• 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!

A victory for the morning-after pill [W:107:233]

Re: A victory for the morning-after pill [W:107]

Tigger said:
1.)If my assumption is wrong, then where is it that you believe the FDA derives its mandate from?



2.)It most definitely does matter, unless you are of the opinion that the US Constitution is no longer relevant. In fact it is the entire basis for my viewpoint on this topic.



I don't want them regulated because the only entity capable of doing it (the US Government) does not have a legitimate mandate to be involved in that sort of business.
Click to expand...

1.) you assumption is wrong because you said "ou seem to believe that it is the role and place of the Government to protect you from unpleasant drug and food issues."

this is not true at all

i do think the government (doesnt have to be the FDA) just governemtn should regulate and monitor food and drugs make sure they are safe, regulate their production etc

this is more then protecting people form unpleasantness, try to understand unregulated drugs and food could wipe out the country

but its also NOT thier only role they have many

2.) nope it doesnt matter to me at all sorry, and yes i view the constitution relevant

3.) your opinions for your reason doesnt matter to me, what you want is absurd and dangerous.

ill stick with logic and saftey
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill [W:107]

AGENT J said:
1.) you assumption is wrong because you said "ou seem to believe that it is the role and place of the Government to protect you from unpleasant drug and food issues."

this is not true at all. i do think the government (doesnt have to be the FDA) just governemtn should regulate and monitor food and drugs make sure they are safe, regulate their production etc... this is more then protecting people form unpleasantness, try to understand unregulated drugs and food could wipe out the country

but its also NOT thier only role they have many
Click to expand...

Yes, the US Government has many roles. They are clearly spelled out in the Constitution. The regulation of medications and food are NOT among them. Regardless of whether it's the FDA, the Agriculture Department, or any other group.

AGENT J said:
2.) nope it doesnt matter to me at all sorry, and yes i view the constitution relevant
Click to expand...

You view the Constitution as relevant yet the fact that there is no mandate for this sort of activity by the Government isn't something that concerns you? Are you picking and choosing the parts of the document you like or am I missing something?

AGENT J said:
3.) your opinions for your reason doesnt matter to me, what you want is absurd and dangerous. ill stick with logic and safety
Click to expand...

That's fine. Your opinion doesn't matter to me either. What I want is only dangerous to those people who are either not competent or unwilling to actually pay attention to their own safety and well being. I see no need to pamper those individuals. We'd be a lot better off without them.
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill [W:107]

Tigger said:
1.)Yes, the US Government has many roles. They are clearly spelled out in the Constitution. The regulation of medications and food are NOT among them. Regardless of whether it's the FDA, the Agriculture Department, or any other group.



2.)You view the Constitution as relevant yet the fact that there is no mandate for this sort of activity by the Government isn't something that concerns you? Are you picking and choosing the parts of the document you like or am I missing something?


3.)That's fine. Your opinion doesn't matter to me either. What I want is only dangerous to those people who are either not competent or unwilling to actually pay attention to their own safety and well being. I see no need to pamper those individuals. We'd be a lot better off without them.
Click to expand...

1.) again id rather have them there than not :shrug:
2.) nope not picking and choosing the parts of the Constitution im picking not endanger my fellow Americans
3.) its not an opinion, its a fact. You dont not want food and drugs regulated

yeah everybody should be 100% educated and able to understand where all food and drugs come from and how safe they are or arnet and know where they were made and if good practices were followed. Yep thats rational and logical.
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

ARealConservative said:
hence child proof caps.

will plan b have those?
Click to expand...

What the heck are you talking about?

Child proof caps do not make drugs that are advertised as having excellent safety profiles being deadly to people with specific medical conditions.

By the way....child proof caps are only childproof for the little kids. Are you saying that there are 4 year olds that are endanger of getting into sisters dose of Plan B that she most likely would have taken within hours of buying it???

Child proof caps. That is funny.
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

digsbe said:
It's still a medical treatment and parents still must consent when medications are given to their children and can deny the use of medications if they do not want them used (unless of course courts step in in specific cases).

Not all surgical procedures are equal in risk, the same applies to drugs.
Click to expand...

That's simply untrue. Teens can buy any over the counter meds without their parent's permission. Surgery is of course a different case because of greater risk.
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

kerussll said:
That's simply untrue. Teens can buy any over the counter meds without their parent's permission. Surgery is of course a different case because of greater risk.
Click to expand...

Over the counter, but not prescription. A parent can overrule and gain access to their kids medical info, they can't do so with an OTC item bought at the store as would be the case with Plan B.

Surgery may be of the greatest risk, but medications are still a risk and Plan B is a medication that parent's should have a right to know and consent to if their child wants to take it. A parent should consent or at least have the right to know if their child is taking synthetic hormones. I see no rational reason why a parent or legal guardian, who is in charge of the child's care, shouldn't be the one consenting and knowing if their kid has taken Plan B.
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

lizzie said:
I believe that parental consent should be required for any prescription drug, just as it is for procedures. A child isn't always capable of making a sound and intelligent decision. This is a hormonal treatment that we are discussing. Birth control pills are not OTC. This one should not be either.
Click to expand...

But this isn't a prescription drug. It's been available safely over the counter for people over 17 for years. Politics was the only barrier to keeping it from younger girls, as there is no evidence it poses a greater physiological risk to someone younger than 17. If you have evidence that plan B poses a greater risk than other over the counter meds (say tylenol or ibuprofen) that the FDA is somehow unaware of, please share.
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

digsbe said:
Over the counter, but not prescription. A parent can overrule and gain access to their kids medical info, they can't do so with an OTC item bought at the store as would be the case with Plan B.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and plan B is an over the counter med. The rest of this didn't make sense to me.

[/QUOTE]Surgery may be of the greatest risk, but medications are still a risk and Plan B is a medication that parent's should have a right to know and consent to if their child wants to take it. A parent should consent or at least have the right to know if their child is taking synthetic hormones. I see no rational reason why a parent or legal guardian, who is in charge of the child's care, shouldn't be the one consenting and knowing if their kid has taken Plan B.[/QUOTE]

So you feel this shouldn't be over the counter for political and not safety reasons. Do you think you should be notified if your kids buy condoms too?
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

year2late said:
What the heck are you talking about?
Click to expand...

I'm talking about how we do take steps to attempt to keep even safe things like aspirin out of the hands of kids.

you know, the subject of the thread.
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

ARealConservative said:
I'm talking about how we do take steps to attempt to keep even safe things like aspirin out of the hands of kids.

you know, the subject of the thread.
Click to expand...

You do realize that child proof caps are really only effective for very young children. So it has absolutely nothing to do with this conversation. If you have a girl of childbearing age that is incapable of opening a childproof container, her being sexually active is only one of your major concerns.

So your comment at best is apples and oranges.
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

year2late said:
You do realize that child proof caps are really only effective for very young children. So it has absolutely nothing to do with this conversation. If you have a girl of childbearing age that is incapable of opening a childproof container, her being sexually active is only one of your major concerns.

So your comment at best is apples and oranges.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if it is even that effective for young kids, but it does show society has a desire and intent to keep even safe things from kids.

plan b is surely in the same situation. we don't want kids taking it without parents being aware and assisting.
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill [W:107]

To the people being all worried about increased promiscuity: whatever happened to personal responsibility, a good sex ed, and people not being crappy parents? I seriously do not think that more people are going to have sex because of this or at least the amounts will not increase drastically.
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

Paschendale said:
And wouldn't forcing a 15 year old to carry a pregnancy against her will be doing quite a bit of harm?
Click to expand...

No harm at all. It's called facing your responsibility. If you don't want the responsibility of raising a child, don't have sex. If you do get pregnant take responsibility and raise you child.
 
Last edited:
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill [W:107]

Texmex said:
No harm at all. It's called facing your
responsibility. If you don't want the responsibility of raising a child, don't have sex. If you do get pregnancy take responsibility and raise you child.
Click to expand...

Nice one Tex, you and I agree on something.

Perhaps your'e a true Texan after all.
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill [W:107]

Fenton said:
Nice one Tex, you and I agree on something.

Perhaps your'e a true Texan after all.
Click to expand...

Born and raised in Texas by parents who were born and raised in Texas. :2wave:
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

Texmex said:
You might want to have her checked for STD's.
Click to expand...

wait you mean because plan b is now available OTC that all teens are gonna become instant idiots turn into mega sluts and get STDS????? you're right that makes perfect sense!!!

:scared:
 
Last edited:
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

AGENT J said:
wait you mean because plan b is now available OTC that all teens are gonna become instant idiots turn into mega sluts with and get STDS????? you're right that makes perfect sense!!!

:scared:
Click to expand...

I just assumed that your daughter had the same sense of morality that you did. I never mentioned slut, you did.
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

Texmex said:
I just assumed that your daughter had the same sense of morality that you did. I never mentioned slut, you did.
Click to expand...
you know what they say about assumptions

whats my sense of morality id LOVE to know?

thats the best part of this is, supporting the FDA in them doing their job has nothing to do with morals, ZERO.

unless of course you think its ok to force morals on others.

but anyway, please proceed. tell me my sense of morals, i cant wit to read this.
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

ARealConservative said:
I'm talking about how we do take steps to attempt to keep even safe things like aspirin out of the hands of kids.

you know, the subject of the thread.
Click to expand...

Out of the hands of babies and toddlers. I'm pretty sure post pubescent teenagers could handle a child proof cap. FYI aspirin has a childproof cap because it can kill you if you overdose. Not so for plan B and other over the counter drugs that don't have these caps.
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

ARealConservative said:
I'm not sure if it is even that effective for young kids, but it does show society has a desire and intent to keep even safe things from kids.

plan b is surely in the same situation. we don't want kids taking it without parents being aware and assisting.
Click to expand...

Umm no. The reason there are childproof caps on those bottles is because they are NOT safe for kids to get in to. Plan B doesn't need that cap. Think about what that means...
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

kerussll said:
Out of the hands of babies and toddlers. I'm pretty sure post pubescent teenagers could handle a child proof cap. FYI aspirin has a childproof cap because it can kill you if you overdose. Not so for plan B and other over the counter drugs that don't have these caps.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure progesterone has toxicity levels. It certainly has the potential of adverse reactions with other drugs.
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

kerussll said:
Personal attacks (no matter how assanine) are not allowed here.
Click to expand...

that was hardly a personal attack, but if you think it is, report it.

acting like a mod isn't really allowed here either.
 
Re: A victory for the morning-after pill

Progesterone naturally occurs in a woman's body.
Progeterone is needed for a fertilized egg to implant in the womb.
It is also needed to continue a pregnancy.

Plan B does not hurt a fetus if the woman is already pregnant.

Plan B if taken soon enough can delay ovulation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom