Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

An ecological blind spot

2»

Comments

  • #52
    georgieporgy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,927 ✭✭✭georgieporgy


    they are touchy because if it's true that the pill harms the environment (and it does :D), well then we can't have that can we. We must protect the environment right??. So we gotta quit using the pill.

    No wait a minute, we don't want to do that!

    So- let's see- let's just say the pill doesn't harm the environment. (we don't really give a hoot about the environment anyway)


  • #53
    Kamila Enough Deodorant
    Posts: 0 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Kamila Enough Deodorant


    Jester Minute wrote: »
    It is about ecology. Read my post just above.

    But I'm not sure, in all honesty, PDN, that the hostility towards this thread has anything to do with horses. I think it's more about touched nerves and consciences. Hence all the angst.

    And all because of a few camp trout!

    That's right. When people realise you're spreading misinformation and dogma, they must have guilty consciences, that's all it could be :rolleyes:
    It's clear enough you're here to rant a bit, not concerned about the environment.


  • #54
    Jester Minute
    Closed Accounts Posts: 302 ✭✭Jester Minute


    bluewolf wrote: »
    That's right. When people realise you're spreading misinformation and dogma, they must have guilty consciences, that's all it could be :rolleyes:
    It's clear enough you're here to rant a bit, not concerned about the environment.

    Hold on, sweetheart.

    Show me where I spread misinformation? Point out to me ONE SINGLE FALSEHOOD on this thread posted by me?

    And I do care about the fish - fish are like canaries in a coal mine. They are biological indicators. If the fish are going funny, then people can be sure that we will be affected too.


  • #55
    Kamila Enough Deodorant
    Posts: 0 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Kamila Enough Deodorant


    Jester Minute wrote: »
    Hold on, sweetheart.

    Show me where I spread misinformation? Point out to me ONE SINGLE FALSEHOOD on this thread posted by me?

    And I do care about the fish - fish are like canaries in a coal mine. They are biological indicators. If the fish are going funny, then people can be sure that we will be affected too.

    Alright darling, or snuckums if you will, the pill is not an abortifacient. End of. Go read up on how it works, ie suppressing ovulation.

    And with that, I'm done wasting time in here o/


  • #56
    Jester Minute
    Closed Accounts Posts: 302 ✭✭Jester Minute


    bluewolf wrote: »
    Alright darling, or snuckums if you will, the pill is not an abortifacient. End of. Go read up on how it works, ie suppressing ovulation.

    And with that, I'm done wasting time in here o/
    Pill propelled into abortion debate
    By Jill McGivering
    BBC correspondent in Washington

    The birth control pill revolutionised women's health - and grew to become one of the most popular forms of family planning. But it is now under attack from pro-life groups in the US.

    The birth control pill does not always prevent ovulation
    A growing number of doctors and pharmacists are now refusing to dispense it, on the grounds that it is actually a form of abortion.

    Pro-choice groups fear this new moral objection to the Pill could lead to more unplanned pregnancies, even more abortions.

    A woman taking the Pill does not usually release eggs. But occasionally she might - and it is possible that egg could be fertilised.

    The hormonal conditions created by the Pill mean, if that happened, the fertilised egg would not be implanted or survive.

    Mainstream medicine does not define that as a pregnancy. But some of those strictly against abortion do.

    Dr Cynthia Jones-Nosacek - a family doctor in Milwaukee - now refuses to prescribe the Pill. She opposes it on moral grounds, arguing it is a form of abortion.

    "The contraceptive pill doesn't always prevent ovulation. As often as 30% of the time, ovulation may occur and if that happens, fertilisation may occur," Dr Jones-Nosacek says.

    "Then there are other mechanisms that can prevent that being from surviving. It's called a chemical abortion."

    -- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3652462.stm

    It's playing with words to not call such an occurrence an abortion. We can play with semantics all we want. The end result is the same: a new, unique human being dies when the pill acts as an abortifacient.


  • #57
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    If your issue is that an egg may sometime in a blue moon be released while on the pill and thus be fertilised, this would be an issue of only using 1 contraceptive method. If one uses the pill and say a condom then the odds are significantly reduced yet again and more importantly to this argument if what you are saying is true it won't serve as an abortifacient either.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement