Legalize Abortion?

[giddyboy]

---

Premarital S*x is already very rampant, ni.apas nta sa US. i think we shud not solve the problem by giving a solution to the effects but solving it by starting at its roots.

maybe i.educate ng mga teenagers, para dli cla ma.curious.
i dnt know, thats just 1 thing.. .hehe. suggestion lng.

Sexuality education in schools starting 5th grade and up is one of the answers to prevent pre-marital *** and unwanted pregnancy. and it is provided in the RH Bill.

as for pre-marital ***, hormones coupled by the influence of media is the main culprit. what simple folks like us can do is censor what is shown in our home TVs and internet. it is the parents guidance that is the most important key for their teenagers not to do pre-marital ***.

[mannyamador]

but some sectors here wanted to convince us instead that contraceptives such as prescribed birth control pills and IUD is doing an abortion

Here are the facts as well as the evidence. The pro-RH fanatics of course try to ignore this because they cannot refute the scientific evidence.

FACT: Contraceptives that prevent the fertilized egg from implanting have an abortifacient mechanism. This is a well-known mechanism of contraceptive pills and IUDs. It is false and untrue to claim that contraceptives can never cause an abortion.

• Postfertilization Effects of Oral Contraceptives and Their Relationship to Informed Consent
  http://archfami.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/9/2/126)
  
  
  “It seems likely that for perfect use of COCs, postfertilization mechanisms would
  be likely to have a small but not negligible role. For POPs, COCs with lower
  doses of estrogen, and imperfect use of any OCs, postfertilization effects are
  likely to have an increased role. In any case, the medical
  literature does not support the hypothesis that
  postfertilization effects of OCs do not exist.”
• The Physicians' Prescribing information for Yaz and Yasmin, two oral contraceptives
  http://berlex.bayerhealthcare.com/ht.../Yasmin_PI.pdf
  http://www.berlex.com/html/products/pi/fhc/YAZ_PI.pdf
  
  
  Combination oral contraceptives (COCs) act by suppression of gonadotropins.
  Although the primary mechanism of this action is inhibition of ovulation,
  other alterations include changes in the cervical mucus (which increases the/QUOTE]
  difficulty of sperm entry into the uterus) and the endometrium (which reduces
  the likelihood of implantation).
• Do Contraceptive Pills cause Abortion?
  By Patrick McCrystal MPSNI / MPSI
  http://www.hliireland.ie/abortifacie...raception.html
  
  
  One of the ways by which the 'pill' works is by;
  
  

  "...the rendering of the endometrium unreceptive to implantation" (1)

  
  
  Put simply this means a newly created embryo is not allowed to implant in its mother's womb. This action takes place after fertilisation (conception), ie after a new life has been created. Thus it can be termed abortifacient (2,3) or abortion-causing. Indeed, the medical literature suggests this abortion-causing mode of action does occur during 'pill' use (4,5,20). Every chemical contraceptive preparation involving pills, injections, implants and intrauterine devices have this mechanism present as an inherent part of their birth control action.
  
  
• The Pill – How it works and fails.
  http://www.pfli.org/faq_oc.html
  
  
  Q. So how do you prove that the pill acts as an abortifacient?
  
  A. The answer to this question can be found by comparing the rate of break-through ovulation and the detected pregnancy rate. The ovulation rate has been reported to be about 27 ovulations in 100 women using the pill for one year. But the detected pregnancy rate is much lower at around 4 pregnancies per 100 women using the pill for one year.
  
  As you can see, there is a big difference between the number of women who ovulation (27) and the number of detected pregnancies (4). What has happened within the woman’s body to reduce the high ovulation rate to such a low number of detected pregnancies? I suggest that one answer to this important question is that pregnancies have begun, because ovulation and fertilization have occurred, but some of these pregnancies are terminated because implantation cannot take place. The pill has damaged the lining of the womb, stopping implanation.
• Mechanisms of action of intrauterine devices: update and estimation of postfertilization effects
  American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12501086
  
  
  There are many potential mechanisms of action for the intrauterine device (IUD), which vary by type of IUD (inert, copper, or hormonal). This paper reviews the evidence for each potential mechanism of action. On the basis of available data for fertilization rates and clinical pregnancy rates, the relative contribution of mechanisms acting before or after fertilization were quantitatively estimated. These estimates indicate that, although prefertilization effects are more prominent for the copper IUD, both prefertilization and postfertilization mechanisms of action contribute significantly to the effectiveness of all types of intrauterine devices.
• CVS/Pharmacy
  http://www.cvs.com
  
  
  IUDs are thought to prevent pregnancy by making the womb ‘unfriendly’ to sperm and eggs. Sperm is either killed, or kept from reaching and fertilizing an egg. An IUD also may keep a fertilized egg from attaching to the womb and growing into a baby.
• Mechanism of action of intrauterine contraceptive devices and its relation to informed consent
  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9...ubmed_RVDocSum
  
  
  The purposes of this review are to evaluate the available evidence for the mechanisms of action of copper-impregnated intrauterine contraceptive devices and to describe the informed consent consequences of those mechanisms. The medical literature was reviewed with the use of the Bioethics and Medline databases (1966 to present). Reports that supported or refuted the two major postulated mechanisms (interference with implantation of the fertilized ovum or spermicidal inhibition of fertilization) were assessed for their relative strength and support for the exclusivity of one or the other mechanism. The analysis of the evidence strongly suggests that the contraceptive effectiveness of intrauterine contraceptive devices is achieved by both a prefertilization spermicidal action and a postfertilization inhibition of uterine implantation. Patient informed consent for intrauterine contraceptive device insertion should include a discussion of these mechanisms of actions so as to avoid their use in patients with moral objections to postfertilization contraception.

FACT: Increased contraceptive usage leads to an increase in unwanted pregnancies and an increase in demand for abortion.

• Increased access to contraception not linked to decrease in numbers of unplanned pregnancies, abortions
  http://www.news-medical.net/?id=20761
  
  
  The belief that increased access to contraception will “reduce rates of unintended
  pregnancy and abortion” has “intuitive appeal, but the data prove otherwise,”
  Susan Wills, associate director for education for the U.S. Conference of Catholic
  Bishops’ Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities, writes in a Washington Post letter to
  the editor in response to a Post opinion piece by William Saletan, science and
  technology reporter for Slate magazine.
  
  
• Habit Persistence and Teen ***: Could Increased Access to Contraception have Unintended Consequences for Teen Pregnancies?
  http://www.econ.duke.edu/~psarcidi/teensex.pdf
  
  
  The persistence in sexual activity is such that policies that affect access to
  contraception will have very different effects in the short run than the long run.
  Our results suggest that increasing access to contraception may actually increase
  long run pregnancy rates even though short run pregnancy rates fall. On the other
  and, policies that decrease access to contraception, and hence sexual activity,
  are likely to lower pregnancy rates in the long run.
  
  
• Contraception – It’s time to stop ducking the issue
  http://www.noroomforcontraception.co...t/view/106/57/
  
  
  According to the study Trends in Premarital *** in the United States, 1954-2003,
  the increase in premarital *** amongst a group of teens turning 15 during the
  years 1964-1973 “may be partly due to increased availability of effective
  contraception (in particular, the pill), which made it less likely that *** would lead
  to pregnancy.” (Finer, 2007)
  
  
• Guttmacher Institute Study Casts Doubt on Contraception Use Reducing Abortions
  http://www.lifenews.com/nat5579.html
  
  
  But, Dr. Michael New, a University of Alabama political science professor, writes at National Review Online that Guttmacher’s own study shows how contraception doesn’t reduce the abortion numbers.
  
  “The link between abortion rates and access to contraception is not as clear as the Guttmacher report might indicate. Furthermore, Guttmacher’s own research suggests that there is little reason to believe that contraception subsidies would do much to affect abortion rates,” he explains.
  
  New says “there exists no consensus on the correlation between the availability of contraception and the incidence of abortion.”
  
  “In fact, in 2003, Guttmacher released an article in ‘International Family Planning Perspectives’ that showed simultaneous increases in both contraceptive use and abortion rates in the United States, Cuba, Denmark, Netherlands, Singapore, and South Korea,” New points out.
  
  
• The Role of Contraception in Increasing Abortion
  By Ruben Obregon
  http://www.noroomforcontraception.co...d-Abortion.htm

FACT: Condom programs are not effective in preventing HIV/AIDS infections, at least not in the scale of large groups.

