Thread: The Morning After Pill

I don't think the morning after pill is meant so that people can just go and have sex willy nilly. If it's used in the right way, i'm sure it will prevent a lot of unwanted pregnancies.
I just wish more girls in this country (England) would use it, being as we have the highest teenage pregnancy rate.[/b]

If it is used the right way, was not meant to be................If if. But the fact is that it is used for those reasons.
The percentile people speak of about rape or incest are so minimal. It is just a weak minority report that is used to defend a pour argument.

You probably think I am against abortion. No. But like many things, I feel accountability should reside somewhere rather than making more avenues for woman to take to negate responsibility.

but really? what the fuck does a woman's uterus have to do with us or the government?

i myself respect woman enough to think they should enjoy freedom and self-autonomy...some will say its more than just the woman we are talking about when it's birth control...but i still value a woman's rights over the rights of a group of cells, if even that.

Why is it that someone should not be able to enjoy sex without worrying about a pregnancy? What rule says that women have to have kids? Actually, I never want children, but I would like to be married. Does this mean I should just be an abstinate wife? That's crazy....The world is so overpopulated, and I really don't feel like I should be a baby making machine because society says I should. If that makes me someone who 'negates' my responsibliliy, I guess I'm irresponsible.

Originally Posted by Howetzer

I believe that the argument is quite simply, that it is not just your body at this stage, that you are making decisions for.


[/b]

The morning after pill doesn't kill another person's body....It isn't even a baby yet. A baby doesn't magically appear. It's still an egg and sperm at that stage, and I'm sure that at that point, it doesn't really care if I expell it from my body. I'm not going to feel bad about hurting something that is essentially, a group of my own cells.

Originally Posted by Gwendolyn

Why is it that someone should not be able to enjoy sex without worrying about a pregnancy? What rule says that women have to have kids? Actually, I never want children, but I would like to be married. Does this mean I should just be an abstinate wife? That's crazy....The world is so overpopulated, and I really don't feel like I should be a baby making machine because society says I should. If that makes me someone who 'negates' my responsibliliy, I guess I'm irresponsible.
The morning after pill doesn't kill another person's body....It isn't even a baby yet. A baby doesn't magically appear. It's still an egg and sperm at that stage, and I'm sure that at that point, it doesn't really care if I expell it from my body. I'm not going to feel bad about hurting something that is essentially, a group of my own cells.
[/b]

"It is still an egg and a sperm at this point." Is this true> If this is so, then I would retract most of what I have said. But I did not believe this to be the case.
Sex is something that should be enjoyed.
A contraceptive that prevents the egg and sperm from meeting is entirely different than after they meet. no?
although many religions do not believe in any birth control, I do. But consider the process of birth.

It is all about ME. The woman. "my own cells". No! If the man's sperm has interacted with the embryo, then it is not just you. We now involve the father, and a united reaction, normally thought of as life. Or....just a group of cells ~

As far as population. I have rendered my stance on that many times over. To me it is a result of people being ignorant. Not using condoms or the Pill.
This issue takes on the moral affirmation one holds to what they consider a "being"[/color]

My general opinion is that I think it's ultimately the woman’s decision in the end because she is the one who has to carry the child but with regards to her companion it is only fair that some kind of understanding is made in regards to who and who doesn't want a child. I know it's hard to come to grips with it sometimes in this day and time considering everyone is running around screwing like its F**k Fest 2000. But under conditions where a true relationship is present then I believe it needs to be put out on the table so a general understanding to the rule is known.

Originally Posted by Ne

My general opinion is that I think it's ultimately the woman’s decision in the end because she is the one who has to carry the child but with regards to her companion it is only fair that some kind of understanding is made in regards to who and who doesn't want a child. I know it's hard to come to grips with it sometimes in this day and time considering everyone is running around screwing like its F**k Fest 2000. But under conditions where a true relationship is present then I believe it needs to be put out on the table so a general understanding to the rule is known.
[/b]

If it is ultimately the woman's decision then there is no "understanding", is there?
It is like saying, You can agree with what I am going to do, but if you do not...then I will anyway, but thanks!

Originally Posted by Howetzer

If it is ultimately the woman's decision then there is no "understanding", is there?
It is like saying, You can agree with what I am going to do, but if you do not...then I will anyway, but thanks!
[/b]

Com'n Howie that's not right, the way you put that. You know that's not the way I put it. You out of all people I thought would understand what I was saying. I said "with regards to her companion it is only fair that some kind of understanding is made" I wasn't saying that there was already some undertanding implemented I was generally stating due to the fact that it is utimately the woman's overall decision it would only be fair if the male can be included in the ultimate decision also.

Originally Posted by Ne

Com'n Howie that's not right, the way you put that. You know that's not the way I put it. You out of all people I thought would understand what I was saying. I said "with regards to her companion it is only fair that some kind of understanding is made" I wasn't saying that there was already some undertanding implemented I was generally stating due to the fact that it is utimately the woman's overall decision it would only be fair if the male can be included in the ultimate decision also.
[/b]

I did not mean to come across sarcastic. However I still get the same result.
"It is ultimately the woman's decision." Correct? So if her companion has an opposing view, it is null and void, no?

By understanding what do you mean? An understanding of her choice? Or an understanding that he be included in the entire process, or.....
Maybe I just failed to understand.

I think that unless the child is going to kill the mother during child birth or if the child will have health problems then both parents to be should think of using the pill.

Other then that I think the baby should be allowed to grow and be born. You could argue about if it is a living thing or not at the moment of conception but the fact is it "will" end up being a life in the future if allowed to grow, so in a way I think the pill takes away the life that it could have.

Anyway the parents could consider adoption, or they might bond with the baby when its born and could've been happy they didn't use the pill.

[edit] but its one thing to talk about this and another for it to happy to you
This is just my opinion.

Originally Posted by Howetzer

I did not mean to come across sarcastic. However I still get the same result.
"It is ultimately the woman's decision." Correct? So if her companion has an opposing view, it is null and void, no?[/b]

Actually you're right, that's why I was saying that it would be good if her companion could have some sort of say or understanding in the matter. And don't fret I know you wasn't intentionally trying to be sarcastic.

Originally Posted by Howetzer

By understanding what do you mean? An understanding of her choice? Or an understanding that he be included in the entire process, or.....
Maybe I just failed to understand.
[/b]

By understand, that really didn't have anything to do with this topic, but you'll figure it out in the future.

I think the morning after-pill is a good alternative for abortion (try to agrue that like 64 cells have feeling). However, it shouldn't be used intentionally.

Allso in cases of rape it's a nice thing I guess.

If only freddy krueger's mother had a morning after pill. : )

Although I can't say I fully agree with the pill, I think in some cases people should go through with the birth and if they don't want the baby then they could put it up for adoption but then it depends on the whole situation.[/b]

Are you kidding? going through with the birth is not as simple as you might think. Being pregnant is a medical condition that can be dangerous even if the woman has the best care in the world. Besides, if a woman does get pregnant by accident how are you or anyone else to guarentee that she would be able to afford the appropriate medical attention that she and the baby would require? When I asked my doctor how long it would take me to heal she said A woman's body takes about seven years to go back to how it was before pregnant - SEVEN YEARS! We don't just pop em out like pez.

I think that unless the child is going to kill the mother during child birth or if the child will have health problems then both parents to be should think of using the pill.[/b]

There are very few situation when a dangerous pregnancy can be predicted that early on. Seriously, when a woman chosses to become pregnant there is always a risk.

Other then that I think the baby should be allowed to grow and be born. You could argue about if it is a living thing or not at the moment of conception [/b]

It IS living at the moment of conception. The point is that it takes about 72 hours for conception (the sperm meeting the egg) to actually occur. That is why it is a contraceptive. AGAIN, it does not kill a baby or even an embryo.

but the fact is it "will" end up being a life in the future if allowed to grow, so in a way I think the pill takes away the life that it could have.[/b]

When somone takes the emergency pill they don't even know that they would have gotten pregnant had they not taken it. Besides if you wanna argue that those cells should be "allowed the chance to grow" then that means that every man out there is "taking away the life it could have" when ever they masturbate.

Originally Posted by SpaceFlower

When somone takes the emergency pill they don't even know that they would have gotten pregnant had they not taken it. Besides if you wanna argue that those cells should be "allowed the chance to grow" then that means that every man out there is "taking away the life it could have" when ever they masturbate.
[/b]

Well said. If this goes on, in a few years, every teenage boy will be charged with murder. Fight now!

Originally Posted by icuurd12b42

Well said. If this goes on, in a few years, every teenage boy will be charged with murder. Fight now!
[/b]

So..Are young adolecnance repsonsible for a wet dreeam.
THINK!

Originally Posted by SpaceFlower

Are you kidding? going through with the birth is not as simple as you might think. Being pregnant is a medical condition that can be dangerous even if the woman has the best care in the world. Besides, if a woman does get pregnant by accident how are you or anyone else to guarentee that she would be able to afford the appropriate medical attention that she and the baby would require? When I asked my doctor how long it would take me to heal she said A woman's body takes about seven years to go back to how it was before pregnant - SEVEN YEARS! We don't just pop em out like pez.
There are very few situation when a dangerous pregnancy can be predicted that early on. Seriously, when a woman chosses to become pregnant there is always a risk.
It IS living at the moment of conception. The point is that it takes about 72 hours for conception (the sperm meeting the egg) to actually occur. That is why it is a contraceptive. AGAIN, it does not kill a baby or even an embryo.
When somone takes the emergency pill they don't even know that they would have gotten pregnant had they not taken it. Besides if you wanna argue that those cells should be "allowed the chance to grow" then that means that every man out there is "taking away the life it could have" when ever they masturbate.
[/b]

Wow SpaceFlower looking back at some of my posts I seem ignorant , sorry guess I don't really know the whole situation with the morning after pill.