Morning After Pill, (RU-486)

[Guest NoCalMike]

Ok, first of all, this is NOT, I repeat NOT, an "abortion pill" This pill basically shuts down the system and does not allow conception to take place, so in essence, THERE IS NO "ABORTION" So why are all the anti-abortion whacks up in arms to keep this pill off of the shelves? Don't they realize that this will CUT DOWN on abortions? Alright, that is all, respond at will.....

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Don't quote me on this, but isn't RU-486 the drug in development that is essentially an abortion pill?

 

The "morning after" pill you're talking about is something else entirely, IIRC.

I also agree that it should be OTC, as well as other forms of contraceptives, such as tricycline, and the new patch they're coming out with. Anything to discourage incessant breeding, and I'm behind it 100%.

[Guest NoCalMike]

Ok, I am not 100% sure it is the same pill, but I could have sworn on Loveline the other night Drew said, it indeed was RU-486. See the religious right just want to keep the info so twisted and screwed up. However since the "morning after pill" never kills a fetus, then I am not sure why they are complaining. They don't want abortion, yet want to make it even harder to get contraceptive........AHHH, For heavens sakes, they need a shot they can give to a guy that would make him sterile for a few months at a time. You can be sure I would never "forget" to take it.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Hey, why bother with shots when you can just smoke a lot of weed? I'm sure my two-headed sperm are ramming into each other, swimming in circles, posing no threat of an unwanted pregnancy, pleasantly mutated by the side effects of delta-9 Tetrahydrocannabinol.

[Guest Retro Rob]

Hey, why bother with shots when you can just smoke a lot of weed? I'm sure my two-headed sperm are ramming into each other, swimming in circles, posing no threat of an unwanted pregnancy, pleasantly mutated by the side effects of delta-9 Tetrahydrocannabinol.

Ahhh yes, the wonders of natural contraception.

[Guest EricMM]

My friend always relied on drinking a lot of Mountain Dew...

 

*sigh* I fear for the future...

[Guest Some Guy]

If the pill is safe for women to take then I'm in favor of it being over the counter. But it will be tough to get that ok'ed with the Christian Conservatives and other anti-contraception/Pro-Life groups and with the President probably not in favor of it as well.

[Guest The Czech Republic]

Mountain Dew? That's just a dumb urban legend. Hot tubs, now that's the real deal.

[Guest KoR Fungus]

Yeah, this is just another case of religious fanatics being morons. They don't like abortions, which is perfectly acceptable, however whenever someone comes up with a way to cut down on abortions, they're always against that too. They're so deadset in their ideal that no one should ever have sex without the desire to concieve that they're unwilling to accept any compromise. Being against both abortions and easy access to birth control is a totally illogical position, but that's par for the course for religious fanatics, sigh.

[Guest DrTom]

Being against both abortions and easy access to birth control is a totally illogical position

Not when you think sex should be between married couples for the purpose of procreation. Why would you need either an abortion or borth control under those circumstances?

 

I'm not saying I agree with this position; in fact, I think it's quite stupid. But it's not nearly as "illogical" as some of the other positions the Church takes.

[Guest The Metal Maniac]

I'm no biologist or anything, so I feel inclined to ask - How long does it take after sex for the sperm to meet the egg?

 

Because there are those who will point to that as being conception, thus creating new life, and terminating it, to those people, is the same as terminating at any later date.

 

But I don't know if this pill affects things before the sperm hits the egg, so whatever.

[Guest NoCalMike]

The Morning after pill basically locks the females insides up down there so the Egg cannot be released, thus the sperm swins to nothing and eventually just dies. Basically the same thing that happens everytime you have sex without conception, this time a pill is just making sure of it.

 

I can understand the churches position, but only if they keep it among their people. If you are christian/catholic and believe sex is ONLY FOR PROCREATION then preach it in church, but not to your everyday citizen that doesn't care. I am not christian, why should I have to abstain from and act that a preacher doesn't like/agree with? I am not a scumbag that sleeps around, hell not like the oppurtunity is there anyway, but I should not have to worry about birth control because a preacher thinks I shouldn't have sex.

[Guest Retro Rob]

If you are christian/catholic and believe sex is ONLY FOR PROCREATION then preach it in church, but not to your everyday citizen that doesn't care.

IMO, this church law has to be one of the most pathetic. I can see where they are coming from when they say sex is only for procreation, although I don't agree with it. What bothers me the most about this rule, is that a very small percentage of Christians actually follow it, yet those who don't could care less that they are going against the church and still consider themselves Christians. These are the same Christians that will look me in the eye and say, "You're going to hell." Hypocrisy is everywhere when it comes to religion and it will NEVER go away.

[Guest Ram]

If you are christian/catholic and believe sex is ONLY FOR PROCREATION then preach it in church, but not to your everyday citizen that doesn't care.

Well, I'm Catholic, and my church has a natural contraception class for married couples.

[Guest HoffmanHBK]

These are the same Christians that will look me in the eye and say, "You're going to hell."

I doubt that. If you're fanatic enough to be a Bible-thumper, it's more than likely that you follow the rules pretty well. But hey, feel free to keep generalizing this group of people.

 

As for me personally, I'm all about waiting until marriage (not that I've had that many chances), but I don't feel sex is just for procreation. Sex should also be an expression of love between two (in my opinion) married people. And while I am pro-life, I understand that not every married couple has room in their life, or even wants, a baby. So, frankly, I'm all for this pill. The way I see it, life begins at conception. So, if there's no conception, there can be no life to lose. It may mess with the natural cycle of your body, but so does alcohol, and I drink like a fish. I don't think just because something alters your natural state, that thing is evil. And in the end, when I look at this from all sides, I can't see a problem. Count this as one vote from a Christian conservative who likes this pill.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

If you're fanatic enough to be a Bible-thumper, it's more than likely that you follow the rules pretty well.

Psychologically speaking, it's far more likely that you're expressing the neurotic guilt you feel at your own "failures" by shouting ever louder at people who openly practice the behaviour for which you despise yourself.

 

But hey, feel free to keep generalizing this group of people.

Why not? They do it all the time to their opponents.

[Guest Retro Rob]

These are the same Christians that will look me in the eye and say, "You're going to hell."

I doubt that. If you're fanatic enough to be a Bible-thumper, it's more than likely that you follow the rules pretty well. But hey, feel free to keep generalizing this group of people.

No, No, you see that's where you're wrong. These are the kind of people who don't attend mass, don't follow the guidelines, yet still believe they have a free ride to heaven and I'M the one going to hell. That is the hypocrisy I was talking about.

 

BTW, I didn't generalize, I said "a large percentage" of Christians are hypocrites, not all, just most of them.

[Guest HoffmanHBK]

But hey, feel free to keep generalizing this group of people.

Why not? They do it all the time to their opponents.

And continuing the process is the way to improve relations? Somehow, that seems kind of off to me. And for the record, I try very hard (I'm not arrogant enough to say I always succeed) to be open-minded in all matters.

 

Also, while Marn is right about the thumpers from a psychological standpoint, I don't know many people like that. But maybe for me, ignorance is bliss. If that's the case, I'll be perfectly happy sitting in the dark.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Improving relations with people in the wrong isn't my primary goal.

[Guest HoffmanHBK]

Hey, I never said it should be a primary goal, but it couldn't hurt. Why not at least listen to the other side? So you think they're wrong. It doesn't make them all stupid people. I mean, I have several very liberal friends, and many of them dislike the Church and are very pro-life, yet they often raise some good points. The same holds true for some liberal figures in the media. Just because I think their views are wrong doesn't mean that they aren't intelligent people. To call them stupid (not that you did, I'm just saying) wouldn't be very fair, and I'm glad I hear these opposing views, because it makes me think. It just seems to me that there's no benefit to being closed-minded.

[Guest Ram]

BTW, I didn't generalize, I said "a large percentage" of Christians are hypocrites, not all, just most of them.

Yeah, and the same can be said about the whole human race.

 

They're people too.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Yep, Ram's got a point there.

 

On the whole, I like Christians much more than devotees of other faiths, largely because most of them are so wonderfully lazy about it.

[Guest Retro Rob]

BTW, I didn't generalize, I said "a large percentage" of Christians are hypocrites, not all, just most of them.

Yeah, and the same can be said about the whole human race.

 

They're people too.

That may be true, but it still doesn't make hyprocrisy right.

[Guest HoffmanHBK]

I don't think anyone said it was, Rob.

[Guest J*ingus]

Also, while Marn is right about the thumpers from a psychological standpoint, I don't know many people like that.

Just come & visit a few Churches of Christ down here in TN, and you'll see enough of people exactly like that to last you for your entire life.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

I'm no biologist or anything, so I feel inclined to ask - How long does it take after sex for the sperm to meet the egg?

A matter of minutes to a few hours. Fairly quickly, really, and cells begin to divide almost immediately. It's by no means anything that could be confused as "Human" at that point. As soon as there's a functioning brain, then I'll call it a baby. Around the time of conception, it's just a small mass of exponentially reproducing cells, not a person.

[Guest J*ingus]

It does, however, take up to a few days for the zygote to attach itself to the ovarian wall and being growing, which is precisely what the "morning after" pills prevent from happening.

[Guest Some Guy]

Is this pill safe? Does it have FDA approval?

 

This is going to sound stupid but there is no way to know for sure the next day that the girl is knocked up, so I imagine she would just take the pill the morning after everytime she had unprotected sex, thus making it a very expensive form of contraception. Pills like that are never cheap.

[Guest NoCalMike]

I think you are supposed to take the pill within 48 hours of sex, and then a 2nd pill 8 hours following that, and it is 100% effective. There is no risk in taking the pill. I am still trying to find someone on this board AGAINST this pill that will tell me why, but if there isn't, then I suggest for all of this, that when it comes up on a ballot or anything, VOTE IN FAVOR OF IT.

[Guest Some Guy]

I probably would vote for it and I know it would pass in Mass so you don't have to worry about here.

 

I assume that the people against the pill are religious and against pre-marital sex, contraception, and sex for purposes other than procreation, but that's just a guess.