• 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!

Should a rape victim be able to take the morning after pill?

Should a rape victim be able to take the morning after pill?

  • Yes, it protects her from bearing the rapist's child

    Votes: 82 92.1%
  • No, that pill is unethical

    Votes: 7 7.9%

  • Total voters
    89
Of course the answer is yes. You can go into medical reasons or philosophical reasons...the answer remains 'yes'. Aside from the fact that abortion remains legal and even if 'Plan B' were an abortion pill, best evidence indicates it is NOT an abortion pill but rather prevents the initial pregnancy from occuring in the first place.
This is patently absurd. If it was not an abortion pill, Obama would have absolutely no interest in Plan B, nor in its accessibility to women.
 
This is patently absurd. If it was not an abortion pill, Obama would have absolutely no interest in Plan B, nor in its accessibility to women.

It's a contraceptive, not an abortion pill. Also, your partisan rhetoric doesn't help your argument.
 
This is patently absurd. If it was not an abortion pill, Obama would have absolutely no interest in Plan B, nor in its accessibility to women.
It is far more absurd to presume you know something and express outrage over it than to disagree with a point. You might want to check the medical description of what it is, how and why it works, etc.
 
Should a rape victim be able to take the morning after pill?

Im guessing this is a hypothetical since just about anybody can currently take it now

but the answer is OF COURSE
 
Uhhh yea. Anyone should be able to take the morning after pill if they wanna.
 
How about because some of us believe that consenting to sexual intercourse includes consent to potentially becoming a parent.

I'm laughing here because I can just imagine what sex would look like with someone who thinks like you do: a little foreplay and an emergency appointment with a lawyer before the bar closes.
 
I'm sorry but humans are not animals. Animals do not have a concious and that is the difference. You just defined why we should protect that life because it is so helpless. What could be more helpless than a being that can't feel pain, has no consciousness, is a few cells big, can't think, can't see, can't hear, can't smell, can't eat, can't drink, can't fart, can't do anything. And who are you to say that if will face a likely situation that it will be aborted naturally anyway? What does that even mean? What is a "natural abortion"? Miscarriages are unfortunate events that occur due to many factors. Some could be because of the mom using drugs or not taking care of herself but more often than not they just happen, especially with women who have never had children.

So I am guessing that you are willing to accept rsponsibility for seeing to it that every child brought into this world has every thing they need to become a healthy competitive adult and you are also against all wars.
 
I don't see what difference rape makes, as that would be blaming the child if you thought it was one. I suppose if you are pro-life, but had an usual philosophy behind that position then maybe it would be alright, or you were pro-life after a certain amount of weeks, but if you believe the embryo is already a child then what difference does rape make?
 
It's a contraceptive, not an abortion pill. Also, your partisan rhetoric doesn't help your argument.
I believe there is debate and genuine uncertainty and academic division, but I think that there is at least an equal opinion and evidence that suggests these pills may sometimes act as abortifacients. This would be enough to disagree with them from common pro-life positions.
 
Last edited:
All women should have access to Plan B. Condoms break, after all. Rape victims should be offered Plan B at the hospital or clinic where they are being treated, along with all the other protections available against STD's.

That there are some who believe otherwise does not surprise me, sadly. It does, however, disgust me.
 
I’m going to extrapolate on the root of this poll. The root of the poll is who has the right to decide if a fertilized egg will be allowed to have a chance at becoming a new person. My root is what if a person took a woman’s egg, took out the woman’s genetic material, then substituted his own complete genetic material and implanted that fertilized egg back in the woman. (I don’t think this can be done yet.) So now we have a woman that is in the same status as is as this poll states, only who the fertilized egg will become is different. Yup, now what is your answer? Who is the baby?
Maybe this should be a new poll.
 
Any women should have the option of taking Plan B, and getting an abortion if that fails.

She should also feel free to do one and not the other, or neither.

She should be able to do whatever is right for her, regardless of her circumstances.
 
I'm laughing here because I can just imagine what sex would look like with someone who thinks like you do: a little foreplay and an emergency appointment with a lawyer before the bar closes.

You miss something here Parrish.... I'm not a proponent of casual sex; so no sexual encounter I ever have is going to start with a woman I just met in a bar. Sex is properly reserved for a committed, long-term relationship only.
 
