It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The 'Morning After Pill' - Murder or a condom in pill form?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 11:23 AM
link   
As I understand the '"morning after pill', it stops the egg and the sperm from fertilizing. Just as a condom, birth control pills, 'the patch', IUDs, etc. If life starts at conception, why is there such an opposition to 'the morning after pill'? Why is it equated to 'abortion'?




posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 11:28 AM
link   
It's a post fertilization PERIOD NOW pill. It doesn't mean you're pregnant. You don't know. It just means you'd like to clean house.

Rather handy after a rape.



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 01:00 PM
link   
The Morning After Pill works in several ways, depending on how far along the conception is. If a woman is in a fertile time, she may actually conceive within the alloted 72 hours. In that case, the pill can be considered an abortion of sorts as it alters the uterus so the fertilized egg (or 'baby') cannot attach to the uterus.

My guess is that's what has people so up in arms.



The morning after pill acts to delay ovulation, prevents fertilization, or inhibits implantation by altering the endometrium.



posted on Nov, 10 2005 @ 02:54 AM
link   
If I remember correctly, Bush and his Neo-Con psychos were having a fit about it not long after he took office. One of the first things he tried doing and still works on was banning the morning after pill because it was considered "abortion" because it prevented the attachment of an egg. Religous nuts want the thing banned for good.

But for those of us who are female, the morning after pill is a two tablet peace of mind kit. Generally, say, if you had sex the night before, and say your condom broke, you forgot to take your birth control pill, or got drunk and had unprotected sex, or the boyfriend didnt pull out early enough, the morning after pill is your second line of defense against unwanted pregnancy. Taking it does not mean that you are definitely pregnant. Taking it simply means that you had a sexual incident that, if the conditions are right, could result in pregnancy, and thus, you get the morning after pill JUST IN CASE.

More often than not, you probably werent at risk of becoming pregnant if you had such an accident and had to resort to the pill. Women take the pill just to make sure, that if the off chance sperm and egg do meet, they will not be able to implant anf grow in the uterus.

I like many women have used it. Its called emergency contraception, and must be taken within three days of the suspect sexual encounter. It really does provide alot of peace of mind and can really dampen the worries.

Thats why the most common name for this wonder of medicine is "Plan B"....just in case plan A fails.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 10:27 AM
link   
What I know about it is that it destroys the fertilised egg, and I believe that it is wrong, and so is all other ways of contraception, whats the point of having sex when you don't want to have a baby?



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by speight89
What I know about it is that it destroys the fertilised egg, and I believe that it is wrong, and so is all other ways of contraception, whats the point of having sex when you don't want to have a baby?



How about for enjoyment? So you don't have sex cause you don't want to have children. You need to get out more.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 11:46 AM
link   
If the morning after pill is being considered murder, then your religious wackos are getting dangerously close to "Every Sperm is Sacred" territory.






I have wiped entire civilizations off of my chest with a grey gym sock.
- Bill Hicks



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by speight89
What I know about it is that it destroys the fertilised egg, and I believe that it is wrong, and so is all other ways of contraception, whats the point of having sex when you don't want to have a baby?


I think you belong in the dark ages or you have been rob of your enjoyment as a human being.

Sorry but life is just more than a whole bunch of religious pushers telling you what and what to do with your life.

Sex for the human body is not only for reproduction but for enjoyment that is why our bodies were given all it needs to make it as pleasurable as it can be.

Pregnancy or fertilization is tabu between religious groups because it only falls on the female of the human species.

Kegs if the sperm is to become sacred then it will be a lot of males out there fishing in their toilet bowls.
to cover up for their sins.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by speight89
What I know about it is that it destroys the fertilised egg, and I believe that it is wrong, and so is all other ways of contraception, whats the point of having sex when you don't want to have a baby?



ummmmm.......to keep a marriage from ending in divorce???

I mean let's face it, there's alot of married people out there who would not take the idea of going celabate until the two of them agreed that they both wanted a child, especially if one was dead set about never having one. and well, I do believe that you could find a few professonals out there that would be willing to explain the importance of intimancy within a marriage relationship...susposedly it can do a great deal to strenthen it.

If the morning after pill is murder, then I think most birth control pills would also be, since they can do the same thing....the egg can be fertilized from time to time and the uterus becomes a little hostile to the fertilized egg....
there are other forms of birth control that would apply.

so, okay, let's call it murder, ban all the contraceptive methods out there that might, just might, impede the fertilized egg from developing. wonder just how many people would then find their lack of desire to have a child would overshadow their desire to have sex. and then, well, out of those, who are in marriages? many men just might decide that sex just isn't worth having to spend 20 or so years of their lives working two jobs to support a child, and many women just don't want to have thier lives tied down for that amount of time, they have careers that they lilke, or whatever. and well, considering the number of jobs out there that just don't pay enough to support this child, more than likely there would be some who just saw the sanity of the "I just can't afford it!!!" so, then what do you think will happen when their spouse just doesn't agree with them? maybe they will have enough money to pay for their pleasure, or maybe there's someone who might be interested at work. or maybe they can just keep pressing and pressing their spouse until their need for sleep deminishes their resolve. or maybe the two of them would just argue and bicker about it on their marry way to divorce court.

In the perfect little world that doesn't exist on this earth, never has, and never will, maybe people would avoid having sex, and be allowed to, when they didn't wish to have children. In our world, they don't!!!
they debate on just how much the date would have to spend on the dinner to assure that the women puts out. they drug, use knives, guns even sometimes. the outright buy it and risk getting infected with aids, or whatever. they'll look elsewhere for what they don't get in their homes. and hey, they will even have GOD and Government tell the women that he is to be obeyed in all things and well, then just avoid all the arguments all together!

in the real world, the evils don't just go away, the best we seem to do is to trade them for other evils that we think will be more pleasing to us.
In this case, do we want to let some of those who would enter this world be prevented from doing so.....maybe, then again, who knows, maybe they just go and find another suitable host to form their body in!!! or do we want ALOT MORE to enter this world, to be hungry, abused, unwanted, exploited, enslaved, used as cheap labor, or hey, would you consider doing your part in donating a nice portion of your paycheck to help these kids, so their parent or parent doesn't have to let them go hungry, sell them off or hire them out and let them be exploited. `We can look thru history and find that all these tactics have been used.....but show me one place in history were those women who chose not to have children we actually free from the danger of having sex forced on them!!! one place in history where they didn't have sex, unless of course, they reallly wanted a baby!! in many cultures, such behavior would have been grounds for devorce, including here in america a century or so ago.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by dawnstar
In this case, do we want to let some of those who would enter this world be prevented from doing so.....maybe, then again, who knows, maybe they just go and find another suitable host to form their body in!!!


I think you bring a very good issue here, perhaps one of the reason Christianity is so against believing in Reincarnation is due to the fact that will put abortion obsolete and meaningless in their pursue of control.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 06:24 PM
link   
If one believes that you only life once and this is your only shot at "heaven" and well, there's this horrible fate waiting for you if your fail, well........your fear of death becomes a pretty big motive for staying alive, no matter what........add in a few "Commands from God" and well, it becomes alot easier to enslave, abuse, and exploit the servants!! I mean, why should I stay here and put up that that kind of crap when I can go visit the planet in the next solar system (or the happy hunting ground, or whatever, and live without it.

I don't thing the abortion issue have anything to do with the idea that there's no reincarnation, just final judgement and reward/punishment.



posted on Dec, 3 2005 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by curme
As I understand the '"morning after pill', it stops the egg and the sperm from fertilizing. Just as a condom, birth control pills, 'the patch', IUDs, etc. If life starts at conception, why is there such an opposition to 'the morning after pill'? Why is it equated to 'abortion'?


My guess would be its equated with abortion because that makes it easier to ban, the ultimate goal being to keep women from making choices about their reproductive life. Another reason would be that the types of people who come out most vehemently against the morning after pill lack the reflective capacity to make the distinction.



posted on Dec, 31 2005 @ 08:47 PM
link   
I have always been curious about something... Now, there are some sects of Christianity which take things to the logical extreme of what I am about to ask, but most of them do not.

Now... I think that most Christians would argue that Saving people's lives is something good and wholesome and desirable, that medicine has enriched our lives in many different ways and allowed us to live longer.

That being said, FERTILITY Medicine has allowed people who were never able to have children to bear offspring. What I want to ask the christians present is... do you consider this against gods will? Should we make FERTILITY medicine illegal?



posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 03:50 PM
link   
The morning after pill does NOT simply prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterine wall - it can also cause a fetus already attached and growing to be killed and flushed out of the woman's body.

Quote from outside source: "RU-486 is sold by Danco Laboratories and is approved to terminate pregnancy up to 49 days after the beginning of the latest menstrual cycle. It blocks a hormone required to sustain a pregnancy. When followed two days later by another medicine, misoprostol, to induce contractions, the pregnancy is terminated. "

This is the source:
www.breitbart.com...

So as you can see, a potential mother can abort her baby with the morning after pill up until she is just over 1 1/2 months pregnant.

To answer the question, it doesn't prevent fertilization. It prevents a sustained pregnancy. So it is definately an abortion and anyone who is against abortion will be against this morning after pill too.



[edit on 23-3-2006 by Archerette]



posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Archerette
already attached and growing to be killed and flushed out of the woman's body.

Quote from outside source: "RU-486

Archerette- this thread is NOT about RU486 and the morning after pill apparently does not effect a continuing pregnancy.

So as you can see, a potential mother can abort her baby with the morning after pill up until she is just over 1 1/2 months pregnant.

The morning after pill can only be taken within 72 [?] hours of unprotected sex to prevent conception/implantation.. it brings a period on early not 1 1/2 months after it's due. You are talking about a completely different medication so your 'facts' are not relevent.

[edit on 23-3-2006 by riley]



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by riley
Archerette- this thread is NOT about RU486


WHAT?!?!?!

Oh my goodness, you are so correct! I apologize for this -

RU 486 IS NOT THE SAME THING AS THE MORNING AFTER PILL! Thank you for that correction on that Hugely misleading post. so sorry! Here's a link to some real facts on it from wikipedia:
en.wikipedia.org...

You also stated, riley, that "the morning after pill apparently does not effect a continuing pregnancy."

This I have to strongly disagree with. A pregnancy starts when an egg is fertilized. This morning after pill, which you so correctly stated can be taken up to 72 hours after having sex, does stop a fertilized egg from implanting in the woman's womb.

Wikipedia states that "Emergency contraceptive pill —referred to simply as ..."morning-after pill" —are hormones that act both to prevent ovulation or fertilisation, or the subsequent implantation of a fertilised egg (zygote). ECPs are not to be confused with chemical abortion drugs like Mifepristone (formerly RU-486) that act after implantation has occurred. "

I did confuse this with RU486 with the morning after pill and again I am sorry for that. Thanks again, riley for the clarification!

Another point of contention - you stated the pill "brings a period on early". It would appear that this is not an accurate statement. It's really much more complicated than that. This is what Wikipedia said:

"There are several mechanisms of action by which such drugs may work. Depending on the time during the menstrual cycle that they are taken, this drug may inhibit or delay ovulation, inhibit tubal transport of the ovum or sperm cell, interfere with fertilization. ... emergency contraceptive pills work by triggering the same hormonal changes in the body as regular birth control pills or even breastfeeding — but they require much higher doses and are less effective than ongoing hormonal contraceptives."

While my link to the RU486 med isn't relevant for this thread, it is relevant for women who want to make an informed choice. I am, however, truly sorry if I mislead anyone into believing that the morning after pill is the same as RU486.



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 12:10 AM
link   
My fiance (then boyfriend) and I had been "together" one afternoon when we had realized the condom had broken. I had heard about the pill so we went to the hospital right away. They had to give me a blood test to make sure I wasn't already pregnant. The doctor informed me that if I was, he could not prescribe me the pill. Luckily I wasn't. He prescribed it to me and I went to the pharmacy and was able to purchase it. So from what I gather from that experience and what I have read, it is not supposed to be taken if you are already pregnant. It is meant to be a back up contraceptive in case the first one didnt work out so well



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Archerette

Originally posted by riley
Archerette- this thread is NOT about RU486


WHAT?!?!?!

Oh my goodness, you are so correct! I apologize for this -

RU 486 IS NOT THE SAME THING AS THE MORNING AFTER PILL! Thank you for that correction on that Hugely misleading post. so sorry! Here's a link to some real facts on it from wikipedia:
en.wikipedia.org...

You also stated, riley, that "the morning after pill apparently does not effect a continuing pregnancy."

This I have to strongly disagree with. A pregnancy starts when an egg is fertilized.

If this is your theological opinion about when life starts etc. I understand what you mean but if you are talking about the actual commencement of pregnancy itself it's medically incorrect. Pregnancy starts at the begginning of gestation when the egg is implanted.. conception doesn't guarentee implantation.

www.emergencycontraception.com.au... //www.emergencycontraception.com.
EC works in several ways to stop pregnancy before it starts:
Stopping or delaying your ovaries from releasing an egg;
Preventing sperm from fertilising any egg you may have already released; or
Stopping a fertilised egg from attaching itself to your womb lining.
So EC can stop a pregnancy before it starts. It does not work if you are already pregnant.


I did confuse this with RU486 with the morning after pill and again I am sorry for that. Thanks again, riley for the clarification!

No probs.

Another point of contention - you stated the pill "brings a period on early". It would appear that this is not an accurate statement.

I used the term in this context:

it brings a period on early not 1 1/2 months after it's due.

Period meaning the pill causes the lining of the uterus to shed [early].. which is basically what a period is. Of course it is much more complicated than that.. I just didn't see any reason to get into specifics.

While my link to the RU486 med isn't relevant for this thread, it is relevant for women who want to make an informed choice.

There are probably threads here where it would be relevent if you'd like to add to them.. though I'm not sure what you mean by 'informed choice'.. wouldn't most women know RU486 is the abortion pill by now [unless you are reffering to the health risks]?

I am, however, truly sorry if I mislead anyone into believing that the morning after pill is the same as RU486.

It seems to a common misconception so it's probably a good thing that you mentioned it as there may be other people who have confused the two.. now they know whats what.


[edit on 9-8-2006 by riley]



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 12:20 PM
link   
It's all just another 'No sperm left behind' plan by Bush. Seriously, if you can't even do what you want to your own body, then what illusion of freedom can you say we even have?



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 08:59 AM
link   
I dont think its a kind of abortion becuase the sperm and egg havent fused and joibned together to multiply.

Anyone who thinks it is, probably shouldnt have kids anyway.




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join