Page 2 of 46 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 455

Thread: Judge strikes age restrictions for "morning after" pill

  1. #11
    Only Losers H8 Capitalism
    Spartacus FPV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In your echo chamber
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    12,893

    Re: Judge strikes age restrictions for "morning after" pill

    The fewer unwanted children and teenage mothers the better.
    Haymarket's "support" of the 2nd Amendment, a right he believes we never had.
    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    no. You cannot lose rights you do not have in the first place. There is no such thing as the right to have any weapon of your choice regardless of any other consideration. It simply does not exist.

  2. #12
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,941
    Blog Entries
    25

    Re: Judge strikes age restrictions for "morning after" pill

    Quote Originally Posted by tererun View Post
    unless there is some health issue with a minor taking it the FDA has no business getting in the way. Why they were asking for public opinion on the matter is beyond me since their only concern should be the scientific safety of the drug. If the bible thumpers do not want to buy it they are free to walk on by it. The bible should have nothing to do with the FDA's decision. I actually do support selling it over the counter to kids who may need it. It is cheap, it doesn't involve surgery, and the girl can fix her mistake without making a huge issue about it. We need to get the government out of the practice of enforcing some insane twisted abstinence moral values that don't work on kids who are going to have sex whether the christians like it or not. A baby is not a punishment for a promiscuous teen. Christians need to stop pretending a living human being is god's punishment on girls for having sex.
    I would feel better if the Judge set the minimum age at the legal age when a child becomes an adult. If a parent is still responsible for the minor, then the parent should be the one to okay the drug or not for their child.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The darkside of the moon
    Last Seen
    05-24-14 @ 05:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,905
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Judge strikes age restrictions for "morning after" pill

    Quote Originally Posted by Pilot View Post
    No one mentioned the bible or religion, where are you getting that from?
    The reason why people want the morning after pill banned is because of religious objections to birth control. That would also be the only reason to get public opinion if you were something like a federal science organization capable of testing medical issues with a drug for yourself. The FDA does testing and evaluation and that should be based on science and not religious opinion. If the drug poses minimal to no health risk to the minors then they have no business opposing it's sale to minors.

  4. #14
    Sage
    Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-06-13 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    17,002

    Re: Judge strikes age restrictions for "morning after" pill

    Quote Originally Posted by tererun View Post
    One more step and you can get to bestiality too. It still will be an insane logic leap, but I am sure you can bring in some other obscure unrelated items.
    Hardly. You know laws that don't require parental consent in the name of protecting victims of underage rape and incest actual enable the victimizers to continue to rape or molest by preventing adults like the police from becoming involved. This is no different. You are insulating rapists and molesters from being caught with your "to protect the victim" nonsense.

  5. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The darkside of the moon
    Last Seen
    05-24-14 @ 05:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,905
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Judge strikes age restrictions for "morning after" pill

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    I would feel better if the Judge set the minimum age at the legal age when a child becomes an adult. If a parent is still responsible for the minor, then the parent should be the one to okay the drug or not for their child.
    You see, that is an issue the FDA should not be deciding. If the legislature wants to deal with that sort of thing then that is their thing. The FDA should be scientific in their evaluations of the effects of the drug. There should be no parental, religious, or personal objections for the FDA. The judge was right in smacking the FDA for their BS.

  6. #16
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:43 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Judge strikes age restrictions for "morning after" pill

    In addition, the MAP is huge levels of hormones NOT meant for routine birth control. I can see 14, 15 year olds taking one every time she has sex and doing so thereafter. What would be the effects of someone taking 5, 10, 15 every month, month after month?

  7. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The darkside of the moon
    Last Seen
    05-24-14 @ 05:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,905
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Judge strikes age restrictions for "morning after" pill

    Quote Originally Posted by Fisher View Post
    Hardly. You know laws that don't require parental consent in the name of protecting victims of underage rape and incest actual enable the victimizers to continue to rape or molest by preventing adults like the police from becoming involved. This is no different. You are insulating rapists and molesters from being caught with your "to protect the victim" nonsense.
    There is nothing in here that limits a child's ability to report rape or molestation. There is nothing in here that keeps a parent from doing so either. That was a sad argument that has no basis in the fact the FDA is concerned with the scientific evaluation of the health issues regarding the drug. If you want to oppose the drug because it supposedly makes children get molested then bring that up in the legislature and see if they buy the BS, but the FDA has no business back dooring in regulations that have nothing to do with their purpose. Oh, and we all know the argument against this pill has everything to do with hate of BC, and nothing to do with stopping molestation and child rape.

  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The darkside of the moon
    Last Seen
    05-24-14 @ 05:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,905
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Judge strikes age restrictions for "morning after" pill

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    In addition, the MAP is huge levels of hormones NOT meant for routine birth control. I can see 14, 15 year olds taking one every time she has sex and doing so thereafter. What would be the effects of someone taking 5, 10, 15 every month, month after month?
    hmmm, if only we had a scientific organization who could have brought up studies showing the dangers of such use if they existed. Because that would be a reason to require a prescription, not public opinion. So why do you think the FDA did not bring up the concerns that you just presented? Are we to believe the FDA is not familiar with people who use more than the recommended dosage? Or perhaps there was no evidence that there are huge health risks. Because that would have been something I would imagine would have been important evidence as to why the plan B pill should be prescribed and not offered OTC if it existed. maybe the FDA just left those studies in their office during the trial.

  9. #19
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:43 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Judge strikes age restrictions for "morning after" pill

    Quote Originally Posted by tererun View Post
    hmmm, if only we had a scientific organization who could have brought up studies showing the dangers of such use if they existed. Because that would be a reason to require a prescription, not public opinion. So why do you think the FDA did not bring up the concerns that you just presented? Are we to believe the FDA is not familiar with people who use more than the recommended dosage? Or perhaps there was no evidence that there are huge health risks. Because that would have been something I would imagine would have been important evidence as to why the plan B pill should be prescribed and not offered OTC if it existed. maybe the FDA just left those studies in their office during the trial.
    No, no, no. You can't condemn the FDA as incompetent and then do the exact opposite and claim their opinion makes your point because they are experts - all in the same thread.

  10. #20
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:43 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Judge strikes age restrictions for "morning after" pill

    Morning after pills are emergency contraceptive pills that have to be taken within 72 hours of unprotected sexual intercourse.These pills work by either inhibiting ovulation or inhibiting fertilization of the egg or preventing the attachment of the fertilized egg to the wall of the uterus.
    These pills are about 40 times as strong as regular contraceptive pills and thus, are more likely to cause severe side effects.
    Contraceptive pills can cause serious side effects such as blood clots in heart, intestines and lungs.
    They are not advisable for women who have diabetes, liver problems, heart disease, and deep vein thrombosis and breast cancer.
    The risk further increases with women having smoking habit or history of migraine and cardiovascular diseases.
    Other possible side effects include nausea and vomiting, headaches, fluid retention, dizziness, diarrhea, abdominal pain, breast tenderness, irregular bleeding and chest pain.
    The common side effects of morning after pills are the same as those of ectopic pregnancy. In such a pregnancy, the embryo gets stuck in the fallopian tubes rather than the womb. Women, who are not under medical supervision, may confuse the abdominal pain and nausea of ectopic pregnancy with the side effects. Moreover, studies have shown that the use of some emergency contraceptive pills increases the risk of ectopic pregnancy.
    Use of oral morning after pills is associated with significant weight gain, gall bladder disease, respiratory disorders, high blood pressure, liver tumor, cyst enlargement, visual disturbances, increased risk of ectopic pregnancy and death.
    Other than these, adverse or allergic reactions of the body to the pill include skin irritation, an outbreak of rash, and difficulty in breathing and swallowing.
    The potential for regular use emergency contraceptive pills also raises concerns about the safety. Emergency contraceptive pills are claimed to be safe as per studies based on their occasional use. The large amounts of hormone per dose aggravate the risk significantly.
    Women older than 35 years of age, who either smoke or have a history of heart disease, are not advised to take emergency contraceptive pills.
    Over the counter availability of the morning after pills raises serious questions about its misuse by youth:

    1. The rates of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) among youth may increase.


    1. An increase in the rate of sexual violence may be seen.


    1. It will expose young girls to serious health risks.

Page 2 of 46 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •