Birth Control doesn't stop pregnancy - pill swallowers do!

jakabedy(Alabama)February 10, 2012

After reading the "guns don't kill people" I thought of an interesting parallel.

Absent those rare situations where a house is struck by lightning, and a rifle resting in the corner of the room receives the electric charge and fires, and the bullet ricochets and strikes an unfortunate resident, I agree that guns very seldom kill on their own. But they sure do make one's work easier if the intent is to kill someone.

So consider this: it's not birth control pills that prohibit pregnancy -- it's the women who swallow the pills. So what's with all the uproar about these innocent pills? A birth control pill has never, as far as my research has shown, inhibited a pregnancy unaided by a human. So let's lay off 'em already.

Give pills a chance.

Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
labrea_gw

Shoot the women! It was ZaZa's solution for abortion in the BirdCage.

    Bookmark   February 10, 2012 at 5:41PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
althea_gw

I like the spirit of your comparison, but I don't think it works. Along with the situations you listed where guns go off by themselves, I've heard of a dog stepping on a hunters gun and injuring the hunter. I don't know if one has actually been killed.

Birth control pills, unless they are accidentally ingested, or force fed wouldn't be comparable.

How about blaming gun manufacturers and pharma companies? They are people too.

    Bookmark   February 10, 2012 at 6:15PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
althea_gw

Birth control pills aren't the only thing that prevents pregnancy, condoms do too.

One of the republicans at their CPAC meeting has this under control. He said: "We Will Fight the Condoms on the Beaches"

Here is a link that might be useful: 100 seconds at cpac

    Bookmark   February 10, 2012 at 6:38PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
labrea_gw

Ewww nothing worse than stepping on a condom on the beach....memories of Coney Island as a child ewwwww.

    Bookmark   February 11, 2012 at 5:06AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jodik_gw

So, what is the general point, here? That banning everything with even the slightest chance that something may go wrong will protect us all?

We should begin immediate campaigns against anything heavy, sharp, pointy... and let's not forget water, because drowning is a danger... cleaning supplies and other chemical mixtures because of fumes or burns... anything we could choke on, including food... where does it end?

We can't legislate against stupidity and lack of common sense used by persons who simply don't think before acting.

We can't lock every human being in a soft cage with no edges or corners, and deprive people of living because of a long list of "what ifs". It's not logical.

Some accidents are bound to happen, which is why we call them accidents in the first place. But when inanimate objects are used as directed, with a little care and forethought... what's the problem?

    Bookmark   February 11, 2012 at 6:14AM
Sign Up to comment
More Discussions
One last issue for me with new format
How do I turn off the "say thank you" at...
duluthinbloomz4
GOP flawed charge that Obama's immigration policy is unconstitutional
GOP leaders have been gloating that the courts agree...
dublinbay z6 (KS)
The dress
Okay, so the Department of Homeland Security will close...
Pidge
Indecent Exposure
Rep. David Moore on Tuesday introduced House Bill 365...
labrea_gw
France warns Russia
France Warns Russia And Its Allies Not To Advance On...
momj47
People viewed this after searching for:
© 2015 Houzz Inc. Houzz® The new way to design your home™