Basically, right-to-life organizations flooded lawmakers with propaganda claiming that birth control pills cause abortions. In reality, they do no such thing, as they PREVENT conception from occurring so that there is no NEED for abortion. In addition, if the pill is taken after conception has occurred, it does NOT promote miscarriage or "spontaneous abortion."
The lawmakers very nearly approved "a proposal to refuse federal funds for health clinics because they cover birth control pills and intrauterine devices (IUDs)."
A gem of a quote from the article?
quote:But complicating the issue is the fact that candidates' answers aren't necessarily to be believed. Right to Life also asked, "Will you actively support ... legislation which prohibits all use of state, federal and/or Medicare funds for abortion (including chemical abortions, such as RU-486, or the so-called 'morning after pill,' or the so-called 'standard birth control pill'?) It is now acknowledged that the pharmaceutical manufacturers agree that the so-called 'standard birth control pill' carries an abortifacient function."
Dan Humpert, a Republican running for reelection as District One Kenton County Commissioner, answered yes. But now he says he should have looked at the questionnaire more carefully.
"I don't believe that birth control pills are abortifacients, no, but there are people in Kenton County who do," Humpert says.
God, I hate ignorant people. Anti-abortionists are some of the ludest, most annoying, ridiculous people on earth. They have no right to restrict our rights! Personally, I think if anyone's rights should be suspended, it's their right to breed.
------------------ Art is why I get up in the morning, but my definition ends there. You know it doesn't seem fair, that I'm living for something I can't even define" - Ani D.
While I'm not saying I disagree, that isn't the most appropriate or effective way of getting the point across. It's okay to state that you believe something's not right for whatever reason, but calling people 'ignorant' or 'ridiculous' because you don't agree with them isn't something we're okay with here.
------------------ Milke, SSBD, RATS
Better living through Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V
Posts: 5122 | From: I *came* from the land of ice and snow | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
Wow. Could someone just bother to explain the logic of this one to me? It's absurdity. Let's see . . . the availability of birth control is a contributing factor to abortion . . . ?
I must have missed something there. As far as I know, people who want to have sex tend to have sex. If birth control ceased to be easily and publicly available, how many people who currently wear a condom (or take the pill, or use any other method of contraception) when having sex would just keep on having sex and rely on the pull-out and pray method? Perhaps the increase in teen pregnancy rates can be attributed to the "wages of sin."
quote:Originally posted by FedLips: Take away my birth control and take away my freedom....
Gee, call me crazy, but I'm under the impression that there is a whole lot more to freedom than birth control. Which isn't to minimize the fact that denying people's access to birth control is a serious problem that needs to be addressed. But at the same time, let's not forget that we are some of the more fortunate folks on earth by virtue of the freedoms we do have.
I do not belive this! How utterly ridiculous. I personally am pro-choice, but I have no problem with pro-life people as long as they do not try to control my choices! It is all well and good to personally choose not to have an abortion as you believe it is wrong, but what right do you have to force your choice onto other people? What makes your choice any more justified than thiers? I for one can not see the justification in forcing someone to bring a child into the world when for whatever reason it is not going to be financially and emotionally cared for. The thing about this ruling that really angers me is that it presumes to dictate what is the right thing to do. It takes away one of the most valued rights in life that we have- The right to choose.
Posts: 123 | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged |
first off, i don't want to hear any more name calling. pro-choice, pro-life, the both of them can have some angry, ignorant followers, but that doesn't mean they're all like that.
second, i'd just like to say that personally, i don't believe in abortion, but i couldn't see myself getting in the way of a woman who did.
BUT, that being sad, what you have to realize is that most people who are pro-life honestly believe it is their duty to protect the unborn children by any means possible. In their minds, they're not restricting anybody's rights- most people don't believe that anybody has the right to murder. Well, MOST pro-lifers think of abortion as pure and simple murder. I don't think they're right, but I wanted to get it out there that nobody is simply trying to take away freedom here.
one more thing... as far as the issue goes, i don't think there is anything wrong with the morning after pill. i had this discussion with a girl friend of mine about a week ago.. no matter what your position on abortion is, preventing pregnancy (i.e preventing sperm from fertilizing an egg..) is different than ending a pregnancy.
