http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40229-2004Feb13.html It appears Bush's FDA will knuckle under to the religious fanatics and anti-abortion crowd and the morning after pill may not be available for over-the-counter sales after all.
stupid bush. the abortion pill is great. look at me i dont blindly follow bush! i guess your stereotyping of me was presumptive.
It is not an abortion pill. Maybe you should read some reputable newspapers before posting next time.
call it what you want, abortion pill, morning-after pill, i was trying to agree with you and you still are an ass, calm down. i am in favor of people being able to kill unwanted babies. so are you, we agree, understand? i am opposed to the right wing standing in the way of the pill, do you understand that i agree with you or are you gonna call me out again? your personality is terribly unfortunate.
You do understand that we are not wild animals and this is not the rut? You don't just go around putting your *** into her *** and just killing whatever results.
i dont think that human life is inherently all that valuable. it doesnt sadden me to abort a 5 hour old baby. the earlier the better i say. killing babies when they are one day old is infinitely less depressing than killing them when they are 10 years old. life has relative value. anyways, i know abortion is too hot-button an issue to argue over, so i will leave it there, and agree with cb66 just this one time.
A more unintelligent, less eloquent, ill advised and underinformed statement has never been made. Based on philosophical terms...each child is born with a tabula rasa...or clean slate...What makes the value of a child killed by a suicide bomber in Jerusalem relatively more valuable than an 80 year old alzheimer patient who is euthanized by a Kevorkian? Who makes this arbitrary decision? You? Me? Some medical commission? I can't wait to hear this explanation of your opinion... Perhaps you're friends with Rex from the Lair...who also advocates killing children at up to 1 year old...
well, i didnt mean to get in a big thing about this, but since you asked. i dont see how you could disagree that life has relative value. clearly a human life has more value than a dog right? i would argue that a murderer on death row has a less valuable life than mine also. in fact the murderers life has so little value that his death brings a net gain to the world. if i died now, it would be sadder than if i had been aborted, or if i had died when i was one day old. now if i died, lots of people are sad, and i myself do not want to die. had i died at one day old, the agregate negative it brings to the world would have been far less. had i been aborted, almost no one would have been disturbed by that. not even i would have cared if i had died as a fetus. surely if your wife was pregnant and had a miscarriage that would be terribly unfortunate. but oh how much worse would it be if your child died on his 18th birthday. can we not admit that the value of a fetus is less than an adult, and that they are both human life? since there is no magic wizard granting us souls, and we are not infused with holiness, then our real value is only the utility or basic happiness and enjoyment we bring to the world. since i dont suggest killing anyone except murderers and fetuses, nobody has to make the decision. so what? what if i took my tabula rasa and became hitler? isnt my life now less than worthless? isnt my life less valuable than someone that is clearly good like mr rogers? i surely would cry more tears for the death of mr rogers. if utilitarianism if the belief that the decision that produces the greatest net gain of utility, or general happiness of the universe, then clearly a utilitarian would agree that killing fetuses bring less negative utility to the world than killing sorority girls. just like killing a cute pet puppy is worse than squashing a roach, life has relative value. grow up.
