Put aside your feelings about abortion for a minute. In fact, forget about whether or not you even think the "morning after" pill is abortion. Lets look at this thing objectively if we can.
About a week ago the FDA approved these pills for over the counter sales to anyone 18 years of age or older. How does this make sense? Consider that birth control pills can't be sold without a prescription and these pills are just super powerful versions of those. Does this seem right?
In March the FDA announced that two more women died after taking RU-486 (morning after pill) which brings us to 7 women known to have died from taking this pill. In December the FDA announced that there have been 607 "adverse events" (source IBD) from women who took this pill. Did anyone hear about that? I'm wondering why there haven't been any lawsuits against the "greedy drug companies" that are making these pills.
I wonder if a man or woman over 18 gives the pills to a 17 year old, are they contributing to the delinquency of a minor? I predict a lot of unforseen consequences from this new drug and new law, and none of them will be positive. More deaths, more disease, more children born out of wedlock, lawsuits etc. and it will be women who pay the biggest price.
7 comments:
i disagree donsky, i think much like traditional abortion this will turn out to be a bad deal for women, whether they want to admit/see it, or not.
how is "traditional abortion" a bad deal for women?
anita, just off the top of my head, it's a fall back, so it's easier for women to get pressured into unprotected sex by their partners or dates or whatever. And since i don't think there's any women out there who actually WANT to have an abortion, i think thats a bad deal for them.
let me put it this way. when i was younger (college age) i dated a woman for a while who was catholic, she went to church every sunday, (even during football season). Since i knew that she would NEVER have an abortion, i NEVER had sex with her without protection. Get it?
I would also assume that psychologically it's a tough situation for a woman. And i'm sure it's not a picnic physically. I think young women are probably the most vulnerable, since they would be the ones who would be the least prepared for the situations that they get in, especially in highschool, at parties etc.
It's like hangover medicine. If you never feel the short term affects of drinking like an idiot, you have no motivation to stop doing it. But there's long term effects that follow.
You're having fun dancing for now, but eventually the piper must be paid, and in this situation it's the women who are picking up the bill.
So if i'm understanding you correctly donsky, you're saying that the government shouldn't infringe on the "right" to abortion or the morning after pill. That's fine, but why is it always halfway?
Personally, i'm all for limited govt. involvement, but the problem as i see it is that i have to live in this society that is becoming morally bankrupt, and then when everyone gets in trouble because they're poor, or pregnant, or sick, or all of those things, they want govt. and MY tax dollars to bail them out.
And finally, it's the jews that cause all the wars, why are you blaming the christian coalition?
Just as noone couldve possibly conceived the extent to which abortion would become a form of birth control, Im afraid that this drug will become just another "planned parenthood" option as opposed to the last resort that it was designed to be.
and youre wrong Rhino, the jews dont cause all the wars...everybody knows its all Mel Gibson's fault.
I practice the "rhythm method" but since I am white (1/4 jewish, three quaters rye) I can't say I am very good at it...
I'll let you know.
Post a Comment