• Increasing Condom Use Without Reducing HIV Risk: Results of a Controlled Community Trial in Uganda
  http://journals.lww.com/jaids/pages/...&type=abstract
  
  
  Conclusions: In this study, gains in condom use seem to have been offset by
  increases in the number of *** partners. Prevention interventions in generalized
  epidemics need to promote all aspects of sexual risk reduction to slow HIV
  transmission.
• From Saint Peter’s Square to Harvard Square
  http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...GUyOWYxNmEzN2E
  
  
  We have found no consistent associations between condom use and lower
  HIV-infection rates, which, 25 years into the pandemic, we should be seeing
  if this intervention was working.”
  
  So notes Edward C. Green, director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project
  at the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, in response
  to papal press comments en route to Africa this week.

There is simply no good reason for the government to promote artificial and abortifacient contraceptives. Not passing the RH bill will NOT ban these contraceptives either. They are ALREADY easily available throughout the country.

Sexuality education in schools starting 5th grade and up is one of the answers to prevent pre-marital *** and unwanted pregnancy. and it is provided in the RH Bill.

That depends on the KIND of sexuality education. We ALREADY have sexuality education in some schools and it is the wrong kind. It teaches children how to use contraceptives and that sexuality is only fun with littel responsibility. I have seen some of these materials. You haven't. This is the kind of "education" envisioned in the RH bill.


FACT: This kind of sexuality/contraceptives education has NOT been proven to bring down unwanted pregnancy or promiscuity. The evidence indicates that it has the OPPOSITE effect.

• £6 Million Government Reduction Program Resulted in More than Twice as Many Teen Pregnancies
  More than half of UK teen pregnancies end in abortion
  http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09070904.html
  
  
  A scheme to reduce teenage pregnancies that cost British taxpayers £6 million ($9.8 million US) has backfired, with girls in the program ending up more than twice as likely to become pregnant than those in the general population. The Young People's Development Programme (YPDP) cost £2,500 ($4,085 US) per person and involved giving teenagers s** education and advice about contraception. At the end of the project a total of 16 percent of those involved became pregnant compared with just 6 percent in a comparison group.
• “Comprehensive” *** Education is Ineffective: Abstinence Works, Major National Study Shows
  http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/jun/07061304.html
  
  
  A major report on teen *** education, released by Dr. Stan Weed of the Institute for Research and Evaluation in Salt Lake City, shows why abstinence is the most successful method of preventing physical and emotional complications resulting from pre-marital sexual activity. His research is based on the results of many studies that have followed the education and behavior of over 400,000 adolescents in 30 different states for 15 years (see http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007_docs/CompSexEd.pdf).
  
  ...
  
  The Utah Institute researchers also investigated previous major studies on “comprehensive” *** education and found that these programs had little impact on the behavior of teens during their education and no long-term effects whatsoever. In fact, “of 50 rigorous studies spanning the past 15 years, only one of them reports an improvement in consistent condom use after a period of at least one year.”

And why should all schools have to stick to one kind of government-mandated sexuality education program? Why can't other schools come up with their own values education programs instead of the government's pro-contraceptive "education"? And since when was the Philippine government an expert on sexuality and values education? This is another reason why the so-called RH bill is COERCIVE.


--
NO TO ABORTION. NO TO THE ABORTIFACIENT-PROMOTING RH BILL (HB 5043)
Please sign the petition AGAINST the so-called Reproductive Health Bill (HB5043)

[merl]

Dili jud maayo nga e legalize ang abortion:
1) it is detrimental to the health of the mother.
2) if in case dili jud maabort, ang bata posible nga makalolooy. both the child and mother will suffer
3) kay legalize magpatuyang na lang pa torjac mga batan.on kay salig naman nga pwede ra abort.
4) kuyaw sa hemorhage...patay tanan hasta okok
5) labaw sa tanan it is against the will of God

[cypher86]

I'm split with regards to this matter..

my catholic upbringing teaches me to value life in all its forms. even in its embryonic stage. however consider this situation.

