Is our President for real? - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-06-2003, 11:26 AM   #16
Ghost of Love
 
gvox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: In The Ballroom of The Crystal Lights
Posts: 19,838
Local Time: 06:35 AM
What a freak.

By the same token, I fail to see any logical connection between being against the murder of innocent babies and being against birth control or medication for PMS.
__________________

__________________
ACROBAT - U2 Tribute on Facebook


http://home.cogeco.ca/~october/images/sheeep.jpg

Don't push this button:
 
I'm serious, don't!

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyagu_Anaykus View Post
Interference is my Earth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gvox View Post
Consequently, Earth is an experimental disaster.
 

If you keep going, you have only your self to blame

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Best Interferencer On The Damn Planet View Post
Edge:
too sexy for his amp
too sexy for his cap
too sexy for that god-damned headset
I told you








gvox is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 11:26 AM   #17
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 04:35 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


Daddy Bush had a high approval rating around the Gulf War and fell flat on his ass. Baby Bush seems to be following in his father's footsteps so far, so it is still very unpredictable.

Melon
Many economists believe this war could have a devastating effect on the U.S. economy, which would of course affect the global economy. Our allies basically paid for the Gulf War whereas guess who has to pay for this one. The cost of a "clean" war is estimated by economists into possibly the trillions of dollars, which would far exceed any benefit incurred from increased production of Iraqi oil. Bush has not spoken much about the budget for this war. If economists are correct about the domestic and global financial implications of this war, there is no way he will be re-elected. Of course I nearly flunked economics in college so it's all Greek to me, and it's all speculation anyway. And you're right, it's unpredictable.

Edit: sorry I got off topic.
__________________

__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 11:38 AM   #18
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 05:35 AM
I really don't even think this is an abortion issue. I think everyone knows the abortion issue is far from being resolved.

Quote:
Dr. Hager is a practicing OB/GYN who describes himself as "pro-life" and refuses to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women.
This is the kind of thing we should be scared of. This is the kind of thinking that can that can destroy this nation.

When the "bleeding heart" make policy they at least give you choice. It may not be a choice you like, but it's a choice. But when the extreme right make policy they take away choice.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 03-06-2003, 11:55 AM   #19
Acrobat
 
Zooropa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Long Island, New York, USA
Posts: 421
Local Time: 06:35 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
I really don't even think this is an abortion issue. I think everyone knows the abortion issue is far from being resolved.



This is the kind of thing we should be scared of. This is the kind of thinking that can that can destroy this nation.

When the "bleeding heart" make policy they at least give you choice. It may not be a choice you like, but it's a choice. But when the extreme right make policy they take away choice.
Choice? If we were to make premeditated murder a choice, would that be OK? There is a difference of course, but the analogy is there. W/ the exception of "morning after pills, or in the case of harm to the mother and rape, abortion is wrong. It IS KILLInG an unborn human. To reduce it to the level of simple choice is, IMO, the kind of thinking that can destroy this nation. As I've said before, education is the key to eliminating unwanted pregnancies. Abortion is a band-aid solution, and a moraly reprehensible one at that. Do mistakes happen? Yes which is why I support the use of the of RU-486, in a limited fashion (1 month or earlier). Am I comfortable with it? No, but like I said, mistakes do happen.

Another interesting note, Some are up in arms over Dr. Hagers religious medicine, and say that he will harm women rights and womens health. One of the studies he will be over seeing will be hormone replacement therapy, which recently has come under fire for the detrimental side affects it has on women (i.e. increases in breast cancer, blood clots, etc.). An interesting article on the subject can be found here:
http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2000/...t_hormone.html
With that said, many of the same techniques and compounds used in hormone replacement therapy, are used in birth control pills and shots/patches. These pills may be more harmful to a women's health than many may think. All I'm saying here is that don't take the science here and immediatly equate it with positive results, because that doesn't work out, the science may be worse for you.
__________________
Zooropa is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 12:13 PM   #20
Blue Crack Addict
 
meegannie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Norwich, England
Posts: 15,798
Local Time: 11:35 AM
So contraceptives are harmful to unmarried woment, but married women are biologically different?
__________________
meegannie is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 12:19 PM   #21
Acrobat
 
Zooropa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Long Island, New York, USA
Posts: 421
Local Time: 06:35 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by meegannie
So contraceptives are harmful to unmarried woment, but married women are biologically different?
Meegannie, if you are responding to me, I don;t understand the question.
__________________
Zooropa is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 12:35 PM   #22
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 06:35 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Zooropa

With that said, many of the same techniques and compounds used in hormone replacement therapy, are used in birth control pills and shots/patches. These pills may be more harmful to a women's health than many may think. All I'm saying here is that don't take the science here and immediatly equate it with positive results, because that doesn't work out, the science may be worse for you.
You should consider yourself blessed that you don't have to be on hormone therapy or bcps your entire life like some of the rest of us. You see, people such as myself, who have enzymatic hormone uptake defects depend on these medications daily, and we live with the side effects because the alternative is so much worse it's incomparable.

I'm not an uneducated buffoon - my background is medsci, as a matter of fact, and I know the risks. But I also know that the risks are a given for a subset of population which may have no choice.

ETA: I am an unmarried female who has to be on contraceptives for the above stated medical reasons. I wonder if he'd prescribe them to me or advise me to pray.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 12:40 PM   #23
Acrobat
 
Zooropa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Long Island, New York, USA
Posts: 421
Local Time: 06:35 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram


You should consider yourself blessed that you don't have to be on hormone therapy or bcps your entire life like some of the rest of us. You see, people such as myself, who have enzymatic hormone uptake defects depend on these medications daily, and we live with the side effects because the alternative is so much worse it's incomparable.

I'm not an uneducated buffoon - my background is medsci, as a matter of fact, and I know the risks. But I also know that the risks are a given for a subset of population which may have no choice.
Maybe I haven't made my self clear, I'm not opposed to hormone replacement therapies, or any other medical therapies that have ditremental side affects, if they can improve the quality of life for some one that needs them. That is very different than voluntary use of therapies that may do more harm then good.
__________________
Zooropa is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 12:43 PM   #24
Bono's Belly Dancing Friend
 
Mrs. Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Torontonian in Maryland
Posts: 2,913
Local Time: 07:35 AM
All I can say is thank GOD I'm not an American woman.

And I too am totally confused as to why birth control is bad for single women but OK for married women. As a religous fanatic, I would have though he would want the reverse (ie no single mothers, married women encouraged to procreate etc.)!
__________________
Mrs. Edge is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 12:46 PM   #25
Blue Crack Addict
 
meegannie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Norwich, England
Posts: 15,798
Local Time: 11:35 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Zooropa


Meegannie, if you are responding to me, I don;t understand the question.
No, not responding to you, just Hagar's practices.
__________________
meegannie is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 03:31 PM   #26
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 07:35 AM
Zooropa: I can see what you're saying about not wanting either side making policy based on personal/religious convictions, but (speaking for myself at least) I don't object to him being anti-aborton--I object to him being a LOUSY DOCTOR. I excerpted several quotes from BVS's original e-mail on the 1st page of this thread that support my position that he is unfit for this position based on his medical qualifications--not his religious beliefs.

Although I am (reservedly) pro-choice, I have supported anti-abortion politicians, such as the late Gov. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania. Anti-abortion doesn't bother me as much as anti-science does.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 03:54 PM   #27
Acrobat
 
Zooropa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Long Island, New York, USA
Posts: 421
Local Time: 06:35 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by paxetaurora
Zooropa: I can see what you're saying about not wanting either side making policy based on personal/religious convictions, but (speaking for myself at least) I don't object to him being anti-aborton--I object to him being a LOUSY DOCTOR. I excerpted several quotes from BVS's original e-mail on the 1st page of this thread that support my position that he is unfit for this position based on his medical qualifications--not his religious beliefs.

Although I am (reservedly) pro-choice, I have supported anti-abortion politicians, such as the late Gov. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania. Anti-abortion doesn't bother me as much as anti-science does.
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
Dr. Hager's views of reproductive health care are far outside the mainstream of setback for reproductive technology. Dr. Hager is a practicing OB/GYN who describes himself as "pro-life" and refuses to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women.

Is this such a bad thing? Presription contraceptives affer no preotection from STD's. If you are an unmarried women/or man, using a condom is the most effective means of birth control. Once married, it is assumed that you will have a monogamous relationship with your spouse, and will not be at risk for contracting a STD. This is the difference.




Quote:
he suggests that women who suffer from premenstrual syndrome should seek help from reading the bible and praying.

This is hogwash, I agree.




Quote:
Dr. Hager appears to have endorsed the medically inaccurate assertion that the common birth control pill is an abortifacient.

err, well cetain birth control pills work by allowing the egg to be fertilized, but preventing it from inplanting in the uterine wall. Techincally, by allowing fertilization to occur, in the views of many, a child is already conceived, hence the arguememnt that the birth control bill is an abortifacient. This is of course subjective as to when you believe a fertilized eggs become a human child.


Quote:
Hager's desire to overturn mifepristone's approval on religious grounds rather than scientific merit would halt the development of mifepristone as a treatment for numerous medical conditions disproportionately affecting women, including breast cancer, uterine cancer, uterine fibroid tumors, psychotic depression, bipolar depression and Cushing's syndrome.

Again, I agree that religion does not trump science. However, as I alluded to earlier, the science is not always there to conclusivly show that it is beneficial, although, the absolute dismissal is as dangerous as the absolute acceptance.
__________________
Zooropa is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 04:25 PM   #28
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 07:35 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Zooropa

Is this such a bad thing? Presription contraceptives affer no preotection from STD's. If you are an unmarried women/or man, using a condom is the most effective means of birth control. Once married, it is assumed that you will have a monogamous relationship with your spouse, and will not be at risk for contracting a STD. This is the difference.
But who is he to assume that unmarried women who use oral contraceptives don't also use condoms? Because I know at least unmarried, sexually active woman who uses both--ME.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 04:29 PM   #29
Acrobat
 
Zooropa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Long Island, New York, USA
Posts: 421
Local Time: 06:35 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by paxetaurora


But who is he to assume that unmarried women who use oral contraceptives don't also use condoms? Because I know at least unmarried, sexually active woman who uses both--ME.
Well, let's face it, many people aren't all that responsible when it comes to sex. Especially younger people who don't realize the consequences of unprotected sex,and/or have the old "it won't happen to me" going through there head. That said, condoms are by far the most effective form of birth control, including prescription contraceptives. So theoretically, if you regularly use a condom, you won't need any other form of birth control.
__________________
Zooropa is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 04:41 PM   #30
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 05:35 AM
Quote:
Well, let's face it, many people aren't all that responsible when it comes to sex. Especially younger people who don't realize the consequences of unprotected sex,and/or have the old "it won't happen to me" going through there head. That said, condoms are by far the most effective form of birth control, including prescription contraceptives. So theoretically, if you regularly use a condom, you won't need any other form of birth control.
But this isn't the point. This "Doctor" doesn't prescribe these drugs to unmarried women because of his own religious belief. In his own bent perspective he believes this will promote pre-marital sex.

No the science in this area is not perfect, but the fact that you support Bush's decision to put him in this position is appalling to me and probably to most women.
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com