thomas aquinas believed life did not start exactly the moment of conception...kill those embryos, who cares?

morning after pill is abortion.

 

things like that can create lot's of problems, like infertility in a woman.

 

if women want'em is their problem. but i don't think is a wise choice.

 

somehow government made cigar companies basically advertise against themselves because cigars are harmful, yet things really harmful like this pill get a free ride, which they should. i just can't stand the double standard.

that is a good point. too often are forms of birth control presented as harmless so you can have harmless fun.

 

people should be aware of the consequences, but that is up to the individual and what is valued.

that is a good point. too often are forms of birth control presented as harmless so you can have harmless fun.

 

people should be aware of the consequences, but that is up to the individual and what is valued.

560967[/snapback]

 

totally agree, and the same thing should be with tobacco, but unfortunately is not.

 

goverment gets involved more and more into our everyday lives.

morning after pill is abortion.

 

things like that can create lot's of problems, like infertility in a woman.

 

if women want'em is their problem. but i don't think is a wise choice.

 

somehow government made cigar companies basically advertise against themselves because cigars are harmful, yet things really harmful like this pill get a free ride, which they should. i just can't stand the double standard.

560962[/snapback]

 

if in the future a morning after pill is 99.999999% safe, are you still against it?

 

 

and what's the similarities with tobacco? you're not allowed to smoke cigarettes?

morning after pill is abortion.

 

things like that can create lot's of problems, like infertility in a woman.

 

if women want'em is their problem. but i don't think is a wise choice.

 

somehow government made cigar companies basically advertise against themselves because cigars are harmful, yet things really harmful like this pill get a free ride, which they should. i just can't stand the double standard.

560962[/snapback]

 

if in the future, a morning after pill is 99.9999999% safe, are you still against it?

 

and are you implying that the FDA would release a pill and not disclose any possible harmful side effects to people?

560974[/snapback]

 

they basically say, talk 2 ur doctor about it. they have made the tabacco industry advertise telling people not to smoke. what the hell is that?

 

i'm only against the pill on a personal basis, people can do what they want. i don't like gay people, but if they want to be gay, hey, that's their problem.

I would think "talk to your doctor" about a birth-control device is a pretty responsible thing to say, don't you?

 

And "talk to your doctor" about smoking would be pointless. Doctors see the results first hand. Any of them going to tell you it's safe to light up?

orisha, shouldnt we be able to trust doctors to tell people the dangers of the pills? And what evidence is there that the pill is as dangerous as tobacco? Even if it was, what about a cost benefit analysis? Im sure that would be better than tobacco.

the point is, the company shouldn't be forcing the companies to advertise negative things about their product. that's not the government's business.

isnt that a totally differnt issue than the pill though?

isnt that a totally differnt issue than the pill though?

560995[/snapback]

 

 

i guess my issue is that the pill will go through like nothing, and tobacco companies will stilled be attacked like the black sheep.

I'm a conservative, everyone here knows that....I staunchly oppose abortion, but I support the use of contraceptives, i.e. morning after pill. As for teaching teens about abstinence, I think it's a good thing to present abstinence as an option, but no matter how conservative you are, you have to be realistic and admit that abstinence isn't an option for today's teens.

isnt that a totally differnt issue than the pill though?

560995[/snapback]

 

 

i guess my issue is that the pill will go through like nothing, and tobacco companies will stilled be attacked like the black sheep.

560997[/snapback]

But remember, cibgarettes got basically a free ride for quite a few years before conclusive studies came out saying all the dangers behind them. We have yet to see conclusive studies and in the sheer numbers we have for tobacco and nicotine products, so that's why you don't see it for the pill. If there are serious side effects, you should see them on the ads soon.

 

And I have to say that I'm pretty in the middle on the whole negative advertisement against yourself thing. On the one hand, it isn't the government's problem. But on the other, what happens if there is no one to keep the companies in check?

isnt that a totally differnt issue than the pill though?

560995[/snapback]

 

 

i guess my issue is that the pill will go through like nothing, and tobacco companies will stilled be attacked like the black sheep.

560997[/snapback]

 

 

I totally agree with this issue. Information on the health risks of things should not have to be the focal point of an ad, because a business needs to sell product and in the end the person buying it is the one who mnakes the choice to buy it. I dont oppose the labels on a cigarette box warning about the hazards though, only because it helps people make an informed decision. But whether you choose to smoke, have sex, or use a pill its all the individual's choice and govt should have no say in it. Schools should teach that sex without cotnraceptives is unsafe and could lead to unwanted results, but that the onbly 100% sure fire way to avoid these problems is to not have sex, and let students and parents make choices on their own

like Juanky was alluding to, I think that the major reason the cigarette companies are forced to put such direct dangerous warnings on their products is because they lied about the dangers of smoking for so long, hid/covered up evidence & studies about tobacco addition, etc.

 

If I'm not mistaken, part of the results of all the lawsuits against the tobacco companies was that they had to include warning labels, and support a whole slew of programs that help people fight tobacco additions.

 

They brought it on themselves.

 

Still legal to smoke although the only location it's still legal to smoke IN is a small 10x12 area in South Dakota.

like Juanky was alluding to, I think that the major reason the cigarette companies are forced to put such direct dangerous warnings on their products is because they lied about the dangers of smoking for so long, hid/covered up evidence & studies about tobacco addition, etc.

 

If I'm not mistaken, part of the results of all the lawsuits against the tobacco companies was that they had to include warning labels, and support a whole slew of programs that help people fight tobacco additions.

 

They brought it on themselves.

 

Still legal to smoke although the only location it's still legal to smoke IN is a small 10x12 area in South Dakota.

562060[/snapback]

 

I think those laws prohibiting smokin in restaurants are absurd also. If you dont like the fact a restaurant allows smoking, go to another restaurant. Or campaign to boycott certain restaurants, when their business hurts theyll change on their own. Govt once again steppin on ppl's toes

like Juanky was alluding to, I think that the major reason the cigarette companies are forced to put such direct dangerous warnings on their products is because they lied about the dangers of smoking for so long, hid/covered up evidence & studies about tobacco addition, etc.

 

If I'm not mistaken, part of the results of all the lawsuits against the tobacco companies was that they had to include warning labels, and support a whole slew of programs that help people fight tobacco additions.

 

They brought it on themselves.

 

Still legal to smoke although the only location it's still legal to smoke IN is a small 10x12 area in South Dakota.

562060[/snapback]

 

I think those laws prohibiting smokin in restaurants are absurd also. If you dont like the fact a restaurant allows smoking, go to another restaurant. Or campaign to boycott certain restaurants, when their business hurts theyll change on their own. Govt once again steppin on ppl's toes

562078[/snapback]

 

i agree with that cangey (btw, my 2nd favortie marlin ever)

 

i don't have a problem with having some warning on cigarrette boxes. but they should be allowed to advertise the "virtues" of their product.

 

and there's nothing more wonderful than a cigar right after dinner in a restaurant, talking to ur friends. that's the government stepping on people's toes.

I think those laws prohibiting smokin in restaurants are absurd also. If you dont like the fact a restaurant allows smoking, go to another restaurant. Or campaign to boycott certain restaurants, when their business hurts theyll change on their own. Govt once again steppin on ppl's toes

 

 

 

Yeah, I have a problem with that too....