ditto, Valkyrie-you hit it rt. on the nose. BTW Valkyrie maybe you can answer this-aren't there some states that do as they wish even though you have a living will?

BTW I like peoples opinions but as Damasa said earlier when you start spouting off opinions as facts you need to be careful. I would like to see some data too. Maybe the reason we haven't seen any data yet is b/c the data supports the fact the many orphanges are not up to par or that there is only a line waiting to adopt the healthy caucasian babies- which has been one my points all along.

On the abortion issue I'm pro-choice because first I'm not a woman and I feel that the woman should have all the control because they're having the baby. Secondly, I think abortion should be an option because of criminals. I agree nobody should be forced to make a choice. Just like nobody forces you to be or not to be an organ donor.

I'm major supporter of the death penalty and I think that Bin Laden and everyone of his supporters should get it. Including state sponsors and other terrorist groups across the world. Eye for an eye. Nuff Said.

First, I said I wasn't going to post again...I can't help it.
Second, I said a baby could feel pain at 6 weeks. I was wrong, it's 8.
CHAPTER 14

FETAL PAIN

YES AND BY 8 WEEKS

By 8 weeks? Show me!

By this age the neuro-anatomic structures are present. What is needed is (1) a sensory nerve to feel the pain and send a message to (2) the thalamus, a part of the base of the brain, and (3) motor nerves that send a message to that area. These are present at 8 weeks. The pain impulse goes to the thalamus. It sends a signal down the motor nerves to pull away from the hurt.



Give an example.

Try sticking an infant with a pin and you know what happens. She opens her mouth to cry and also pulls away.

Try sticking an 8 week old human fetus in the palm of his hand. He opens his mouth and pulls his hand away.

A more technical description would add that changes in heart rate and fetal movement also suggest that intrauterine manipulations are painful to the fetus. Volman & Pearson, "What the Fetus Feels," British Med. Journal, Jan. 26, 1980, pp. 233-234.

O.K., that is activity that can be observed, but is there other evidence of pain? After all, the fetal baby can’t tell us he hurts.

Pain can be detected when nociceptors (pain receptors) discharge electrical impulses to the spinal cord and brain. These fire impulses outward, telling the muscles and body to react. These can be measured. Mountcastle, Medical Physiology, St. Louis: C.V. Mosby, pp. 391-427 "Lip tactile response may be evoked by the end of the 7th week. At 11 weeks, the face and all parts of the upper and lower extremities are sensitive to touch. By 13 1/2 to 14 weeks, the entire body surface, except for the back and the top of the head, are sensitive to pain." S. Reinis & J. Goldman, The Development of the Brain C. Thomas Pub., 1980

Give me more proof.

In 1964 President Reagan said: "When the lives of the unborn are snuffed out, they often feel pain, pain that is long and agonizing." President Ronald Reagan to National Religious Broadcasters, New York Times, Jan. 31, 1984

This provoked a public reaction from pro-abortion circles and a response from an auspicious group of professors, including pain specialists and two past presidents of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

They strongly backed Mr. Reagan and produced substantial documentation. Excerpts of their letter (2/13/84) to him included:

"Real time ultrasonography, fetoscopy, study of the fetal EKG (electrocardiogram) and fetal EEG (electroencephalogram) have demonstrated the remarkable responsiveness of the human fetus to pain, touch, and sound. That the fetus responds to changes in light intensity within the womb, to heat, to cold, and to taste (by altering the chemical nature of the fluid swallowed by the fetus) has been exquisitely documented in the pioneering work of the late Sir William Lily — the father of fetology."

We state categorically that no finding of modern fetology invalidates the remarkable conclusion drawn after a lifetime of research by the late Professor Arnold Gesell of Yale University. In The Embryology of Behavior: The Beginnings of the Human Mind (1945, Harper Bros.), Dr. Gesell wrote, "and so by the close of the first trimester the fetus is a sentient, moving being. We need not speculate as to the nature of his psychic attributes, but we may assert that the organization of his psychosomatic self is well under way."

Mr. President, in drawing attention to the capability of the human fetus to feel pain, you stand on firmly established ground. Willke, J & B, Abortion: Questions & Answers, Hayes, 1991, Chpt. 10

What of The Silent Scream?

A Realtime ultrasound video tape and movie of a 12- week suction abortion is commercially available as, The Silent Scream, narrated by Dr. B. Nathanson, a former abortionist. It dramatically, but factually, shows the pre-born baby dodging the suction instrument time after time, while its heartbeat doubles in rate. When finally caught, its body being dismembered, the baby’s mouth clearly opens wide — hence, the title (available from Heritage House '76 at http:www.heritagehouse76.com). Proabortionists have attempted to discredit this film. A well documented paper refuting their charges is available from National Right to Life, 419 7th St. NW, Washington, DC 20004, $2.00 p.p. A short, 10-minute video showing the testimony of the doctor who did the abortion in Silent Scream definitely debunks any criticism of Silent Scream’s accuracy. The Answer, Bernadel, Inc., P.O. Box 1897, Old Chelsea Station, New York, NY, 10011.

Pain? What of just comfort?

"One of the most uncomfortable ledges that the unborn can encounter is his mother’s backbone. If he happens to be lying so that his own backbone is across hers [when the mother lies on her back], the unborn will wiggle around until he can get away from this highly disagreeable position." M. Liley & B. Day, Modern Motherhood, Random House, 1969, p. 42

But isn’t pain mostly psychological?

There is also organic, or physiological pain which elicits a neurological response to pain. P. Lubeskind, "Psychology & Physiology of Pain," Amer. Review Psychology, vol. 28, 1977, p. 42

But early on there is no cerebral cortex for thinking, therefore no pain?

The cortex isn’t needed to feel pain. The thalamus is needed and (see above) is functioning at 8 weeks. Even complete removal of the cortex does not eliminate the sensation of pain. "Indeed there seems to be little evidence that pain information reaches the sensory cortex." Patton et al., Intro. to Basic Neurology, W. B. Saunders Co. 1976, p. 178

How about during an abortion?

This really hit the fan during the 1996 debate in the U.S. Congress over a law to ban partial birth abortions. Pro-abortionists had claimed that the anaesthetic had already killed the fetal baby. Top officials of the U.S.

Society for Obstetric Anaesthesia & Perinatology vigorously denied this explaining that usual anaesthesia did not harm the baby. D. Gianelli, Anaesthesiologists Question Claims in Abortion Debate, Am. Med. News, Jan. 1, ’96

This brought the issue of fetal pain into the news, and testimony was given to the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the U.S. House of Representatives.

"The fetus within this time frame of gestation, 20 weeks and beyond, is fully capable of experiencing pain. Without doubt a partial birth abortion is a dreadfully painful experience for any infant. R. White, Dir. Neurosurgery & Brain Research, Case Western Univ.

Also, "Far from being less able to feel pain, such premature newborns may be more sensitive to pain"...that babies under 30 weeks have a "newly established pain system that is raw and unmodified at this tender age." P. Ranalli, Neuro. Dept., Univ. of Toronto

Give me more research data.

Data in the British Medical Journal, Lancet, gave solid confirmation of such pain. It is known that the fetal umbilical cord has no pain receptors such as the rest of the fetal body. Accordingly, they tested fetal hormone stress response comparing puncturing of the abdomen and of the cord.

They observed "the fetus reacts to intrahepatic (liver) needling with vigorous body and breathing movements, but not to cord needling. The levels of these hormones did not vary with fetal age." M. Fisk, et al., Fetal Plasma Cortisol and B-endorphin Response to Intrauterine Needling, Lancet, Vol. 344, July 9, 1994, Pg. 77

Another excellent British study commented on this:

"It cannot be comfortable for the fetus to have a scalp electrode implanted on his skin, to have blood taken from the scalp or to suffer the skull compression that may occur even with spontaneous delivery. It is hardly surprising that infants delivered by difficult forceps extraction act as if they have a severe headache." Valman & Pearson, "What the Fetus Feels," British Med. Jour., Jan. 26, 1980

http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_...s?%20Show%20me!

This site shows both sides if you search it.

feeling pain
 

So the fetus feels pain at 8 wks... what are we supposed to take from that? Is it wrong to kill something just because it will feel pain? We kill things all the time that can feel a LOT of pain, creatures far more cognizant than an 8 wk old fetus. Just something to think about...

Re: feeling pain
 

That pain is a sign of life. Isn't that the argument, that fetuses aren't really considered as "living"?

twinstars, I only wanted to correct a statement I made earlier that was wrong. Also, people have been asking for "evidence" and the link to the site has (as I mentioned) both sides covered.

I think that this thread runs much deeper than what I saw initially on the surface. I would venture a guess that more than a few of the posters have either had an abortion, their girlfriend has had one or as in dzrose's case a close friend.

It is against the law of my church to even encourage anyone to get an abortion. Sometimes, I really don't agree with all the laws, but then I have to consider that my faith is not like a dress that I toss aside if I don't like the fit or it goes out of style.

Don't worry, I'm not going to blow up any clinics or shoot any doctors. I wouldn't say anyone who does this is condemned to hell either-if there is true remorse and meaningful contrition. If I can influence once sngle person to consider their full range of options, then I know I have done something good.

Re: Re: feeling pain
 

I'm pro-choice, and that's not my argument (that abortion is morally ok because the fetus "isn't living.") It is certainly living, what else would it be, dead??

A very early fetus is "living," but not in the same sense that you and I are, at least in my opinion.

I highly doubt that you think it's wrong to kill something just because it is living.

Sometimes we kill living things because we think we are justified in doing so (as in, killing adult cows for food, when we don't really NEED to), or because we think it's the best of several bad options (in the case of abortion).

Re: Re: Re: feeling pain
 

Let me clarify, "living humans".
No, I don't think it is wrong to kill animals for food. But, I do think it is wrong to kill humans, no matter the reason.

I have a question. Would any of you put your family pet(s) asleep if they became inconvient?

I may put an animal to sleep if it is in pain-if it's the most humane thing to do. In no case would I put an animal to sleep simply because it inconveniences me.

I am pro-life-BTW

huh?
 

Ok, so you have no problem with killing healthy, happy animals for food (as you've stated above), when you could easily get protein and nutrients from other sources, sparing those animals' lives, yet you think it would be wrong to put an inconvenient pet to sleep (if that's what you're getting at)??

How exactly do you justify that?

Re: huh?
 

That question was directed towards the pro-choicers. I know a lot of pro-choicers who wouldn't dare to eat meat nor put their family pet asleep just because it was an inconvience. However, the same people have no problems aborting babies, just because they were an inconvience.

inconvenience
 

Curous,
I think you're oversimplifying things a LOT to say that an unwanted pregnancy, and the responsibilities of raising a kid for 18+ years, are just "inconveniences" for the mother. These things change the mother's life, maybe for the worse, in MAJOR, MAJOR ways. It's a really big deal to have a kid and give it up for adoption, or to have a kid and raise it right. It takes a huge amount of sacrifice on the parents' part. I understand why some women in some circumstances would choose abortion. I don't think it's because they're just selfish and want to avoid the "inconvenience" of pregnancy and caring for a kid. It's just not that simple.

Re: inconvenience
 

Unless raped, people who don't want babies should not have sex. In that way I am pro-choice. Once a woman is pregnant it is too late to change her mind.

Like it or not curiouss many people are going to keep having sex and will get pregnant and will have an abortion if that is what they choose. It is not as simple as saying "if you don't want the possibility of getting pregnant then don't have sex". BTW I am with twinstars, I know the fetus has pain sensation just like the cow they slaughtered yesterday for your steak has pain sensation. I also see the starving kids on TV suffering from hunger pains-this kind of pain is ok but an abortion is not??? That is not going to change my view.

Also curiouss to reply to your animal question-there are people that give up their pet b/c it is an inconvenience-I have seen it. Though I do not do convenient euthanasias I usually try and adopt these animals out I know the shelter will do these euthanasias. I cannot take all of these animals in as there are way to many.
Many times the other alternative is a slow painful death-whether it be on the streets or by the hands of their owners (I have had many clients say they are just going to take their animal out in the back and shoot it). Thank God we have euthanasia and shelters for these unwanted creatures and thank God for legal abortion.

Re: Re: inconvenience
 

Easier said than done.....

Curiouss, I don't know you nor do I know if you have ever been in a serious relationship where you are head-over-heels in love with the man you are with. But, to anyone who has never been in a relationship that is like that:
When you are that in love with someone, it is sooooo difficult to say no to sex. I use to want to wait until marriage to have sex. But, that was before I had a serious relationship. When I became involved in a serious relationship, I finally realized what my friends were talking about. It is hard not to give into temptation. Wanting sex is both biological and emotional. It is part of human nature and it is a beautiful and wonderful thing. It is an expression of love between two people. It should not be shunned because it may possibly produce a child.
My roommate/sorority sister use to go around at her church preaching to others about why they should wait until marriage to have sex (when she was in high school). Last October (2000), she met the man of her dreams who happened to be our next door neighboor. Two months later, she gave into temptation. Over a year later, she is still involved in a healthy sexual relationship with her boyfriend.
Most women who do not want to have children use precautions. They use condoms, the Pill, or other methods of birth control. Thankfully, many girls don't see abortion as a birth control method. But, pregnancy can happen to even the most cautious of all people. Pregnancy should not be a punishment for being involved in a beautiful thing such as sex.
Like I said before, I am pro-choice. If I were to get pregnant, I am not sure what I would do. But, I would love to have that option open.
PS- To any woman out there that uses abortion as a method of birth control....shame on you! Not only is it immoral but sometimes an abortion can leave you sterile. If you ever want a kid one day, an abortion can ruin that chance so be careful.

I think it is entirely different. When someone is on a respirator, nobody else's body is being sacrificed against her will. - Valkyrie

I respect your opinion, however how is your body being sacrificed against your own will when you have a baby. You put yourself in that position to have a baby. Baby didnt ask to be here. Thats just my 2 cents.

Abortion is, in my opinion, a very personal and horrifying decision one may have to make. A few years ago, I was completely pro-life. I am totally against the idea of abortion being substituted for contraception. If you don't think you can control your urges, use something. A screaming baby at all hours of the night is not fun.
I know there are cases where the woman, man, or couple just doesn't see any other way besides abortion, and I can see that side. But, the baby didn't ask to be conceived, and there are so many consequences to abortion. Not only is there some health risk (minimal as it may seem), but just think of the emotional side.
Can you imagine the nightmares? Not to mention that the experience wouldn't just fade away. There would be thoughts of what might have been. Talk about your "if only's..." and "what if's..."
All things considered, I would have to say I am pro-choice. I just don't know how many people actually take into consideration all the things that are really at stake.

ok, been gone for a while...so back to this fact/opinion thing for a red hot second...

i apologize if my opinions are coming off as fact to the pro-choice supporters on here. if they come off as such, though, it's probably b/c i believe them to be fact. and if i believe something to be true, then i am going to voice that to those who see otherwise (just like they do), not to be out to change their mind necessarily, but to maybe have them think about things differently...just to see the other side. but the statistics that you all are asking for...you want how many kids put up for adoption are actually taken home and what else...i do want to try and provide some honest data of what you are asking. i just thought i was on here to voice my opinion, not write a research paper. :(

and i know in AL few years back when a mother and her unborn baby were killed, the person was brought up for both deaths. i don't think either circumstance is across the board for all states, though...

FYI, in states where a person is charged for both deaths, the life of the unborn child must be sustainable outside the body of the mother.

I am all for the woman choosing. If it was my kid I don't know what i would do.

Except in the case of rape or fetal defects, lesbians should not be allowed to have abortions.

WTF?

The last I heard (and I could be wrong - kddani?), in PA, the knowledge that the woman is pregnant (either by sight or by personal knowledge) is reason enough to be charged for two deaths.

I am pro-life in all cases. Yes, even in the cases of rape, incest, or endangering the health/life of the mother. Ibelieve abortion is wrong, plain and simple.
That being said, I despise the people that stand outside of abortion clinics with hateful signs that hurl insults at the women and doctors going into them. I don't agree with the choices that these women make, but knowing how much it breaks my heart for them to think that they see this as their only choice, I can't imagine what they've gone through to make this choice. (I'm not talking about the women that use abortion as a form of birth control - my heart breaks for them as well because of the consequences, both physical and emotional, that they will have to deal with later.)
I know I posted this somewhere else, but I'll post my experience again. Several years ago I was raped by an exboyfriend and I was terrified I was pregnant. When someone suggested to me to get an abortion, the thought came to me, "Why? This won't cause the rape to be undone - it would just kill the baby that could be raised by someone else."
I realize that no form of birth control is 100% effective. I'm a birthcontrol/condom baby, and my best friend became pregnant with both of her children while she was on the pill. Abstinence is the only sure way for someone to not become pregnant, and I realize that this isn't realistic to expect of most people.
I do believe however that you accept the risks of sex when you choose to engage in it, and becoming pregnant is one of those risks.

pro-life. I had much difficulty deciding on this issue when I was younger but have since come to the conclusion that abortion is fundamentally wrong. In the past few years many things have happened to shape my views (my sister had a daughter, which I could not imagine being absent from my life). Something else that I never really thought about until the other day was what if my parents had had an abortion with me (kinda scary thought) I mean I wouldn't be here to write this post.

I've never really understood this statement -- if you weren't here to write this post, you also wouldn't be here to care if you could write this post or not.

I am a pro-choice person. No, I have never had kids but if I was put in the situation where my life or the baby's life or both lives were in danger then I say abort. If I was raped and got pregnant, then, I would not hesitate with an abortion because that child was not brought into this world by my choosing nor by a loving relationship. Now, if I chose to have sex and got pregnant, then, that baby is my responsibility and abortion, by no means, should be used as a form of birth control. An abortion is not by any means easy on a woman's body. I don't care what anyone says. I mean geez they're killing something that's in your body and yanking it out.

I hate it when those people say that abortion is wrong when the mother's or baby's life is in danger. Wouldn't you want that baby to have a mother? Or would you want both baby and mother to die because heaven forbid an abortion might save one of their lives? Why lose two lives over you not wanting an abortion? Or lose the mother's life when the mother can still go on to have other children? That child will grow up without it's natural mother. Yes, I know about adoption where a lot of people grow up without knowing their natural mothers. I also know about all of those abusive relationships.

I also hate it when those people stand out in front of schools with graphic signs advocating pro-life. They're also the ones standing out in front of doctors' offices with those same signs and yelling all kinds of absurd things.

Now, with all of that said, it does outrage me when a pregnant woman is killed and the killer isn't charged with 2 counts of murder. There was no choice on the victims' part, just the killer's.

Also, I am not against sex but my personal choices about sex (like those with an abortion) is my own private decision. I know how I feel about having sex before marriage and it's not a curse to wait. I have been in 2 very serious relationships where the temptation was there. I do know sex is going to happen outside of marriage and out-of-wedlock pregnancies do happen. If you don't want to have a baby, then, when you have sex, use a condom. Not only use a condom but the pill. That way you are less likely to have a baby and contract an STD. Rocket science I know but it doesn't blow my mind!

I'm pro-choice about everything; abortion, drugs, school choice. My stance on these issues is anything but purely ideological. My father was a drug addict, and I attended a private school in the 11th and 12th grades, so I was able to see just how horrendous public education is. But those are topics for another thread.

Abortion is not a good thing, and in a perfect world, it would never happen. Restricting a woman's right to control her body is also a terrible thing. Unfortunately, we can't eliminate both evils, so we must choose.

If abortion were to again become illegal, it could be dramatically reduced, but only if we turned this country into a police state. The United States would cease to exist as a nation of liberty. This is a very heavy price to pay. People don't move to the America to lose freedom, and they don't move to oppressive nations at all.

As I see it, making abortion illegal is profoundly unpatriotic, and anathema to all that is special about America.

http://www.maycoelectrical.com/american_flag.jpg

I'm against it, I think it's wrong.

If you believe this, do you also believe that people who, by having sex, get an STD should accept their consequences and not seek treatment? Now, note that I am not saying a child is a disease, but as is characterized by the post I am quoting, getting pregnant is a risk, as is getting an STD. One may use protection, which may sometimes fail, and suffer the consequences of the risks they have taken. Yet, I never see anyone claiming that people should suffer through gonorrhea or crabs because they deserve it, having taken a risk they knew full well could lead to this consequence.

Similarly, there is the oft-quoted car accident analogy. Knowing that driving will often lead to accidents, you are only getting what you deserve, or taking on a consequence you knew was inherent in driving (or even riding in) a car, therefore you should not seek treatment. The point being that people will and should still drive, trying their damned best to avoid the consequences. All of life is about measured risk taking for rewards. Should we all quit doing anything at all risky because we may have an undesired consequence?