You miss something here Parrish.... I'm not a proponent of casual sex; so no sexual encounter I ever have is going to start with a woman I just met in a bar. Sex is properly reserved for a committed, long-term relationship only.

You're a proponent of traditional values, like only having sex with someone you're married to. Right?
 
You're a proponent of traditional values, like only having sex with someone you're married to. Right?

No. I don't believe one has to wait until marriage. I do believe that they should be waiting until they are in a committed, long-term relationship. That doesn't necessarily mean a marriage. It's also why at age 37 I can still count the number of women I've been with on a single hand's worth of fingers.
 
No. I don't believe one has to wait until marriage.

Then you should stop claiming that you are for traditional values and morality and all that.
 
Amazing to me that "most" who are adamantly against morning after pill and abortion abandon the welfare and well being of children after they are born and instead focus on what scum bags the irresponsible women (in most cases women are blamed - some will say "parents") and suggest social policies that are aimed at punishing these parents, but wind up punishing the children.

If unwanted children are forced to be born...then all of society MUST STEP UP and accept financial responsibility for these kids if their parents fail to do so...PERIOD.
 
Last edited:
I’m going to extrapolate on the root of this poll. The root of the poll is who has the right to decide if a fertilized egg will be allowed to have a chance at becoming a new person. My root is what if a person took a woman’s egg, took out the woman’s genetic material, then substituted his own complete genetic material and implanted that fertilized egg back in the woman. (I don’t think this can be done yet.) So now we have a woman that is in the same status as is as this poll states, only who the fertilized egg will become is different. Yup, now what is your answer? Who is the baby?
Maybe this should be a new poll.

The last time I debated this topic we all were snipey and the thread was promptly flushed.

I'll just sum up my views: my eggs are not for anyone to do with as they please and neither is my body. Just because someone figures out how to make something happen via coercion or tactic with me or my eggs doesn't mean I have to accept the results and struggle to reconcile it.

If this was centuries ago - and I was the Virgin Mary - I'm afraid religion would have ended there.
 
Then you should stop claiming that you are for traditional values and morality and all that.

Then I am going to assume you are unfamiliar with the ancient Northern European tradition of Handfasting, right?
 
Then I am going to assume you are unfamiliar with the ancient Northern European tradition of Handfasting, right?
What on earth would that have to do with this issue you two are debating?
 
What on earth would that have to do with this issue you two are debating?

He seems to have the idea that in a Traditional philosophy sex has always been reserved SOLELY for after marriage; which is not true by any stretch of the imagination. Especially when one goes back to the medieval days.
 
No. I don't believe one has to wait until marriage. I do believe that they should be waiting until they are in a committed, long-term relationship. That doesn't necessarily mean a marriage. It's also why at age 37 I can still count the number of women I've been with on a single hand's worth of fingers.

Should we address you as "St. Tigger"? Obviously you selected your own standards that best fit your perceptions about sex and partners. Good for you. But that's where it should end.

Be a living example of your standards and values and "IF" others like what they see, they'll seek you out and make inquiry about your standards and values.

But your standards and values don't make you a better person or the moral example of humanity.
 
Should we address you as "St. Tigger"?

LOL. Not in the least. I'm not Catholic, and I doubt most of the Saints carried as much armament as I do or had as little regard for human life as I do.

Obviously you selected your own standards that best fit your perceptions about sex and partners. Good for you. But that's where it should end. Be a living example of your standards and values and "IF" others like what they see, they'll seek you out and make inquiry about your standards and values.

You make a mistake if you believe I'm trying to convert anyone to my point of view, RW. That's not what I'm here for at all. I have no interest in converting anyone. They may choose to accept my point of view or not to. They will get their just desserts on the other side of Eternity.

But your standards and values don't make you a better person or the moral example of humanity.

That we will have to disagree on.
 
LOL. Not in the least. I'm not Catholic, and I doubt most of the Saints carried as much armament as I do or had as little regard for human life as I do.



You make a mistake if you believe I'm trying to convert anyone to my point of view, RW. That's not what I'm here for at all. I have no interest in converting anyone. They may choose to accept my point of view or not to. They will get their just desserts on the other side of Eternity.



That we will have to disagree on.
Nothing like the self-righteous gloating in their self perceive value.
 
Back
Top Bottom