31. Botts - folks like Preter and Nina etc have never been and never will be the majority. Birth control pills have been around since the 1960's, condoms and other forms of birth control much longer and they have yet to ban any of them. If anything, they are far more widespread than ever. One would think conservatives would care more about helping the poor, feeding the hungry, or helping that pregnant teen-ager find job or finish school. But, no, apparently millions of women swallowing a pill daily causes them to lose sleep at night. Go figure.

David S. at 9:43PM on Aug 8th 2008

32. So who is supposed to pay for raising all these babies that stupid woman is ranting about? She is an idiot. Talking about women having a right to give birth but not have a right to decide when? Whatever. This is not the 1800's, and women DO have the right to choose. Period.

Annabelle at 11:54PM on Aug 8th 2008

33. Nina, I happen to be an RN with a BSN who worked as a nurse practitioner in maternal-child nursing for almost 30 years. BCP's prevent ovulation and discourage IMPLANTATION (the fertilized egg, a zygote, from planting itself into the uterus lining and forming a placenta - that is the moment FERTILIZATION occurs, NOT when an egg is fetilized. Millions of fertilized eggs pass through women's bodies every month all over the world without implanting - are all those eggs people? no, they become a person after they are implanted and begin to differentiate into separate cell type and form organs). A zygote is just a round, hollow sphere of identical cells that have yet to differentiate, they are "stem cells." Ask any woman who has gone through artificial conception - she will tell you that a fertilized egg does not a baby make, there is more to it than that. Birth control pills do not kill babies, because there are no babies to kill - there is no implantation even if an egg does get fertilized. Therefore, they do not cause "abortions."
My grandmother had 12 children, all from the same husband, and she died at age 70 of uterine cancer. I prefer not to have that many, as I don't live on a farm and don't need that many farm hands.

Sarah at 11:50PM on Aug 8th 2008

34. Oh, and Nina, please provide some documentation about your outrageous claim that Medicaid no longer wants to pay for BCP's "because they cause abortions?" Are you serious? Which do you think Medicaid should pay for - a package of pills or a C-section which produces a high-risk infant who is in NICU on a ventilator for months and is finally discharged with life-long medical/mental/social/educational problems, who ends up in foster care that we all are going to pay for? $30/month vs. millions? I think Medicaid would be better off paying for the prescription, and in my field, I know they feel the same.

Sarah at 12:00AM on Aug 9th 2008

35. Oh, and one more thing - I'm so tired of hearing that "women do have a right to choose." I see 16 year-olds having their 3rd baby, all of who were fathered by an older relative or other grown man, young girls who have been raped, and married women whose husbands refuse to use birth control and control their women by keeping them barefoot and pregnant. Some women do not have the right to choose - some women's rights have been taken away from them. Yes, there are those who are promiscuous, and I see those too, but some women (and girls) are in very bad situations where they have no choices and no one to turn to. Happens every day all over the world.
I am a Christian, and I know Jesus doesn't want his girls to be treated this way. Do something about that, Nina!

Sarah at 12:05AM on Aug 9th 2008

36. 34. Oh, and Nina, please provide some documentation about your outrageous claim that Medicaid no longer wants to pay for BCP's "because they cause abortions?" Are you serious? Sarah.

Hi, Sarah,my name is Mary Irene and I've gotten that documentation for you. see below please. here it is: (Nina, thanks for letting me help out;)

HHS Moves to Define Contraception as Abortion

In a spectacular act of complicity with the religious right, the Department of Health and Human Services Monday released a proposal that allows any federal grant recipient to obstruct a woman's access to contraception. In order to do this, the Department is attempting to redefine many forms of contraception, the birth control 40% of Americans use, as abortion. Doing so protects extremists under the Weldon and Church amendments. Those laws prohibit federal grant recipients from requiring employees to help provide or refer for abortion services. The "Definitions" section of the HHS proposal states,



Abortion: An abortion is the termination of a pregnancy. There are two commonly held views on the question of when a pregnancy begins. Some consider a pregnancy to begin at conception (that is, the fertilization of the egg by the sperm), while others consider it to begin with implantation (when the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus). A 2001 Zogby International American Values poll revealed that 49% of Americans believe that human life begins at conception. Presumably many who hold this belief think that any action that destroys human life after conception is the termination of a pregnancy, and so would be included in their definition of the term "abortion." Those who believe pregnancy begins at implantation believe the term "abortion" only includes the destruction of a human being after it has implanted in the lining of the uterus.

The proposal continues,



Both definitions of pregnancy inform medical practice. Some medical authorities, like the American Medical Association and the British Medical Association, have defined the term "established pregnancy" as occurring after implantation. Other medical authorities present different definitions. Stedman's Medical Dictionary, for example, defines pregnancy as "[t]he state of a female after conception and until the termination of the gestation." Dorland's Medical Dictionary defines pregnancy, in relevant part, as "the condition of having a developing embryo or fetus in the body, after union of an oocyte and spermatozoon.

Up until now, the federal government followed the definition of pregnancy accepted by the American Medical Association and our nation's pregnancy experts, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which is: pregnancy begins at implantation. With this proposal, however, HHS is dismissing medical experts and opting instead to accept a definition of pregnancy based on polling data. It now claims that pregnancy begins at some biologically unknowable moment (there's no test to determine if a woman's egg has been fertilized). Under these new standards there would be no way for a woman to prove she's not pregnant. Thus, any woman could be denied contraception under HHS' new science.

The other rarely discussed issue here is whether hormonal contraception even does what the religious right claims. There is no scientific evidence that hormonal methods of birth control can prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the womb. This argument is the basis upon which the religious right hopes to include the 40% of the birth control methods Americans use, such as the pill, the patch, the shot, the ring, the IUD, and emergency contraception, under the classification "abortion." Even the "pro-life" movement's most respected physicians cautioned the movement about making these claims. In 1999, the physicians--who, like the movement at large, define pregnancy as beginning at fertilization-- released an open letter to community stating: "Recently, some special interest groups have claimed, without providing any scientific rationale, that some methods of contraception may have an abortifacient effect...The 'hormonal contraception is abortifacient' theory is not established fact. It is speculation, and the discussion presented here suggests it is error...if a family, weighing all the factors affecting their own circumstances, decides to use this modality, we are confident that they are not using an abortifacient."

As the HHS proposal proves, the absence of fact or evidence does not slow anti-abortion movement attempts to classify hormonal contraception as abortion. With HHS' proposal they have struck gold. Anyone working for a federal clinic, or a health center that receives federal funding--even in the form of Medicaid--and would like to prevent a woman from accessing most prescription birth control methods has federal protection to do so. As the HHS proposal details,

Because the statutes that would be enforced through this regulation seek, in part, to protect individuals and institutions from suffering discrimination on the basis of conscience, the conscience of the individual or institution should be paramount in determining what constitutes abortion, within the bounds of reason. As discussed above, both definitions of pregnancy are reasonable and used within the scientific and medical community. The Department proposes, then, to allow individuals and institutions to adhere to their own views and adopt a definition of abortion that encompasses both views of abortion. (emphasis mine)


So HHS proposes that anyone can enforce his or her own definition of abortion "within the bounds of reason." And, it would seem the bounds are pretty far flung. Most dangerously, perhaps, this new rule establishes a legal precedent that may eventually be used as a basis for banning the most popular forms of birth control along with what is, in fact, abortion.

MI at 1:03AM on Aug 9th 2008

37. Sarah, for being in the field for so many years, I congratulate you on your precious service to so many women and babies!
I also have to scratch my head and wonder how come you didn't know about this documentation.
__________________________________________________
you say, ".. that is the moment FERTILIZATION occurs, NOT when an egg is fetilized.."
--------------
* When a sperm penetrates the egg, fertilization occurs. (Basic General Bio 101) Life begins at this conception even if it's on its way to reaching and being implanted into the lining which is not too far away.

* This very same fertilization of an egg can occur in a test tube (in vitro).
__________________________________________________

you say: "Are you serious? Which do you think Medicaid should pay for - a package of pills or a C-section which produces a high-risk infant who is in NICU on a ventilator for months and is finally discharged with life-long medical/mental/social/educational problems, who ends up in foster care that we all are going to pay for? $30/month vs. millions? "
-----------
*Are you implying that all women who are not on OCP's deliver by C-Section and deliver Premies by that C-Section? The C-Section rate at a good hospital is 10% and the rest are vaginal.
In fact I had 3 C-sections and my first child was only in NICU for a few days and my other 2 sons were fine and are healthy and happy in every way.
_________________________________________________

"$30/month vs. millions?"
----------------------------
* Sarah this is a tough one to discuss as we've come back to the age-old controversy of when life begins. So, I'll pass on it, though I think you grossly over exxagerate the situation.
___________________________________________

I am a Christian, and I know Jesus doesn't want his girls to be treated this way. Do something about that, Nina!
------------------
Sarah,you are far from being alone in that feeling toward those girls! I am a Christian too!
Do you mean to tell me that you've never referred any of these unfortunate girls and their babies to say, Project Rachel, Catholic Charities, etc. There are many programs in place dedicated to getting these people food, clothing, shelter and both maternal and perinatal care for both mom and baby.

And, yes, you're correct, there are some rather unfortunate circumstances out in the world. That's something that the whole of communities are going to have to come together on and try and make a difference.

*But, Jesus never advocated murder or even suicide over one's unfortunate circumstances. But, rather hope and trust. And, yes, we the neighbors, teachers, care-takers, relatives, and friends all need to be stepping up to the plate to help such unfortunate souls. That's what's needed. And, it is do-able. I didn't say easy, I just said do-able.


As for the older relative men or older males who impregnate these little 12 and 13 year olds against their will, that's the work of therapists and psych and possibly even police and child protective services.
__________________________________________________
???How can society help men curb their sexual urges so that so many young girls don't have to suffer rape, abuse and the loss of their human dignity?

That is my question to you since you seem to be in the thick of that type of situation with young girls.

Thanks!
Mary Irene

MI at 1:58AM on Aug 9th 2008

38. Christians say birth control goes against god. How ,then, do they explain this passage from the bible?
------------------------------------------

Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell;
And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to rot: And the woman shall say, Amen, amen.
And the priest shall write these curses in a book, and he shall blot them out with the bitter water:
And he shall cause the woman to drink the bitter water that causeth the curse: and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter.
Then the priest shall take the jealousy offering out of the woman's hand, and shall wave the offering before the LORD, and offer it upon
the altar:
And the priest shall take an handful of the offering, even the memorial thereof, and burn it upon the altar, and afterward shall cause the woman to drink the water.
And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people. -- Numbers 5:21-27.

--------------------------------------
Ever hear of pennyroyal tea( this is it!)?

The bible commands this of adulterous women.
God wrote the bible.
God commands abortion!

mac at 2:20AM on Aug 9th 2008

39. Hi, mac,
what's doin?

MI at 2:38AM on Aug 9th 2008

40.
Okay, I'm looking up Numbers for you since I'm not fully sleepy as of yet.

Just let me run and get my old lady glasses so I can give you an answer to your question ;)

MI at 2:40AM on Aug 9th 2008

41. Okay,(NAB) Numbers 5:27-31 sums it up:

The woman's not pregnant when the ritual/punishment is administered:

------------------------------------------------
"Once she has done so (drank the water), if she has been impure and unfaithful to her husband, this bitter water that brings a curse will go into her, and her belly will swell and her thighs will waste away, so that she will become an example of imprecation among her people. If, however, the woman has not defiled herself, but is still pure,she will be immune and will still be able to bear children.
This then is the law for jealousy: When a woman goes astray while under the authority of her husband and acts impurely, or when such a feeling of jealousy comes over a man that he becomes suspicious of his wife, he shall have her stand before the Lord, and the priest shall apply this law in full to her. The man shall be free from guilt, but the woman shall bear such guilt as she may have."
------------------------------------------

So, there you have it.
good night,
Mary Irene

MI at 2:54AM on Aug 9th 2008

42. Forgot one thing,

The pennyroyal* tea you mentioned, the herb which does act like an abortifacient is not the same as the bitter water used in the above ritual.


*I dig the song, though !

MI at 3:10AM on Aug 9th 2008

43. Botts: As much as I don't like abortion Preter, we can't play God. We can't play God.

PV: Murder is illegal (and abortion is murder). And the law against murder helps deter it. It allows for those who break the law to receive some just penalty.


Botts: People make their own choices and they must live with them.

PV: Murder is not a choice any society allows people to make. Society rightly deprives individuals of the right to choose murder. Individual freedom has limits.

preteristvision at 10:37AM on Aug 9th 2008

44.
I'm good MI. You?

One quick question:
We all know abortions were around during the time the bible was written. WHY the ommission?

The bible sees fit to specifically ban all sorts of things( eating pork, shellfish, 'dirty' meat, working on the Sabbath, laying with a menstuating woman, adultery, sodomy...all the fun stuff), why does it fail to ban abortion? The act certainly occured at the time.

OK, not so quick, sorry :-)

mac at 11:00AM on Aug 9th 2008

45. God wrote the Bible? I must have skipped that class.

Bill at 2:42PM on Aug 9th 2008