Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: uptoolate

Plan B is an attempt to replace Plan A (Surgical Abortion) with an early chemical abortion. It doesn't always cause an abortion, but it does in some cases when it works after fertilization.

Don't let the liberals say Plan B isn't an abortion. That's part of the propaganda campaign that has been waged for years over this.

Hillary Clinton got what she wanted, too.

And Bush caved on it, make no mistake.


12 posted on 08/24/2006 7:35:33 PM PDT by Nextrush (Chris Matthews Band: "I get high...... I get high.....I get high.....McCain.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: Nextrush

Abortion it is. But now with less guilt.

We've come from the days of laying a newborn on the alter, then driving a knife through its heart, sacrificing it to the god of Molech, to...

Going to an alley with a coat hanger, poking and slicing the infant while still in the womb, sacrificing it to the god of selfishness, to...

Going to a 'doctor', who will help remove some of the guilt by calling it a 'medical procedure', as he shoves a vacuum tube in a womans uterus to suck the unborn into a canister for later disposal in a garbage dumpster, all for the god of self-centeredness, to...

Waking up the next day and taking a pill, no trauma, very little to remind, no big mess, early enough so she won't see the little one in her menstration, all for the "god of this age".


15 posted on 08/24/2006 7:51:35 PM PDT by uptoolate (The U.N. will be the tool of the Anti-Christ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Nextrush

Plan b can cause an abortion, just as contraceptives can and do cause abortions. That is, for those who believe that preventing implantation is an abortion, as opposed to removal of an implanted embryo.

If an embryo never implants, it will never be viable. There are women who have problems with implantation who spend years trying to "get pregnant", and unknowingly lose many embryos. In-vitro fertilization involves injecting embryos, some of which don't implant. I don't mind that some people would call both of these things "abortions", but I do think that it prevents us from drawing a useful distinction and makes it harder to argue against procedural abortions and chemical post-implantation abortions, which many think are the real problem.

Some people just don't agree there is a difference between the two, and I haven't been able to bridge that gap with any degree of understanding between our positions.


21 posted on 08/24/2006 8:05:00 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson