Zone1 Does anyone object to the use of abortion pills to terminate pregnancies before 10 weeks?

If you terminate prior to 10 weeks that virtually guarantees no fetal heartbeat. Does anyone have a problem with greatly expanding the availability and promoting the use of emergency contraceptives a.k.a morning after pills a.k.a abortion pills prior to 10 weeks fetal development?

There are better alternatives such as morning after pills... or FFS birth control pills.
Having said that, there are women who have bad reactions to birth control pills and can't take them.
But these "abortion pills" are a better compromise than the murderous and barbaric practice of killing a human fetus that is beyond 12 weeks.
 
If you aren't going to discuss the topic then there isn't any need to comment. Your opinion as to whether or not someone else is "allowed" to have an opinion is not the debate here.
 
If you terminate prior to 10 weeks that virtually guarantees no fetal heartbeat. Does anyone have a problem with greatly expanding the availability and promoting the use of emergency contraceptives a.k.a morning after pills a.k.a abortion pills prior to 10 weeks fetal development?


Yes. The only moral reason would be the life of the mother.
 
There is so much general ignorance about morning after v. abortion pills. I don't blame anyone for this because it's all very confusing.

So the morning after pill does not cause an abortion. It floods the woman's body with hormones so that implantation does not occur. If implantation does not occur there is no pregnancy in the first place. She will have a period, presumably, and life goes on.

An abortion pill--RU 486--aborts a known pregnancy where implantation has been established and the embryo/fetus is developing. The woman will expel the fetus at home. I am morally opposed to this because it is an abortion, whether pre- or post- 10 weeks.

Sorry; the morning after pill is intended as an abortion. It is intended to take a fertilized egg, if it exists, and cause it to flush out rather than attach. That kills the fertilized egg unnaturally.
 
I respect your opinion and your knowledge on this issue. I am just very concerned that if as a country we cannot find some sort of compromise on abortion, it will be a source of perpetual division and violence. A wide expansion of birth control and "abortion pills" into states with very restrictive abortion laws at least gives women some other options. From what I have read, over half of the "abortions" are via the use of pills and not a physical doctor assisted abortion.
Compromise is purely evil. It is used by evil people with evil agendas to get otherwise good people to accept more and more evil in small bits at a time.

There is no acceptable compromise on abortion. Well, maybe we could compromise on 20 years in prison for the mother and everyone involved in arranging and performing the abortion instead of public hanging... There's a compromise I could get behind.
 
There are better alternatives such as morning after pills... or FFS birth control pills.
Having said that, there are women who have bad reactions to birth control pills and can't take them.
But these "abortion pills" are a better compromise than the murderous and barbaric practice of killing a human fetus that is beyond 12 weeks.

Are there women who have had bad reactions to saying NO?
 
It delays ovulation, thickens the mucus in the cervical wall and can prevent implantation, yes. So yes, there is a small chance there could be a fertilized ovum that never implants if you take Plan B. Some people feel this is also the case with IUDs and with certain birth control pills.
Everything that is intended to, or known to, kill a human life, even one of just two cells, is murder and must be banned.
 
Which will be one of the ramifications sans Roe…
Require DNA proof of fatherhood and the fathers and mothers pay to support their own children. A woman who claims she doesn't know who is the father then must meet the financial needs of her child on her own. The only help she should get legally would be to name the father and have that verified by DNA and then the father will be required to help.

Failure to maintain the appropriate financial resources to provide for the minimal care - a dry, warm, bed at night, three nutritious meals a day, and clothing including shoes that fit and have no holes in the soles, gets alternating jail months for the two parents.

Pretty much beyond that, a child doesn't need much other than love.
 
I disagree

Taxpayers are expected to support unwanted babies

WIC
FOOD STAMPS
ETC

Interesting. Now we can kill people that we don't want to pay to support. Are you suggesting maybe the chairs in the welfare offices be electric chairs and when the adults sit we zap them? I have to say, if that's what you're suggesting then I definitely agree.
 
Some states are legislating their pseudo science and defining personhood. Saying personhood is at fertilization.
These pills, even IUDs, would have the mother take a murder charge.
Thats where we are. A woman cant even make a mistake in some backward ass states!
Of course she can make a mistake. She just can't kill the outcome of the mistake. Pay a price for a few months (that's called consequences of our mistakes) and put the baby up for adoption.
 
But to me once the embryo is implanted and is developing, it's a unique human life and anything that purposely disrupts that cycle is an abortion--the pregnancy is literally "aborted".
Wrong. Once the embry is an embryo, once the egg is fertilized, it is a unique human life.
 
That is juvenile.
My daughter in law is one of those women who can't take birth control.
So they will never have sex?
Think before you post.
And BTW - she is pregnant now, they messed up the time and got exited and he stayed in.
So I am to be a grandfather again. :)
Spare us the details, please. Even grandpa shouldn't know those details.

There's no reason your daughter-in-law can't have sex. Have sex with a person willing to commit to staying together to raise any child that comes from sex.

Use a condom; oral sex; B.o.B. sex. or just don't have sex if you don't want to raise a child. No, your granddaughter should not be allowed to use abortion as birth control.
 
Wrong. Once the embry is an embryo, once the egg is fertilized, it is a unique human life.

I'm mostly with you, but a fertilized egg is not an embryo. First. Second, this leaves you on very shaky ground when it comes to ectopic pregnancy. A pregnancy implanted in the fallopian tube WILL NOT result in a baby and very much can kill the mother if left. In most cases, "the life of the mother" is an excuse to abort the baby--but not in ectopic pg.

So for that reason alone it is not rational to take your hard line.
 
That is juvenile.
My daughter in law is one of those women who can't take birth control.
So they will never have sex?
Think before you post.
And BTW - she is pregnant now, they messed up the time and got exited and he stayed in.
So I am to be a grandfather again. :)

awwww congrats! The best news. I hope I can be a grandma someday--I can't WAIT
 
If you terminate prior to 10 weeks that virtually guarantees no fetal heartbeat. Does anyone have a problem with greatly expanding the availability and promoting the use of emergency contraceptives a.k.a morning after pills a.k.a abortion pills prior to 10 weeks fetal development?

Does an "abortion pill" KILL a biological HUMAN?
 
That is juvenile.
My daughter in law is one of those women who can't take birth control.
So they will never have sex?
Think before you post.
And BTW - she is pregnant now, they messed up the time and got exited and he stayed in.
So I am to be a grandfather again. :)
Get "fixed"

A baby should die for recreational sex?


Barrier methods have fewer side effects compared to hormonal birth control options.
  • Diaphragm. The diaphragm is a small, flexible cup made of silicone. ...
  • Cervical cap. ...
  • Spermicides. ...
  • Male and female condoms. ...
  • The sponge. ...
  • Phexxi.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top