing. and yes, you may already know that.....idk.....but it just makes me wonder why all the more then.
and i know you clearly stated you were not for a 100% ban, i understood that and accept that. i do realize that everyone who is labelled 'pro-life' is not 100% anti-abortion.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
I'll probably pass on the other thread, but my opposition to the morning after pill has to do with timing and not with mechanism of action.
I actually stated that I am for a 100% ban with provisions that in medical situations where the life of the mother and child are in jeopardy that the doctor do whatever necessary to save as much life as possible.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
so it is based on a judgement of the action rather than the mechanism. gotcha. however, wouldn't you far prefer that action rather than an abortion? honestly, that's the part i don't understand.
i am pro-choice, and i would far rather more girls/women choose the morning after pill - if they can/are aware - than to wait it out and choose abortion. i think it is a far better way to go when possible. if reducing abortion is the goal, why not?
again, if one accepts hormonal BC methods, why is the TIMING of such....such a sticking point? seriously, one may well use another method of BC, say a condom, and the condom breaks, realize there is a tear, whatever....after intercourse...isn't it wiser to choose the morning after pill (high dose BC pill) rather than take the chance? i mean, otherwise, it's quite the assumption that everyone who chooses the morning after pill was 'irresponsible'...and beyond that, if BC pills are a-ok beforehand, it simply doesn't make logisitical sense to say no to it afterwards, from a BC/preventative stance. obviously it may make sense to some from a moral standpoint, but again, the results are the same. the morning after pill is no more 'abortion' than any form of hormonal BC.
it reads to me, in any case.....that this is more about judging the actions than actual avoidance of abortion per se. thank you for clarifying your position.
btw - you cannot be in for a 100% ban, with provisons...b/c then it is not a 100% ban. you obviously support a partial ban then, even if the 'partial' portion is very miniscule in your scenario.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
:? :? :?
How so?
I've been thinking about how these conversations so frequently revert to the fringes. I think this happens when people make absolute statements, e.g. "I support a total ban on abortion" or "Women who have abortions are irresponsible" or "Women should not have abortions." For me anyway, these generalizations are problematic.
So, for instance, if someone says we should have a total abortion ban, I would also be inclined to post an article that illustrates the atrocities that occur when such a ban exists. Point being: This is how a total abortion ban would impact these women and children. Although these examples may be on the fringe, they are still reason enough not to impose such an extreme measure.
Statements about abortions (or the women who have them) necessarily being irresponsible or about what women "should" and "should not" do are similarly irresponsible, ignorant, and short-sighted, in my opinion.
Maybe I'm just ignorant of how it works and not really against it. My assumption when I said that I was against it was that it was terminating an egg that was likely fertilized at that point. If there is NO question that it is NOT fertilized, then I do not oppose it (even though I'm not necessarily a fan of it either).
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
It can keep a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus - and so can regular birth control pills.
sadly, i think FAR too many are 'ignorant of how it works' and yet, are STILL against it, and that is the problem. given that it works as BC pills work, and other hormonal methods (as i explained in the other thread you don't want to look at, and i may've here too...i don't recall) work....no one who is in support of these methods of BC really should have a problem with the morning after pill.
it may or may not be fertilized, just like it may or may not be fertilized when using any of the other hormonal forms of BC....that's the point. you just don't know....it all depends on where in the menstrual cycle the woman may be, when intercourse occurred, etc. one may well opt to use the morning after pill 'just in case' and not even be pregnant!
however, if you are ok with the BC pill that may prevent fertiization OR implantation of a fertilized egg, why differeniate for the morning after pill? that was my Q. they are the same treatment, just a larger dosage. above you said it's not the metod, but the timing....so that would lead me to think it's more on judgements and not about actual fertilization. if i am incorrect tho, do please clarify.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
Then I guess I don't oppose it and never have. I can't remember ever in my life having been asked whether I opposed it or not until today and I made a statement based upon an ignorant assumption.
I will say that I'm not a big fan of it either from the standpoint that I think these "safety nets" diminish the responsibility that people need to demonstrate to have responsible adult sexual lives (let the blasting begin on this one, but I don't have the time to elaborate). That is another example of why I oppose abortion. I think people should have communication about their sex lives and a long term (i.e. married) committed relationship and be in agreement on their stance on birth control, abortion, children, etc. BEFORE they have sex with someone. And yes, I know, someone's going to say that's not realistic for everyone, blah, blah, blah...
The tie-in to BC (not the morning after) is that someone on birth control has obviously thought about the consequences of their actions and made a decision. The use of the morning after pill (not for rape) implies they did something they consider a mistake.
I truly feel - and recognize this is an extremely minority position that will encourage people to bash me - that having easily available outlets to avoid the consequences of bad decisions leads to more bad decisions.
(and I'm not talking about rape here. I'm talking about people who were not raped who either took the morning after pill or had an abortion because they made what they later decided was a bad decision)
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
You'd better try hippie lefist nutjob if you want to survive in the society you just mentioned.
and...no bashing. i can absolutely disagree with someone, and yet offer respect for their opion and pov, especially when explained so well. i appreciate your candor. again, i disagree with much of it...but i do always like to gain more understanding for various perspectives, especially when they are so outside my own pov.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
omg, idk ur pov.
Man, I found myself cringing reading your text speak. I'd like to abort it.
cringe and abort away!
funny, i try and be respectful...and yet you still can't help yourself but find 'fault' with something...;)
also, i rarely....as in almost never.....text. so it's not my 'text-speak'...it's merely 'posting-speak.'
glad you pulled something of value from the discussion tho.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
DAMN!
I thought I'd better weigh in, since I was the OP ...
I really didn't intend to "sensationalize what anti-abortion people think," and it sure doesn't seem to have hurt this "discussion on the matter" very much, nor did I mean to post and run, but I am just now being able to get back on line and see what a shit storm this post caused ... I think, after going through all of these responses, that I have learned something, and I thank this intelligent and passionate group of people for such an important and informative dialogue ... at least we agree on one thing: Pearl Jam is great!!! But, seriously, I now see how counter productive ANY absolute rule is, whether it's against abortion or smoking marijuana ... I think the really intelligent, and most effective approach might be to make abortion almost completely legal while working towards making it as rare as possible. If you're right about why a woman shouldn't abort that baby she is pregnant with because her father or her kidnapper raped her, or because she knows it will be born brain dead, then you have a right to attempt to convince her of that. If you're successful, then you've made a difference.
...I was always a DeadHead, but when I first heard Winston Rodney, aka the Burning Spear, sing, I became a SpearHead too!