A question for our Conservative acquaintances?

[usmc1]

Just what is it that conservatives and the RRR have against sex without consequence?

The growingly popular Plan "B" after sex-pill continues to be under assault from religious and conservative action groups despite the FDA's testing and investigation and ultimate approval of the drug for over 18s.

The pill merely prevents pregnancy and does not terminate pregnancies already begun. It removes the fear of unwanted or unintended pregnancies if taken within 72-hours of intercourse and many localities include its use in their ER "rape-kits"

Please, someone explain to me how this is a bad thing?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20394494/

[nudebushwalker]

"RRR" ?

is that 7 steps more advanced than the KKK ?


http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/laugh.gif

[usmc1]

Er, takes awhile for things to sift through to the outback does it? RRR = Radical Religious Right. And I thought Texas was a decade or so out of touch.

But, yeah, they'ra step or two removed from the Nazis. I'll leave to others to suggest whether those those steps away from or toward.

[Boreas]

Good question. I look forward to the answer.

There are health professionals in the US who refuse to prescribe or fill prescriptions for the birth control pill because it allegedly is a form of abortion. There are studies to support this in their eyes. I am not a scientist, but I would question these studies, for the record.

Interesting question usmc.

[luvnaturism]

My understanding of the way the morning after pill works is that it prevents the fertilized egg from implanting itself into the uteris. The religious argument from those who are so inclined would be that human life begins at conception, and so this is merely another form of abortion.

Understand that I'm not arguing for this position; I'm merely responding to the original question.

There are groups which work to protect the sanctity of life in all cases, and they would be opposed to the morning after pill as they are opposed to the death penalty, killing people im war, etc. That position is entirely consistent, has a lot of morality and some scripture on its side, and is worthy of respect.

The religious right mostly zigzags around a variety of convenient positions, opposing abortion with great emotion while pressing for the death penalty, and rushing toward war. It is without moral consistency, and deserves little respect.

[BinCo]

All the people I know who oppose abortion in all forms consider the death penalty as necessary. They believe in the 'eye for an eye' theme of life. Since the 2 cell thing that will possibly be a human has done no harm, it should have no harm done to it. None the less if the mother is going to die, some believe that is the way God wants it, but the fetus should be kept alive at all costs. It is very contradictory to any logic I can come up with.

If only these idiologue men would give up on the concept that women are beneath men and they should be controlled we would have a better world. I find it horrible that some people could see no problem with giving a man viagra so he can have the choice of sex, while the women he impregnates has no choice after the fact.

This is just one of the many reasons I hate the RRR. I have a bumper sticker " Doing my part to piss off the Religious Right ". People ask what I am doing, I reply that just being alive and in America pisses many of them off.

[harveym]

Let's see if I have this straight:

The only purposed of sex is procreation. It is evil to engage in such activity for any other reason.

Contraception is evil as it prevents a human life from being created in addition to the point made above.

Abortion is evil because it ends a potential human life.

Let's carry this to its logical conclusion:

Any female who is not sexually active once menses is reached is destroying a potential human life by not allowing the ova the chance to be fertilized.

Any male who 'spends' him self in any manner that does not involve intercourse with a female is destroying a potential human life.

You know something? These right wingers are weird (and dangerous)!

[walter05]

luvnaturism;

According to Orthodox Jewish law, there is no prohibition from use of the morning after pill.

At times according to Orthodox Jewish law, abortion is not only permitted but also recommended. If the life or health of the mother, and yes this can include mental health are threatened, the abortion is recommended.

Binco;

An eye for an eye appears in places of the Bible referring to property laws and damages. According to the Talmud it has always meant that if someone harms someone, the one harmed is entitled to financial compensation. It never meant that it provided anyone the right to physically harm someone else.

harveym;

From a Jewish law perspective, the following answers are for your points:

Sex is also for fun and to help promote a special closeness and bond for two people.

Many forms of contraception are not a problem at all.

Abortion may in fact be wrong. It is certainly a problem if done for convenience. Men and women can choose to abstain or an acceptable form of birth control. There is no excuse for aborting a six-month old fetus due to convenience. Since a seven-month or older fetus may be able to survive outside of the uterus, it is more of a problem.

However, as noted above, there are times it is recommended.

Menses is not causing the destruction. It happens beyond the woman's control. She is not responsible.

The willful spilling of semen with sperm is potentially a problem. The potential for human life is sacred because human life is sacred.

However, these are not matters for the government to get involved in. This is why very few Orthodox Jews support the right wing Christian agenda.

I remember a Georgia State Representative used to say that Republicans complain that Democrats want to be in charge of what is in peoples' pockets. At the same time, Democrats complain that Republicans want to be in charge of what is in peoples' underpants.

I would prefer the government allow me to run my own life.

[nacktman]

What I find striking is the total lack of response for the resident dogmatic ideologues to a straight forward and simple question. Especially after their recent rants about 'bias' against them and demanding a 'debate' on issues? Could it be that is exactly want they don't want - just as others have stated was the case?

Worthy of respect and logic or the lack thereof has been brought up by posters who have identified themselves as 'conservative' and they make good points with them, actually sounding more 'center' than 'conservative'.

It might be time to coin a new label for such as they, as the label 'conservative' has been forever polluted and perverted by the RRR/Neo-Con/Fascist cadre in such that in the eyes and minds of the nation and the world it is forever linked to them just as the "X" rating in films if forever linked to porn flicks.

[harveym]

I have a feeling that sarcasm is not recognized here.

[usmc1]

Originally posted by harveym:
I have a feeling that sarcasm is not recognized here.

Not recognized? Hell boy, it reigns supreme!

But, on the other hand, I don't think it, as well as irony, wryness, and lampoon are always understood as such.

[blackrebel]

7 steps better than the KKK? http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/freak.gif That still leaves them far behind the curve.

Originally posted by nudebushwalker:
"RRR" ?

is that 7 steps more advanced than the KKK ?


http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/laugh.gif

[blackrebel]

Sigh. The RIL speaks up ... again. Radical Intolerant Left. All they can do is to accuse those who are on the right of the fence of being hate filled Nazis or close to it. If you look back you will see that an overwhelming number of these chats are started with Liberals mis-labeling those who are not like THEM and accusing them of sexism, racism, and every other intolerance on the face of this earth. Now, if I called them 'anti-war spineless pu**y socialists', I'd be called intolerant, and you folks would be ready to name call me 15 ways to Sunday. (and you know that you would)

Why can't they just stop it and stop dragging us into these meaningless discussions that do nothing more than show their inability to accept that they are just as unaccepting of other opinions as the people that they are mis-labeling.

Black, Republican and Proud!! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/smoking.gif

Originally posted by usmc1:
Er, takes awhile for things to sift through to the outback does it? RRR = Radical Religious Right. And I thought Texas was a decade or so out of touch.

But, yeah, they'ra step or two removed from the Nazis. I'll leave to others to suggest whether those those steps away from or toward.

[usmc1]

Originally posted by blackrebel:
Sigh. The RIL speaks up ... again. Radical Intolerant Left. All they can do is to accuse those who are on the right of the fence of being hate filled Nazis or close to it. If you look back you will see that an overwhelming number of these chats are started with Liberals mis-labeling those who are not like THEM and accusing them of sexism, racism, and every other intolerance on the face of this earth. Now, if I called them 'anti-war spineless pu**y socialists', I'd be called intolerant, and you folks would be ready to name call me 15 ways to Sunday. (and you know that you would)

Why can't they just stop it and stop dragging us into these meaningless discussions that do nothing more than show their inability to accept that they are just as unaccepting of other opinions as the people that they are mis-labeling.

Black, Republican and Proud!! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/smoking.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by usmc1:
Er, takes awhile for things to sift through to the outback does it? RRR = Radical Religious Right. And I thought Texas was a decade or so out of touch.

But, yeah, they'ra step or two removed from the Nazis. I'll leave to others to suggest whether those those steps away from or toward. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And your thoughts on the morning after pill are........?

[Croydon]

Originally posted by usmc1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by blackrebel:
Sigh. The RIL speaks up ... again. Radical Intolerant Left. All they can do is to accuse those who are on the right of the fence of being hate filled Nazis or close to it. If you look back you will see that an overwhelming number of these chats are started with Liberals mis-labeling those who are not like THEM and accusing them of sexism, racism, and every other intolerance on the face of this earth. Now, if I called them 'anti-war spineless pu**y socialists', I'd be called intolerant, and you folks would be ready to name call me 15 ways to Sunday. (and you know that you would)

Why can't they just stop it and stop dragging us into these meaningless discussions that do nothing more than show their inability to accept that they are just as unaccepting of other opinions as the people that they are mis-labeling.

Black, Republican and Proud!! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/smoking.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by usmc1:
Er, takes awhile for things to sift through to the outback does it? RRR = Radical Religious Right. And I thought Texas was a decade or so out of touch.

But, yeah, they'ra step or two removed from the Nazis. I'll leave to others to suggest whether those those steps away from or toward. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And your thoughts on the morning after pill are........? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thank you, I was myself the same thing. Thank you USMC1.

Nothing sadder than a black man who is a republican...sad sad sad, just sad. SAD I tell you, JUST SAD

[Big-Thinker]

Originally posted by Croydon:
Nothing sadder than a black man who is a republican...sad sad sad, just sad. SAD I tell you, JUST SAD

What, whites should have a monopoly on the republican style of thinking? Maybe minorities like economic freedoms and a stronger country too.

My thoughts on the pill...
I vote Republican, but for my economic/military philosophy. I have no problem with that pill being avialble.

[nacktman]

I see the ideologues finally made an appearance and true to form they instantly attack, ridicule and revile and do not answer the question posed.
It is just this sort of knee-jerk reactionary spittle that marks them as idiotic and in some cases quite possibly insane.

Being republican is just sad.
Being black, green, purple or puce has noting to do with it.
Being proud to be a republican is way beyond sad, it is pathetic.

It is time for true conservatives to oust the cadre from their midst and leave the conservative label to them as noted before it is forever tainted and so is the label republican - tainted by the foulness that is the RRR/Neo-Con/Fascist cabal that has perverted it so.

[usmc1]

Originally posted by Big-Thinker:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Croydon:
Nothing sadder than a black man who is a republican...sad sad sad, just sad. SAD I tell you, JUST SAD

What, whites should have a monopoly on the republican style of thinking? Maybe minorities like economic freedoms and a stronger country too.
c
My thoughts on the pill...
I vote Republican, but for my economic/military philosophy. I have no problem with that pill being avialble. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, economic freedom and stronger country are rather vague. Hell man, I'm a bleeding-heat, fellow-traveling, left-wing, liberal activist and organizer; and I'm for economic freedom and a stronger country too.

I think we'd find the devil in the details, however. They would pretty rely on how one defines freedom and strength. And, most importantly, how those freedoms and strengths are to be used.

For me, this is one of many essential differences between conservatives and liberals. Conservatives like these simplistic, nice-sounding, sound-bite phrases which, on examination really have little or no real-life meaning. Liberals, most---not all, understand the complexities and depths of economic and defense policies and focus on the welfare of the entire nation rather than of the select few.

And, before everyone gets their knickers in a knot over racial angst, let's remember that it was our African-American acquaintance who defined himself as a Proud-Black-Republican. There's nothing wrong at all in a person displaying pride in their political affiliation or race. But, one wonders why it was necessary in the context of the topic of this thread.

For me, it smacked of the same old, same old, liberal-baiting of the past. If so, that game is over--if you haven't noticed; progressives, populists, liberals, leftists, Democrats, and unionists are returning the shoves from the right with as much, or more, force.

But, as always, when asking a conservative for more than rote, one finds one's self waiting for an answer: nuderebel, your thoughts on the morning after pill, please?

[LamontCranston]

And your thoughts on the morning after pill are........? Yet you let Nacky pass... twice.

The religious right mostly zigzags around a variety of convenient positions, opposing abortion with great emotion while pressing for the death penalty, and rushing toward war. It is without moral consistency, and deserves little respect. Being morally consistent, the Vatican does *not* support the death penalty and the Pope wrote that the invasion of Iraq did *not* meet the standard of a just war.

It is the view that the morning after pill is a form of abortion that leads to the objections.

[nudebushwalker]

I believe that, in the context of their supporting the war, invasion of sovereign states, and removal of individual rights and freedoms, we can define the religious arm of the extreme right wing as being those groups associated with the evangelical, fundamentalist, 'born-again' churches - based in the bible belt of the US, but with smaller off-shoots in Canada, Australia and Western Europe.
The great bulk of the Christian churches did not support the second Gulf War, as it is obvious that it has only ever been about liberating and securing the Oil.....

Personally, I would support the morning after pill, as I'm in that camp that believes that independent and individual life starts a few days, or even weeks after conception.
Why is that 'Right to Lifers' never hold any regard nor respect for human life, individual rights nor individual freedoms. They themselves are no better than other the other types of fascists out their. Nazis are simply fascists with a racist and xenophobic slant..

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/cry.gif

[DoctorSurferDude]

“Fear always springs from ignorance” - Ralph Waldo Emerson

“Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” Martin Luther King, Jr.

Here is a big secret...."Plan B" is nothing but a heafty dose of progesterone. The same exact progesterone that is the ingredient to a number of birth control pills. It is repackaged and sold as "Plan B", but essentially if a person took 2-4 times the number of birth control pills in a single day they would likely accomplish the same thing.

All it does is induce a period sooner, to decrease the chance that a fertalized egg will have the chance to embed in the uterine wall.

So how do you think normal birth control works? 2 fold....first hormone, estrogen, tries to stop the release of the egg in an indirect fashion, but that is not 100%. Second hormone, progesterone, assures that a period will flush out anything that got through, it guarentees a period at the end of each month.

SO....how many fundamentalists take birth control pills?? Cause I'd like to propose to them that the only REAL difference between Plan B and regular Oral Contraceptives is....the timing.

Isn't ironic that many of the people who protest Plan B are taking the exact same drug for the exact same reason??

Most people don't know that nature or God aborts upto 30% of pregnancies naturally, in the first month of the fertalization....it's quality control to get rid of something that messed up at the start. Nobody would know....cause it leaves with the regular monthly period.

Another fact....in the USA, 54% of unplanned pregnancies are aborted. Personally, I don't have any moral issues with Plan B. I have moral issues with abortion. Although I support a woman's right to choose either, I'd rather prevent an abortion later by prescribing Plan B now.

Deeper underlying question is when does life begin? At fertalization? or at Implantation? If it is at fertalization, then better attack the fertility clinics and come down hard on all people who use birth control pills. If it is at Implantation....then birth control is ok, so are fertility clinics....and so is Plan B.

[Naturist Mark]

Deeper underlying question is when does life begin? At fertilization? or at Implantation? If it is at fertilization, then better attack the fertility clinics and come down hard on all people who use birth control pills. If it is at Implantation....then birth control is ok, so are fertility clinics....and so is Plan B.
Which "life"? Sperm (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9002085385040727366) and Egg cells are alive prior to fertilization, and at least the Egg cell has all the genes necessary (including the full X and mitachondrial) to produce a human being - so it is potential 'human' life. If a zygocyte or pre-implantation blastocyst is 'human' there are a lot of pregnant test tubes at fertility clinics. Isn't it odd that the owner of those test tubes has more rights than a pregnant woman?

When it comes to Abortion it is important to pay very close attention to what the Bible says about it ... absolutely nothing. God's opposition to Abortion was apparently revealed by post Biblical prophets.

-Mark

[LamontCranston]

we can define the religious arm of the extreme right wing as being those groups associated with the evangelical, fundamentalist, 'born-again' churches - based in the bible belt of the US, but with smaller off-shoots in Canada, Australia and Western Europe. Yes, this is the distinction I was making. I am religious and right-leaning but am not a member of this demographic.

Another fact....in the USA, 54% of unplanned pregnancies are aborted. Personally, I don't have any moral issues with Plan B. I have moral issues with abortion. Although I support a woman's right to choose either, I'd rather prevent an abortion later by prescribing Plan B now. I think we could make great strides if the Right To Lifers could reach an understanding like this, while at the same time the Right To Choosers give up on late-term partial birth abortions.

Neither end of that spectrum seems supportable buy either ethics or medicine.

Also...
whenever someone uses the term Nazi, I know I've run into a person who won't listen to whatever is said next. They are making a speech and not engaging in discussion. Big difference.

[usmc1]

Isn't a part of the scientific definition of life inclusive of something along this qualifier: the organism's ability to replicate its self into new life, reproduction?

If that is a valid consideration or condition for determining life, wouldn't it follow that neither egg nor sperm alone constitute life since neither can reproduce its self?

It would seem simple then to assert that preventing fertilization and/or seating in the lining of the womb would have no effect on "life". Yeah, I know, the mysterious "soul" is maybe lurking in there too, maybe in the egg, maybe in the sperm, and maybe just hanging around until the fertilized egg settles into the lining of the womb. Or maybe not!

But, it seems of all the eggs and sperms in all the living things of the earth only humans have souls.

Right.....!

But as to the question at hand, I've yet to see any agreement, or strong argument from conservatives as to why the pill should be taken off the market.

So maybe it would be a fair assumption to say that not all conservatives belong to the Radical Religious Right or espouse their extreme views regarding human sexulaity, but all members of the RRR are conservative?

[Naturist Mark]

Right To Choosers give up on late-term partial birth abortions.
That is a bit of a canard. Abortion on demand is only legal in the first trimester, in the third trimester (late term) it is only legal if the pregnancy poses a serious threat to the health or life of the woman.

There is no medical procedure called 'partial birth abortion', but opponents often target the extremely rare (less than 0.2% of abortions in 2000) D&X (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%26X) procedure with such bans, which forces doctors to use alternatives that may not be as safe for the woman, but still result in the end of the pregnancy - which in late term pregnancy can only be performed if medically necessary.

Understand the point here: the so called 'partial birth abortion ban' removes the ability of doctors to choose the safest medical procedure in medically necessary abortions. These pregnancies would still be terminated even if abortion were ruled illegal, because they are only done when medically necessary to save the woman. Since these late term procedures can only be done if medically necessary another procedure MUST be used, and no babies are saved, the only result is to unnecessarily increase the risk for the woman.

Of course 'less safety for the woman' is the whole point. No babies are saved by the 'partial birth abortion' ban, but more women will die or be harmed. And THAT is by design.

[nacktman]

A note to those overly concerned by my not answering the question as posed in the opening thread ... The question was not addressed to me as I am not a 'conservative' therefore did/does not require an answer on my part.

My first commentary was to the fact that the ideologues had yet to make an appearance and that those who had posted answers had done so without bile and vitriol.
My second commentary was an acknowledgment that the ideologues had made their appearance and true to form they had done so with bile and vitriol.

[usmc1]

MORNING-AFTER PILL SALES JUMP AS ACCESS EASES
Conservatives: Pill promotes promiscuity, STDS


http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/08/24/contraceptive.reut/index.html