Legalize Abortion?

[wakkanakka]

---

just because 2 sides don't agree means the issue is undecided...which authority says that it is undecided?

Well then who are you to say it has been decided?

If there is any conclusive evidence, it does not point to these contraceptives NOT being abortifacint. Can you prove they can never be abortifceint? Of course not! That is why it is still controversial. So the best you can do is say it is unresolved.

There is so much evbidence that says these contraceptives can cause abortion. So if you cannot prove for sure that these can never be causing abortion, you have to play it safe. What is so hard to undertsand about that?

You are beiog so fanatic about your RH thing. Grabe. That isn't logical anymore.

now whether you talk about 2 sides that doesn't agree about the definition of conception and whether contraceptives are abortifacient or not, the authority we should look into is W.H.O., US FDA, and our BFAD.

The BFAD did not make decision on that at all. They still have to determine the facts. But you are just being blind to it and being fanatic. You refuse to look at the evidences that say what you dont agree with.

There are many other authorities who disagree. Why should you choose which ones we should follow? The issue is still unsure at the most. You have no proof. But I think the proofs given that show these contraceptives are abortifacent are very strong. So why should I go with you?

Besides, I think some have already pointed out that the WHO and FDA use the definition that life begins at implantation. But is not the definition usind in the Phil. Consti. We define life as beginning at fertilization. Or as @mannyamador shpowed, they assumed that. So that is the assumption of the Phil. Consti. And that is what we should follow. If we follow the Consti, then your authorites are wrong and those contraceptives are capable of causing abortion.

The Consti is still higher than the WHO or FDA or BFAD, bro. Dont forget that.

[wakkanakka]

That's three strikes (actually more), Mr. RH.

Grabe! Now that is PROOF that @giddyboy is a liar! I bet he has lied even more times.

@giddyboy, bro, you are really unfair. How can anyone believe you when you keep lying? Tsk tsk.

[mannyamador]

Here is even more evidence that shows how contraceptives are linked to increasing demand for abortion.

‘Contraceptive’ Push by Abortion Business Leads to Largest Ever Surge in UK Abortion
Marie Stopes International staff professed themselves “taken aback” at abortion surge
By Gudrun Schultz
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/feb/07020807.html

LONDON, United Kingdom, February 8, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Almost 6,000 abortions were carried out in January alone by the nine Marie Stopes International abortion centers in the UK, the highest rate ever in the last 32 years.

MSI staff professed themselves “taken aback” at the surge in abortion demand despite a campaign to promote the use of emergency contraception. Described as a massive publicity drive, the campaign urged women to purchase the morning-after pill and promoted the MSI “party purse”, according to a report by the UK News, including the pill, condoms and a guide to sexual health.

“Despite our efforts we have still seen the biggest rise ever in abortion figures in the month after Christmas,” said Liz Davies, director of MSI in the UK, who attributed the rise to “excess partying” and alcohol consumption over the Christmas season.

Anthony Ozimic, political secretary for the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), responded to Marie Stopes's comments on the unprecedented numbers of abortions it performed last month, saying, “Marie Stopes should stop trying to fool the public by feigning innocence and bewilderment about the rise in abortions. There is overwhelming evidence that easier access to birth control drugs and devices, which Marie Stopes promotes and provides, has failed to contain the rising number of abortions.”

“Marie Stopes also spends significant resources promoting and providing abortion,” Ozimic said. “Unborn children are being killed and vulnerable women are suffering post-abortion trauma as a result of Marie Stopes' work.”

A leading UK family planning expert admitted in September that promoting emergency contraception has not decreased the number of pregnancies or abortions in the country, which in fact have continued to rise.

“Despite the clear increase in the use of emergency contraception, abortion rates have not fallen in the UK. They have risen from 11 per 1,000 women aged 15-44 in 1984 (136,388 abortions) to 17.8 per 1,000 in 2004 (185,400 abortions),” wrote Anna Glasier, director of the Lothian primary care NHS trust in Edinburgh, in the British Medical Journal.

Ms. Davies, meanwhile, called for more campaigning to promote the use of emergency contraception, saying it was a “clear case for an annual government-funded national education campaign to alert women and men to the importance of preventing unwanted pregnancies and STIs, including HIV/AIDS.”

Britain has seen a recent push to make MAP accessible to girls as young as 12 in over the counter sales, as well as a government decision to reduce sales tax on the drug.



NO TO THE ABORTIFACIENT-PROMOTING RH BILL!
Please sign the petition AGAINST the deadly Reproductive Health Bill (HB5043)

[giddyboy]

Like they say, it ain't over till the fat lady sings. So don't count your chickens before they hatch.

of course im not counting the chickens yet before they hatch. i'm just showing how many are now in support of the bill. if i'm not mistaken, to get a bill passed, it has to take at least 1/3 of the vote of the Legislative (or perhaps majority of the quorum). AFAIK, 1/3 of Congress is around 70+, but those in support of the bill is already around a bit more than 100. furthermore, in the senate has also more than half i think who is in support of the bill. that means the passage of the bill in the House is inevitable, except if in case PGMA will veto it. but take note that a veto can always be over-rided by 1/3 of the House. well correct me lang if i'm wrong.

By the way, here's the part that you conveniently omitted in your quote from the Sun star story. Hmm... I wonder why? Were you perhaps worried that the truth would spoil the bandwagon effect you are trying to achieve?

Fortunately, I am no liar, so I'll even include the title of the story, which is "damaging" to my position. You see, just because YOU are a liar doesn't mean I have to be one too. I can always beat you with the truth. Here's tthe rest of the article:

From: RH bill’s supporters outnumber critics, ‘but GMA may veto it’
http://www.sunstar.com.ph/cebu/rh-bi...veto-it’

what the heck are u saying now? are u smoking something? I am just emphasizing some points from the entire article.

istorya.net is not a newspaper mannyboy. even in our forum rules, it requested us to post it as short as possible and just cite the source whenever needed. unlike you nga murag hapit na maghimo ug libro diri...tell me if this is not true.

if i have tried to omit anything, i didn't have to bother to post the link to the entire article, didn't I? you just want to make it look like I was lying...so who is lying now by making up stories that I even didn't do?

[giddyboy]

Below is another one of your lies that was exposed here recently. You are truly a PROVEN LIAR.

From: https://www.istorya.net/forums/politi...ml#post5015316

That's three strikes (actually more), Mr. RH. It's prettty obvious you are following the deceptive tactics used by the pro-aborts in the US years ago to get abortion legalized. I guess you know you can't win and get that stupid RH bill passed without lying. But it looks like you've refined the art of lying even more so now you can sneak in abortion (through abortifacients) with the RH bill as the vehicle! I wonder what's next?

strike 3 strike 3 paka dha... well sir, ur strike 3 is actually a foul.

If u myt recall, here's what u said:

"All of them talk about destroying a fetus or embryo. Well, the fertilized egg fits that description, UNLESS you arbitrarily re-define what it means."

it is only after that statement u made that I thought u r confused between what is a fetus or an embryo. what am i lying then there? even if you said later on that is not what u meant, still, even grammar teachers I have asked knows it's a grammar error but it seems you have tried vehemently not to want to see your error.

coz if we try to simplify ur statement, what u mean is that "the fertilized egg fits the description of a fetus or embryo." IS THAT A LIE?

what is lying instead is not accepting that error and made it look like I was the one lying. wow! nya pun-an pa gyud nga I am also trying to help sneak in abortion in the phils? toink!

[giddyboy]

LOL!!! In case you haven't noticed I have stated many times that I am against artificial and abortifacient contraceptives. That includes condoms and herbal abortifacients, you know. This is the dumbest lie from you yet!

I guess Wakkanakka was really justified when he wondered whether you lie to your wife too.

wow! pls don't twist on what I'm trying to say. I know u r against artificial contraceptives including the condom. I didn't say u aren't.

what i meant is that all your opposing the proposed RH Bill does not take the fact that you including your supposed pro-life kumares didn't even make vocalizations against the proliferation of herbal pampa reglas near churches and condoms being sold freely in stores other than pharmacies. u knew well already that herbal pampa regla is one of the biggest common usage in committing illegal abortion in the phils. especially to our poor. and i call that "double-standard"...still didn't get it? am i lying here?

btw, i have been profusely asking you about your "anti-abortifacient bill". you said you guys somehow have already submitted it in Congress. would you care then to show us some proof that you did? because if you can't, i would be forced to call you a BIG FAT LIAR then!

[giddyboy]

Grabe! Now that is PROOF that @giddyboy is a liar! I bet he has lied even more times.

@giddyboy, bro, you are really unfair. How can anyone believe you when you keep lying? Tsk tsk.

and i already disproved that i was not the one lying...

[giddyboy]

The BFAD did not make decision on that at all. They still have to determine the facts. But you are just being blind to it and being fanatic. You refuse to look at the evidences that say what you dont agree with.

There are many other authorities who disagree. Why should you choose which ones we should follow? The issue is still unsure at the most. You have no proof. But I think the proofs given that show these contraceptives are abortifacent are very strong. So why should I go with you?

are you blind? our BFAD has been approving the use of contraceptives since time immemorial!
there were those they approved and there were those that they did not approve. that's the decision they already made and to continue making! that's why they are there!

what's in BFAD that they have not decided yet man diay? would u care to elaborate?

if what u r saying is that facts and counter facts are changing with time, well that's a matter of continuity but not of decision!

I also know that our Consti is higher than BFAD or US FDA. But it is not up to you to decide whether contraceptives are abortifacients or not. It is the BFAD! and whether BFAD made the right decision or not, it is up to the SC to decide! I AM NOT LYING!

The RH Bill is a matter of national policy and not of your faith, dogma, or advocacy! AGAIN, I'M NOT LYING!

Well then who are you to say it has been decided?

well, i'm not the one who decides but it's our BFAD and its related laws. they are the ones who decide to approve or disapprove a certain drug.

If there is any conclusive evidence, it does not point to these contraceptives NOT being abortifacint. Can you prove they can never be abortifceint? Of course not! That is why it is still controversial. So the best you can do is say it is unresolved.

There is so much evbidence that says these contraceptives can cause abortion. So if you cannot prove for sure that these can never be causing abortion, you have to play it safe. What is so hard to undertsand about that?

You are beiog so fanatic about your RH thing. Grabe. That isn't logical anymore.

No, the best thing to say is that the issue is "continuously unresolved", "an unsettled issue" or controversial around the world that's why the continuing debate, but never "undecided". i already explained why we should not use the term "undecided". coz if we use the term, we should ask then "who is the authority" we are referring to that you say is undecided. is it BFAD? is it WHO? is it US FDA? is it the church?

but because it seems manny's influence had already seeped into your head, you can not anymore distinguish between those definitions.

again, i am in no position to claim contraceptives are abortifacient or not. i'm not a physician nor an expert. I'm only here to say what I believe. there are studies and position papers that claim contraceptives are not abortifacients. and vice versa.

[giddyboy]

Yes you DID specifically say condoms. You have been caught LYING again!

Here is what you said, found at: https://www.istorya.net/forums/politi...ml#post5147343


We were talking about "erring on the side of caution" with respect to whether some contraceptives are abortifacients. But then you tried to include condoms perhaps to make the pro-life side look silly. That is a deceptive tactic. But whatever your reasons the fact is that I have caught you lying AGAIN. You seem to be quite a HABITUAL LIAR.

well, one statement i had is for the other and another for the other. don't try to mix them both. My statement to you was clear that i'm talking about contraceptives in general. Another statement I made to another makes you look silly of course!

i don't care how u took my statements but one thing is certain: you just cannot ban the use of condoms just because you believe it is against nature. You need not promote it, but should not ban it. you just cannot ban the use of oral contraceptives just because you believe it is abortifacient. You need not promote it, but should not ban it.

While we have to respect the opinion of the Church, the RH Bill is a matter of national policy and not of faith. If the bill is passed, couples still have the right of choice of which type of family planning to use. and you still have the advocacy to influence people not to use contraceptives accdg to your beliefs. But then again, the RH Bill is not only about contraceptives.

In the same breadth, just because alcohol and cigarettes can cause abortion in pregnancy, or that using condoms is against the church teachings, means we have to ban them all from the face of the earth! You need not promote it, but you should not ban it.

I know that what we are debating here is not the primary and secondary mechanism but the 3rd mechanism of action of oral contraceptives. You say because of this, contraceptives to you is abortifacient. But not all people agree. and you have to realize that fact. otherwise, that's BIGOTRY!

[cebulifer]

im using condoms and thats that. wife using the pills too because of her condition.

whatever debate is going on here or in congress. I have a choice. and we're making it.