Say Anything Blog

So that morning after pill isn’t going to put a funny mark in your wallet is it?

I agree with you on the underaged purchasers though.

The age of concent is lower than 18 in most states, so your argument doesn’t hold much water.

The age of consent is about getting married.  Married folks aren’t the problem here, are they?

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

bob:

1. the “age of concent” applies to more than mariage. It’s the cut-off date for statutory rape as well. Basically, it’s the age a person can concent to having sex.

2. Married people use contraception as well, bob

The reason why sensible people want universal access is because it’s better for the girl to keep it private and quiet.  People who want oarental notification laws are people who want to further abuse raped children, because, as we know, a pregnant child is by definition a raped child.

Also, a child is something that said child will have to deal with for the rest of her life - her parents don’t.  So, just as your parents can not legally maime you for the rest of your life, neither can they saddle you with the burden of an unwanted child conceived of rape.

Get it?

JMJ

People who want oarental notification laws are people who want to further abuse raped children, because, as we know, a pregnant child is by definition a raped child.

What if the other party was younger than her?  Does that make her the rapists.

If it was legitimately rape it’s absolutely something the family needs to deal with.

Congratulations, that’s the new record for dumbest post ever.

And what if the rapist is her father?  And think of the shame!  If it’s rape, we would all hope she comes forward to the police.  That’s her call - that’s what the constitution says.  You can not compel anyone to testify to anything - including kids.  And you can’t have parents maiming their kids for life just as you can’t have parents saddling their children with children.

As for dumb - pl-ease.  You wouldn’t last five minutes in a debate with me.

JMJ

If we hold that parents are responsible for their children (and we’d better all agree on that point or this country is in serious trouble) then we also have to agree that children shouldn’t be allowed access to abortions or emergency contraceptives without their parent’s knowledge.

I don’t think kids under 18 should be allowed to buy anything without their parents’ permission.

I think we can all agree that any young girl seeking a (thong or other revealing article of clothing) is obviously engaging in risky sexual behavior, should that child be allowed to engage in that behavior and then make decisions that will likely alter the rest of her life without involving her parents? NO!

Well then, Dave.  Should parents be allowed to break their kids backs leaving them paraplegic for the rest of their lives?  Or, should a child that can be cured of paraplegia be denied a cure because the parents don’t like it?

JMJ

And what if the rapist is her father?

There are provisions in place - social services, child protection, police procedures and the court system - to deal with abusive parents.

I don’t think that’s an argument to support policies which exclude the vast majority of parents who aren’t abusive.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Oh yeah Rob, I’m sure that’ll be a blast for a little girl.

The point here is simple - forcing a child to carry a child IS child abuse.  And all you sickos are condoning CHILD ABUSE.

JMJ

The dissonance on this subject is just amazing.  Women can’t get oral contraceptives ("the pill") without a doctor’s prescription, but they can get it a concentrated and more dangerous form over the counter if they intend to use it for abortion?  It’s just further proof that “the right to an abortion” trumps all other considerations in the debate for the pro-abortion crowd.

Oh yeah Rob, I’m sure that’ll be a blast for a little girl.

So you’re saying the better solution is to let the girl avoid talking to authorities about the fact that her father raped her and just abort the incestuous child?

Boy, that’s just wonderful.

The point here is simple - forcing a child to carry a child IS child abuse. And all you sickos are condoning CHILD ABUSE.

No, we “sickos” are trying to keep these little girls from getting knocked up in the first place by opposing laws that allow these little girls to keep their parents out of their lives.

And even if the girl gets pregnant, having her carry it to term is preferable to murdering the younger child in her womb simply to avoid some bit of emotional trauma.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

As for dumb - pl-ease. You wouldn’t last five minutes in a debate with me.

Body oder problem?

And what if the rapist is her father?

Then the father should be locked up for pretty much the rest of her life.

And think of the shame!

Then why do you want to make it easier to continue?

If it’s rape, we would all hope she comes forward to the police.

Well that is her moral responsibility.  Otherwise the jerk will likely hurt someone else.

That’s her call

You hurt everyone when you make it easier for the pervert to continue by telling her she doesn’t have a responsibility.  Furthermore it’s the responsibility of the family to handle that, not some 15 year old girl.

- that’s what the constitution says.

You must have a different constitution than I do.

You can not compel anyone to testify to anything - including kids.

Ask Judith Miller.  Although it does present some problems if she really won’t.  However that’s something that the family should handle as a family.

And you can’t have parents maiming their kids for life just as you can’t have parents saddling their children with children.

Pretty sick to assume that all families are sexual abusers.  You should seek some professional help.

And even if the girl gets pregnant, having her carry it to term is preferable to murdering the younger child in her womb simply to avoid some bit of emotional trauma.

Even if abortion is legal it’s still wrong to let a child make that terrible decision herself.

For all your “abstinance education,” and your Christian moralizing, the truth is that a girl from the “liberal, Godless” coasts is far less likelyto get pregnant than a girl from the “Bible Belt.”

If you want girls to not get pregnant, just be honest and open with them and don’t clutter their minds with myths and lies.

As for “dissonance,” yes - the Pill should be available over the counter too.

Rob - you condone child rape and abuse.  Period.  That you would force a child to have a child shows exactly why we need these pills universally available.  People like you are why the Bible Belt has almost twice the rates of social ills as the rest of the country.

Whistler, you are constitutionally illiterate.  Nice try at a baiting me, though.  You must be a real “Christian,” huh?

JMJ

For all your “abstinance education,” and your Christian moralizing, the truth is that a girl from the “liberal, Godless” coasts is far less likelyto get pregnant than a girl from the “Bible Belt.”

I’m an atheist, so find another talking point.

If you want girls to not get pregnant, just be honest and open with them and don’t clutter their minds with myths and lies.

Myths and lies?  Like the idea that abstinence will keep them from getting pregnant/getting diseases?

When did that become a myth?

Rob - you condone child rape and abuse. Period. That you would force a child to have a child shows exactly why we need these pills universally available. People like you are why the Bible Belt has almost twice the rates of social ills as the rest of the country.

Got some proof of that bub?  My community is quite nice, thank you very much, though I’m not sure that ND is part of the “bible belt.”

And I don’t condone child rape.  I just don’t think the proper response to the rape of a child is to kill another child.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

As for “dissonance,” yes - the Pill should be available over the counter too.

I take some prescription drugs that I don’t think should require me to see a doctor.

Rob - you condone child rape and abuse.

No that’s the person who wants to facilitate covering up rape and abuse, which would be YOU.

Whistler, you are constitutionally illiterate.

What a maroon.  You have no clue what your talking about.  Here’s a hint a person may be compelled to testify.  They may not be compelled to testify against themselves.

Pathetic really.

Bearing in mind yesterday’s discussion about the disparity in fertility rates between those of us on/in the Right, and the twits on the Left, I’m inclined to let them have their pills.  The fewer their numbers… and the quicker… the better.

JMJ,

Like so many angry, defensively beligerent liberals (forgive the redundancy), you are mightly long on rhetoric and insults, and mighty short on supporting evidence.  Perhaps when you get a little older you’ll come to realize that shrill invective is rarely as convincing as reasoned argument.  Perhaps.

You offer that,

the truth is that a girl from the “liberal, Godless” coasts is far less likelyto get pregnant than a girl from the “Bible Belt.”

but offer nothing to back up that rather specious hyperbole.  You accuse your host of condoning rape and abuse, a typically gratuitous tactic when intellect fails you, as it often does liberals, and disparage the intelligence, knowedge, and religous faith of others who are clearly your betters in all three categories.

As I said, perhaps when you get a bit older…

Ironically, Jersey hits on a wonderful point that should lead us to keep “Plan B” restricted: yes, a pregnant child generally IS a (statutory or otherwise) raped child--the impregnators are generally 20 or above.  So if “Plan B” is “over the counter”, then she can be given $20 and pressured to “deal with the problem” without authorities knowing.

Another argument against making this “over the counter” (behind the counter is more accurate) is that about 2 million women between 15 and 44 do face some risk from “the Pill"--it’s known to lead to heart trouble and diabetes in some.  So it’s definitely a good idea, even if one supports abortion, to require a doctor for this.

Not quite as likely to be lethal as RU-486, but there is definitely a clear, likely risk that indicates a doctor ought to be involved in prescribing it. 

Just like “the pill”.

I take some prescription drugs that I don’t think should require me to see a doctor.

While I get your point, there are many good reasons for requiring prescriptions for drugs, including avoiding: allergic reactions, deadly drug interactions, addiction, screening for possible side effects, etc.  Professional consultation will also aid in determining the appropriate dosages, and in the case of intravenous drugs, ensure that proper safety precautions are taken (sterile equipment, etc.).  This is true of oral contraceptives, as well as most other prescription drugs.

I feel that for the sake of the girl’s health, medical consultation should be required. 

The age limit is a no-brainer.  JMJ would prefer that the hypothetical raped girl quietly abort the pregnancy without telling her parents (or the police in the event that a parent was the abuser).  This would allow the abuse to continue indefinitely without an authority finding out and helping the girl out of the situation.  JMJ, you are advocating that which you accuse other of - child abuse.

In addition, the 13 year old being raped by a 20 year old is much more commonplace than parental abuse.  This happens more than most could possibly imagine.  I know several adults who had this happen to them at 13-17.  They were afraid to discuss the rapes with anyone.  This allowed the perpetrators to continue their predatory actions. Removing the age restriction would aid these predators.

I,for one, am glad that this is another alternative available to women. It is better than having an abortion further along in the term and possibly there never was fertilization.  A precautionary measure.  About time it’s been made available in this country.

While I get your point, there are many good reasons for requiring prescriptions for drugs, including avoiding: allergic reactions, deadly drug interactions, addiction, screening for possible side effects, etc. Professional consultation will also aid in determining the appropriate dosages, and in the case of intravenous drugs, ensure that proper safety precautions are taken (sterile equipment, etc.). This is true of oral contraceptives, as well as most other prescription drugs.

I was being somewhat facetious, although there are some prescriptions that I’ve take for years that could just as well have a permanent renewal.  (In my opinion of course)

I’m actually quite offended. The morning after pill is not used solely by prostitutes. People who are raped do not act or dress to get the sex, it just happens.

I have taken the morning after pill at 17 years of age and have been called a murderer. I think it was a good choice for me in that time of my life. I was in a bad relationship, and stayed in that relationship regardless of what other people said. I felt there was no way out. Taking the morning after pill on that one day that I chose to take it made me feel more comfortable with the future I was going to have.

I don’t think anyone would want the pain that the morning after pill has to bring from sickness due to the overdosage of hormones. That is why it is a last- minute thing. At 17 years old, in my state, it is legal to give consent. Therefore, all the surgeons knew that what they had was a rape, but I was unwilling to admit it because I didn’t want to betray my rapist’s family. Rape is more complicated than you think it is. It involves groups of people and their feelings. It involves your feelings of safety, and your lack of trust in the law when people are treating you like dirt.

The day my mom came home and found out I took that pill, she called me a murderer. She was angry at me. But now I live a normal life, without the stigma of having a child at my age or being without an education. Wouldn’t any parent want their kid to be a kid?

I’ve read about the morning after pill. It does not kill a child because the sperm has not implanted yet. As a matter of fact, if the sperm has implanted, the morning after pill is rendered useless. Therefore, I felt that I did not kill any child. I simply took away the risk that the sperm would join with the egg. If you think that is wrong, then perhaps everyone should stop masturbating, because masturbation is a waste of sperm. All of those could have equal potential of forming a baby if only we gave them a chance.

I am glad that I chose to get myself a chance in life like everyone else. It would not be possible for me to go to school and have a job and baby. My mom would not be able to quit work to take care of the baby, and nobody would support me.

And I’m sure everyone knows about the stigma that follows you when you’re a kid with a kid. The gossip, the hate, everything. My cousin had a kid early, and a lot of her friends left her. You can’t say that there isn’t emotional damage.

If you’re against Plan B, then you might as well be against birth control pills and condoms. All of the above allow sperm to die.

I am curious about the affects of taking this pill every day for 10 years. If it becomes a choosen method of birth control, what would the long term affects be?

SERIOUS question, ..

can men buy this pill too?

ss: You make a great case for Plan B in cases of rape.  When there is consent, though, it becomes a different story.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

.. Plan B, ..birth control pills, and condoms. All of the above allow sperm to die.

how true is that statement?