Good for Wal-markt!!!

[seraph]

Charlie, I have a question... iyo, because the morning after pill sometimes prevents pregnancy it doesn't matter that it sometimes causes abortions?

It's not that it doesn't matter; it's that birth control pills can, on rare occasions, do the same thing. Most drugs including perscription drugs can sometimes cause death. Look at viagra; it can cause death and blindness sometimes; I don't hear any outrage about that one.

(snip)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree that benefits and side effects should be looked at with any medication... our disagreement is that I cannot with good conscience say that the morning after pill's benefits- preventing pregnancies- outweighs the side effects- abortions. An adult, in most cases, has the ability to make an informed decision to take a drug or not- to risk death or blindness, etc for the benefits of the medication... the abort-er kinda makes that decision for the abort-ed, don't ya think? So when a precious life is created, that life is then ended as easily as popping a tic-tac in your mouth.

[seraph]

(snip)

Seraph, in his question, makes a good point I think.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

*coughcoughinHERquestioncoughcough*

[ted]

t.

[Ovedya]

Why hasn't someone mentioned the fact that any drug that alters or prevents the natural biological processes of the body is potentially harmful, and even deadly?

I mean, forget for a moment about the fact that the "morning after" pill can potentially cause abortion. In fact, forget for a moment about the whole abortion issue as a whole. Let's talk about messing around with a woman's body chemistry. Let's talk about the increasing rate of drug dependency in America. I'm not just talking about addiction here, I'm talking about "the pill mentality" that seems to be sweeping the country.

This stuff is dangerous; not because of what it does to a pregnancy, but because of what it does to the human body! The "morning after" pill is essentially a very high dosage - up to two to three times the normal dosage - of birth control pills.

In Britain the drug is called "Levonelle."

Here is the data sheet I found for the drug: http://www.medsafe.govt.nz/Profs/Datasheet...evonelletab.htm

Take note of the very first sentence under "Actions":

"The precise mode of action of LEVONELLE is not known."

Does that send a red flag up for anybody besides me? Here is a drug that can be obtained over-the-counter in England, and nobody really knows how it works. The next sentence actually says that this drug (levonorgestral) is "thought" to work mainly by preventing ovulation..."

Thought to work?

Let me ask you saints a question: Let's say you had a splitting headache. A completer stranger walks up to you and offers you a little green pill that you've never seen or heard of before, and says, "Here, take this." So you then ask, "What does it do and how does it work?" That stranger then says, "Well, it should take care of your headache. I'm not sure how it works or what it will do to your body, but it should get rid of your headache."

Would you take it?

This is essentially what the pharmacists are saying to us. They are telling us to take a drug that at the least elevates hormone levels, and changes the natural processes of our body; and at the worse has the potential to seriously damage some people long-term, and they don't know exactly how it works.

[Guest aggie, daughter, self, mom]

When did Bentonville Arkansas become the do all,know all on birth control?

How desparate can we be?

Abortion Advocates Say Wal-Mart Should Stock Morning After Pills Email this article

by Steven Ertelt

LifeNews.com Editor

June 30, 2005

Bentonville, AR (LifeNews.com) -- The world's largest retail chain is coming under fire from abortion advocates because it does not stock the morning after pill at any of its 3,000 locations. Wal-Mart operates more pharmacies in the United States than any other chain, but it will not stock the Plan B drugs, which sometime cause an abortion.

Wal-Mart spokeswoman Jacquie Young told the Associated Press that the retailer doesn't carry the morning after pills for "business reasons." She declined to elaborate, but previous Wal-Mart representatives have said the decision is in response to customer concerns.

"We don't carry a lot of products," she added.

That upsets abortion advocates like Ted Miller of NARAL.

"For many rural women, Wal-Mart is their only pharmacy," Miller says. "That's what makes Wal-Mart's refusal to carry emergency contraception so disconcerting."

NARAL and Planned Parenthood are targeting Wal-Mart and other pharmacy chains with a lobbying campaign seeking to get them to stock the drugs and to post a sign saying all legal prescriptions will be honored.

Like other pharmacy chains such as Walgreens, Rite-Aid and Winn-Dixie, Wal-Mart allows pharmacists not to dispense a drug that violates their moral and religious views. However, the retailer asks pharmacists to help customers find the morning after pill drugs at another location.

Walgreens spokeswoman Carol Hively told the Associated Press that not every store the company runs has the Plan B drugs either. She indicated it may not be stocked in places where demand is lower.

"That's true of any prescription drug," she said.

http://www.lifenews.com/nat1409.html

__________________

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Edited July 4, 2005 by traveller

[nebula]

Nebula,  your link also had this to say:

Biologists who are content to focus on terrestrial organisms often note some additional signs of a "living organism", including these:

  1. Living organisms contain molecular components such as: carbohydrates, lipids, nucleic acids, and proteins.

  2. Living organisms require both energy and matter in order to continue living.

  3. Living organisms are composed of at least one cell.

  4. Living organisms maintain homeostasis.

  5. Species of living organisms will evolve.

What you are misunderstanding, Charlie, is that to be considered a living organism, it must meet all of the requirements listed, not just one item.

[Work in Progress]

(snip)

Seraph, in his question, makes a good point I think.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

*coughcoughinHERquestioncoughcough*

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh, gosh, Seraph!! I'm so sorry!!! HER.

(LOL @ your coughing!! )

What I find so awsome is that despite all the wonderful things scientists are able to do with very few cells or even one cell, they cannot create even one single cell from nothing. That's right, they ALWAYS have to begin with at least one already existing cell from some living organism. Only God can create a single living cell of any kind from absolutely nothing.

Oh, AMEN, Brother!! God - the ONLY giver of life!

( though, hey - I'm not sure that scientists are doing "wonderful things" with cells. )

[Guest charlie]

The morning-after pill should not be confused with other abortifacient pills, such as mifepristone (aka RU-486) or methotrexate, which always cause an abortion after implantation has occurred. The morning-after pill can prevent a pregnancy, or it can end one at its earliest stage. It can prevent pregnancy by preventing ovulation. However if ovulation occurs, it can function as an abortifacient to end a pregnancy by preventing implantation of the embryo.

I understand that you are not condoning abortion; neither do I. I do think that if a woman has a brutish husband she should be able to discretely get the morning after pill while she's at wal-mart doing the family shopping the "day after", without her husband's knowlege or consent....to prevent a pregnancy. 

Abortafacient: anything that triggers abortion of fertilized eggs, or fetuses.

Actually Charlie, you are condoning abortion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

AJ, it reads: it can function as an abortifacient to end a pregnancy by preventing implantation of the embryo; despite the "wording" it's clear that the embryo is not allowed to implant into the wall of the uterus. I don't believe there's a pregnancy without implantation; you think the fertilized egg is a pregnancy even without implantation. Be sure and read those other references I gave. I do think they have relevancy to this thread.

Oveyda, you bring up a good point about the body; but do you think it's healthy for a woman to have a baby every year?

Nebula, we're in disagreement on the biological definition of the smallest unit of life; I see an impasse between us on this.

I think safety of drugs is the reason we have the FDA.

How many of you think that Wal-Mart should also refuse to stock or fill perscriptions for birth control pills?

[Work in Progress]

I don't know, Charlie, it seems like too much hair splitting to differentiate between fertilization and implantation, regarding which one is actually "life". Why get into hair splitting and semantics, what's the purpose?

Oveyda, you bring up a good point about the body; but do you think it's healthy for a woman to have a baby every year?

What's "unhealthy" about that? Her body, during a certain period of years, is made to work that way, Charlie. Her body is also made to breastfeed for a period of time - which is a natural birth control. God's got it all planned, Charlie. What man comes along and "thinks" is better, never is.

[Ovedya]

Oveyda, you bring up a good point about the body; but do you think it's healthy for a woman to have a baby every year?

The female body is incredibly resilient and adaptable. I don't think any natural process of the human body is "unhealthy."