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.

 

Obama okay with morning-after pill sales at age 15?

page: 3
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 3 2013 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
New York is looking at raising the age to buy tobacco products to 21.

Yet 15 year olds are supposedly old enough to make a determination that will affect their body.

Either lower the drinking/smoking age to 15, or get rid of this idiotic rule that allows 15 year-old girls to make these individual determinations.


I'm not saying I agree with either, but New York isn't being contradictory here. Both cases are to try to curb a public health issue. People smoking and dying of cancer is a drain on society and the healthcare system and so is teenage pregnancy.




posted on May, 3 2013 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I think 15 year olds should be allowed to have it, I just think they should have to have an adult with them when they purchase it. Not even a parent necessarily, just someone that is older and a bit smarter so they don't buy a ton of them and take one after every time they have sex. 15 year olds are stupid.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by 48e18

Originally posted by beezzer
New York is looking at raising the age to buy tobacco products to 21.

Yet 15 year olds are supposedly old enough to make a determination that will affect their body.

Either lower the drinking/smoking age to 15, or get rid of this idiotic rule that allows 15 year-old girls to make these individual determinations.


I'm not saying I agree with either, but New York isn't being contradictory here. Both cases are to try to curb a public health issue. People smoking and dying of cancer is a drain on society and the healthcare system and so is teenage pregnancy.


People doing things to themselves, self-determining isn't/wasn't a drain on society. . . . until the advent of Obamacare.

Before, people could do what they wanted with their own bodies.

Now?

Our bodies don't belong to our individual selves. They are part of the "collective" now.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I think 15 year olds should be allowed to have it, I just think they should have to have an adult with them when they purchase it. Not even a parent necessarily, just someone that is older and a bit smarter so they don't buy a ton of them and take one after every time they have sex. 15 year olds are stupid.

Now that logic I can get behind. I'd said something similar at the start of the thread for having to at least touch base with a Doctor, as they do now for the monthly schedule birth control. Nothing invasive or costly. Nothing to form a barrier or deter them. At least, that wouldn't be the intent on any level.

I just want to know, as you say there, it isn't starting and ending entirely with the sole judgement of a young teen, already panicky and thinking a bit off with the sudden personal crisis they find themselves in the middle of to be considering this in the first place.

I'll never say I like the idea of a teenager using a thing like this...but I'm also pragmatic. We can't stop hormonal teens in the ultimate end result of things and even highly restrictive societies have some teen pregnancy. We can at least insure they don't compound problems or, indeed, take too much. I can just see a teen figuring "If 2 over 12 hours works well.. Hmm... Then doubling it will insure total success, huh??' ... can't you? I'd say the Doctor would be the step I'd want to see required (parental knowledge or not, if it must be to make it work at all) but some adult. yes.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 



People doing things to themselves, self-determining isn't/wasn't a drain on society. . . . until the advent of Obamacare.

Before, people could do what they wanted with their own bodies.

Now?

Our bodies don't belong to our individual selves. They are part of the "collective" now.


Are you serious?

The government has been trying to fight against high lung cancer rates due to smoking for decades now...exactly how do you just pin that on "Obamacare"?

I'm confused, are you for this decision to make the morning after pill more available, because it sounds like you are making a pro-choice argument about being able to do whatever you want with people's own bodies.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by 48e18
reply to post by beezzer
 



People doing things to themselves, self-determining isn't/wasn't a drain on society. . . . until the advent of Obamacare.

Before, people could do what they wanted with their own bodies.

Now?

Our bodies don't belong to our individual selves. They are part of the "collective" now.


Are you serious?

The government has been trying to fight against high lung cancer rates due to smoking for decades now...exactly how do you just pin that on "Obamacare"?

I'm confused, are you for this decision to make the morning after pill more available, because it sounds like you are making a pro-choice argument about being able to do whatever you want with people's own bodies.


Yes I'm serious. YOU were the one who started off with the "drain to society".

People should be able to choose what they do to their own bodies.

Not the state.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 



Yes I'm serious. YOU were the one who started off with the "drain to society".

People should be able to choose what they do to their own bodies.

Not the state.


So you are pro-choice?



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by 48e18
reply to post by beezzer
 



Yes I'm serious. YOU were the one who started off with the "drain to society".

People should be able to choose what they do to their own bodies.

Not the state.


So you are pro-choice?


Nope. People can do whatever they want with their own bodies.

An infant is another individual. Another body.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by 48e18
reply to post by beezzer
 



Yes I'm serious. YOU were the one who started off with the "drain to society".

People should be able to choose what they do to their own bodies.

Not the state.


So you are pro-choice?


Nope. People can do whatever they want with their own bodies.

An infant is another individual. Another body.


So in the case of this morning after pill...you are a supporter of it?

The pill doesn't do anything except to the women's body.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by 48e18

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by 48e18
reply to post by beezzer
 



Yes I'm serious. YOU were the one who started off with the "drain to society".

People should be able to choose what they do to their own bodies.

Not the state.


So you are pro-choice?


Nope. People can do whatever they want with their own bodies.

An infant is another individual. Another body.


So in the case of this morning after pill...you are a supporter of it?

The pill doesn't do anything except to the women's body.


Not going to say either way until I do my own research on it. But anything done to the individual's body should be their choice, right?

And if this pill is allowed to 15 year olds, then why isn't tobacco or alcohol?



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 



And if this pill is allowed to 15 year olds, then why isn't tobacco or alcohol?


Well that doesn't entirely make sense.

We know tobacco and alcohol are both damaging to the body in the short and long term. I see no reason not to limit these things to adults.

But this brings up another question...are you for the legalization of all drugs?



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


you cant figure out why the morning after pill is less dangerous than drinking?

Surely your just trolling.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by 48e18
reply to post by beezzer
 



And if this pill is allowed to 15 year olds, then why isn't tobacco or alcohol?


Well that doesn't entirely make sense.


What doesn't make sense?


We know tobacco and alcohol are both damaging to the body in the short and long term. I see no reason not to limit these things to adults.


Because children can't make informed decisions based on what to do with their own bodies, correct?

Hmmm, yet. . . . .



But this brings up another question...are you for the legalization of all drugs?


Stay on topic. And play by T&C's, please.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 11:59 AM
link   
Well Hoorah for BIG PHARMA!!!

Morning after pills should make them billion's more, just like birth control pills!

Take a good look at more corporate fascism.

A 15 year old is to young to be having sex.

Say hello to eugenics!

Because that is what it is.

Morning after pill/birth contro pill/planned parenthood the trifecta of the deliberate systematic state sponsored destruction of life.

Then the same people turn around, and say "it's for the children' yeah well babies shouldn't be having babies as there is more than one way to accomplish that instead of putting pharmaceuticals in a young developing body.
edit on 3-5-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by beezzer
 


you cant figure out why the morning after pill is less dangerous than drinking?

Surely your just trolling.


No.

Pay attention.

Alcohol is for adults because CHILDREN can't make informed decisions even though it is their own body.

Yet. . . . .

NOW DO YOU GET IT?



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 



Because children can't make informed decisions based on what to do with their own bodies, correct?


No, because it is damaging to their bodies and addictive to boot. I wouldn't mind seeing both of those ages boosted up to 21.

My second question is very on topic...it will tell the difference between honesty and ideology...I'll tone it down for you though for the teeandcees.

Do you support removing laws on anything you can ingest, smoke, inject into your own body?



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


How Is giving people control over their reproduction eugenics?

Why the **** do idiots come out of the woodwork parroting buzzwords.
edit on 3-5-2013 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by 48e18
reply to post by beezzer
 



Because children can't make informed decisions based on what to do with their own bodies, correct?


No, because it is damaging to their bodies and addictive to boot. I wouldn't mind seeing both of those ages boosted up to 21.


Kinda police-statish, aren't you? Making that kind of determination for another individual to do with their own body?


My second question is very on topic...it will tell the difference between honesty and ideology...I'll tone it down for you though for the teeandcees.

Do you support removing laws on anything you can ingest, smoke, inject into your own body?


Yep.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


If they are old enough to get pregnant... they are old enough to make choices about reproduction.

What is so hard to understand about that?


edit on 3-5-2013 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by neo96
 


How Is giving people control over their reproduction eugenics?

Why the **** do idiots come out of the woodwork parroting buzzwords. Ive noticed most of the people who do this are religious... because we all know religious people are stupid.


People already do have control its called keeping their pants zipped up, and on.

This ain't got jack to do with religion it has everything to do with child endangerment.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join