The FDA approves non-prescription sale of Plan B, but not to minors. Neopuritans are outraged at another Bush betrayal.
On Thursday the Food and Drug Administration announced the approval of the contraceptive treatment commonly known as 'Plan B' for over the counter sale to anyone over the age of 18.…
Article comments
26 - JR
Dave Nalle: Religion should play a role in one's personal position on abortion, but it should not play a role in legal policy on abortion, or on anything else. That amounts to imposing the beliefs of one religion on the entire population, and that's clearly both unethical and illegal.
That's a pretty tough line to draw. Religion helps determine peoples' value judgements, and we all vote based on our value judgements - you delineated some of yours in the first paragraph of comment #25. To say that religious people can't vote based on their religious beliefs unfairly negates their value judgements.
27 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
David, ok so you want to establish accountability? In other words it's ok if the zygote is flushed out naturally but not if the mother increases the probability of it being flushed out? That's an incredibly fine line to draw.
First of all, if human technology has the power to save nearly all of those naturally flushed out zygotes, are we not equally responsible for their "deaths?" As in a murder case, the moral and lawful requirement of a citizen is to reveal information that could have prevented the murder or could lead to the conviction of the murderer after the fact (you could be tried as a conspirator, for obstruction of justice etc.) In the eyes of morality and the law, someone who does not use their power to prevent murder is as responsible for the murder as the murderer himself. (Ex. if I know Bob is going to kill Frank, I dont act on that knowledge, and I watch Bob kill Frank are I not equally responsible for Frank's death?) So if there is something inherently immoral and unethical about the death of the zygote, shouldnt we require a woman to save all of the zygotes she produces by taking fertilization medicines etc?
And second, where do you draw the line of accountability? Is any assitance in the death of the zygote equivalent to murder? Should all women who have had unprotected sex lie flat on their backs for the next 48 hours to make sure they are not increasing the chance of the zygote not attaching to the uterine lining? I mean wouldnt a woman who had unprotected sex and then conciously engaged in any activity known to decrease the probability of the zygote implanting - as plan B does - be as accountable as a woman who actually took plan B? If going on a long run decreases the chance of implantation 20%, is some one who went running as accountable as someone who takes plan B, which decreases the chance of pregnancy 89% of the time - and ussually before fertilization even occurs? Perhaps the woman even knew that running would decrease the chance of implantation and consciously chose to run farther that day. Under your reasoning that should be as unlawful as taking plan B.
One of the legal requirements for conviction is knowing the difference between right and wrong. If a defendent is unaware that what he/she did was wrong they cannot be held accountable. They do not have to know it is unlawful, but they DO have to know it is wrong.
If a woman does not feel aborting a zyote is wrong, then she cannot be held accountable for taking a pill that may or may not abort that zygote. She could of course take the insanity defense, but then half the woman in this country would be insane. Even if there were laws protecting zygotes, a woman who kills her zygote could only be determined to be insane, and not accountable for her so-called wrong doing.
You run into a lot of legal envorcement problems when you try and impose youre personal sense of morality on other people. Anyone who disagrees can plead insanity.
Your sense of morality can only be justly imposed on other people if and only if it is a sense of morality shared by all people of all cultures, religions, races, genders, and backgrounds. Something inherent in human nature. Protecting the life of a zygote is, by its very definition, no such thing.
28 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
I also wanted to reiterate the correction Clavos made in post #22.
Dave's article says: Plan B "prevents conception rather than causing a spontaneous abortion after conception."
That is misleading because it implies it does not harm zygotes after fertilization. That is FALSE. As Clavos points out, Plan B "may also work by preventing it from attaching to the uterus" beyond contraceptive measures.
In fact, Dave's misleading statement automatically destroys his main argument that anyone opposed to Plan B is hypocritical and not really pro-life, but rather anti-sex. Since there is a viable argument that Plan B can be used for abortion, it would only be natural for anyone intent on preventing abortions to rally against Plan B. Not at all hypocritical.
Of course that doesnt mean Dave's point is wrong, but this example doesnt illustrate it. Certainly opposition to entirely contraceptive medication is anti-sex religious zealotry and not at all pro-life. Plan B just isnt entirely contraceptive. It can also be an abortive since technically killing a zygote IS abortion.
29 - Dave Nalle
PETI, I believe if you read Clavos further exploration of the abortion vs. contraception aspects of Plan B, you'll find that 2/3 of the time it functions as a contraceptive, but 1/3 of the time it does function as an abortifacient. The main factor in this is how quickly you take it. The longer you wait the more likelihood that what you get is at least technically and in the most generous terms an abortion - if you even consider aborting a zygote an abortion, which I certainly don't.
And regardless of the technical questions about Plan B, the truth is that hatred of sex is still behind the entire anti-abortion movement.
Dave
30 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
Yes, I read Clavos's statement which is why I said it "isnt entirely contraceptive." and may be an abortaficient. In fact, I would guess it is a contraceptive 99% of the the time, not just 2/3s, but I dont know that.
And I certainly agree with the point of your article, a lot (not "the entire") anti-abortion movement is motivated by anti-sex religious zealotry. This just isnt the best example since technically Plan B can cause abortion. And although you may not consider it abortion, it is technically a "lesser" form of abortion. Abortion occurs when a human fetus OR embryo is expelled. And that's what Plan B does. (Upon fertilization the egg begins dividing forming an embryo that eventually attaches to the uterine wall. This embryo is expelled by Plan B.)
31 - Dave Nalle
The problem, PETI, is that in the eyes of fanatics there's no 'lesser' form of abortion. To them even what most sane people consider contraception counts as murder as much as it would to smother the baby after it was born.
Dave
32 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
Or your own mother for that matter...
33 - Dave Nalle
Sorry, PETI. That last one made no sense to me at all. What was that about my mother?
Dave
34 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
To them even what most sane people consider contraception counts as murder as much as it would to smother the baby after it was born
...or smother one's own mother for that matter.
35 - Baronius
Dave, talking about The Pro-Life Voter is inaccurate. There are many sentiments and degrees on this issue, as on most issues.
One big distinction is Catholic versus Evangelical pro-lifers. Evangelical (or I should probably just say "non-Catholic") pro-lifers generally don't care about contraception. Catholics oppose contraception. It's kind of funny that you look at parents with 10 children as anti-sex. You do realize where those kids are coming from, right?
If Plan B only prevented fertilization, a majority of pro-lifers would be fine with it. There would be concern about its availability to minors, but let's face it, minors are able to get contraceptives. The primary objection among abortion opponents is that Plan B can destroy the life of a fertilized egg. That may be a lesser form of abortion - pro-lifers can make those distinctions. Yet the result is the extinction of a living being with unique DNA.
Your analysis blurs the different arguments about abortion and contraception, which is just as fair as if I assumed that every pro-choicer favored exposing infants to wolves.
36 - Michael J. West
What should be pointed out here is that the new legislation doesn't make Plan B THAT much easier to get. It is over-the-counter, but it is still to be kept BEHIND the counter, at the pharmacy section of drugstores, and still can only be sold to you if the pharmacist feels like selling it to you.
Which means, to me, that the legislation is still pretty damn restrictive. Which should be good news to the wackos who oppose it.
Parenthetically, it also lifts a lot of the burden off of the pharmacist's shoulders. It used to be that if he refused to fill a prescription, he was unprofessional and a blemish on the pharmacists' trade. Now that it's an OTC product, if he refuses to sell it to you he's just an asshole.
37 - Clavos
Now that it's an OTC product, if he refuses to sell it to you he's just an asshole.
Well put, MJW. Thanks for the grin!
38 - Nancy
But which also means you can get the bastard canned if he DOES refuse, or kick his ass yourself then & there.