Legalize Abortion?

[kenjie86]

---

A big NOOOOOOOOOOO.... Its a sin..

[Hellblazer 2.1]

Sounds nice. As long as they don't mess with the unborn child's life and body! That's where the woman's right to her body end sand the unborn child's rights begin.

what? the mother doesn't have rights anymore?

[hunt99]

di gyud na maayo ng abortion

[KASAAC]

NO to ABORTION, say YES to SELF-CONTROL.

[PentiumPoor]

Yup, only for those defective babies. Wa mani sala mga baby nga normal oi, ang papa og mama maoy ipa birth control

[hunt99]

ana gyud di na maayong abortion

[giddyboy]

DO U AGREE THAT BIRTH CONTROL PILLS AND IUD be labelled as ABORTIFACIENTS or if by using them would be tantamount to CHEMICAL ABORTION?

Pro-life groups, some experts and the RC church says so. it's because daw of the post-fertilization mechanisms of these pills that makes them "abortifacient contraceptives": they believe life begins w/ fertilization so any prevention of implantation of the fertilized egg on the uterus is abortion, to them. They strongly argue that although the 1987 Consti did not specify where life really begins, it holds the assumption of the Constitutional Commissioners (who some are priests) that we play it safe. This is the main reason why these pro-life groups and the church want to put a label on the RH Bill as promoting and legalizing abortion. They try to blur the line between the definition of "abortion" and the supposed "chemical abortion" as both synonymous, even as far as calling the pill "abortifacient contraceptives" and the condom as "preemptive abortion".

In contrast, pro-choice groups, those who dissent from the stance of the church, some experts, and pharma companies say they are not: main function of the pill is to prevent pregnancy. and onset of pregnancy is the beginning of life: life begins during implantation, and not during fertilization. their arguments cite the case of invitro fertilization where the embryo can be frozen and thawed. they also cite the case of LAM and fertility awareness methods. besides, dispensing pills and IUD is covered by our laws and BFAD regulations, therefore legal and medically safe. and contraceptives of 50 yrs ago are not anymore the same as of today, thanks to new advents in technology. so there is no reason why these contraceptives cannot be made available in the RH Bill while they are available in other existing laws. they also counter argue about the Consti issue saying that the Commissioners' assumptions cannot hold water since it is the Supreme Court that decides on an ambiguous provision.

---000---

SO TO THOSE ANTI-RH PEEPS, STOP LABELING THE RH BILL AS PROMOTING OR LEGALIZING ABORTION! THE RH BILL NEVER INTENDS TO LEGALIZE ABORTION. IN FACT, IT EXPLICITLY TREATS ABORTION AS A CRIME... THE FILIPINO PEOPLE ARE NOT GULLIBLE AND STUPID...6 out of 10 Pinoys supporting the bill is enough proof of that. majority of Congressmen supporting the bill is enough proof of that.

STOP MISLEADING PEOPLE EVEN AS FAR AS MAKING MISLEADING POLL QUESTIONS here in istorya.net! hangyo lang unta ni as a fellow istoryan... IT MIGHT ONLY BACKFIRE ON YOU AND MAKE YOUR SITUATION WORSE...

[SioDenz]

Ingna ang mga kaparian ana imung mga rason, kay sila kusog kaayu nibabag ana...hehehe

[mannyamador]

They try to blur the line between the definition of "abortion" and the supposed "chemical abortion" as both synonymous, even as far as calling the pill "abortifacient contraceptives" and the condom as "preemptive abortion".

The condom is NOT abortifacient.

SO TO THOSE ANTI-RH PEEPS, STOP LABELING THE RH BILL AS PROMOTING OR LEGALIZING ABORTION! THE RH BILL NEVER INTENDS TO LEGALIZE ABORTION.

This is the persistent LIE of the pro-RH fanatics. They keep pointing to the fact that the bill doesn't legalize SURGICAL abortion, but they sweep under the rug the fact that THE RH BILL EFFECTIVELY LEGALIZES CHEMICAL ABORTION THROUGH ABORTIFACIENT CONTRACEPTIVES

• The abortifacient mechanism of these abortifacient contraceptives is acknowledged by the manufacturers themselves.
  
  
• Numerous studies have shown that this abortifacient mechanism is significant and does actually occur.
  
  
• The pro-RH Bill fanatics constantly refer to flawed surveys, which are also nopthing more than appeals to popularity, a logcial fallacy (arrgumentum ad populorum).
  
  
• The Philippine Constitution explicitly protects life from conception, and it assumes that conception is at fertilization. This was confirmed by a vote of the Constitutional Commission, and this vote will be one of the primary considerations if ever this question comes before the Supreme Court. Opinions of RH fanatics will are not.

NO TO THE ABORTION-PROMOTING RH BILL (HB 5043)!

[mannyamador]

Do Contraceptive Pills cause Abortion?
By Patrick McCrystal MPSNI / MPSI
http://www.hliireland.ie/abortifacie...raception.html

An excerpt from this article is below:

Abortion causing effect

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.

Only a zero 0% ovulation rate at all times could truly assure a non-abortifacient effect. However the table below reports a wide range of 'break-through' ovulation varying with the type of preparation used. This wide range of ovulation indicates the very real risk of subsequent abortion for any embryo conceived in such circumstances.

Contraceptive Data
--------------------------------------------------------
Preparation           Ovulation Rate     % Breakthrough 
                                            Pregnancy
--------------------------------------------------------

Combined Pill 	       Up to 5%              0.1 *** 
                      ref: 5,6,7,8,20
Progestogen-only Pill 1-60% depending 
                      on type used
                      see ref: 9,10,11,22   0.3
Intra-uterine Device  Up to 100%
                      ref: 12,13,14         0.6

Norplant Implants     10-50% ref: 13,15     0.09
Depo-Provera 
Injection             1% ref: 16,17         0.3
--------------------------------------------------------

Key *** Figures for 1st year of use, for perfect usage. 
See Ref.(16)
--------------------------------------------------------

'Break-through' pregnancy is the occurrence of an unexpected pregnancy during contraceptive use. The very existence of 'break-through' pregnancy proves that human embryos can indeed be conceived during chemical contraceptive usage and proceed to recognizable pregnancy (7,16,17,18). Such breakthrough pregnancies appear to occur even during 'perfect' usage, i.e. even when women do not forget to take their next dose (16,18). Stress, disease, infection, irregular pill use, vomiting, diarrhoea, and use of several drugs all lower the contraceptive effectiveness rates during typical use.

How many embryos are lost by the abortifacient effect at the endometrial stage is hard to quantify. However, the very concept of 'break-through' pregnancy is a powerful indication that embryos are indeed conceived during pill and contraceptive use, and some are certainly lost at the endometrial stage. The substantive effect of the pill on the endometrium, and its abortion-causing consequences, is highlighted by various authors (4, 20, 21).

NO TO ABORTION. NO TO THE ABORTION-PROMOTING RH BILL.