You keep going back to this failed argument. Preventing someone from committing a wanton homicide is not punishing the would be killer.
Sure there is! As soon as you started using the term "lifer" you labeled yourselves deathers. Deal with it!
Sice it is illegal, it is sae to say that whatever source you are using to determine your abortion rate is suspect and you are most likely using a wild guess.
as always....righties run their mouths without the facts.... Ive tried to tell people this before....banning the pill is the next step for the antichoice crowd. heres a RW website talking about it...
So you are using something that happens 2% of the time as the purpose for the pill? That is supremely lame.
There is nothing there to indicate that it works as an intentional abortifacient. In fact, if it did it would have caused more than 2% !!!! You are trying, once again, to launch another emotion laden weak argument, and it has once again failed. 2% unitended consequences is low for just about any measure.
Yes a woman has a right to prevent her uterine from going into the stage of fertility. Else are you maintaining we must force fertility on women and even use drugs to make it 24/7?
Where did I say that? So are you advocating we force all women into fertility? If not what is your point?
The point here is whether we should force women into fertility, I don't believe so do you? I am sure we could come up with the hormonal mix to do so. You claim that women should be able to control their own bodies, I agree they should be able to control their fertility, do you disagree?
its not controlling their fertility if a fertilized (notice past tense) egg is a baby... because at that point they would be already pregnant woudlnt they?
The last year I could find data for (2008 ) shows 1.2 million abortions vs 4.1 million live births in the US. That's a disgusting statistic no matter how you spin it.
There is no freer method than allowing individuals to make this choice on their own. Our founders did not want mob rule democracy taking away the rights of others.
What's so amazing is that they claim to be for "less government involvement in our lives" - while doing the very same thing.
Can you show me where anything about this bans contraceptives? "SECTION 1. Article III of the constitution of the state of Mississippi is hereby amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION TO READ: Section 33. Person defined. As used in this Article III of the state constitution, The term person or persons shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof. This initiative shall not require any additional revenue for implementation."
"Every human being from the moment of fertilization....." - if you read some of the posts you will be able to determine that the pill not only keeps women from ovulating, if an egg happens to get fertilized, the pill lines the walls of the uterus so that the "fertilized" egg does not attach. In essence a fertilized egg is being flushed out without the woman even knowing it. If a fertilized egg is determined to be a "person" then flushing one out by the use of contraceptives is tantamount to murder.
Banning contraceptives and abortion will increase the number of live births for sure, at least in Mississippi.
Don't make yourself dizzy spinning this. And, yeah, I've read some of these posts that are just parroting some talking points of PP and the like. NO WHERE does this proposed amendment outlaw contraceptives. It's just ridiculous to say otherwise.
You want "spin" try a pro-life website http://www.abort73.com/abortion_facts/which_birth_control_methods_cause_abortion/ Or read this site http://www.prolifephysicians.org/abortifacient.htm
