Bush Gives Support for Emergency Contraceptive Without Prescription

Washington Examiner ^ | 8/22/2006 | Bill Sammon

[johnb2004]

In every case we know that fertilization has not taken place?

[B Knotts]

That's not correct. Look it up. One of the ways in which this drug works is by the mechanism of preventing implantation.

[sandbar]

>>>This drug induces an abortion, terminating a human life.>>>

No it doesn't, it prevents a life from forming in the first place.

>>>There are also questions about its safety for the mother.>>>

That is BS. There is plenty of stuff OTC that can be misused and sometimes unsafe.

I am FOR this as it prevents abortion in my opinion. If you can stop it BEFORE a life is formed (before egg meets sperm), then you can prevent a person from waiting until they are 8 weeks and having an abortion.

JMO though and I feel the flames coming on.

[sandbar]

>>>In every case we know that fertilization has not taken place?>>>

This pill does not END a pregancy, it is not designed for that. It PREVENTS the egg from attaching (if I'm understanding it correctly). No different in my mind than birth control pills that prevent the egg from releasing.

[johnb2004]

But, the point is the drug does not only prevent ovulation, in some cases it aborts a fertilized egg. It is not always simply that ovulation is suppressed. Each case is different.

It depends on when the drug is taken and where she is in the cycle and if fertilization has taken place.

[B Knotts]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/01/AR2006040100005.html

That's the idea behind Plan B. "It prevents pregnancy mainly by stopping the release of an egg," says the manufacturer, Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc. However, Barr adds, the drug "may also prevent the fertilization of an egg" or prevent a fertilized egg "from attaching to the uterus."

[johnb2004]

There is plenty of evidence that the pill does end preganancy. Why do you think it is so highly effective? It not only suppresses ovulation, but it can change the uterine lining and prevent implantation in certain cases.

[widowithfoursons]

Yes, it has caused death; also, it doesn't always work. Maybe if GW had EVER been in the real world he would know these facts. I am so tired of elitists of either party who think the "little people" are dumb as dirt - and then legislate based on the opinions of other elitists.

[sandbar]

>>>It depends on when the drug is taken and where she is in the cycle and if fertilization has taken place.>>>

It takes 10 days for the ovum to implant in the uterus. That in my opinion is not a 'baby' at that point. Medically speaking, that isn't even 'conception'.

[johnb2004]

You think a fertilized egg, not implanted, is not a human? How long does the egg need to be implanted before you deem it a human?

[sandbar]

>>>You think a fertilized egg, not implanted, is not a human?>>>

Nope. I think it is an ovum. As I said, that is my opinion.

[johnb2004]

Nope, it is a zygote. Conception has happend. Life has begun.

[annalex]

The notion that life begins at implantation is a deathist lie, designed to obfuscate the issue of the contraceptive pill.

Life begins at fertilization.

[sinkspur]

This is the morning after bill plain and simple.

Kinky Friedman supports it, too.

[Hydroshock]

I do not like either position.

[FJ290]

What's this? Another thread where supporters of life can be called whining Neanderthal Muslim Mullah Bush bashers?

[Anthem]

Neo-Conned again!

Malthusian-Trotskyites, all.

[Revenge of Sith]

That's RU 486.

[franky]

Regardless:

Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, in his August 5, 2006 interview with broadcasters’ ARD-Bayerischer Rundfunk, Deutsche Welle, ZDF, said, “As far as abortion is concerned, it's part of the fifth, not the sixth, commandment: "You shall not kill!” We have to presume this is obvious and always stress that the human person begins in the mother's womb and remains a human person until his or her last breath. The human person must always be respected as a human person.”

[ImpBill]

I wasn't commenting to pick a fight with anyone. And I have been around long enough to know there are no perfect "candidates". In fact I wasn't even contemplating candidates when I posted. Just agreeing with the "drip ... drip ... drip" someone else posted.

And even if GW was head over heels better than either choice in both elections, and I donated money to him twice, as well as votes cast, I don't believe it is out of place to be critical of him when "I" choose.

But thanks for the post and have a great day!