Posted on 08/24/2006 6:26:38 AM PDT by Pyro7480
US OKs wider access for Barr 'morning-after' pill
WASHINGTON, Aug 24 (Reuters) - Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc. (BRL.N: Quote, Profile, Research) won U.S. approval to sell its Plan B "morning-after" contraceptive without a prescription to women 18 and older, the company said on Thursday.
Younger girls still need a prescription for Plan B, the company said in a statement. The Plan B pills may prevent pregnancy when taken within 72 hours of sexual intercourse.
Pro-life ping!
Yeah... approving a pill that prevents pregnancy is much worse than abortions!! [/sarc]
You would think that the feminists would be gathering their vats of tar and feathers on this one too, regardless of their stand on abortions. This medication is too dangerous to be offered without medical supervision. This one is bad for everyone, but as you mention, especially for embryos (which is to say, unborn babies).
It's too early for this kind of bad news. Sigh.
If the egg is fertilized, it IS an abortion.
I've read scary things about this "morning after" pill. Bad health risks...I love the name though..."you've been out drinking all night, had sex with a faceless man...you need THE MORNING AFTER PILL....
No, it's not... but don't let that get in the way of your histrionic ramblings.
It's about preventing pregnancy not aborting babies.
Histrionic? Just what do you think an "embryo" is, anyway? Just a blob of flesh? Where do you think YOU came from?
The real pro-death crowd isn't interested in safety for women, they're interested in maximizing the opportunities for non-reproductive sex. Women dying in the process is mere collateral damage, just as babies dying in the process are an annoyance.
It's the same insanity that motivates the homosexual crowd, for some of whom the possibility of dying of AIDS is a small price to pay for promiscuity.
I'm a social conservative, and I'm not betrayed.
Shouldn't that have been "hystrionic" ramblings? ;-)
The emergency contraceptive/morning-after pill has three possible ways in which it can work (as does the regular birth control pill):
1. Ovulation is inhibited, meaning the egg will not be released;
2. The normal menstrual cycle is altered, delaying ovulation; or
3. It can irritate the lining of the uterus so that if the first and second actions fail, and the woman does become pregnant, the human being created will die before he or she can actually attach to the lining of the uterus.
In other words, if the third action occurs, her body rejects the living human embryo, and the child will die. This result is a chemical abortion. (Abortion is an act of direct killing that takes the life of a living preborn human being—a life that begins at fertilization.)
That's a bit of an apples and orange juice comparison.
That'd be one place to stop it ~ citing the law that prohibits federal funds and resources being used for purposes of abortion.
Actually, in Texas at least, the law is ambiguous. The Prenatal Protection Act of 2003 declares that the human individual begins at fertilization, while abortion is restricted to those procedures which purposefully interupt a pregnancy "known to the attending physician."
"This process ultimately leads to the formation of a diploid cell called a zygote. When the zygote reaches the uterus and implants in the endometrium, it begins to divide and form an embryo. At this point the female is said to be pregnant" -Wikipedia
I love how the "All-Or-Nothing" Religious Right demand the complete abandonment of reproductive control in the name of God. Here we have a method that will prevent abortions, and they ignorantly redefine this as an abortion in order to keep the troops in camp.
What on earth will the Church do when abortion is made obsolete???
My question has been, how does anyone know if any of the egg released from the fallopian tubes are met by a sperm, thus becoming a zygote? Isn't it possible that none of the eggs are fertilized? And if that is true, there is no abortion, because there is no chance of a fetus forming, to begin with. How can that be called an abortion, when no one knows if fertilization has taken place? It sounds to me like it is a stab in the dark, assuming that everytime someone has sex, the egg and sperm meet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.