Plan B available to 17 year olds

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Awesome decision by FDA not to appeal the court ruling.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090423/ap_on_he_me/us_morning_after_pill

[SuspectCorner]

Awesome decision by FDA not to appeal the court ruling.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090423/ap_on_he_me/us_morning_after_pill

The Palinists will up in arms in 3... 2... 1... *with apologies to BP for borrowing your schtick*

[zrinkill]

I have no problem with this being that it is within 21 days.

Unless there are some health dangers involved.

[burmafrd]

17 and older I have no problem with that.

What is seriously twisted is that a 13 year old can have an abortion on her own but to have her ears pierced she needs her parents permission.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Not sure how anyone can be against this decision. Sure it will make the girls super cranky for a couple of days but it is sure better than an unwanted pregnancy (and no, it is not an abortion as the fertilized egg has not yet implanted itself).

[zrinkill]

Not sure how anyone can be against this decision.

Who here is?

Or are you just attempting to "stir" as usual?

[vta]

Not sure how anyone can be against this decision.

Personally I couldn't care less what path people sell their silly ***** down, but to see people trumpet as though it were something important is at least worth commenting on.

You act as though this were some sort of great milestone for humanity. People have been banging since time immemorial; all this is indicative of is, if people need medical science to help them navigate their own lives, their pretty much a product of mental regression anyway.

Let's hear it for de-evolution! Soon enough we won't know how to wipe our arse's without a medical manual.

[Phrozen Phil]

Personally I couldn't care less what path people sell their silly ***** down, but to see people trumpet as though it were something important is at least worth commenting on.

You act as though this were some sort of great milestone for humanity. People have been banging since time immemorial; all this is indicative of is, if people need medical science to help them navigate their own lives, their pretty much a product of mental regression anyway.

Let's hear it for de-evolution! Soon enough we won't know how to wipe our arse's without a medical manual.

I look at it as another opportunity to prevent an unwanted pregnancy. It does not replace good education on the subject or the need for people to make better decisions about their sexual behaviour, but it will hopefully help.

[vta]

I look at it as another opportunity to prevent an unwanted pregnancy. It does not replace good education on the subject or the need for people to make better decisions about their sexual behaviour, but it will hopefully help.

Like I said, it'll have no effect on me, but to trumpet this as though it were some milestone and then fish for dissent is ridiculous. How on earth does this even impact the average person??

As for it helping, let me tell you, unequivocally, drugs are frigging killing people. Legal drugs. I'd much rather smoke a joint, which I don't, than take these toxic disablers that are a multi-million dollar industry.

If anyone needs to go beyond the physical need for drugs, for pain, etc and rely on this sort of garbage to manage simple matters in life, that's a major sign of mental regression and should be lamented, not touted as something glorifying and progressive.

[Phrozen Phil]

Like I said, it'll have no effect on me, but to trumpet this as though it were some milestone and then fish for dissent is ridiculous. How on earth does this even impact the average person??

As for it helping, let me tell you, unequivocally, drugs are frigging killing people. Legal drugs. I'd much rather smoke a joint, which I don't, than take these toxic disablers that are a multi-million dollar industry.

If anyone needs to go beyond the physical need for drugs, for pain, etc and rely on this sort of garbage to manage simple matters in life, that's a major sign of mental regression and should be lamented, not touted as something glorifying and progressive.

I hear what you're saying, and it may not be significant to you, but there are others who might benefit from this. I don't see this as a contentious issue for many, but, as I said before, it could help.
The proliferation of pharmacuticals is another issue, and a valid one. I'm not fishing for dissent, and I'm not advocating for better living through indiscriminate use of chemistry. The use of prescription drugs is an individual decision and I think we all hope that people will use good judgment. Sadly, that too often not the case. Not all of it is garbage.

[DFWJC]

17 and older I have no problem with that.

What is seriously twisted is that a 13 year old can have an abortion on her own but to have her ears pierced she needs her parents permission.

Tell me about it.

Same with an 18 year old can go to war but can't buy a beer. Just odd.

[vta]

I hear what you're saying, and it may not be significant to you, but there are others who might benefit from this. I don't see this as a contentious issue for many, but, as I said before, it could help.
The proliferation of pharmacuticals is another issue, and a valid one. I'm not fishing for dissent, and I'm not advocating for better living through indiscriminate use of chemistry. The use of prescription drugs is an individual decision and I think we all hope that people will use good judgment. Sadly, that too often not the case. Not all of it is garbage.

No I know you weren't fishing for dissent. I was referring to my first response with that.

Though, I will disagree on the topic drugs. Apart from surgical needs, where they are needed, they have very small advantages and even less an instance of true need.

It's disheartening to see them used in this way, which isn't new, but simply expanding. A society with too much reliance on this sort of this thing is not progressing at all.

[joseephuss]

Tell me about it.

Same with an 18 year old can go to war but can't buy a beer. Just odd.

An 18 year old can be tried as an adult and get the death penalty, but can't buy a beer. Maybe not being able to buy a beer is what is driving them to commit crimes worthy of the death penalty.

[zrinkill]

Tell me about it.

Same with an 18 year old can go to war but can't buy a beer. Just odd.


I agree with that as well

[CanadianCowboysFan]

An 18 year old can be tried as an adult and get the death penalty, but can't buy a beer. Maybe not being able to buy a beer is what is driving them to commit crimes worthy of the death penalty.


classic

VTA, please to pick on this post as one that is not important and just fishing for a response is hilarious given the numerous other irrelevant threads started on this board.

[ScipioCowboy]

classic

VTA, please to pick on this post as one that is not important and just fishing for a response is hilarious given the numerous other irrelevant threads started on this board.

The fact that other people make substantive contributions does not mean that your contributions are substantive.

Your behavior and attitude have given you the reputation that you have around here. If you wish to change your reputation, I suggest you change your behavior and attitude.

[ABQCOWBOY]

classic

VTA, please to pick on this post as one that is not important and just fishing for a response is hilarious given the numerous other irrelevant threads started on this board.

The threads are relevant to those who posted them I suppose. I would, however, say that there is a difference between stirring the pot and posting thoughts or opinions that do not seem relevant to others.

[vta]

classic

VTA, please to pick on this post as one that is not important and just fishing for a response is hilarious given the numerous other irrelevant threads started on this board.

Actually, it was your own response which engendered the response you're that fishing.

You're not being able to see how anyone can be against this decision doesn't mean you are unequivocally correct it just means you probably have not given it much thought.

Really, how on earth does this tripe even effect you, that you will feign some form of glee from this? Another country's law to permit yet another unnecessary drug to be accessible is, to a Canadian lawyer important because...?

This country - this world - has far more pressing issues to deal with; do you expect anyone to believe you're genuine in your nail biting over something, not only as fundamentally flawed, but as generally unimportant as this?

Unless of course you're truly happy about any bad decision this country makes.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

The fact that other people make substantive contributions does not mean that your contributions are substantive.

Your behavior and attitude have given you the reputation that you have around here. If you wish to change your reputation, I suggest you change your behavior and attitude.

I will give your opinion of me the consideration it deserves.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Actually, it was your own response which engendered the response you're that fishing.

You're not being able to see how anyone can be against this decision doesn't mean you are unequivocally correct it just means you probably have not given it much thought.

Really, how on earth does this tripe even effect you, that you will feign some form of glee from this? Another country's law to permit yet another unnecessary drug to be accessible is, to a Canadian lawyer important because...?

This country - this world - has far more pressing issues to deal with; do you expect anyone to believe you're genuine in your nail biting over something, not only as fundamentally flawed, but as generally unimportant as this?

Unless of course you're truly happy about any bad decision this country makes.

How can anyone be against such a decision?

[ScipioCowboy]

I will give your opinion of me the consideration it deserves.

I'm not the only holder of this particular opinion.

[vta]

How can anyone be against such a decision?

I've already provided an example...
How can anyone be for it?

[CanadianCowboysFan]

I'm not the only holder of this particular opinion.


they get the same consideration

[CanadianCowboysFan]

I've already provided an example...
How can anyone be for it?

my thought is, people are going to do it, especially 17 year olds, so why not give them an easy way to deal with a possible unwanted pregnancy?

[zrinkill]

my thought is, people are going to do it, especially 17 year olds, so why not give them an easy way to deal with a possible unwanted pregnancy?

Although I am not disagreeing with you about this certain topic ..... I hate the argument that "people are gonna do it anyway"

I mean people are gonna rape, murder, steal,and kill themselves as well ..... lets make it easier.

"People are gonna do it anyway", should never be a reason to give into something some people think is morally wrong.

Like I said ..... in this situation I do not disagree with you since I do not feel that the cluster is a baby until its heart starts beating.

[vta]

my thought is, people are going to do it, especially 17 year olds, so why not give them an easy way to deal with a possible unwanted pregnancy?

We all have sex, we all don't impregnate people spastically. Relying on more faulty drugs, not only is going to perpetuate the careless attitude, it's only a matter of time before we see the effects of another drug on the body.

People like to kick and scream about the costs of unwanted humans, but no one seems to give a crap about the avoidable costs of damaged livers and kidneys, due to these ridiculous wonder drugs.

Why not promote responsibility over convenience? Hasn't a pampered generation that's failing miserably, both economically and morally engendered enough evidence that maybe 'the easy out' is pure fantasy that only inflicts it's own damage later on?

They're going to do it anyway is the lazy mans excuse: simply put: No They Are Not.
If you don't possess the strength to influence your own children, to guide them from making stupid mistakes, you're not much of proponent of anything but failure.

[ScipioCowboy]

We all have sex, we all don't impregnate people spastically. Relying on more faulty drugs, not only is going to perpetuate the careless attitude, it's only a matter of time before we see the effects of another drug on the body.

People like to kick and scream about the costs of unwanted humans, but no one seems to give a crap about the avoidable costs of damaged livers and kidneys, due to these ridiculous wonder drugs.

Why not promote responsibility over convenience? Hasn't a pampered generation that's failing miserably, both economically and morally engendered enough evidence that maybe 'the easy out' is pure fantasy that only inflicts it's own damage later on?

They're going to do it anyway is the lazy mans excuse: simply put: No They Are Not.
If you don't possess the strength to influence your own children, to guide them from making stupid mistakes, you're not much of proponent of anything but failure.

Well, let's face it.

Shunning and reallocating moral responsibility is a hallmark of certain elements within the American Left. Why should you have to pay the consequences when you can make someone else pay them for you?

Who cares whether that someone else is the taxpayer or an unborn child? The whole point is that you aren't paying them in the here and now.

[joseephuss]

We all have sex, we all don't impregnate people spastically. Relying on more faulty drugs, not only is going to perpetuate the careless attitude, it's only a matter of time before we see the effects of another drug on the body.

People like to kick and scream about the costs of unwanted humans, but no one seems to give a crap about the avoidable costs of damaged livers and kidneys, due to these ridiculous wonder drugs.

Why not promote responsibility over convenience? Hasn't a pampered generation that's failing miserably, both economically and morally engendered enough evidence that maybe 'the easy out' is pure fantasy that only inflicts it's own damage later on?

They're going to do it anyway is the lazy mans excuse: simply put: No They Are Not.
If you don't possess the strength to influence your own children, to guide them from making stupid mistakes, you're not much of proponent of anything but failure.

Why not promote both? Why does it have to be a choice between the two? And whoever said that taking the Plan B drug is convenient? And certainly no one has ever said that having an abortion is convenient. These are not straightforward issues with one clear right way to do it and one clear wrong way to do it.

If you do think that this generation is failing miserably then you want them to be able to use this drug. You don't want a bunch of failures giving birth to a new generation.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

We all have sex, we all don't impregnate people spastically. Relying on more faulty drugs, not only is going to perpetuate the careless attitude, it's only a matter of time before we see the effects of another drug on the body.

People like to kick and scream about the costs of unwanted humans, but no one seems to give a crap about the avoidable costs of damaged livers and kidneys, due to these ridiculous wonder drugs.

Why not promote responsibility over convenience? Hasn't a pampered generation that's failing miserably, both economically and morally engendered enough evidence that maybe 'the easy out' is pure fantasy that only inflicts it's own damage later on?

They're going to do it anyway is the lazy mans excuse: simply put: No They Are Not.
If you don't possess the strength to influence your own children, to guide them from making stupid mistakes, you're not much of proponent of anything but failure.

the problem with the argument with promoting "responsibility" over convenience is that one rarely has a good definition of responsible. Say for example a teen age girl is on the pill but maybe forgot one day due to stress so to make sure she isn't knocked up, she goes to Plan B, is she choosing convenience over responsibility? Seems to me she was responsible but made an error.

Influencing children is fine but you all know when you were teenagers, you did what you wanted anyway.

[vta]

Why not promote both? Why does it have to be a choice between the two? And whoever said that taking the Plan B drug is convenient? And certainly no one has ever said that having an abortion is convenient. These are not straightforward issues with one clear right way to do it and one clear wrong way to do it.

If you do think that this generation is failing miserably then you want them to be able to use this drug. You don't want a bunch of failures giving birth to a new generation.

How can popping a pill be inconvenient? How can it take the place of good judgement? Yes, it is pretty straight forward; give your life the moment of reflection it deserves and chances are, you won't end up needing a drug to make good choices.

And I'd rather see this generation get it's *** straight, not simply give up and go sterile. The precedent of relying on drugs is a serious handicap.

[vta]

the problem with the argument with promoting "responsibility" over convenience is that one rarely has a good definition of responsible. Say for example a teen age girl is on the pill but maybe forgot one day due to stress so to make sure she isn't knocked up, she goes to Plan B, is she choosing convenience over responsibility? Seems to me she was responsible but made an error.

Influencing children is fine but you all know when you were teenagers, you did what you wanted anyway.

Responsibility isn't ambiguous; you don't want kid's? Don't make them.
The worst case scenario for applying a general salve is never a good argument.

I'm in no position to tell someone how to live a life, so to return to the core of my response, what on earth is there to be happy about? How is this awesome? What about recognizing a society has so reduced itself to needing drugs to enforce some kind of responsibility screams anything other than degradation and failure?

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Responsibility isn't ambiguous; you don't want kid's? Don't make them.
The worst case scenario for applying a general salve is never a good argument.

I'm in no position to tell someone how to live a life, so to return to the core of my response, what on earth is there to be happy about? How is this awesome? What about recognizing a society has so reduced itself to needing drugs to enforce some kind of responsibility screams anything other than degradation and failure?

deep down it appears to you responsibility means no intercourse.

[vta]

deep down it appears to you responsibility means no intercourse.

Not so deep down, it's obvious you'd rather come up with the stock excuses than take what's said at face value to avoid the truth.

I've had sex innumerable times and made only 1 child. Intentionally.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Not so deep down, it's obvious you'd rather come up with the stock excuses than take what's said at face value to avoid the truth.

I've had sex innumerable times and made only 1 child. Intentionally.

I am glad for you (although do you really know if she went to Plan B at anytime?)

[trickblue]

the problem with the argument with promoting "responsibility" over convenience is that one rarely has a good definition of responsible. Say for example a teen age girl is on the pill but maybe forgot one day due to stress so to make sure she isn't knocked up, she goes to Plan B, is she choosing convenience over responsibility? Seems to me she was responsible but made an error.

Influencing children is fine but you all know when you were teenagers, you did what you wanted anyway.

I can agree with you here... responsibility is gone by the wayside...

Our leftists friends actively promote "do what feels good"... until it pisses them off...

[vta]

I am glad for you (although do you really know if she went to Plan B at anytime?)

Who?
This crap most likely wasn't around when I was younger and I know my wife sure as hell never took it.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Who?
This crap most likely wasn't around when I was younger and I know my wife sure as hell never took it.

Plan B has been around since I was in university in the 1980s