If you(if your a woman) or your Wife(if your a man) is raped brutally by a gang of thugs(and if your a man, were forced to watch the whole ordeal), which resulted in a conception. what would you do then? do you

keep the child because it was innocent when everyday you see the child you'd be reliving the nightmare? do you really think that at this point you could rise above and accept the child which is the product of a heinous act? do you really think you could love the child and treat it fairly like your other children?

its very easy to say "we are against abortion" when we are not in the situation in itself. to put it more simply its very easy to proclaim anything when have experienced nothing

[mannyamador]

Women and Men Who Regret Their Abortions to Join 40 Days for Life on March 10
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/mar/09030503.html

Powerful Silent No More Awareness Campaign Exposes Abortion’s Harsh Personal Aftermath
Post-abortive women and men proclaim, “I Regret My Abortion,” “I Regret Lost Fatherhood”
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/may/050518a.html






--
NO TO ABORTION. NO TO THE ABORTIFACIENT-PROMOTING RH BILL (HB 5043)
Please sign the petition AGAINST the so-called Reproductive Health Bill (HB5043)

[porbidaman]

save the innocent child

[kit_kat]

no way!!

no no no

[unsay_ngalan_nimo]

legalize the RH bill... no to abortion.. :d

[mannyamador]

Tough Questions - Pro-choice or Pro-abortion; is There a Difference?
http://www.standtrue.com/pages/comme...ceabortion.htm

There are a lot of things that are unpleasant that people or organizations try to make less appalling by changing the words used to describe them. As a parent I am guilty of this myself. When my children need to defecate I do not use that term; I say “go potty”. Does this change the fact that they are defecating? No, it just makes it sound less gross and nasty.

That is why the pro-abortion movement wants to be referred to as pro-choice, not pro-abortion; abortion carries a stigma that they don't want to be identified with. The difference is that there is nothing wrong with defecating; it is natural and how our bodies were created to work. There is, however, something wrong with abortion; it is un-natural and destroys one of the natural functions of a woman's body.

We should not give into the sanitization of abortion; it needs to be exposed for what it is. We should not allow rhetoric to define how we describe an evil like the killing of innocent human persons.

--
NO TO ABORTION. NO TO THE ABORTIFACIENT-PROMOTING RH BILL (HB 5043)
Please sign the petition AGAINST the so-called Reproductive Health Bill (HB5043)

[giddyboy]

Here are the facts as well as the evidence. The pro-RH fanatics of course try to ignore this because they cannot refute the scientific evidence.[/B]

again, it's not a question of ignoring. it's a matter of being convinced or not. Great minds like Sen. Manny Villar and Sen. Chiz Escudero even supported the RH Bill. They're no RH fanatics. They just believe that the RH Bill should be passed into law. They don't believe contraceptives cause abortion. Kung ikompara nato, wala rka sa kumingking aning duha ka senators.

and no matter what you post here, many physicians, even pro-life physicians are still not convinced that oral contraceptives cause abortion. they are not convinced w/ the "hostile endometrium" theory. and they are not even pro-RH fanatics. i have already posted earlier 2 position papers to prove that even in the pro-life community, disagreement exists on the matter. and that is a fact that you've been hiding for years!

I'm not a physician. Thus, I am not in the position to claim or refute any scientific findings. You are not a physician too but it seems you are posturing that you are one, fake that is. Your opinion and your borrowed and "personally preferred" articles are good here. But you should not shove it up the arses to those who differ in opinion from yours.

That depends on the KIND of sexuality education. We ALREADY have sexuality education in some schools and it is the wrong kind. It teaches children how to use contraceptives and that sexuality is only fun with littel responsibility. I have seen some of these materials. You haven't. This is the kind of "education" envisioned in the RH bill.

of course it depends on the kind of sexuality education. Problem is, do they even have sexuality education in the first place? and you saying "some schools" have sexual education is not enough. It should be "all schools". we cannot only rely on each and every school to initiate their own sexual education program. just like Reproductive Health programs in gov't health centers, sexuality education has to be standardized in all schools via a law wherein it still leaves room for each school to add their own versions such as in Catholic-run or religious-run schools. and the right vehicle would be the proposed RH Bill. and mind me asking, how do you know some of our schools teaches the wrong kind of sexuality education? do u have some criteria on that perhaps? were u a witness to a wrong kind? are you a licensed teacher or perhaps having a degree in Education mannyboy?

and u r wrong. I don't even think children in our elementary and high school are taught or will be taught how to use contraceptives. (dili kha mag wild ang mga parents ani kng naa man gani?) Some high schools are only informing them about the different kinds of contraceptives w/ the intention of giving them general knowledge. I don't think a high school teacher shows to class a condom, then shows how to insert it to a p3nis, and then shows how to dispose of it after using it, do you?

They are instead taught w/ emphasis about the anatomy of the reproductive system as part of the entire human anatomy subject and a children's biology version of how a human life is formed. i think kanang "how to use contraceptives" are taught only in college my friend when your supposed children are at their legal age na.