Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
« ROUND Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: Santorum campaign suggests Mitt Romney may have done deal to make Ron Paul his running mate

By: Riana in ROUND | Recommend this post (0)
Fri, 24 Feb 12 4:44 AM | 51 view(s)
Boardmark this board | De's Test Board 		Msg. 39096 of 45651
(This msg. is a reply to 39092 by Decomposed)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

I think it's a matter of semantics.

The morning-after pill is an elevated dose of hormones. It does one of three things - prevents ovulation if it hasn't occurred, prevent fertilization if ovulation has occurred, or prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg. If the morning-after pill is taken AFTER the zygote is implanted, it doesn't do anything to harm the pregnancy (as I understand it)

Since technically, a woman is not considered pregnant until the implantation occurs, and an abortion is ending a pregnancy, then the morning-after pill is not, in fact, an abortion pill.

Of course, if you believe that life begins at the moment of conception, then taking either pill could be taking a life.

There are plenty of medications that can cause the fertilized egg to not continue developing. Should those fall under the same rules proposed for birth control and morning-after pills? Because if they don't, I bet you'd start finding off-label prescribing of those medications.




Avatar

What is the point of rules that are not enforced?


 - - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: Santorum campaign suggests Mitt Romney may have done deal to make Ron Paul his running mate
By: Decomposed in ROUND
Fri, 24 Feb 12 2:27 AM 		Msg. 39092 of 45651

Thanks, clo! I appreciate your taking the time to post that.

Ron Paul points out something that's literally true. The morning-after pill is, I believe, the same as certain birth control pills, but with at an elevated dose. Hormonally, it's the same.

However, I'm not sure of his point. If one is okay, so is the other? Hardly! Apple seeds contain a glycoside that breaks down in the body to form cyanide. You can eat them all day, though, without any effect because the dose per seed is so small. But concentrate them, and the result is deadly.

It's no crime to feed a person apple seeds. Some cultures even use them medicinally - remember laetrile? But do the same with a concentrate, and suddenly it's murder.

Ethically the same? Hardly. So, as I said, I'm not sure what Ron Paul is getting at. I'll have to read your whole link later. (I've got class in a few minutes. I'm currently on a school computer.)

« ROUND Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next