View Full Version : Emergency Contraception is abortion: discuss among yourselves
I like to see Gregg grovel as much as the next person but I don’t think it’s fair to jump on him for saying that “morning after pills…essentially perform an abortion.” (This from other thread.)
If one defines abortion as preventing a fertilized egg from growing into a human, then Gregg didn’t speak out of turn. The devil is in the details.
Today I read website articles to catch up on what is new—there’s not much. Remove the politics, and the science (at least, at layman level) is the same as the last time I looked into this, probably a few years ago.
There is more than one kind of pill and Jane wrote (in that other thread)only about Plan B and (we assume) the generic equivalent. But there are others.
“Ella” works with a different hormone than Plan B. It primarily keeps sperm from entering egg, but a secondary action is that is may keep fertilized egg from attaching.
The RU486 pill, the abortion pill, was around for a long time and was used for emergency contraception. It still is.
So the facts seem to me to be: some emergency contraception pills (not IUD) may prevent a fertilized egg from growing into a human, so choose your drug if that’s a moral issue for you.
In the real world I think it’s likely that Plan B and its latest version and its generics are used the most often. But more than one site said this is not as effective as Ella and RU486, and timing is essential. Also, IUD insertion is a recommended method of emergency contraception, and the layman articles for some IUD’s have always suggested that it may act as abortifactant.
But I completely understand that politics will subvert the definition of “abortion” to suit the needs of either side. I’m not phased by abortion, pro-abortion thought, partial-birth abortion, and all of that stuff so labels just don’t interest me. And so much of these discussions center on emotional meaning attachment to words.
I like to see Gregg grovel as much as the next person...
Betcha' my wife still gets a bigger kick out of it than you do! At this point I usually bring home something like this....
976
I believe that a new life begins when sperm fertilizes an egg. It is not viable without a few other pretty significant things happening, but nonetheless at the moment of fertilization a unique new life is formed. That is, for me, nothing grand and spiritual, its just simple biology. I wrestled with questions about sentience and whether or not it matters if you take a life when that entity has no 'idea' it was alive. To me, I guess it does and so abortion is not an action I would take except, as said before, in any but the most extreme circumstances. That is a personal choice, not something I would want to dictate to others or have dictated to me. As sad as it makes me feel when abortions are performed I will not take any action that limits a woman's right to decide for herself. As puglogic said in the other thread, it is entirely possible to be anti-abortion, but pro-choice.
Regarding the various pills, its pretty much splitting hairs and technicalities, but yes, the devil is in the details. If a product keeps sperm and egg from meeting up there is no reason to add abortion to the discussion. If a different product causes a fertilized egg to be jettisoned somehow then there is, IMO, a basis to consider it a form of abortion. As a practical matter, handing any such pills out to 8th graders at school or anywhere else without parental involvement is something I have a far bigger problem with than the actual chemistry.
Well, I admire your attitude Gregg. Abortion is up to the woman whose body is hi-jacked, so to speak, for nine months, (then 18 or so years after). It IS up to the woman, Period.
Frankly i don't like the discussions that try to 'split hairs' about it, groveling and excusing by saying, well, it isn't REALLY an abortion if this or that, or 'You know women use birth control for OTHER reasons than birth control'. Who cares! Who's business is it other than the woman's?
You know why I used birth control when younger? I used it so I WOULDN'T GET PREGNANT! And if I had gotten pregnant before i was ready, I would have seriously considered abortion! Yes. Abortion is LEGAL in this country, and a perfectly LEGITIMATE way to STOP A PREGNANCY. Frankly It's the only way i know of to safely stop a pregnancy. I'm frankly tired of letting the far right frame the conversation. Abortions are to stop a pregnancy, because the pregnancy is unwanted. Period. There is nothing left to discuss.
Frankly, knowing how young people are these days, i wish they handed out birth control to all young women/teenagers, along with classes in self esteem/ownership of their own bodies. They should not be made ashamed of their bodies/urges/biology, and allowed the freedom of complete control of their own bodies. Which means that along with the counsel to abstain until it's right, the absolute knowledge that they are ultimately in charge of their own biology (and that it's not dirty or sinful or wicked)
IUD's are abortion, basically, and a perfectly legitimate way to prevent pregnancy. So is the morning after pill. Unless the parents are willing to carry and raise the baby, i think young girls should have access to this, even with out the parents consent. If the girl is pregnant, or could be pregnant, she is old enough to decide if she wants to carry a baby for 9 months. She decided to have sex, without telling you, kudos to her for seeking the responsible action to prevent an unwanted pregnancy.
