Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Anyway, I think this is a good thing. The morning after pill reduces the number of unwanted children being born and the number of abortions. Pro-lifers should be happy - not upset - about this.
They should be, if their prime motivation is preventing abortion. But it's all too clear from many in the "pro-life" movement that their true motivation is trying to prevent sex, specifically, their version of immorality. What good is reducing abortions if you can't stop all that sex going on?
It will be a win - lose proposition once Obamacare goes into effect and Medicaid people can get the pills for free from hospitals. That is what is being argued by Catholics and the administration, isn't it?
And this has what to do with a university in PA?
Again, the university population asked for this option and those who choose to use this service will pay to do so.
No one is forcing anyone to utilize this service nor will anyone be forced to use any form of contraception despite availability.
I suppose the argument some would liike to make is that women in general are so easily (mis)led that if something is available they will have to use it, not having any free will to say no and all.
Not sure what that says about the power of anyone's religious convictions, but, it sure says a lot about those who ascribe so little credit to the 'fairer sex.'
You oncologist is a physician familiar with your medical history and thus you were under his/her supervision at the time the pill was given to you, whether you chose to take it or not. Thank you for proving my point.
I was saying *I* was having trouble seeing the downsides. If you see some, by all means, share...
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
But this is the way society wants to go and the government is going to help them get there. My opinions on this will only get bashed.
Government is supposed to be a reflection of the citizenry, is it not? If you admit this is the "way society wants to go", isn't government obliged to reflect that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
Society wants their kids to have free wheeling spontaneous sex without the "hassle" of getting pregnant.
Study upon study has shown that kids are going to have sex, period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
I don't have kids in the school system anymore but have much pity for those that do. They will have a very hard time instilling their beliefs to their children.
Penn isn't exactly part of a "school system". It's a university.
They should be, if their prime motivation is preventing abortion. But it's all too clear from many in the "pro-life" movement that their true motivation is trying to prevent sex, specifically, their version of immorality. What good is reducing abortions if you can't stop all that sex going on?
Until the gal taking it hemorrages too much. This should not be an OTC drug but rather prescribed and used under a physician's supervision.
The world is upside down when one must sign in with a pharmacist to buy an OTC anti-histamine but can get the morning after pill out of a common vending machine.
Well, the fact remains that it IS an OTC drug and has been approved as such for young women in this age group. And studies indicate that the most recently approved versions of this drug have very minimal side effects.
I should think that, statistically, any young person in this age group has a much greater chance of being seriously injured in a car accident than suffering negative side effects from this medication and we sure aren't going to tell them to stop driving now, are we?
You oncologist is a physician familiar with your medical history and thus you were under his/her supervision at the time the pill was given to you, whether you chose to take it or not. Thank you for proving my point.
My oncologist concerned about my lymph nodes in my armpit had no idea what was going on in my vagina, particularly if I chose to take it at 6 in the morning 7 months later. Thanks for proving my point.
Again, you have your MD, right? After all, you are directly going against FDA guidelines, so you must have the proper medical training to state such opinions.
No, I'm not failing to see the downsides here.
But this is the way society wants to go and the government is going to help them get there. My opinions on this will only get bashed.
Society wants their kids to have free wheeling spontaneous sex without the "hassle" of getting pregnant.
I don't have kids in the school system anymore but have much pity for those that do. They will have a very hard time instilling their beliefs to their children.
If you haven't instilled your beliefs in your "children" by the time they are 18 years old, then you only have yourself to blame.
Are we calling college kids children now? Then are we going to stop complaining when they *dare* not be able to find jobs and have to live with their parents?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Until the gal taking it hemorrages too much. This should not be an OTC drug but rather prescribed and used under a physician's supervision.
