COMMENTS: 249
The GOP Forced Me to Have an Abortion
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Civil Liberties headlines via email.
The conservative politics of the Bush administration forced me to have an abortion I didn't want. Well, not literally, but let me explain.
I am a 42-year-old happily married mother of two elementary-schoolers. My husband and I both work, and like many couples, we're starved for time together. One Thursday evening this past March, we managed to snag some rare couple time and, in a sudden rush of passion, I failed to insert my diaphragm.
The next morning, after getting my kids off to school, I called my ob/gyn to get a prescription for Plan B, the emergency contraceptive pill that can prevent a pregnancy -- but only if taken within 72 hours of intercourse. As we're both in our forties, my husband and I had considered our family complete, and we weren't planning to have another child, which is why, as a rule, we use contraception. I wanted to make sure that our momentary lapse didn't result in a pregnancy.
The receptionist, however, informed me that my doctor did not prescribe Plan B. No reason given. Neither did my internist. The midwifery practice I had used could prescribe it, but not over the phone, and there were no more open appointments for the day. The weekend -- and the end of the 72-hour window -- was approaching.
But I needed to meet my kids' school bus and, as I was pretty much out of options -- short of soliciting random Virginia doctors out of the phone book -- I figured I'd take my chances and hope for the best. After all, I'm 42. Isn't it likely my eggs are overripe, anyway? I thought so, especially since my best friend from college has been experiencing agonizing infertility problems at this age.
Weeks later, the two drugstore pregnancy tests I took told a different story. Positive. I couldn't believe it.
I'm still in good health, but unlike the last time I was pregnant, nearly a decade ago, I'm now taking three medications. One of them, for high cholesterol, is in the Food and Drug Administration's Pregnancy Category X -- meaning it's a drug you shouldn't take if you're expecting or even planning to get pregnant. I worried because the odds of having a high-risk pregnancy or a baby born with serious health issues rise significantly after age 40. And I thought of the emotional upheavals that an unplanned pregnancy would cause our family. My husband and I are involved in all aspects of our children's lives, but even so, we feel we don't get enough time to spend with them as it is.
I felt sick. Although I've always been in favor of abortion rights, this was a choice I had hoped never to have to make myself. When I realized the seriousness of my predicament, I became angry. I knew that Plan B, which could have prevented it, was supposed to have been available over the counter by now. But I also remembered hearing that conservative politics have held up its approval.
My anger propelled me to get to the bottom of the story. It turns out that in December 2003, an FDA advisory committee, whose suggestions the agency usually follows, recommended that the drug be made available over the counter, or without a prescription. Nonetheless, in May 2004, the FDA top brass overruled the advisory panel and gave the thumbs-down to over-the-counter sales of Plan B, requesting more data on how girls younger than 16 could use it safely without a doctor's supervision.
Apparently, one of the concerns is that ready availability of Plan B could lead teenage girls to have premarital sex. Yet this concern -- valid or not -- wound up penalizing an over-the-hill married woman for having sex with her husband. Talk about the law of unintended consequences.
By late August 2005, the slow action over Plan B led the director of the FDA's Office on Women's Health to resign her post. The agency's delay on the drug, she wrote in an e-mail to her colleagues, "runs contrary to my core commitment to improving and advancing women's health." As recently as April 7, Steven Galson, director of the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said that the agency still needed time to work on the issue.
Unfortunately, time was the one thing I didn't have.
Meanwhile, I hadn't even been able to get Plan B with a prescription that Friday, because in Virginia, health-care practitioners apparently are allowed to refuse to prescribe any drug that goes against their beliefs. Although I had heard of pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions for birth control on religious grounds, I was dumbfounded to find that doctors could do the same thing.
Moreover, they aren't even required to tell the patient why they won't provide the drug. Nor do they have to provide a list of alternative sources. I had asked the ob-gyn's receptionist if politics was the reason the doctor wouldn't prescribe Plan B for me. She refused to answer or offer any reason, no matter how much I pressed her. By the time I got on the phone with my internist's office and found that he would not fill a Plan B prescription either, I figured it was a waste of time to fight with the office staff. To this day, I don't know why my doctors wouldn't prescribe Plan B -- whether it was because of moral opposition to contraception or out of fear of political protesters or just because they preferred not to go there.
In any event, they were also partly responsible for why I was stuck that Friday, and why I was ultimately forced to confront the decision to terminate my third pregnancy.
After making the decision with my husband, I was plunged into an even murkier world -- that of finding an abortion provider. If information on Plan B was hard to come by, and practitioners were evasive on emergency contraception, trying to get information on how to abort a pregnancy in 2006 is an even more Byzantine experience.
On the internet, most of what I found was political in nature or otherwise unhelpful: pictures of what your baby looks like in the womb from week one, and so on.
Calling doctors, I felt like a pariah when I asked whether they provided termination services. Finally, I decided to check the Planned Parenthood Web site to see whether its clinics performed abortions. They did, but I learned that if I had the abortion in Virginia, the procedure would take two days because of a mandatory 24-hour waiting period, which requires that you go in first for a day of counseling and then wait a day to think things over before returning to have the abortion. Because of work and the children, I couldn't afford two days off, so I opted to have the procedure done on a Saturday in downtown D.C. while my husband took the kids to the Smithsonian.
The hidden world of abortion services soon became even more subterranean. I called Planned Parenthood two days in advance to confirm the appointment. The receptionist politely informed me that the organization never confirms appointments, for "security reasons," and that I would have to just show up.
I arrived shortly before 10 a.m. in a bleak downpour, trusting that someone had recorded my appointment. I shuffled to the front door through a phalanx of umbrellaed protesters, who chanted loudly about Jesus and chided me not to go into that house of abortion.
All the while, I was thinking that if religion hadn't been allowed to seep into American politics the way it has, I wouldn't even be there. This all could have been stopped way before this baby was conceived if they had just let me have that damn pill.
After passing through the metal detector inside the building, I entered the Planned Parenthood waiting room; it was like the waiting room for a budget airline -- crammed full of people, of all races, and getting busier by the moment. I was by far the oldest person there (other than one girl's mom). The wait seemed endless. No one looked happy. We were told that the lone doctor was stuck in Cherry Blossom Parade traffic.
He finally arrived, an hour and a half late.
The procedure itself took about five minutes. I finally walked out of the building at 4:30, 6 1/2 hours after I had arrived.
It was a decision I am sorry I had to make. It was awful, painful, sickening. But I feel that this administration gave me practically no choice but to have an unwanted abortion because the way it has politicized religion made it well-nigh impossible for me to get emergency contraception that would have prevented the pregnancy in the first place.
And to think that, all these years after Roe v. Wade became the law of the land, this is what our children have to look forward to as they approach their reproductive years.
Stay up to date with the latest Civil Liberties headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LMNOP on Jun 8, 2006 1:19 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Apparently, one of the concerns is that ready availability of Plan B could lead teenage girls to have premarital sex. Yet this concern -- valid or not -- wound up penalizing an over-the-hill married woman for having sex with her husband. Talk about the law of unintended consequences."
Hardly. This woman's pregnancy was not an unintended consequence of erecting barriers against the legitimate use of Plan B. The purpose of blocking the use of this morning after pill is to cause more children to be born to, among other things, man the fast food restaurants, mimi-marts, Wal-Marts and battlefields of tomorrow.
In addition, children, like excessive dependence on credit cards, keeps a family in more debt and makes the breadwinners, especially as jobs become harder to find or replace, more dependent on their present job and less free to objecting to working conditions or to leave the job.
Toward this end, social defenses against unemployment and poverty such as unemployment insurance, welfare, disability and Medicaid will be progressively eroded away as bankruptcy protection and restrictions on credit card interest and penalties has been weakened or obliterated.
These are all intermediary steps in the construction of the corporate state where people are seen as capital like the flocks of sheep or cattle are in pastoral and subsistence cultures.
» RE: HER PREGNANCY WAS NOT AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE...
Posted by: johnecolby
» RE: HER PREGNANCY WAS NOT AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE...
Posted by: hoscot
» RE: HER PREGNANCY WAS NOT AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE...
Posted by: Aim
» RE: HER PREGNANCY WAS NOT AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE...
Posted by: JayDee
Comments are closed-
Posted by: marxalot on Jun 8, 2006 3:54 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I blame the Bushistas for a lot - they are guilty of a lot. But you took this child's life, not them. And for shallow and selfish reasons too. Sad.
Progressives everywhere I call upon you to dump abortion as an issue. We've been saddled with it too long and it works against all the worthy causes we stand for. If we can get progressives elected then Roe will stand in the long run. I do not want law dictating this decision to women. But most people understand intuitively that abortion takes a life. The swing voters will continue to stay away from pro-choicers.
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: mazel
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: billfaster
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: mazel
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: okcamp
» Procreation: The Height of Selfishness
Posted by: susan28
» RE: Don't have kids
Posted by: Jamboree
» Her choice, not yours
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: greenman
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: LMNOP
» How dare you?