A parent should be proud of a daughter who shows such maturity.
As a member of the far right (so far that at times I wrap around to the far left), I absolutely support a woman's right to control over her own body. I do believe that killing a fertilized egg is at some point killing a human. And that doesn't bother me a bit. So I feel no need to get into debates about when exactly it becomes a human, or if rape/incest were involved, or what day of the week it is. Because even if the new life was fully human at the instant of conception, the woman's right to determine the use of her own body outweighs the child's right to occupy it against her will, even for a moment.
(I also think people who wantonly abort children are scum. I believe I have mentioned the case of my sister on these forums before as an example.)
ApatheticNoMore
10-8-12, 6:50pm
“Ella” works with a different hormone than Plan B. It primarily keeps sperm from entering egg, but a secondary action is that is may keep fertilized egg from attaching.
I think that is how most birth control pills work. They mostly prevent conception but if conception occurs they prevent the fertilized egg from attaching. So I don't know that they are fundementally different than plan B. Plan Bs are usually used within a few days, sometimes hours, of intercourse, it's not like you are talking anything resembling a human there.
Where do you get the idea IUDs are abortion? It was my understanding that the mechnisms by which copper IUDs work isn't known, and hormonal IUDs work not much differently than the pill.
...Where do you get the idea IUDs are abortion? It was my understanding that the mechnisms by which copper IUDs work isn't known, and hormonal IUDs work not much differently than the pill...
I didn't distinguish betweent type of IUD.
Plan B does NOT (NOT! It DOESN'T! :laff:) create an abortion according to the New York Times in the article summarized in the other thread. I suppose I could read the article because I'm interested in what set them off to research this topic and make the declaration that they did. Any who disagree will be labeled "anti-science." That's a common tactic of the lefties at NYT, but I digress.
This scientific point doesn't matter either way to me, my position is exactly that of bae: abortion kills a human. I don't need to define when the human is human or even when it is MORE human. Adult woman trumps human embryo every time.
edited about a million times
No matter where on the spectrum of this your beliefs take you, wherever that is, it is where you are.
Perhaps intellectually stimulating, but I seriously doubt that anyone's mind or belief system is going to be changed by any discussion, no matter how stimulating or thought provoking it might be. It takes significantly less energy to be content where one is in one's belief system.
Because I am active in my community people think that I have opinions worthy of sharing on all manner of subjects and issues. They are wrong. I am a simpleton where any of this sort of thing is concerned. It is my preference. Even if I do not post much, I read most threads, just to feel involved, but I have to share that although topics like this make me queasy, I find comfort in how respectful dialogue is here. That said, I have not read the other thread mentioned, but have to admit that this made me smile: "I like to see Gregg grovel as much as the next person but..."
Abortion is up to the woman whose body is hi-jacked, so to speak, for nine months, (then 18 or so years after). .
I guess if I willingly opened the plane's doors to a hi-jacker and invited them in with open arms, knowing full well that there is a strong possibility I will be hi-jacked and it will change the course of my life forever, then I agree, it is my responsibility to take care of it. I just think that the responsibility is to keep from getting hi-jacked in the first place rather than kill the other passenger so that I can remain free.
As a member of the far right (so far that at times I wrap around to the far left), I absolutely support a woman's right to control over her own body. I do believe that killing a fertilized egg is at some point killing a human. And that doesn't bother me a bit. So I feel no need to get into debates about when exactly it becomes a human, or if rape/incest were involved, or what day of the week it is. Because even if the new life was fully human at the instant of conception, the woman's right to determine the use of her own body outweighs the child's right to occupy it against her will, even for a moment.
(I also think people who wantonly abort children are scum. I believe I have mentioned the case of my sister on these forums before as an example.)
Pretty much my view, except I have a jaundiced view of people who are careless about birth control in general. I don't get the hand-wringing about zygotes and early-term abortions, but we all have different views of what constitutes human life, obviously.
I guess if I willingly opened the plane's doors to a hi-jacker and invited them in with open arms, knowing full well that there is a strong possibility I will be hi-jacked and it will change the course of my life forever, then I agree, it is my responsibility to take care of it. I just think that the responsibility is to keep from getting hi-jacked in the first place rather than kill the other passenger so that I can remain free.
There are going to be people on the road today that will end up killing someone - some through irresponsible behavior, some for some momentary lapse of attention, some for really no fault of their own. Are we just going to tell all of them "well it's your fault for driving"?
Pretty much my view, except I have a jaundiced view of people who are careless about birth control in general. I don't get the hand-wringing about zygotes and early-term abortions, but we all have different views of what constitutes human life, obviously.
Yep. That.
I really don't know the answer to the question. Personally, I would not have an abortion, but I am politically pro-choice. As someone who considers herself pro-life, I would not feel queasy about emergency contraception--at all. I was raised Catholic, and I'm quite sure that it's abortion from a dogmatic point of view, but I don't consider it so. What I do feel queasy about, and where I am NOT politically pro-choice, is in late-term abortions.
ApatheticNoMore
10-10-12, 12:18am
I wouldn't be at ease with a real abortion either, and I wouldn't encourage it either. But it's hard to see emergency contraception that way. It's taken generally within a few days (what you have is a mass of cells), I guess plan B doesn't even prevent implantation, whereas I've heard birth control pills might prevent implantation. I had never heard of IUDs being used for abortion rather than as birth control before. The mechanisms by which copper IUDs work as birth control is unknown last I heard.
I guess if I willingly opened the plane's doors to a hi-jacker and invited them in with open arms, knowing full well that there is a strong possibility I will be hi-jacked and it will change the course of my life forever, then I agree, it is my responsibility to take care of it. I just think that the responsibility is to keep from getting hi-jacked in the first place rather than kill the other passenger so that I can remain free.
Thank you Spartana. That's what I was feeling, but couldn't find the right words. You did.
There are going to be people on the road today that will end up killing someone - some through irresponsible behavior, some for some momentary lapse of attention, some for really no fault of their own. Are we just going to tell all of them "well it's your fault for driving"?
There can be very real consequences for irresponsible behavior and for momentary lapses of attention. There can also be similar consequences for things that are purely accidental and unavoidable in the driving analogy which I suppose would correlate to rape/incest in the pregnancy argument. In the case of things that can be avoided (irresponsible behavior or attention lapse) doesn't it at least make sense to be wearing your seat belt?
I guess if I willingly opened the plane's doors to a hi-jacker and invited them in with open arms, knowing full well that there is a strong possibility I will be hi-jacked and it will change the course of my life forever, then I agree, it is my responsibility to take care of it. I just think that the responsibility is to keep from getting hi-jacked in the first place rather than kill the other passenger so that I can remain free.
I couldn't agree more. Well said.
I have not read the other thread mentioned, but have to admit that this made me smile: "I like to see Gregg grovel as much as the next person but..."
Y'all are making this a tough room to play.
Thank you Spartana. That's what I was feeling, but couldn't find the right words.
There can be very real consequences for irresponsible behavior and for momentary lapses of attention. There can also be similar consequences for things that are purely accidental and unavoidable in the driving analogy which I suppose would correlate to rape/incest in the pregnancy argument. In the case of things that can be avoided (irresponsible behavior or attention lapse) doesn't it at least make sense to be wearing your seat belt?
Well of course it does! Absolutely! But if you forget to wear that seat belt, it doesn't mean you can't buckle it later (plan B) and hopefully next time you will buckle up before putting it in gear, so to speak! A child shouldn't be made to carry the label of punishment for irresponsible adults.
I really don't like the terms pro-life and pro-abortion. I don't know anyone who ISN'T pro-life or who IS pro-abortion. A more accurate set of terms is pro-choice and no-choice.
As republicans are so no-choice, I don't understand why they are so hot to defund Planned Parenthood, which does more to prevent actual pregnancies than all the 'just say no' programs out there. Plus they generally aid women's health for women who maybe can't afford it otherwise. Abortions are only 3% of the service!
As far as late term abortions, this nasty trick that the right keeps trying to pull is the most disgustingly reprehensible thing they have done so far. How nasty do you have to be to attack people at their most vulnerable time, adding incredible hurt to injury. Most late term abortions are preformed because the woman's life is in danger, or the fetus is dead, or lacks a brain, literally. Abortions in the 6th, 7th, or 8th month aren't done for 'convenience'. There is nothing convenient about it. More often than not it's a gut wrenching decision made, when there is no other choice, by parents who absolutely wanted that baby, which is why they are in the 6th, 7th, or 8th month. The fact that someone, somewhere once did it for 'convenience' doesn't change the fact that most are gut wrenchingly painful for the parents and the doctor, who would much rather deliver a healthy, live baby. For some to use these people just to push their political agenda is beyond disgusting.
Well of course it does! Absolutely! But if you forget to wear that seat belt, it doesn't mean you can't buckle it later...
Reaching back to buckle up when your 1/2 way through the windshield doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but hey, everybody's different.
A child shouldn't be made to carry the label of punishment for irresponsible adults.
At least we can agree on something.
ApatheticNoMore
10-10-12, 11:46am
Reaching back to buckle up when your 1/2 way through the windshield doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but hey, everybody's different.
Not really what emergency contraception is intended for, although sure it could be used for that but it's only 50-60 somethigng% effective if used as your only method of birth control, that's not good effectiveness for birth control AT ALL. It's intended for circumstances like a condom breaks. But you should have been using more effective birth control than just a condom, well maybe (although the effectiveness of condoms themselves is far greater than the 50-60 something % of plan B). That means hormonal birth control or IUDs then (short of sterilization).
"I don't know anyone who ISN'T pro-life or who IS pro-abortion."
I think this sums it up very well. There are probably a few out there that could be pointed to, as always - but I don't think many people would want to identify themselves with them.
Thank you Spartana. That's what I was feeling, but couldn't find the right words. You did.
There can be very real consequences for irresponsible behavior and for momentary lapses of attention. There can also be similar consequences for things that are purely accidental and unavoidable in the driving analogy which I suppose would correlate to rape/incest in the pregnancy argument. In the case of things that can be avoided (irresponsible behavior or attention lapse) doesn't it at least make sense to be wearing your seat belt?
The argument being made is here that one should not be driving in the first place.
The argument being made is here that one should not be driving in the first place.
It makes me sad that kids feel pressure to have sex at such a young age. My first instinct is to say that's a different thread, but it all relates. Sex is a good thing and I don't have any problem teaching all the positive, loving, happy aspects of it to kids. If fact I think its silly to dwell on the negatives and try to scare them into abstinence because it won't work. That said, a well rounded discussion of human relations, including sex, needs to cover the potential consequences. Pregnancy is certainly one. STD's and AIDS are others as are possible social ramifications. STD's are what makes me more of a condom advocate than some other methods, but that really is another thread. Other posters have stated quite eloquently that effort put into preventing unwanted pregnancy offers the greatest bang for the buck and I agree, but it will never reduce the number to zero which is obviously why there are Plan B's. My personal comfort level goes away when we start relying more on Plan B than we do on Plan A. That's all. I just want our kids to have as much information as possible starting very young so they are as prepared as possible when the time comes to "drive".
The argument being made is here that one should not be driving in the first place.
While I am not anti-abortion for all cases, and even feel that it's a woman right to choose, I VERY STRONGLY believe that, unlike driving accidents, most pregnancies CAN be prevented but that many people aren't willing to take as many precautions as needed to protect themselves. My belief is that 99% of all abortions CAN be prevented because 99% of all pregnancies CAN be prevented. If that statistic was the same for driving a vehicle by taking certain precautions, then I'd say yes, "one should not be driving in the first place" unless those precausions are taken. So far this year there have been close to one million abortions preformed in the USA, approx. 9,400 of those were due to rape or incest. So over 990,000 people "voluntarily" got preggers due to negligence. So I guess what I'm saying (badly) is that if 99% of the people who were in car accidents could have prevented them by taking minimal precautions, then everyone would justifiably be pretty dern ticked off if there were over a million accidents a year - resulting in over a million deaths. So yeah, those people shouldn't be driving in the first place.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.