Posts: 98 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
I think Kandy does have a point. Slogans such as "my body, my choice" do not contribute very much to the debate on this complex issue. The anti-abortionists do have a moral argument that is in some ways valid. Thus counter arguments must be intelligent moral and scientific comments rather than an immediate collapse into what "self-evident rights" are being violated (the child or parent).
------------------ 'An Anarchist is a Liberal with a bomb' Trotsky
The problem as I see it is, truthfully, that there is no real argument for or aganist abortion, or contraception for that matter. It boils down to personal choice and personal belief.
Also, there are so many facets to the defense of either side of the argument. There's no real, scientifically-proven stand on when life begins, whether it be when the sperm touches ova and conception occours, or when conigitive thoughts can be had by a given organism.
It's an argument that takes place in a morally and ethically grey area. It's all about personal and/or religious beliefs and convictions.
If social groups exist to help the individuals involved survive (as I daresay they do for humans and many other animals), contraception, at very least, has a valid place here and now. Too many unwanted children, and the spread of disease are very real problems that can destroy general well-being, and cause problems for all associated with the afflicted. Some things may be considered morally debatable, but others really are practical concerns -- and this is something that's easily overlooked, and really shouldn't be.
Whilst I am pro-choice, I can understand the argument put forward by the pro-lifers here (although I DO NOT agree with it). A lot of pro-lifers are catholics, and therefore belive that life begins at conception (when sperm meets egg). The contraceptive pill works mostly by preventing this, but also works by changing the womb lining so that if conception takes place the embryo cannot implant. If you are catholic, this could be seen as abortion.
Posts: 166 | From: London, England | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
...yet if that is the case, so then is male masturbation and NOT conceiving at every available opportunity. So is miscarriage, by that thought process. So then might be menstruation, for that matter.
Given, there are a few Catholics who would agree with that, and thus do NOT masturbate and DO have children until the cows come home, whose wives never miscarry and never get a chance to menstruate because they are pregnant all the time.
But very, very, very few.
So, that argument is TREMENDOUSLY limited and breaks down pretty fast when you follow it to it's logical conclusions. And that's without even going into the idea that women are not baby factories and the feminist and humanist implications of that notion or the whole questionable business of encouraging endless fecundity in our world, period.
Ahem, I would just like to say that I am a catholic and I am pro-choice. I do believe that was a hasty generalization there. Sadly, I don't think there ever will be answer to this issue. Both sides have valid arguments. It really is up to the individual. A certain group of people should not dictate what everyone else has to do/say/believe. We have to respect everyone's opinion, but I know in reality we don't and that it's hypocritical to even say that.
Can't we all just...get along?
Posts: 34 | From: Old Bridge, NJ, USA | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
Oddly, there were other posts in here that I recall, which seem to no longer be here, including a link from me to the following group with a clear statement that many catholics are pro-choice: http://www.cath4choice.org
Maybe I'm getting senile.
(I wasn't generalizing -- I stated that a few Catholics may subscribe to a certain trail of logic.)
I think the point in much of this is, Joe, that yes, we can all get along, even in terms of issues like this -- if our choices about our own bodies and sexual lives aren't dictated by someone else's religious beliefs -- which is the issue with a case like this.
Personally, I get twitchy whenever I hear about government using religious arguments. I'd rather they use a general humane approach instead. It's such a delicate balancing act as it is, without complicating it with choosing one belief system over another.
Posts: 17 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
If I lost my birth control pills I'd be in big trouble because they are used to control a medical problem - I'm not sexually active, but when I do become sexually active I've got a start on safe sex. Geeze, looking back on what my life was like before I was on the pill compared to now, wow, I love my pills!
Copyright 1998, 2014 Heather Corinna/Scarleteen
Scarleteen.com: Providing comprehensive sex education online to teens and young adults worldwide since 1998
Information on this site is provided for educational purposes. It is not meant to and cannot substitute for advice or care provided by an in-person medical professional. The information contained herein is not meant to be used to diagnose or treat a health problem or disease, or for prescribing any medication. You should always consult your own healthcare provider if you have a health problem or medical condition.