Posted by: McJulie
» yeah right
Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: hoscot
» Never
Posted by: owleyes
» Before you pass moral judgement...
Posted by: AmyB
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: wenoel
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: Jamboree
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: Aim
» Correction
Posted by: Aim
» RE: Correction
Posted by: mazel
» I can't even hear you....
Posted by: decembrist
» Such a futile arguement.
Posted by: aussidawg
» Don't waste energy...
Posted by: decembrist
» *(*(*(*`
Posted by: decembrist
» It's Cartman
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: blackpyecat
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: bergiecc007
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rsaxto on Jun 8, 2006 4:20 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: HereticChick on Jun 8, 2006 4:47 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: Don't have kids!
Posted by: sln70
» RE: Don't have kids!
Posted by: maddy
» RE: Don't have kids!
Posted by: devi
» ignore this troll
Posted by: mazel
» I second that
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Abortions before and after birth
Posted by: Liberty777
» RE: Don't have kids!
Posted by: beachy
» RE: Don't have kids!
Posted by: beachy
» RE: Don't have kids!
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Please don't try and silence me...
Posted by: JayDee
» Um, thats the POINT
Posted by: repo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Must have been the Roses on Jun 8, 2006 5:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» I blame the religious right. Bush is symbolic of that.
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: blame someone else
Posted by: greenman
» The difference between contraceptives and abortofacients
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: blame someone else
Posted by: owleyes
» RE: blame someone else
Posted by: owleyes
» RE: blame someone else
Posted by: Aim
» RE: blame someone else
Posted by: LMNOP
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ladyoracle on Jun 8, 2006 5:38 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All the same, she knew she didn't use her birth control. She's an educated woman, and since she's a lawyer, I have to assume that $$ can't be that tight, so why not have her tubes tied, why not have her spouse get a vasectomy, etc? Of course I sympathize with the "we were in a hurry and didn't use protection just this once" situation, but two factors caused that unwanted pregnancy: she didn't use the contraceptive she had, and she couldn't find Plan B. Then she and her husband decided to terminate the pregnancy, not Bush.
I am fully supportive of the persuasive aims of this article, but the writer's lack of self-consciousness leaves me doubtful that it would convince anyone who disagrees with Plan B or is undecided.
» yes - a very unpersuasive article
Posted by: mysticpal
» RE: yes - a very unpersuasive article
Posted by: fork
» wrong
Posted by: sln70
Comments are closed-
Posted by: AndyF on Jun 8, 2006 5:40 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: Sounds Like She Needs a New Doctor
Posted by: springdaisies
» RE: Sounds Like She Needs a New Doctor
Posted by: freedomfrBush
» Yes ...
Posted by: AdamSelene40
» RE: Yeah, a psychologist
Posted by: JayDee
» RE: Yeah, a psychologist
Posted by: JayDee
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SDres11 on Jun 8, 2006 5:47 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
P.S.: Martha Stewert and Ann Coulter will be getting all the "abortions" they want while working class women such as this author will continue to face mass persecution by our looney government !
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kooz on Jun 8, 2006 6:04 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: Libs are quick to judge
Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: Libs are quick to judge
Posted by: owleyes
» RE: Libs are quick to judge
Posted by: Aim
» RE: Dissent is patriotic
Posted by: CJC
» RE: Dissent
Posted by: Aim
» RE: Dissent
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Dissent
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Dissent
Posted by: Jamboree
» RE: Dissent
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Dissent
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE Sure, that's ? u hang here aqnd not w/the wingnuts
Posted by: kooz
» RE: Screed
Posted by: kooz
» Typical Ditto Head
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Sure, that's ? u hang here aqnd not w/the wingnuts
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Choice we make should remain free from judgement
Posted by: andrushka
» RE: Choice we make should remain free from judgement
Posted by: feller
» RE: Choice we make should remain free from judgement
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: g on Jun 8, 2006 6:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Bush administration is guilty as charged. They haven't caused the pregnancy, for sure, but they did let their religions beliefs interfere with decisions that should prioritize the health of women. It is a well known pattern.
However, let us not forget that health care practitioners here are as guilty as the Bush administration. Shame to those who use their position of power as physicians or pharmacists to impose their religious beliefs. I hope she changed doctor. Notice that only women are penalized by this attitude. Can you imagine the reaction if physicians or pharmacists refused Viagra or equivalent to unmarried men?
Comments are closed-
Posted by: derfb1 on Jun 8, 2006 6:24 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
D.
» RE: MR.
Posted by: WyrdSister
» A Nurse's Perspective
Posted by: sigridfroid
» RE: A Nurse's Perspective
Posted by: mysticpal
» RE: MR.
Posted by: owleyes
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Linda50 on Jun 8, 2006 6:51 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: Politics of Women
Posted by: mirimac
» Different kinds of Christians
Posted by: LMNOP
» And then there's this kind
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: You love Christians, as long as they are silent
Posted by: Linda50
» RE: The Nazi's were pagans
Posted by: Linda50
» BEWARE THE JABBERWOCK, MY FRIEND!
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Beware the Alternetwocky
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Beware the Alternetwocky
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: History
Posted by: CJC
» RE: Check out these anti-Christian Nazi quotes
Posted by: CJC
» RE: The Nazi's were pagans
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: You love Christians, as long as they are silent
Posted by: feller
» RE: You love Christians, as long as they are silent
Posted by: Linda50
» RE: Nero was the first hero
Posted by: kooz
» BIGOT?
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Politics of Women
Posted by: feller
» RE: Politics of Women
Posted by: Linda50
» RE: Politics of Women
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Politics of Women
Posted by: Linda50
Comments are closed-
Posted by: nickprogresss on Jun 8, 2006 6:54 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Check out this short video explaining how the Internet may soon be much more like the medium of TV - highly structured and controlled by financial interests!!
Spread the word - use the Internet to save the Internet.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Maxwellst on Jun 8, 2006 7:06 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Abortion and homosexuality, the two hot-button issues that are so obsessed about in the US, are both related to sexual intercourse. Fixating upon them is evidence of sexual repression--perhaps caused by religious demonization of the sex act coupled (in some cases) by being a victim of sexual predatory behavior or ones own repressed sexual desire. One can oppose abortion without being mentally ill, but to call the opposition to abortion "pro-life" as if abortion were the sole cause of unjust death in the world is ludicrious and irrational.
It also suggests an unfulfilled desire to return to mythical idyllic times, in which people had large families, mom stayed at home and everyone sat up straight at the table and went to church on Sunday mornings. If you know a place like that, don't keep it to yourself. I am sure the author of this article would be happy not to be grabbing spare moments of love with her family, the way that modern life often causes us to do. It's sad, in the bigger sense, but that's the way it is.
Please compare societies in which unwanted pregnancy is dealt with more pragmatically than ours and decide for yourself which society has better mental health concerning abortion.
I am an ethical vegetarian who doesn't wear leather, who buys organic and carries bugs out of the house rather than killing them. It takes a lot of effort to lead a life in which one causes a minimum of pain and death, but I think it makes for a better world and a more personally serene state of being.
I commend people who choose not to have abortions, but that is not the same as condemning people who do. A personal decision (such as mine to not kill other sentient beings) is not a political one that should be foisted upon unwilling fellow-citizens. I would be happy if you stopped eating meat, but I am not going to work for legislation to limit your access to McDonald's.
If the author of this article had real concerns about the result of an unintended child upon the stability of her family and marriage, it is not my place to judge her. If someone wants to offset that loss of life in the world, go do good in the world. Feed a homeless person. Help fund cancer research. Help put a troubled youth back onto the right path. Send a check to earthquake victims. Don't support wars. Eat a veggie burger.
But fighting the death of a fetus with hatred and condemnation does not seem to add much good energy to the world, and draws more than a little attention to he who throws the stone. Mother Theresa had the right idea: You gain more converts by your own good works than by pelting (those whom you perceive to be) sinners.
» RE: Step back and view the big picture, folks
Posted by: devi
Comments are closed-
Posted by: efjo on Jun 8, 2006 7:35 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. It seems to me that both sides have politicized this issue. If the Plan B is allowed to be sold over the counter, it would be the riskiest and most medically invasive pill to be available OTC. If the usual safety standards were followed, and not a political agenda, the pill wouldn't even been considered as an OTC drug. (That said, I have no moral objections to Plan B, so that isn't my agenda here. I think it should be available with a prescription, and even purchasable in advance for those who believe they may need it.)
2. I hate to sound like a conservative here, but whatever happened to personal responsibility? To blame Bush (or the religious right, or even the doctor or the laws as they stand) is far-fetched at best. This woman and her husband gambled, and they lost. It doesn't make sense to blame someone else for that. Bush is wrong about all sorts of things, but that doesn't mean he's to blame for everything.
» Ultimate personal responsibility
Posted by: McJulie
» RE: Ultimate personal responsibility
Posted by: twerquie
» RE: Both sides politicized
Posted by: sigridfroid
» RE: Both sides politicized
Posted by: owleyes
» RE: Both sides politicized
Posted by: lmwilker
» I think you're confusing "Plan B" with RU486
Posted by: AdamSelene40
» RE: I think you're confusing "Plan B" with RU486
Posted by: LMNOP
» Immoral Morality.
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Immoral Morality.
Posted by: feller
» RE: Immoral Morality.
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Both sides politicized
Posted by: LMNOP
Comments are closed-
Posted by: dikaiosyne on Jun 8, 2006 7:58 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: The GOP made me do it.....
Posted by: okcamp
» RE: Don't you have anything to say beside criticizing othere for what the believe?
Posted by: kooz
» RE: The GOP made me do it.....
Posted by: owleyes
» I've seen the light ! Hallelujah!
Posted by: Kelly
» Spanky, sweetie
Posted by: Kelly
» RE: Spanky, sweetie
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Stupid hippie
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Stupid hippie
Posted by: bornxeyed
» Thanks for that
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Oh, Spanky! Let me spell it out for you!!
Posted by: Againstthewindwalking
» RE: The GOP made me do it.....
Posted by: aussidawg
» ABORTION vs CONTRACEPTION: A FALSE DISTINCTION
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: The GOP made me do it.....
Posted by: Aim
» RE: The GOP made me do it.....
Posted by: lindalee
Comments are closed-
Posted by: aussidawg on Jun 8, 2006 9:17 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Come on people, the religious rights go only as far as they don't harm someone else. (Maybe not legally, but what about morally?) The woman in the above article was obviously harmed by someone else's belief in dogma. In the case of preventing cervical cancer or AIDS, the religious right's beliefs are putting other people's lives in direct jeopardy. How in the hell can this be legal?
» NOT legal: Impeach!
Posted by: sigridfroid
Comments are closed-
Posted by: zedaker on Jun 8, 2006 9:23 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CJC on Jun 8, 2006 9:48 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What's the lesson - don't have sex on Thursday because if you can't get through to the medical profession on Friday you can't get Plan B?
Dana L was brave to publish her story. Our puritanical roots make any public discussion of sex so highly charged that reason and good sense go right out the window. No wonder most people won't talk about the abortions they've been involved in - the men who have helped and supported sisters, girlfriends, daughters, wives etc etc get abortions they wanted and the women who have had them.
In my own ordinary circle of family and friends I've known of several abortions - to teenagers, college students, newly married, and mothers with all the children they could cope with. None of these abortions was done without regret and anguish. All these women are excellent and loving mothers each of them to two or more children; two are pediatricians.
Let she and he who have never made a mistake in their lives cast the first stone. The rest of us normal mortals should be in favor of easily accessible and inexpensive birth control and unjudgmental, accessible, and safe abortion. Sadly our country is in a very regressive and controlling frame of mind. May enlightenment and good sense come again soon!
» RE: How about some tolerance and sympathy?
Posted by: mysticpal
» RE: How about some tolerance and sympathy?
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: How about some tolerance and sympathy?
Posted by: mokidugway
» RE: How about some tolerance and sympathy?
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: youngdem on Jun 8, 2006 12:02 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't blame the author for not doing so, obviously her method had worked well for her for years, and EC *should* be just a phone call away. But it's not. I commend the author for sharing her real life experience.
Websites to help you find a provider fast:
http://ec.princeton.edu/
http://www.backupyourbirthcontrol.org/howto/index.htm
1-888-NOT-2-LATE
(English)
Comments are closed-
Posted by: quetlin on Jun 8, 2006 12:56 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The next day, they were denied by the doctor’s personal choice due to his philosophy, which he did not disclose to his patients. Due to Bush’s philosophy, the doctor even had such a choice. This is the system philosophically headed and endorsed by Bush to punish people for married sex by withholding the second line of defense
The overbooked Planned Parenthood clinic did not have emergency services available, probably because abstinence religious based clinics who shared Bush’s philosophy got the money instead.
So, she went to the third line of defense, an abortion after the sperm and egg came together and implanted -instead of being able to use a measure to prevent this step.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: babs on Jun 8, 2006 1:12 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Any person that doesn't have a womb or ovaries, or can't carry a baby to term, has absolutely no opinion on the subject of abortion. If they do, they are hypocrites and should be ignored.
And don't spew religious dogma - the bible says we should stone prostitutes to death and turn the other cheek to our enemies - where would Vegas or the Iraq war be then?
Sure, men can have a say (that is, if they are willing to support a child from cradle to grave), but the final decision is made by the person who grows and bears the babies. Period.
» RE: "If men could get pregnant.... And 24 hour wait for Viagra
Posted by: mbarthel
» Hey...A good idea appears
Posted by: Kelly
» RE: "If men could get pregnant....
Posted by: feller
» Yeah, right.
Posted by: Aim
» RE
Posted by: Againstthewindwalking
» All anti-Life forces are evil
Posted by: feller
» RE: You are abslutely right
Posted by: kooz
» RE: You are abslutely right
Posted by: lindalee
» Spanky69 is now advocating choice
Posted by: libgal
» RE: Spanky69 is now advocating equality of the genders
Posted by: libgal
» What your argument has in common with hemmorhoids
Posted by: libgal
» RE: I don't know about that
Posted by: libgal
» RE: You are abslutely right
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: You are abslutely right
Posted by: Linda50
Comments are closed-
Posted by: doctorsquared on Jun 8, 2006 1:15 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: coyote on Jun 8, 2006 3:53 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think if we are going to discuss this issue it should be to agree that abortion is a tragedy and there should be fewer of them.....and change the subject.
Grown children dying in Iraq, the future of our existence in the face of diminishing resources, these are the things that we are losing when we are fooled into planting a flag on the abortion issue.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: feller on Jun 8, 2006 4:29 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: You Aborted Not George Bush
Posted by: Aim
» And then there is the endless scream of Howard Dean
Posted by: feller
» RE: You Aborted Not George Bush
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: midge on Jun 8, 2006 5:13 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: Not that simple
Posted by: Kelly
» RE: Not that simple
Posted by: Callibrarian
Comments are closed-
Posted by: KUCING on Jun 8, 2006 5:17 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hope you are up to a bit of irony. The GOP didn't force you, on the contrary the GOP's so-called Christian backers will be all too happy to consign you to hell for this abortion. I have that on the authority of Dubya - whom God speaks to - himself. And to think of diaphragms. Sin! SIN! S I N ! All those innocent spermatozoids being stopped from achieving their life's goal! Really!
» I hope you are up to another bit of irony.
Posted by: libgal
» RE: I hope you are up to another bit of irony.
Posted by: kooz
» RE: You laugh because I'm different...
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: You laugh because I'm different...
Posted by: aussidawg
Comments are closed-
Posted by: aussidawg on Jun 8, 2006 6:00 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Please understand, I'm on your side on this arguement, and truly believe the Plan B alternative should be available over the counter, and as long as it remains prescription only, no physician or pharmacist should be able to refuse this need based on personal opinion. These folks are supposed to be professionals, not preachers.
I see a lot of posters commenting on the author's lack of responsibility. Well, she described her situation of not having much time together with her husband, and well...the act of sex generally is rather spontaneous. Not a whole lot of people out there (including you "Christian" types) sit down and discuss what their options are to avoiding an unwanted pregnancy immediately prior to having sex. Look, she had a reasonable expectation of having the Plan B option available to her. Her expectation was dashed by several self serving (and rather selfish) zealots. Sorry all you righteous types, I lay the blame for this one on you, not her.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: boygranddakar on Jun 8, 2006 10:40 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Every woman who has been sexually active with men has had a pregnancy scare at one time or another, and not necessarily because she was "irresponsible." Think of how many times a married couple will make love during a lifetime. Who can expect a 100% safe-sex rate in that time? Condoms break. Diaphragms are not fail-safe for all women. Moreover, there are women whose fertility simply defies many otherwise reliable forms of birth control. It just happens.
NO ONE has the right to judge whether or not a woman should continue a pregnancy to term or terminate it. Women in this position make the most ethical decision that they can while considering a myriad of factors including health, economics, family situation, and personal morals.
Those of you who condemn the author for making the decision she did - and for blaming Bush and conservative Christians for barring her way to take steps to AVOID an abortion - need to mediate on the ethics of throwing the first stone.
Many people on the right think that leftists are "obsessed" with abortion rights and think the left is a one-issue movement. Wrong. They have myopia because it's the issue that seems to push their buttons the most.
The left has many issues - economic equity, workers' rights, environmentalism, social justice for marginalized groups, better health care for all... the list could go on and on. But, as part of a larger agenda, abortion rights SHOULD be protected. Like abolishing the death penalty, it's an obvious moral imperative that many developed nations made into law a long time ago.
It's about protecting women's health and women's LIVES. It's about having children that are well-provided for. It's about individual rights. It's about religious freedom, and the freedom not to be religious, and the freedom not to be governed by someone else's religion. It's about having a safer, more compassionate nation for everyone.
To me, those who oppose abortion rights are simply sexist. Although "it takes two to tango," women literally bear the burden of having children - the physical stress of being pregnant, the social stigma of peers from whom a woman cannot hide her "mistake," and, potentially, the economic responsibility of her health care and the care of the child that is born if the man decides to abandon her. Laws that create barriers to abortion say, in essence, that a woman cannot be trusted to have the moral and ethical intelligence to make the right decision - so the state must make it for her. I cannot imagine that this would be the case if men could get pregnant.
The U.S. needs to join other developed nations and guarantee women - and girls - access to birth control, sexuality education, and abortion. Better access to the two former would surely reduce need for the latter - and it would have for the author, too.
» RE: ver accidentally gotten pregnant? No? Then don't judge.
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Eithne on Jun 9, 2006 1:26 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What has been proven is that Plan B (and other birth control pills) prevent ovulation.
Due to the difficulty inherent in such testing, the theory of prevention of implantation has never been tested. It is a theory that was derived via inference but not based on any real data.
So I'm not sure on what grounds any doctor who prescribes birth control pills would refuse to prescribe Plan B. The doctor in question was obviously willing to prescribe a diaphragm, which is just different way of preventing sperm from reaching ova.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: repo on Jun 9, 2006 7:04 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"i want someone to carry on the family name"
"i want someone that is going to love me"
"i want someone that i can impart my values onto"
"if i have this kid, then its father has to pay me child support"
in this overpopulated world, NOT having children could be the most altruistic thing you could do
» RE: Altruism
Posted by: owleyes
» RE: Truth Hurts
Posted by: Aim
» RE: Truth Hurts
Posted by: Aim
» RE: Some laws are necessary
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Truth Hurts
Posted by: bornxeyed
» PLEASE don't feed...
Posted by: doctorsquared
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CJC on Jun 9, 2006 1:15 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Abortion is rarely treated as murder except rhetorically. Even when abortion is absolutely legally prohibited neither the woman having the abortion, the provider of the abortion, nor anyone paying for or procuring the abortion is charged with murder. Again, except rhetorically, no one treats the fertilized egg or the extremely immature embryo or fetus as a full human life. Up to 50% of fertilized eggs never develop. Even 20% of recognized pregnancies result in early miscarriage. Where are the funerals? The unwanted loss of a fetus may cause a great deal of sadness and grief, but we don't treat the event as a death.
As for the paradox that many of those most passionately opposed to abortion also are in favor of the death penalty and even support preemptive war, it confirms that the issue is more about control of others' (mostly women's) behavior than it is about protecting life.
Choose to be compassionate.
» RE: Adoption.
Posted by: Maryanne
» RE: Adoption.
Posted by: Maryanne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Taraerin on Jun 9, 2006 4:26 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am totally supportive of this woman who had the abortion. Each case is different and it is only their choice no one else's!
» RE: Abstinance works
Posted by: owleyes
» RE: Abstinance works
Posted by: mazel
» RE: Spanky 69? Hmm...Freud would like to study you
Posted by: kooz
Comments are closed-
Posted by: HereticChick on Jun 9, 2006 10:15 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: Idiot
Posted by: kooz
» Faulty Logic
Posted by: feller
» RE: Faulty Logic
Posted by: mokidugway
» RE: Faulty Logic
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: In Pittsburgh on Jun 10, 2006 1:01 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: Life begins
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Life begins
Posted by: bornxeyed
» So Bill Clinton Was God?
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: In Pittsburgh on Jun 10, 2006 1:06 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Will we allow doctors to refuse to treat patients who eat meat because they are morally against the killing of animals?
» RE: How can you be so humouless? Typical Christian Nutjob
Posted by: kooz
» RE: Boycott dipshits
Posted by: bornxeyed
» Boycott DITTO HEADS: EMIGRATE
Posted by: LMNOP
» Did somebody say something?
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Did somebody say something?
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: I'll pick your nursing home, hippie.
Posted by: aussidawg
» Oh for the Sake of the Great Bleeding Heart God! COOL IT!!!!!
Posted by: Againstthewindwalking
Comments are closed-
Posted by: scoxevanescence on Jun 10, 2006 2:31 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» It's a killing NOt a Choice
Posted by: feller
» It's a CHOICE (still), not a BABY (yet)
Posted by: LMNOP
» So you're a pacifist except when it comes to babies?
Posted by: feller
» So where you going to put all us "murderers?"
Posted by: beetruetoyou
» RE: So where you going to put all us "murderers?"
Posted by: feller
» Did somebody say something?
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: It's a WOMAN regardless
Posted by: AmyB
» RE: It's a WOMAN regardless
Posted by: AmyB
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Maryanne on Jun 10, 2006 4:15 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the government is going to limit access to OTC medicines does this mean that those of us who use these are potential terrorists? Does it mean that it can start restricting all other OTC medicines under this act? deny filling doctor's prescriptions under this act?
Big Brother is taking care of us. However, being intellegent and well educated, I feel that I can make the best decisions for myself. I do NOT need some nameless bureaucrat who knows nothing about me, who is not even in the medical field, making such decisions.
» i.d.s required because of meth
Posted by: Must have been the Roses
» RE: i.d.s required because of meth
Posted by: Maryanne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: aussidawg on Jun 10, 2006 9:01 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I guess the way I look at it is that abortion is a KNOWN proceedure, like it or not. If we choose to outlaw abortions, they won't be stopped, rather, like drugs, be regulated by the black market. This is an issue of keeping women SAFE, period. If Roe vs. Wade were to be overturned, women will once again be forced to use "back alley" practitioners to perform their abortion rather than a safe and certified M.D. The outcome of this will simply be more death, and that is by no means a solution.
p.s. Mr/Ms ssegallmd, I hope I didn't tread on your ground by referring to you, but I do think you could be an authority on this, and I respect your knowledge on the subject. Thanks!!!
» RE: Making Abortion isn't the answer!!!
Posted by: kooz
» RE: Making Abortion isn't the answer!!!
Posted by: aussidawg
» Thanks
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Thanks
Posted by: aussidawg
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LieMeNot on Jun 11, 2006 6:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dont make sense to me.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jun 11, 2006 9:07 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The FDA plays along with Republican political goals because the Republicans have allowed Big Pharma to load FDA panels with their employees, ensuring a smooth ride for their drug marketing practices. Quid pro quo - you help us keep our looney fundies happy, we'll let you dump dangerous drugs onto the US market for profit maximization. Keep those donations coming!
The FDA is starting to smell really, really foul - the stench is no longer ignorable.
» Life is Tragic
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ac1d8urn on Jun 11, 2006 1:52 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I could tell right away that this woman is a lawyer b/c she does an excellent job of slanting the facts and placing blame everywhere but where it belongs.
Plan B SHOULD be available OTC. But nobody "forced" this woman to do anything. The GOP did not cause her to use poor judgement and neglect her birth control. A "rush of passion" is no excuse for irresponsibility! It is also not the government's fault that she did not try hard enough to get the Plan B pill. Her going to only one or two clinics doesn't exactly sound like she was too worried. When I was faced with my unfortunate choice at age 18, I had to call clinic after clinic & ended up having to drive to another STATE because no one in my town would perform abortions past 13 weeks(I was 13 & 1/2 weeks. Ridiculous, I know). My point is, if it was such an emergency, she would have tried harder to get that pill.
What happened to her is nobody's fault but her own. She's only writing articles like this because she's trying to shrug off her irresponsibility & save face.
» RE: ridiculous!
Posted by: fork
» RE: ridiculous!
Posted by: repo
» RE: ridiculous!
Posted by: fork
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Liberty777 on Jun 11, 2006 5:27 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: As for your statement on Saddam
Posted by: Liberty777
Comments are closed-
Posted by: madelinefan on Jun 11, 2006 6:54 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» You are such a LUUUUUUUUUUUVING person
Posted by: feller
» RE: You are such a LUUUUUUUUUUUVING person
Posted by: madelinefan
» There is no Christian Taliban: It's a Muslim Thing
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: lythandrel on Jun 13, 2006 2:34 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What's severely disturbing is that even if her doctor were to prescribe Plan B for the writer of this article, there is still a chance that the pharmacist would refuse to fill it, or the pharmacy tech refuse to ring up the sale based on their moral issues. There are no protections in place for the patient, yet states are passing laws to protect the pharmacist who is directly objecting to a doctors written order or the cashier or pharmacy tech who refuses to ring up the prescription sale. The patients rights are being usurped in favour of personal issues which are supposed to be kept out of the medical field in the first place.
South Dakota has already put a ban on abortions, and the same group that lobbied for getting that ban passed, is also trying to get birth control banned as well. I view this as an abomination unto our rights and freedoms in this country. Once something like this passes in a state, it often leads to debate on a federal level. If things continue to snowball in this direction, there's a possibility that women will be barefoot, pregnant, and back in the kitchen. Married couples would no longer have the right to plan when they want or if they want to have a family. If they wanted to hold off on children, they would have to hold off on sex. To me this is utter insanity.
To make things worse, due to the size of Texas, textbooks for much of the US are decided by what the state of Texas requires for their school board. Currently, Texas is teaching abstinence only sexual education in health classes. It's a proven fact that states that teach abstinence only education have higher teenage pregnancy rates, and STD transmission, because these teens are not taught how NOT to get pregnant and not taught about safer sex. It's quite obvious these teens are NOT abstaining. While abstinence is the ONLY way not to get STDs or pregnant, these teens NEED to be taught what is necessary to arm themselves against the possibilities in the case they choose not to abstain.
The US is supposed to have a separation of church and state, however, religion is further encroaching into the government on a daily basis.
» the myth of separation of "church" and state
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Gakl on Jun 13, 2006 2:51 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It’s a small amalgamation of cells. You're talking about a mass of cells that's mentally indistinguishable from a hamster, if that. Sometimes, smaller than a grain of sand. Barely, worth a glimmer in a 14 year-old’s eye as he shoots a protein surprise into his hand while thinking about Britney Spears.
It is amazing the lack of compassion that so called Christians have for people in difficult circumstances, faced with a tragic choices. It is amazing the lack of dehumanization that those who push such an anti-liberty agenda. If those who presume to judge others really had as much faith as they claim, they wouldn't rush to judge others and control them in this life. Rather, they would know that God would judge those who have acted inappropriately in the next. So why not put your faith to the test?
Meanwhile, one man's law should stop another woman’s body and we should all do our best to prevent unwanted pregnancies from occurring in the first place. Now abstinence and the promotion of such is all nice, fluffy, and fine. Hell, I’m for it. You should be too. It’s a noble goal, but meanwhile, people are going to continue to “get it on” as it were as we have for untold millions of years (or thousands if your reality does not share a liberal bias). Unfortunately, reality isn’t so nice. That’s why we’re over in Iraq, killing terrorists, and lots of unlucky people who just so happen to be poor and brown. It sucks, but we deal with it. Unfortunately, reality isn’t so nice. That’s why we’re over in Iraq, killing terrorists, and lots of unlucky people who just so happen to be poor and brown. It sucks, we may try to stop it, and still fail.
Now, good intentions stop being good, when they turn to idiocy. Preventing women from obtaining viable contraception that can avoid pregnancy is utter lunacy if you’re stated goal is to prevent abortions. If that is your goal, please, by all means prove it and step up to the plate. Unintended pregnancies should be avoided. Otherwise, what you’re doing is trying to prevent sex. That’s simply ridiculous. It’s a perfectly natural, necessary, and healthy thing for two loving adult human beings. The world will be a better place if the unkind things you wish to say toward people you disagree with are kept to yourselves.
The only thing worse than an unintended pregnancy is an unwanted child. That is a tragedy and tragedies must be avoided.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Laura Barcella on Jun 15, 2006 10:23 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LMNOP on Jun 8, 2006 1:19 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Apparently, one of the concerns is that ready availability of Plan B could lead teenage girls to have premarital sex. Yet this concern -- valid or not -- wound up penalizing an over-the-hill married woman for having sex with her husband. Talk about the law of unintended consequences."
Hardly. This woman's pregnancy was not an unintended consequence of erecting barriers against the legitimate use of Plan B. The purpose of blocking the use of this morning after pill is to cause more children to be born to, among other things, man the fast food restaurants, mimi-marts, Wal-Marts and battlefields of tomorrow.
In addition, children, like excessive dependence on credit cards, keeps a family in more debt and makes the breadwinners, especially as jobs become harder to find or replace, more dependent on their present job and less free to objecting to working conditions or to leave the job.
Toward this end, social defenses against unemployment and poverty such as unemployment insurance, welfare, disability and Medicaid will be progressively eroded away as bankruptcy protection and restrictions on credit card interest and penalties has been weakened or obliterated.
These are all intermediary steps in the construction of the corporate state where people are seen as capital like the flocks of sheep or cattle are in pastoral and subsistence cultures.
» RE: HER PREGNANCY WAS NOT AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE...
Posted by: johnecolby
» RE: HER PREGNANCY WAS NOT AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE...
Posted by: hoscot
» RE: HER PREGNANCY WAS NOT AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE...
Posted by: Aim
» RE: HER PREGNANCY WAS NOT AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE...
Posted by: JayDee
Comments are closed-
Posted by: marxalot on Jun 8, 2006 3:54 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I blame the Bushistas for a lot - they are guilty of a lot. But you took this child's life, not them. And for shallow and selfish reasons too. Sad.
Progressives everywhere I call upon you to dump abortion as an issue. We've been saddled with it too long and it works against all the worthy causes we stand for. If we can get progressives elected then Roe will stand in the long run. I do not want law dictating this decision to women. But most people understand intuitively that abortion takes a life. The swing voters will continue to stay away from pro-choicers.
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: mazel
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: billfaster
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: mazel
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: okcamp
» Procreation: The Height of Selfishness
Posted by: susan28
» RE: Don't have kids
Posted by: Jamboree
» Her choice, not yours
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: greenman
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: LMNOP
» How dare you?
Posted by: McJulie
» yeah right
Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: hoscot
» Never
Posted by: owleyes
» Before you pass moral judgement...
Posted by: AmyB
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: wenoel
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: Jamboree
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: Aim
» Correction
Posted by: Aim
» RE: Correction
Posted by: mazel
» I can't even hear you....
Posted by: decembrist
» Such a futile arguement.
Posted by: aussidawg
» Don't waste energy...
Posted by: decembrist
» *(*(*(*`
Posted by: decembrist
» It's Cartman
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: blackpyecat
» RE: Your choice
Posted by: bergiecc007
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rsaxto on Jun 8, 2006 4:20 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: HereticChick on Jun 8, 2006 4:47 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: Don't have kids!
Posted by: sln70
» RE: Don't have kids!
Posted by: maddy
» RE: Don't have kids!
Posted by: devi
» ignore this troll
Posted by: mazel
» I second that
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Abortions before and after birth
Posted by: Liberty777
» RE: Don't have kids!
Posted by: beachy
» RE: Don't have kids!
Posted by: beachy
» RE: Don't have kids!
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Please don't try and silence me...
Posted by: JayDee
» Um, thats the POINT
Posted by: repo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Must have been the Roses on Jun 8, 2006 5:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» I blame the religious right. Bush is symbolic of that.
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: blame someone else
Posted by: greenman
» The difference between contraceptives and abortofacients
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: blame someone else
Posted by: owleyes
» RE: blame someone else
Posted by: owleyes
» RE: blame someone else
Posted by: Aim
» RE: blame someone else
Posted by: LMNOP
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ladyoracle on Jun 8, 2006 5:38 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All the same, she knew she didn't use her birth control. She's an educated woman, and since she's a lawyer, I have to assume that $$ can't be that tight, so why not have her tubes tied, why not have her spouse get a vasectomy, etc? Of course I sympathize with the "we were in a hurry and didn't use protection just this once" situation, but two factors caused that unwanted pregnancy: she didn't use the contraceptive she had, and she couldn't find Plan B. Then she and her husband decided to terminate the pregnancy, not Bush.
I am fully supportive of the persuasive aims of this article, but the writer's lack of self-consciousness leaves me doubtful that it would convince anyone who disagrees with Plan B or is undecided.
» yes - a very unpersuasive article
Posted by: mysticpal
» RE: yes - a very unpersuasive article
Posted by: fork
» wrong
Posted by: sln70
Comments are closed-
Posted by: AndyF on Jun 8, 2006 5:40 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: Sounds Like She Needs a New Doctor
Posted by: springdaisies
» RE: Sounds Like She Needs a New Doctor
Posted by: freedomfrBush
» Yes ...
Posted by: AdamSelene40
» RE: Yeah, a psychologist
Posted by: JayDee
» RE: Yeah, a psychologist
Posted by: JayDee
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SDres11 on Jun 8, 2006 5:47 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
P.S.: Martha Stewert and Ann Coulter will be getting all the "abortions" they want while working class women such as this author will continue to face mass persecution by our looney government !
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kooz on Jun 8, 2006 6:04 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: Libs are quick to judge
Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: Libs are quick to judge
Posted by: owleyes
» RE: Libs are quick to judge
Posted by: Aim
» RE: Dissent is patriotic
Posted by: CJC
» RE: Dissent
Posted by: Aim
» RE: Dissent
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Dissent
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Dissent
Posted by: Jamboree
» RE: Dissent
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Dissent
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE Sure, that's ? u hang here aqnd not w/the wingnuts
Posted by: kooz
» RE: Screed
Posted by: kooz
» Typical Ditto Head
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Sure, that's ? u hang here aqnd not w/the wingnuts
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Choice we make should remain free from judgement
Posted by: andrushka
» RE: Choice we make should remain free from judgement
Posted by: feller
» RE: Choice we make should remain free from judgement
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: g on Jun 8, 2006 6:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Bush administration is guilty as charged. They haven't caused the pregnancy, for sure, but they did let their religions beliefs interfere with decisions that should prioritize the health of women. It is a well known pattern.
However, let us not forget that health care practitioners here are as guilty as the Bush administration. Shame to those who use their position of power as physicians or pharmacists to impose their religious beliefs. I hope she changed doctor. Notice that only women are penalized by this attitude. Can you imagine the reaction if physicians or pharmacists refused Viagra or equivalent to unmarried men?
Comments are closed-
Posted by: derfb1 on Jun 8, 2006 6:24 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
D.
» RE: MR.
Posted by: WyrdSister
» A Nurse's Perspective
Posted by: sigridfroid
» RE: A Nurse's Perspective
Posted by: mysticpal
» RE: MR.
Posted by: owleyes
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Linda50 on Jun 8, 2006 6:51 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: Politics of Women
Posted by: mirimac
» Different kinds of Christians
Posted by: LMNOP
» And then there's this kind
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: You love Christians, as long as they are silent
Posted by: Linda50
» RE: The Nazi's were pagans
Posted by: Linda50
» BEWARE THE JABBERWOCK, MY FRIEND!
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Beware the Alternetwocky
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Beware the Alternetwocky
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: History
Posted by: CJC
» RE: Check out these anti-Christian Nazi quotes
Posted by: CJC
» RE: The Nazi's were pagans
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: You love Christians, as long as they are silent
Posted by: feller
» RE: You love Christians, as long as they are silent
Posted by: Linda50
» RE: Nero was the first hero
Posted by: kooz
» BIGOT?
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Politics of Women
Posted by: feller
» RE: Politics of Women
Posted by: Linda50
» RE: Politics of Women
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Politics of Women
Posted by: Linda50
Comments are closed-
Posted by: nickprogresss on Jun 8, 2006 6:54 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Check out this short video explaining how the Internet may soon be much more like the medium of TV - highly structured and controlled by financial interests!!
Spread the word - use the Internet to save the Internet.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Maxwellst on Jun 8, 2006 7:06 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Abortion and homosexuality, the two hot-button issues that are so obsessed about in the US, are both related to sexual intercourse. Fixating upon them is evidence of sexual repression--perhaps caused by religious demonization of the sex act coupled (in some cases) by being a victim of sexual predatory behavior or ones own repressed sexual desire. One can oppose abortion without being mentally ill, but to call the opposition to abortion "pro-life" as if abortion were the sole cause of unjust death in the world is ludicrious and irrational.
It also suggests an unfulfilled desire to return to mythical idyllic times, in which people had large families, mom stayed at home and everyone sat up straight at the table and went to church on Sunday mornings. If you know a place like that, don't keep it to yourself. I am sure the author of this article would be happy not to be grabbing spare moments of love with her family, the way that modern life often causes us to do. It's sad, in the bigger sense, but that's the way it is.
Please compare societies in which unwanted pregnancy is dealt with more pragmatically than ours and decide for yourself which society has better mental health concerning abortion.
I am an ethical vegetarian who doesn't wear leather, who buys organic and carries bugs out of the house rather than killing them. It takes a lot of effort to lead a life in which one causes a minimum of pain and death, but I think it makes for a better world and a more personally serene state of being.
I commend people who choose not to have abortions, but that is not the same as condemning people who do. A personal decision (such as mine to not kill other sentient beings) is not a political one that should be foisted upon unwilling fellow-citizens. I would be happy if you stopped eating meat, but I am not going to work for legislation to limit your access to McDonald's.
If the author of this article had real concerns about the result of an unintended child upon the stability of her family and marriage, it is not my place to judge her. If someone wants to offset that loss of life in the world, go do good in the world. Feed a homeless person. Help fund cancer research. Help put a troubled youth back onto the right path. Send a check to earthquake victims. Don't support wars. Eat a veggie burger.
But fighting the death of a fetus with hatred and condemnation does not seem to add much good energy to the world, and draws more than a little attention to he who throws the stone. Mother Theresa had the right idea: You gain more converts by your own good works than by pelting (those whom you perceive to be) sinners.
» RE: Step back and view the big picture, folks
Posted by: devi
Comments are closed-
Posted by: efjo on Jun 8, 2006 7:35 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. It seems to me that both sides have politicized this issue. If the Plan B is allowed to be sold over the counter, it would be the riskiest and most medically invasive pill to be available OTC. If the usual safety standards were followed, and not a political agenda, the pill wouldn't even been considered as an OTC drug. (That said, I have no moral objections to Plan B, so that isn't my agenda here. I think it should be available with a prescription, and even purchasable in advance for those who believe they may need it.)
2. I hate to sound like a conservative here, but whatever happened to personal responsibility? To blame Bush (or the religious right, or even the doctor or the laws as they stand) is far-fetched at best. This woman and her husband gambled, and they lost. It doesn't make sense to blame someone else for that. Bush is wrong about all sorts of things, but that doesn't mean he's to blame for everything.
» Ultimate personal responsibility
Posted by: McJulie
» RE: Ultimate personal responsibility
Posted by: twerquie
» RE: Both sides politicized
Posted by: sigridfroid
» RE: Both sides politicized
Posted by: owleyes
» RE: Both sides politicized
Posted by: lmwilker
» I think you're confusing "Plan B" with RU486
Posted by: AdamSelene40
» RE: I think you're confusing "Plan B" with RU486
Posted by: LMNOP
» Immoral Morality.
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Immoral Morality.
Posted by: feller
» RE: Immoral Morality.
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Both sides politicized
Posted by: LMNOP
Comments are closed-
Posted by: dikaiosyne on Jun 8, 2006 7:58 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: The GOP made me do it.....
Posted by: okcamp
» RE: Don't you have anything to say beside criticizing othere for what the believe?
Posted by: kooz
» RE: The GOP made me do it.....
Posted by: owleyes
» I've seen the light ! Hallelujah!
Posted by: Kelly
» Spanky, sweetie
Posted by: Kelly
» RE: Spanky, sweetie
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Stupid hippie
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Stupid hippie
Posted by: bornxeyed
» Thanks for that
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Oh, Spanky! Let me spell it out for you!!
Posted by: Againstthewindwalking
» RE: The GOP made me do it.....
Posted by: aussidawg
» ABORTION vs CONTRACEPTION: A FALSE DISTINCTION
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: The GOP made me do it.....
Posted by: Aim
» RE: The GOP made me do it.....
Posted by: lindalee
Comments are closed-
Posted by: aussidawg on Jun 8, 2006 9:17 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Come on people, the religious rights go only as far as they don't harm someone else. (Maybe not legally, but what about morally?) The woman in the above article was obviously harmed by someone else's belief in dogma. In the case of preventing cervical cancer or AIDS, the religious right's beliefs are putting other people's lives in direct jeopardy. How in the hell can this be legal?
» NOT legal: Impeach!
Posted by: sigridfroid
Comments are closed-
Posted by: zedaker on Jun 8, 2006 9:23 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CJC on Jun 8, 2006 9:48 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What's the lesson - don't have sex on Thursday because if you can't get through to the medical profession on Friday you can't get Plan B?
Dana L was brave to publish her story. Our puritanical roots make any public discussion of sex so highly charged that reason and good sense go right out the window. No wonder most people won't talk about the abortions they've been involved in - the men who have helped and supported sisters, girlfriends, daughters, wives etc etc get abortions they wanted and the women who have had them.
In my own ordinary circle of family and friends I've known of several abortions - to teenagers, college students, newly married, and mothers with all the children they could cope with. None of these abortions was done without regret and anguish. All these women are excellent and loving mothers each of them to two or more children; two are pediatricians.
Let she and he who have never made a mistake in their lives cast the first stone. The rest of us normal mortals should be in favor of easily accessible and inexpensive birth control and unjudgmental, accessible, and safe abortion. Sadly our country is in a very regressive and controlling frame of mind. May enlightenment and good sense come again soon!
» RE: How about some tolerance and sympathy?
Posted by: mysticpal
» RE: How about some tolerance and sympathy?
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: How about some tolerance and sympathy?
Posted by: mokidugway
» RE: How about some tolerance and sympathy?
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: youngdem on Jun 8, 2006 12:02 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't blame the author for not doing so, obviously her method had worked well for her for years, and EC *should* be just a phone call away. But it's not. I commend the author for sharing her real life experience.