Also, what about those people who don't want to have children ever? What would you say to them? That it is not their right to choose whether or not to reproduce? That they should go through life as virgins? Keeping in mind that any ethical medical practictioner pretty much makes it policy that women that have never borne a child shall not qualify for sterilization and that men younger than 35 or so with no children still have a hard time getting sterilized, it would seem that there is no realistic solution to this problem. People will have sex. It's a natural part of a relationship, and in primates, is NOT just for reproducing. People, IMHO, should have the ability to choose whether or not they will bear children. There are many of us out there that practice safe sex and have been monogomous for about a decade, don't want children but no doctor will sterilize us. If I get pregnant, having done MY very best to avoid it, I don't think I should be punished.

There are many of us out there that practice safe sex and have been monogomous for about a decade, don't want children but no doctor will sterilize us.

It's called a vasectomy and a tubal ligation.
Last I heard, you can have it done just about anywhere-except a Catholic hospital perhaps.

Actually you can do it at home with an Ginzu knife, a mirror, some glue, thread and a bit of scotch. :)

And it's called sterilization if you are speaking about either sex interchangeably. Last I was told by 2 physicians in separate practice, the guidelines I posted above are SOP. Did you hear it from a more credible source perchance?

Oh my.

In spite of your disclaimer that you are not saying a child is a disease, you are equating becoming pregnant with a disease. Yes, both are risk. And yes, I believe that you should receive treatment for STDs. There are still consequences to suffer - you run the risk of sterliziation, having something that you can spread to others and never be rid of yourself, etc. I believe this also is a risk you accept when you choose to have sex, because NOTHING is 100% guaranteed.

I am saying that if you are willing to engage in the activity, you are willing to accept the consequences. I've been in 3 car accidents. (One was my fault for those wondering.) Do I stop drinving? No, but I understand that I may one day be in another accident and that is a risk I accept because I need to drive to work, school, etc.

I believe children are a gift. There are those that do not want to have children, and I understand that as well. I do not agree with doctors that refuse to perform a vasectomy or tubal ligation.
I believe there is a difference in performing one of these surgeries than in an abortion - they take place prior to conception and an abortion takes place after.

I am willing to suffer the consequences of unplanned pregnancy. Thats one of the things that abortion is, an option.

Credible source!?! HA! LOL!

Do you need your parents signature or what? Either you aren't looking, or you don't know where to look? Or did you just pose that as a possibility?

They are out there, but just as some physicians would NEVER perform an abortion, others would NEVER do sterilization techniques-especially if they feel the individual is too young to comprehend the consequences.

Picture it: A 25 year old woman. She does not, does NOT, DOES NOT want children! (did I say she didn't want to have children in any way shape or form?) :D She has known this for ages. She wants to get the baby shop closed. Many doctors will NOT do it because "she might change her mind". I personally have known friends who tried to get the factory closed but because they have not had kids and are under 40, no doctor will do it

MTSUgirl, I see your point. (I don't agree w/ your stance, btw.) Your driving analogy was excellent. However, there are many people on this board who either are, know, or made "condom babies" (children born despite use of contraceptives). If you read the little inserts in any box of birth control, they list the statistics for conception rates per year of average use. Even tubal ligation has a possibility, however slight, of conceiving. Should married (or unmarried, for that matter) people be forced to live in celibacy simply because they don't want kids? Newsflash: people don't have sex simply for procreation. There's a reason it feels good.
Yes children are a gift. But for some these gifts can pose serious emotional or physical problems. I don't advocate serial abortions, nor do I have much sympathy for people who take no precaution whatsoever (yet want no children). However, let individuals make those decisions. Otherwise we'll revert to the years of back alley abortions and tragic consequences.

Co-sign! I did the March for Women's Lives on Washington in 1992. Had I been living in or near DC in 2004, you bet your ass I woulda marched this past April.

I have never had an abortion myself (never been pregnant). I am an advocate of "use protection or keep your legs closed"

I have issues with late term abortions and dumbasses that use abortion for birth control. But it is a woman's body and a woman's choice and I will fight to the death for the right to choose. No way in hell I want to go back to the back alley procedures or only the rich being able to get them.

My favorite sticker: Against Abortion? Then Don't Have One!

On the same token, there should be more education about protecting one's self from STDs and making birth control more available! I mean how many people can afford $37 a month for birth control pills? (yup if you are not insured or don't know the connections to get BC at reduced prices or free, that is how much they cost).

It kills me that SOME (notice I mentioned SOME) pro life folx don't want birth control to be readily available....HELLO you can't have it both ways!

BTW-I am for capital punishment.

To make things weirder, I am married to a pro life atheist! :eek: