Abortion over-the-counter?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
PERTINENT QUOTE OF THE SHOW:

Right now in America you can get [RU486] and kill your baby but it's by perscription. And so [the FDA is] debating whether to make it an over-the-counter purchase to sell in any store. Could you imagine Walmart selling an abortion to their customers? Imagine the boycott that would follow.
 

frugalmom

Night Elf
I haven't listened to this show but wanted to comment on:

Could you imagine Walmart selling an abortion to their customers?

I had thought about this before. Then I thought, Wal Mart already does this, in a slightly different manner. They fill birth control pill prescriptions. :down: Difference being a prescription is needed for one and won't be needed for the other soon.
 

Gerald

Resident Fiend
Originally posted by frugalmom
I had thought about this before. Then I thought, Wal Mart already does this, in a slightly different manner. They fill birth control pill prescriptions. :down:
Do I understand you correctly? Do you equate birth-control pills, which prevent conception, with abortion?

I suppose you consider tubal ligations and vasectomies to be abominable as well?
 

frugalmom

Night Elf
Originally posted by Gerald
Do I understand you correctly? Do you equate birth-control pills, which prevent conception, with abortion?

I suppose you consider tubal ligations and vasectomies to be abominable as well?

You, like so many others, do not understand how the pill works. Here is some info for you:

In summary, according to multiple references throughout The Physician’s Desk Reference, which articulate the research findings of all the birth control pill manufacturers, there are not one but three mechanisms of birth control pills:

1. inhibiting ovulation (the primary mechanism),

2. thickening the cervical mucus, thereby making it more difficult for sperm to travel to the egg, and

3. thinning and shriveling the lining of the uterus to the point that it is unable or less able to facilitate the implantation of the newly fertilized egg.

The first two mechanisms are contraceptive. The third is abortive.

When a woman taking the Pill discovers she is pregnant (according to The Physician’s Desk Reference’s efficacy rate tables, this is 3 percent of pill-takers each year), it means that all three of these mechanisms have failed. The third mechanism sometimes fails in its role as backup, just as the first and second mechanisms sometimes fail. Each and every time the third mechanism succeeds, however, it causes an abortion.

from http://epm.org/bcp3300.html
 

Gerald

Resident Fiend
Originally posted by frugalmom
You, like so many others, do not understand how the pill works. Here is some info for you:
from http://epm.org/bcp3300.html
No, I know how the Pill works; I'm simply profoundly unmoved.

Now, if you can present some statistics on how often the third mechanism occurs...

Though one would think that if you had the courage of your convictions you would take issue with the first and second mechanisms...
 

frugalmom

Night Elf
Originally posted by Gerald
No, I know how the Pill works; I'm simply profoundly unmoved.

You did not know the pill could be an abortifacient or you would not have asked "Do I understand you correctly? Do you equate birth-control pills, which prevent conception, with abortion?" Whether you were moved or not is beside the point.


Now, if you can present some statistics on how often the third mechanism occurs...

If you had read the link you might find out. :idea: Anyway, do your own homework kid.


Though one would think that if you had the courage of your convictions you would take issue with the first and second mechanisms...

The first two don't gamble with an already conceived human life.
 

Gerald

Resident Fiend
Originally posted by frugalmom
The first two don't gamble with an already conceived human life.
And why should that make any difference? Actively preventing conception has the same net effect as abortion: a child isn't born who otherwise would be.
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
Originally posted by frugalmom
The first two don't gamble with an already conceived human life.
The odds are already at 1:4 that the fertilized egg won't make it without human intervention. The marvelous "god designed process" kills roughtly 25% of the fertilized eggs as it is. :think:
 
4

4 A.M. Prayer

Guest
Zakath...

Zakath...

...the events of your past including your Pentecostal melt-down, granted a vantage point condusive to attack, have IMO reduced, to a varying degree, your opinions somewhat...

But, what the hay, I hold Enyart-disciples as well as self-serving atheists in equal distain... ;)
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
Re: Zakath...

Re: Zakath...

Originally posted by 4 A.M. Prayer
...the events of your past including your Pentecostal melt-down, granted a vantage point condusive to attack, have IMO reduced, to a varying degree, your opinions somewhat...
:confused:

But, what the hay, I hold Enyart-disciples as well as self-serving atheists in equal distain... ;)
Would that be something like "disdain"?
 
4

4 A.M. Prayer

Guest
Re: Re: Zakath...

Re: Re: Zakath...

Originally posted by Zakath
:confused:

Would that be something like "disdain"?

Yes, Zak, it would be (I'm sorry for my spelling after a couple of pre-Christmas glasses of Merlot this evening ) but you, despite many insightful posts, remain as self-serving as the Enyart gang you so often attack.

As to my Pentacostal comment; you were a former pastor were you not? In a Pentacostal environment?
You attack Christianity not as an outsider but as one who has had a bad experience as an "insider" and your opinions, at least to me, hold about as much water as a two and a half pack a day ex-cigarette smoker who tells me I'm no better than Adolf Hitler for lighting up...:rolleyes:
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
Re: Re: Re: Zakath...

Re: Re: Re: Zakath...

Originally posted by 4 A.M. Prayer
Yes, Zak, it would be (I'm sorry for my spelling after a couple of pre-Christmas glasses of Merlot this evening ) but you, despite many insightful posts, remain as self-serving as the Enyart gang you so often attack.
Gotta watch that Merlot, it'll sneak up on you... :chuckle:

I'm presenting my opinion here; if that's self-serving then so be it. :think:

There are several big differences between the "Enyart gang" and me which include:

1. I'm not claiming divine sanction for my viewpoint.

2. I'm not judging the opposition worthy of hellfire for holding a conflicting opinion.

3. I'm not making any money from book sales or subscriptions to a web site from what is posted here.


As to my Pentacostal comment; you were a former pastor were you not? In a Pentacostal environment?
Yes, on both counts. The denomination was the Assemblies of God, the oldes U.S. Pentecostal denomination, to be precise. An interesting (and very diverse) group, the AoG...

You attack Christianity not as an outsider but as one who has had a bad experience as an "insider" and your opinions, at least to me, hold about as much water as a two and a half pack a day ex-cigarette smoker who tells me I'm no better than Adolf Hitler for lighting up...
Not being an ex-smoker I don't relate to your metaphor, but as what some folks term an "EX-tian", particularly as one familiar with denominational structure and function and formal seminary training, I have a perspective on how Christianity is actually manifested in the U.S. that is different from folks who only sat in the pew...

Contrary to the line put out by Christian pastors to explain defectors from their ranks (a line I used on several occasions my self when I pastored), my departure was based on the demise of my faith in the deity, not a "bad experience" in the Church.
 

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Re: Re: Re: Re: Zakath...

Re: Re: Re: Re: Zakath...

Originally posted by Zakath
my departure was based on the demise of my faith in the deity, not a "bad experience" in the Church.
What caused the demise of your faith in the deity?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top