Websites to help you find a provider fast:
http://ec.princeton.edu/
http://www.backupyourbirthcontrol.org/howto/index.htm
1-888-NOT-2-LATE
(English)
Comments are closed-
Posted by: quetlin on Jun 8, 2006 12:56 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The next day, they were denied by the doctor’s personal choice due to his philosophy, which he did not disclose to his patients. Due to Bush’s philosophy, the doctor even had such a choice. This is the system philosophically headed and endorsed by Bush to punish people for married sex by withholding the second line of defense
The overbooked Planned Parenthood clinic did not have emergency services available, probably because abstinence religious based clinics who shared Bush’s philosophy got the money instead.
So, she went to the third line of defense, an abortion after the sperm and egg came together and implanted -instead of being able to use a measure to prevent this step.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: babs on Jun 8, 2006 1:12 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Any person that doesn't have a womb or ovaries, or can't carry a baby to term, has absolutely no opinion on the subject of abortion. If they do, they are hypocrites and should be ignored.
And don't spew religious dogma - the bible says we should stone prostitutes to death and turn the other cheek to our enemies - where would Vegas or the Iraq war be then?
Sure, men can have a say (that is, if they are willing to support a child from cradle to grave), but the final decision is made by the person who grows and bears the babies. Period.
» RE: "If men could get pregnant.... And 24 hour wait for Viagra
Posted by: mbarthel
» Hey...A good idea appears
Posted by: Kelly
» RE: "If men could get pregnant....
Posted by: feller
» Yeah, right.
Posted by: Aim
» RE
Posted by: Againstthewindwalking
» All anti-Life forces are evil
Posted by: feller
» RE: You are abslutely right
Posted by: kooz
» RE: You are abslutely right
Posted by: lindalee
» Spanky69 is now advocating choice
Posted by: libgal
» RE: Spanky69 is now advocating equality of the genders
Posted by: libgal
» What your argument has in common with hemmorhoids
Posted by: libgal
» RE: I don't know about that
Posted by: libgal
» RE: You are abslutely right
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: You are abslutely right
Posted by: Linda50
Comments are closed-
Posted by: doctorsquared on Jun 8, 2006 1:15 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: coyote on Jun 8, 2006 3:53 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think if we are going to discuss this issue it should be to agree that abortion is a tragedy and there should be fewer of them.....and change the subject.
Grown children dying in Iraq, the future of our existence in the face of diminishing resources, these are the things that we are losing when we are fooled into planting a flag on the abortion issue.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: feller on Jun 8, 2006 4:29 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: You Aborted Not George Bush
Posted by: Aim
» And then there is the endless scream of Howard Dean
Posted by: feller
» RE: You Aborted Not George Bush
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: midge on Jun 8, 2006 5:13 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: Not that simple
Posted by: Kelly
» RE: Not that simple
Posted by: Callibrarian
Comments are closed-
Posted by: KUCING on Jun 8, 2006 5:17 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hope you are up to a bit of irony. The GOP didn't force you, on the contrary the GOP's so-called Christian backers will be all too happy to consign you to hell for this abortion. I have that on the authority of Dubya - whom God speaks to - himself. And to think of diaphragms. Sin! SIN! S I N ! All those innocent spermatozoids being stopped from achieving their life's goal! Really!
» I hope you are up to another bit of irony.
Posted by: libgal
» RE: I hope you are up to another bit of irony.
Posted by: kooz
» RE: You laugh because I'm different...
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: You laugh because I'm different...
Posted by: aussidawg
Comments are closed-
Posted by: aussidawg on Jun 8, 2006 6:00 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Please understand, I'm on your side on this arguement, and truly believe the Plan B alternative should be available over the counter, and as long as it remains prescription only, no physician or pharmacist should be able to refuse this need based on personal opinion. These folks are supposed to be professionals, not preachers.
I see a lot of posters commenting on the author's lack of responsibility. Well, she described her situation of not having much time together with her husband, and well...the act of sex generally is rather spontaneous. Not a whole lot of people out there (including you "Christian" types) sit down and discuss what their options are to avoiding an unwanted pregnancy immediately prior to having sex. Look, she had a reasonable expectation of having the Plan B option available to her. Her expectation was dashed by several self serving (and rather selfish) zealots. Sorry all you righteous types, I lay the blame for this one on you, not her.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: boygranddakar on Jun 8, 2006 10:40 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Every woman who has been sexually active with men has had a pregnancy scare at one time or another, and not necessarily because she was "irresponsible." Think of how many times a married couple will make love during a lifetime. Who can expect a 100% safe-sex rate in that time? Condoms break. Diaphragms are not fail-safe for all women. Moreover, there are women whose fertility simply defies many otherwise reliable forms of birth control. It just happens.
NO ONE has the right to judge whether or not a woman should continue a pregnancy to term or terminate it. Women in this position make the most ethical decision that they can while considering a myriad of factors including health, economics, family situation, and personal morals.
Those of you who condemn the author for making the decision she did - and for blaming Bush and conservative Christians for barring her way to take steps to AVOID an abortion - need to mediate on the ethics of throwing the first stone.
Many people on the right think that leftists are "obsessed" with abortion rights and think the left is a one-issue movement. Wrong. They have myopia because it's the issue that seems to push their buttons the most.
The left has many issues - economic equity, workers' rights, environmentalism, social justice for marginalized groups, better health care for all... the list could go on and on. But, as part of a larger agenda, abortion rights SHOULD be protected. Like abolishing the death penalty, it's an obvious moral imperative that many developed nations made into law a long time ago.
It's about protecting women's health and women's LIVES. It's about having children that are well-provided for. It's about individual rights. It's about religious freedom, and the freedom not to be religious, and the freedom not to be governed by someone else's religion. It's about having a safer, more compassionate nation for everyone.
To me, those who oppose abortion rights are simply sexist. Although "it takes two to tango," women literally bear the burden of having children - the physical stress of being pregnant, the social stigma of peers from whom a woman cannot hide her "mistake," and, potentially, the economic responsibility of her health care and the care of the child that is born if the man decides to abandon her. Laws that create barriers to abortion say, in essence, that a woman cannot be trusted to have the moral and ethical intelligence to make the right decision - so the state must make it for her. I cannot imagine that this would be the case if men could get pregnant.
The U.S. needs to join other developed nations and guarantee women - and girls - access to birth control, sexuality education, and abortion. Better access to the two former would surely reduce need for the latter - and it would have for the author, too.
» RE: ver accidentally gotten pregnant? No? Then don't judge.
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Eithne on Jun 9, 2006 1:26 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What has been proven is that Plan B (and other birth control pills) prevent ovulation.
Due to the difficulty inherent in such testing, the theory of prevention of implantation has never been tested. It is a theory that was derived via inference but not based on any real data.
So I'm not sure on what grounds any doctor who prescribes birth control pills would refuse to prescribe Plan B. The doctor in question was obviously willing to prescribe a diaphragm, which is just different way of preventing sperm from reaching ova.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: repo on Jun 9, 2006 7:04 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"i want someone to carry on the family name"
"i want someone that is going to love me"
"i want someone that i can impart my values onto"
"if i have this kid, then its father has to pay me child support"
in this overpopulated world, NOT having children could be the most altruistic thing you could do
» RE: Altruism
Posted by: owleyes
» RE: Truth Hurts
Posted by: Aim
» RE: Truth Hurts
Posted by: Aim
» RE: Some laws are necessary
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Truth Hurts
Posted by: bornxeyed
» PLEASE don't feed...
Posted by: doctorsquared
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CJC on Jun 9, 2006 1:15 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Abortion is rarely treated as murder except rhetorically. Even when abortion is absolutely legally prohibited neither the woman having the abortion, the provider of the abortion, nor anyone paying for or procuring the abortion is charged with murder. Again, except rhetorically, no one treats the fertilized egg or the extremely immature embryo or fetus as a full human life. Up to 50% of fertilized eggs never develop. Even 20% of recognized pregnancies result in early miscarriage. Where are the funerals? The unwanted loss of a fetus may cause a great deal of sadness and grief, but we don't treat the event as a death.
As for the paradox that many of those most passionately opposed to abortion also are in favor of the death penalty and even support preemptive war, it confirms that the issue is more about control of others' (mostly women's) behavior than it is about protecting life.
Choose to be compassionate.
» RE: Adoption.
Posted by: Maryanne
» RE: Adoption.
Posted by: Maryanne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Taraerin on Jun 9, 2006 4:26 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am totally supportive of this woman who had the abortion. Each case is different and it is only their choice no one else's!
» RE: Abstinance works
Posted by: owleyes
» RE: Abstinance works
Posted by: mazel
» RE: Spanky 69? Hmm...Freud would like to study you
Posted by: kooz
Comments are closed-
Posted by: HereticChick on Jun 9, 2006 10:15 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: Idiot
Posted by: kooz
» Faulty Logic
Posted by: feller
» RE: Faulty Logic
Posted by: mokidugway
» RE: Faulty Logic
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: In Pittsburgh on Jun 10, 2006 1:01 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: Life begins
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Life begins
Posted by: bornxeyed
» So Bill Clinton Was God?
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: In Pittsburgh on Jun 10, 2006 1:06 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Will we allow doctors to refuse to treat patients who eat meat because they are morally against the killing of animals?
» RE: How can you be so humouless? Typical Christian Nutjob
Posted by: kooz
» RE: Boycott dipshits
Posted by: bornxeyed
» Boycott DITTO HEADS: EMIGRATE
Posted by: LMNOP
» Did somebody say something?
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Did somebody say something?
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: I'll pick your nursing home, hippie.
Posted by: aussidawg
» Oh for the Sake of the Great Bleeding Heart God! COOL IT!!!!!
Posted by: Againstthewindwalking
Comments are closed-
Posted by: scoxevanescence on Jun 10, 2006 2:31 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» It's a killing NOt a Choice
Posted by: feller
» It's a CHOICE (still), not a BABY (yet)
Posted by: LMNOP
» So you're a pacifist except when it comes to babies?
Posted by: feller
» So where you going to put all us "murderers?"
Posted by: beetruetoyou
» RE: So where you going to put all us "murderers?"
Posted by: feller
» Did somebody say something?
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: It's a WOMAN regardless
Posted by: AmyB
» RE: It's a WOMAN regardless
Posted by: AmyB
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Maryanne on Jun 10, 2006 4:15 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the government is going to limit access to OTC medicines does this mean that those of us who use these are potential terrorists? Does it mean that it can start restricting all other OTC medicines under this act? deny filling doctor's prescriptions under this act?
Big Brother is taking care of us. However, being intellegent and well educated, I feel that I can make the best decisions for myself. I do NOT need some nameless bureaucrat who knows nothing about me, who is not even in the medical field, making such decisions.
» i.d.s required because of meth
Posted by: Must have been the Roses
» RE: i.d.s required because of meth
Posted by: Maryanne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: aussidawg on Jun 10, 2006 9:01 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I guess the way I look at it is that abortion is a KNOWN proceedure, like it or not. If we choose to outlaw abortions, they won't be stopped, rather, like drugs, be regulated by the black market. This is an issue of keeping women SAFE, period. If Roe vs. Wade were to be overturned, women will once again be forced to use "back alley" practitioners to perform their abortion rather than a safe and certified M.D. The outcome of this will simply be more death, and that is by no means a solution.
p.s. Mr/Ms ssegallmd, I hope I didn't tread on your ground by referring to you, but I do think you could be an authority on this, and I respect your knowledge on the subject. Thanks!!!
» RE: Making Abortion isn't the answer!!!
Posted by: kooz
» RE: Making Abortion isn't the answer!!!
Posted by: aussidawg
» Thanks
Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Thanks
Posted by: aussidawg
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LieMeNot on Jun 11, 2006 6:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dont make sense to me.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jun 11, 2006 9:07 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The FDA plays along with Republican political goals because the Republicans have allowed Big Pharma to load FDA panels with their employees, ensuring a smooth ride for their drug marketing practices. Quid pro quo - you help us keep our looney fundies happy, we'll let you dump dangerous drugs onto the US market for profit maximization. Keep those donations coming!
The FDA is starting to smell really, really foul - the stench is no longer ignorable.
» Life is Tragic
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ac1d8urn on Jun 11, 2006 1:52 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I could tell right away that this woman is a lawyer b/c she does an excellent job of slanting the facts and placing blame everywhere but where it belongs.
Plan B SHOULD be available OTC. But nobody "forced" this woman to do anything. The GOP did not cause her to use poor judgement and neglect her birth control. A "rush of passion" is no excuse for irresponsibility! It is also not the government's fault that she did not try hard enough to get the Plan B pill. Her going to only one or two clinics doesn't exactly sound like she was too worried. When I was faced with my unfortunate choice at age 18, I had to call clinic after clinic & ended up having to drive to another STATE because no one in my town would perform abortions past 13 weeks(I was 13 & 1/2 weeks. Ridiculous, I know). My point is, if it was such an emergency, she would have tried harder to get that pill.
What happened to her is nobody's fault but her own. She's only writing articles like this because she's trying to shrug off her irresponsibility & save face.
» RE: ridiculous!
Posted by: fork
» RE: ridiculous!
Posted by: repo
» RE: ridiculous!
Posted by: fork
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Liberty777 on Jun 11, 2006 5:27 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» RE: As for your statement on Saddam
Posted by: Liberty777
Comments are closed-
Posted by: madelinefan on Jun 11, 2006 6:54 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» You are such a LUUUUUUUUUUUVING person
Posted by: feller
» RE: You are such a LUUUUUUUUUUUVING person
Posted by: madelinefan
» There is no Christian Taliban: It's a Muslim Thing
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: lythandrel on Jun 13, 2006 2:34 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What's severely disturbing is that even if her doctor were to prescribe Plan B for the writer of this article, there is still a chance that the pharmacist would refuse to fill it, or the pharmacy tech refuse to ring up the sale based on their moral issues. There are no protections in place for the patient, yet states are passing laws to protect the pharmacist who is directly objecting to a doctors written order or the cashier or pharmacy tech who refuses to ring up the prescription sale. The patients rights are being usurped in favour of personal issues which are supposed to be kept out of the medical field in the first place.
South Dakota has already put a ban on abortions, and the same group that lobbied for getting that ban passed, is also trying to get birth control banned as well. I view this as an abomination unto our rights and freedoms in this country. Once something like this passes in a state, it often leads to debate on a federal level. If things continue to snowball in this direction, there's a possibility that women will be barefoot, pregnant, and back in the kitchen. Married couples would no longer have the right to plan when they want or if they want to have a family. If they wanted to hold off on children, they would have to hold off on sex. To me this is utter insanity.
To make things worse, due to the size of Texas, textbooks for much of the US are decided by what the state of Texas requires for their school board. Currently, Texas is teaching abstinence only sexual education in health classes. It's a proven fact that states that teach abstinence only education have higher teenage pregnancy rates, and STD transmission, because these teens are not taught how NOT to get pregnant and not taught about safer sex. It's quite obvious these teens are NOT abstaining. While abstinence is the ONLY way not to get STDs or pregnant, these teens NEED to be taught what is necessary to arm themselves against the possibilities in the case they choose not to abstain.
The US is supposed to have a separation of church and state, however, religion is further encroaching into the government on a daily basis.
» the myth of separation of "church" and state
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Gakl on Jun 13, 2006 2:51 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It’s a small amalgamation of cells. You're talking about a mass of cells that's mentally indistinguishable from a hamster, if that. Sometimes, smaller than a grain of sand. Barely, worth a glimmer in a 14 year-old’s eye as he shoots a protein surprise into his hand while thinking about Britney Spears.
It is amazing the lack of compassion that so called Christians have for people in difficult circumstances, faced with a tragic choices. It is amazing the lack of dehumanization that those who push such an anti-liberty agenda. If those who presume to judge others really had as much faith as they claim, they wouldn't rush to judge others and control them in this life. Rather, they would know that God would judge those who have acted inappropriately in the next. So why not put your faith to the test?
Meanwhile, one man's law should stop another woman’s body and we should all do our best to prevent unwanted pregnancies from occurring in the first place. Now abstinence and the promotion of such is all nice, fluffy, and fine. Hell, I’m for it. You should be too. It’s a noble goal, but meanwhile, people are going to continue to “get it on” as it were as we have for untold millions of years (or thousands if your reality does not share a liberal bias). Unfortunately, reality isn’t so nice. That’s why we’re over in Iraq, killing terrorists, and lots of unlucky people who just so happen to be poor and brown. It sucks, but we deal with it. Unfortunately, reality isn’t so nice. That’s why we’re over in Iraq, killing terrorists, and lots of unlucky people who just so happen to be poor and brown. It sucks, we may try to stop it, and still fail.
Now, good intentions stop being good, when they turn to idiocy. Preventing women from obtaining viable contraception that can avoid pregnancy is utter lunacy if you’re stated goal is to prevent abortions. If that is your goal, please, by all means prove it and step up to the plate. Unintended pregnancies should be avoided. Otherwise, what you’re doing is trying to prevent sex. That’s simply ridiculous. It’s a perfectly natural, necessary, and healthy thing for two loving adult human beings. The world will be a better place if the unkind things you wish to say toward people you disagree with are kept to yourselves.
The only thing worse than an unintended pregnancy is an unwanted child. That is a tragedy and tragedies must be avoided.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Laura Barcella on Jun 15, 2006 10:23 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Starbucks' Cop-Out to Gun Nuts: Customers Served Coffee While Strapped
ACORN Smear Collaborator Claims Persecution to Raise Money for Her Legal Troubles
Bad Policies Are Really What's Driving California's Huge Prison Costs




