• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge strikes age restrictions for "morning after" pill

sangha said:
And I wouldn't assume that they'd be worse, either.

And teens generally don't have that much disposable income to make such purchases on a regular basis. MAPs cost from $10-$70 each

The Morning-After Pill - Emergency Contraception - Cost & Info
Click to expand...

From Daily Kos (2011):

Hearing things like “there’s no science showing that Plan B is harmful to underage girls. It’s just birth control & teens need access” seemed solid in logic. However, I don’t agree. My main argument against this reason is look at the history of women’s birth control, i.e. - the pill. As it ushered in an unprecedented force in the woman’s movement and the sexual revolution; it had its problems too. The cheers of the pill’s ability to make decisions about child birth a true women’s issue (i.e. - they controlled their fertility) was nothing short of amazing. Science, making things happen!!! However, there is a dark cloud to that story. Even now, there are tons of testimonials from women who suffer from non functional libidos due to the pills hormones. Non-hormonal IUDs are now very popular for that reason. The pill, originally designed to help regulate a woman’s fertility, was now causing women serious side effects, some of which were irreversible. So lets fast forward and get back to Plan B.

As I said before, I am all for Plan B for women. I think its a great option for those moments (hopefully rare) that traditional birth control or clear heads fail. Also, the sentiment that it can prevent the possibility of a child being conceived from rape is one I 100% agree with. The issue for me is we don’t really know what would happen to young girls who may take this pill numerous times while they are still developing. Just like the birth control pill now, we are still battling back and forth about its LONG TERM EFFECTS. This is what matters to me. If we find that sterility, for example, happens what do we tell a generation of women then? As Condi Rice was famously said, “who could have seen that one coming?” So the cautious approach of 16 or younger girls have to get someone else to get it for them is in my opinion reasonable.

Daily Kos: Plan B Debate
 
nota bene said:
From Daily Kos (2011):

Hearing things like “there’s no science showing that Plan B is harmful to underage girls. It’s just birth control & teens need access” seemed solid in logic. However, I don’t agree. My main argument against this reason is look at the history of women’s birth control, i.e. - the pill. As it ushered in an unprecedented force in the woman’s movement and the sexual revolution; it had its problems too. The cheers of the pill’s ability to make decisions about child birth a true women’s issue (i.e. - they controlled their fertility) was nothing short of amazing. Science, making things happen!!! However, there is a dark cloud to that story. Even now, there are tons of testimonials from women who suffer from non functional libidos due to the pills hormones. Non-hormonal IUDs are now very popular for that reason. The pill, originally designed to help regulate a woman’s fertility, was now causing women serious side effects, some of which were irreversible. So lets fast forward and get back to Plan B.

As I said before, I am all for Plan B for women. I think its a great option for those moments (hopefully rare) that traditional birth control or clear heads fail. Also, the sentiment that it can prevent the possibility of a child being conceived from rape is one I 100% agree with. The issue for me is we don’t really know what would happen to young girls who may take this pill numerous times while they are still developing. Just like the birth control pill now, we are still battling back and forth about its LONG TERM EFFECTS. This is what matters to me. If we find that sterility, for example, happens what do we tell a generation of women then? As Condi Rice was famously said, “who could have seen that one coming?” So the cautious approach of 16 or younger girls have to get someone else to get it for them is in my opinion reasonable.

Daily Kos: Plan B Debate
Click to expand...

I didn't read the entire link; just what you quoted

I agree that there should be more research into the long term effects. That should happen for every drug. Nevertheless, all sorts of drugs come onto the market without adequate testing of the long-term effects.

However, that (not knowing) isn't a reason to restrict the use by teens. It never has been, so I don't see why we should apply special standards simply because the issue is sexually related.
 
"Special" standards do apply when you're talking about hormones and the developing body. We don't know what the long-term effects are...but many of us remember how RU-86 was considered low-risk...unless it wasn't. Mifepristone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
sangha said:
I didn't read the entire link; just what you quoted

I agree that there should be more research into the long term effects. That should happen for every drug. Nevertheless, all sorts of drugs come onto the market without adequate testing of the long-term effects.

However, that (not knowing) isn't a reason to restrict the use by teens. It never has been, so I don't see why we should apply special standards simply because the issue is sexually related.
Click to expand...

If the drug hasn't been tested on teens how can you so cavalierly dismiss the possibility of serious side effects for young teens that don't manifest in adults? Ever hear about the deaths of many children related to taking aspirin and Reyes Syndrome? A woman I worked with many years ago was a single mom with a 12 yr old daughter. One day she left the girl with her father, the girl's grandfather, and the girl complained about a headache and the grandfather innocently gave the girl some aspirin and within a day the girl's brain literally exploded and she was dead. The girl's mother was obviously shattered and took many years to recover and the grandfather never did recover from the guilt.
 
CanadaJohn said:
If the drug hasn't been tested on teens how can you so cavalierly dismiss the possibility of serious side effects for young teens that don't manifest in adults? Ever hear about the deaths of many children related to taking aspirin and Reyes Syndrome? A woman I worked with many years ago was a single mom with a 12 yr old daughter. One day she left the girl with her father, the girl's grandfather, and the girl complained about a headache and the grandfather innocently gave the girl some aspirin and within a day the girl's brain literally exploded and she was dead. The girl's mother was obviously shattered and took many years to recover and the grandfather never did recover from the guilt.
Click to expand...

I read until the part where you dishonestly claim I have dismissed the possibility of side effects.

As I said earlier, irrational and unreasonable people will allow their emotionalism to lead them into seeing things that are not there.
 
sangha said:
I read until the part where you dishonestly claim I have dismissed the possibility of side effects.

As I said earlier, irrational and unreasonable people will allow their emotionalism to lead them into seeing things that are not there.
Click to expand...

And ideologues throw caution to the wind, consequences be damned, in the pursuit of their goals.
 
sangha said:
I don't know what you're referring to when you say that special standards do apply.
Click to expand...

I mean that children are special. Listen to the TV commercials that advise of constraints--e.g. not to be taken if under 18. Children's bodies are not the same as adults, and pubescents girls' hormones aren't the same either.
 
Re: Judge orders morning-after pill available without prescription

SheWolf said:
The sooner you take it, the more likely it is to prevent pregnancy. I think making OTC is the best way to make it avaliable.
Click to expand...

Like I said before, it is OTC for adults, but for minors they needed a prescription. Personally, I think it needs to be OTC for everyone but dispensed by the pharmacist under conditions of safe use and have it logged. Someone doesn't need to be buying Plan B daily and it would help prevent abuse. In the case of minors a parent would have to sign off on it. It eliminates the need for an office visit, the women would receive counselling and safe use guidelines, and parents would still have to be notified and approve of it.
 
CanadaJohn said:
And ideologues throw caution to the wind, consequences be damned, in the pursuit of their goals.
Click to expand...

That's right. Ideologues do not see how their moralistic blatherings supporting the restriction of health care simply because it has something to do with sex could lead to the restriction of medicines that save lives and protect the health of millions of people.
 
nota bene said:
I mean that children are special. Listen to the TV commercials that advise of constraints--e.g. not to be taken if under 18. Children's bodies are not the same as adults, and pubescents girls' hormones aren't the same either.
Click to expand...

Which is why I believe that Plan B should be subject to the same constraints as any other OTC drug
 
sangha said:
I read until the part where you dishonestly claim I have dismissed the possibility of side effects.
Click to expand...

However, that (not knowing) isn't a reason to restrict the use by teens. It never has been, so I don't see why we should apply special standards simply because the issue is sexually related.

You apparently have a short memory, or at least a convenient one, so I've repeated your own words above. Perhaps you could explain how "not knowing" isn't a reason to restrict use in teens isn't being cavalierly dismissive? I won't hold you to honesty, since that may cramp your ideological spin, but I'd love to watch you twirl.
 
CanadaJohn said:
However, that (not knowing) isn't a reason to restrict the use by teens. It never has been, so I don't see why we should apply special standards simply because the issue is sexually related.

You apparently have a short memory, or at least a convenient one, so I've repeated your own words above. Perhaps you could explain how "not knowing" isn't a reason to restrict use in teens isn't being cavalierly dismissive? I won't hold you to honesty, since that may cramp your ideological spin, but I'd love to watch you twirl.
Click to expand...

The words you quoted do not dismiss the possibility of side effects. Once again, your argument is dishonest.

And once again, I stopped reading once I came upon your dishonest claim
 
rocket88 said:
Don't forget how we're all homos too.
Click to expand...

If you say so. Some of you are so ugly that the other guys wouldn't touch you apparently so you have to take women as a port of last resort if that is true. I'll take your word for it, because liberals are always honest.
 
sangha said:
That's right. Ideologues do not see how their moralistic blatherings supporting the restriction of health care simply because it has something to do with sex could lead to the restriction of medicines that save lives and protect the health of millions of people.
Click to expand...

And leftist ideologues apparently have no use for honesty. Point out one place where my comments referred to sex as the reason for my concern about young teens having unfettered access to the pills - you can't, because I didn't - the act is not the issue, at least not for me - my point is that there is more to the issue of a 13 yr old potentially being pregnant and her parents should know what's going on and make those kinds of decisions.
 
sangha said:
The words you quoted do not dismiss the possibility of side effects. Once again, your argument is dishonest.

And once again, I stopped reading once I came upon your dishonest claim
Click to expand...

Like most on the left, they can't even be honest with themselves in their pursuit of ideological goals - they're too embarrassed by the implications.
 
CanadaJohn said:
And leftist ideologues apparently have no use for honesty.
Click to expand...

I'm not the one who has repeatedly lied about

1) Insurance coverage for OTC drugs
2) Dismissing the possibility of side effect.

That was you

And once again, I stopped reading as soon as I saw another of your dishonest claims
 
CanadaJohn said:
And leftist ideologues apparently have no use for honesty. Point out one place where my comments referred to sex as the reason for my concern about young teens having unfettered access to the pills - you can't, because I didn't - the act is not the issue, at least not for me - my point is that there is more to the issue of a 13 yr old potentially being pregnant and her parents should know what's going on and make those kinds of decisions.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The act is not the issue; the pill's safety is my concern. Also, of course, the role of the parents. Not good for little girls to be making medical decisions for themselves by themselves.
 
sangha said:
I'm not the one who has repeatedly lied about

1) Insurance coverage for OTC drugs
2) Dismissing the possibility of side effect.

That was you

And once again, I stopped reading as soon as I saw another of your dishonest claims
Click to expand...

Point out one comment I posted where I claimed that insurance covers OTC drugs? I didn't. You're the one who stated it in response to my comment that the reproductive rights people and their friends in the administration and HHS will see that the pill is "free" under Obamacare.

You really should learn to comprehend the meaning of words when used in sentence form.
 
nota bene said:
Agreed. The act is not the issue; the pill's safety is my concern. Also, of course, the role of the parents. Not good for little girls to be making medical decisions for themselves by themselves.
Click to expand...

Do you apply the same standard for all OTC drugs, like dandruff shampoo and ointments that fight foot fungus?
 
nota bene said:
Agreed. The act is not the issue; the pill's safety is my concern. Also, of course, the role of the parents. Not good for little girls to be making medical decisions for themselves by themselves.
Click to expand...

Why do leftists feel that concerns about a child's health is none of a parent's concern when it relates to sex/contraceptives/abortion, no matter the age of the child? Perhaps society should reduce the age of consent for young teens - if they can biologically manage the act, they can consent to do it with whomever. For that matter, let's let 13 yr olds vote, drive cars, drink, enter into contracts - why stop at sex?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom