ayin jade Posted May 4, 2013 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 44 Topic Count: 6,178 Topics Per Day: 0.87 Content Count: 43,800 Content Per Day: 6.17 Reputation: 11,247 Days Won: 58 Joined: 01/03/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted May 4, 2013 It is abortion under another name though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted May 4, 2013 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 30 Topic Count: 600 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,388 Content Per Day: 7.55 Reputation: 28,136 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted May 4, 2013 I'm not for this loosening of the controls on this drug either......but; if if will reduce the number of abortions then it would be worth it. If no pregnancy occurs, no life is ended. As for condoning sex, kids are going to do what they've always done......but maybe if pregancy can be prevented, a child won't have to pay with his/her life for their would-be parents' lack of morals. Sorry, but you're not making any sense. It is designed to dislodge a fertilized egg from the uterine wall. Sorry, the "kids are going to do what kids always do" argument isn't washing either. Abstinence works every time it's tried. Hummmmmm, didn't work so well for Mary..... When did you convert to Islam? Are you saying that Mary was not a vigin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthitjah Posted May 4, 2013 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 1,285 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 17,917 Content Per Day: 2.26 Reputation: 355 Days Won: 19 Joined: 10/01/2002 Status: Offline Share Posted May 4, 2013 I'm not for this loosening of the controls on this drug either......but; if if will reduce the number of abortions then it would be worth it. If no pregnancy occurs, no life is ended. As for condoning sex, kids are going to do what they've always done......but maybe if pregancy can be prevented, a child won't have to pay with his/her life for their would-be parents' lack of morals. Sorry, but you're not making any sense. It is designed to dislodge a fertilized egg from the uterine wall. Sorry, the "kids are going to do what kids always do" argument isn't washing either. Abstinence works every time it's tried. Yes, abstinence DOES work every time....but that's not the world we're living in. As for not making any sense, it depends on how clearly one thinks. I'm not going to believe that wishing for people to practice abstience is going to affect the number of abortions that take place. We have to deal with situations as they are, not the way we wish they were. Actually, we need to deal with the reality of sin and it's consequences and stop marginalizing our children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthitjah Posted May 4, 2013 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 1,285 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 17,917 Content Per Day: 2.26 Reputation: 355 Days Won: 19 Joined: 10/01/2002 Status: Offline Share Posted May 4, 2013 I'm not for this loosening of the controls on this drug either......but; if if will reduce the number of abortions then it would be worth it. If no pregnancy occurs, no life is ended. As for condoning sex, kids are going to do what they've always done......but maybe if pregancy can be prevented, a child won't have to pay with his/her life for their would-be parents' lack of morals. Sorry, but you're not making any sense. It is designed to dislodge a fertilized egg from the uterine wall. Sorry, the "kids are going to do what kids always do" argument isn't washing either. Abstinence works every time it's tried. Hummmmmm, didn't work so well for Mary..... When did you convert to Islam? Are you saying that Mary was not a vigin? No, not at all, I thought you were. That's why I asked. I've heard Muslims state that exact viewpoint prior to this conversation. Mary did practice abstinence. Mt 1:18 ¶ Now the birth of Jesus Christ happened this way: When his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found to be with child of the Holy Spirit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningGlory Posted May 4, 2013 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.07 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted May 4, 2013 I'm not for this loosening of the controls on this drug either......but; if if will reduce the number of abortions then it would be worth it. If no pregnancy occurs, no life is ended. As for condoning sex, kids are going to do what they've always done......but maybe if pregancy can be prevented, a child won't have to pay with his/her life for their would-be parents' lack of morals. Sorry, but you're not making any sense. It is designed to dislodge a fertilized egg from the uterine wall. Sorry, the "kids are going to do what kids always do" argument isn't washing either. Abstinence works every time it's tried. Yes, abstinence DOES work every time....but that's not the world we're living in. As for not making any sense, it depends on how clearly one thinks. I'm not going to believe that wishing for people to practice abstience is going to affect the number of abortions that take place. We have to deal with situations as they are, not the way we wish they were. Actually, we need to deal with the reality of sin and it's consequences and stop marginalizing our children. Not marginalizing, Dave, being realistic. ANYTHING that would reduce the number of abortions is, if not a good thing, at least a better alternative to murder. The morning after pill prevents pregnancy (I'm not sure of the medical mechanics of it all) and that's better than killing a fetus in the womb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoob57 Posted May 4, 2013 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 35 Topic Count: 100 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 41,855 Content Per Day: 8.05 Reputation: 21,841 Days Won: 77 Joined: 03/13/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/27/1957 Share Posted May 4, 2013 If this, as all else, doesn't cause us to cry out Lord come quickly.... I do not know what will! Love, Steven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthitjah Posted May 5, 2013 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 1,285 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 17,917 Content Per Day: 2.26 Reputation: 355 Days Won: 19 Joined: 10/01/2002 Status: Offline Share Posted May 5, 2013 I'm not for this loosening of the controls on this drug either......but; if if will reduce the number of abortions then it would be worth it. If no pregnancy occurs, no life is ended. As for condoning sex, kids are going to do what they've always done......but maybe if pregancy can be prevented, a child won't have to pay with his/her life for their would-be parents' lack of morals. Sorry, but you're not making any sense. It is designed to dislodge a fertilized egg from the uterine wall. Sorry, the "kids are going to do what kids always do" argument isn't washing either. Abstinence works every time it's tried. Yes, abstinence DOES work every time....but that's not the world we're living in. As for not making any sense, it depends on how clearly one thinks. I'm not going to believe that wishing for people to practice abstience is going to affect the number of abortions that take place. We have to deal with situations as they are, not the way we wish they were. Actually, we need to deal with the reality of sin and it's consequences and stop marginalizing our children. Not marginalizing, Dave, being realistic. ANYTHING that would reduce the number of abortions is, if not a good thing, at least a better alternative to murder. The morning after pill prevents pregnancy (I'm not sure of the medical mechanics of it all) and that's better than killing a fetus in the womb. So let me get your argument straight. Help me understand what you're saying. Are you really saying that compromising with sin is better than not sinning in the first place? Ge 4:7 If you do well, shall you not be accepted? and if you do not well, sin lies at the door. And you shall be its desire, and you must rule over it. It does not prevent pregnancy. It dislodges fertilized and unfertilized eggs from the uterus wall. It in fact terminates a pregnancy. That's being realistic. What would reduce the number of abortions is to stop marginalizing and underselling our kids in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Valnomi Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 (edited) JustinM said So, what if a 20 year old is having a sexual relationship with a 15 year old girl, and there's a chance she might become pregnant? The State has now become an accomplice to her rape, and is obstructing justice by allowing her or her rapist to cover it up. Giving a minor access to an abortifacent, such as this, is interfering with justice, if the person that got her pregnant is an adult. It is not the same as a condom either, the drug is only to be used after unprotected sex, to prevent a pregnancy, and will not protect her from getting a STI. ................................................................................................................................. So, you are against the morning after pill because a pregnant victim aids justice? It's no wonder the heathens think we are crazy. Edited May 5, 2013 by Valnomi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayin jade Posted May 5, 2013 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 44 Topic Count: 6,178 Topics Per Day: 0.87 Content Count: 43,800 Content Per Day: 6.17 Reputation: 11,247 Days Won: 58 Joined: 01/03/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted May 5, 2013 Not marginalizing, Dave, being realistic. ANYTHING that would reduce the number of abortions is, if not a good thing, at least a better alternative to murder. The morning after pill prevents pregnancy (I'm not sure of the medical mechanics of it all) and that's better than killing a fetus in the womb. It prevents fertilized eggs from implanting in the uterus. You stated that you do not view fertilized eggs as disposable so how is that better than abortions? It just happens at an earlier time frame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolutionist90 Posted May 5, 2013 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 46 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 460 Content Per Day: 0.11 Reputation: 42 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/16/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/26/1990 Share Posted May 5, 2013 JustinM said So, what if a 20 year old is having a sexual relationship with a 15 year old girl, and there's a chance she might become pregnant? The State has now become an accomplice to her rape, and is obstructing justice by allowing her or her rapist to cover it up. Giving a minor access to an abortifacent, such as this, is interfering with justice, if the person that got her pregnant is an adult. It is not the same as a condom either, the drug is only to be used after unprotected sex, to prevent a pregnancy, and will not protect her from getting a STI. ................................................................................................................................. So, you are against the morning after pill because a pregnant victim aids justice? It's no wonder the heathens think we are crazy. The heathens would think we are crazy even if JustinM had a reason you agreed with lol. Also I think his example was wrong but I do think this drug would be good for human traffickers/incestuous molestation. If the rape was non-consensual it would be best if the girl could go to a hospital to check for STDs and then the hospital could give her the pill under supervision. If the girl just takes the pill and does not go to a doctor/hospital/police then that would help the rapist escape justice since he would never get caught. That reason should not be the only reason but I think it is okay to be on a list of reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts