So now we can murder babies easier?

I must say I totally agree with Sen. Allison, and totally disagree with the comment by DLC. Women should have the right to make choices about their own bodies and whether or not they want to be pregnant. I find the arguments about pregnancy being "natural" spurious and arguments about the sanctity of life to be ludicrous.

Too much of the discussion is ideological. The decisions about termination of a pregnancy should be made exclusively by those most closely involved.

As for questioning pregnancy being "natural", I mean that the body has to work against itself to stop the rejection of something that does not have the same DNA. That is a particular stress on the body that can result in the forms of sickness, up to and including fatal illness, that can accompany pregnancy.

Let the woman, and her closest medical advisors decide.

Keep the religious right and the ideologues out of trying to run other people's lives.

2 Articles discussing access to a drug for abortion. Great, good lets discuss
But wait we have the already “Pro-choice” accusing “Right to Lifers” of quashing women right to control their body, Right to life saying its murder etc etc etc.

I am going to start another lobby group called the “Take Educated responsibility”. I will be using the oft-neglected philosophy of you take responsibility for your actions.
What is behind this new lobby group…….

Well I am all for giving access to best medical care to women who are pregnant and want an abortion. Especially if the pregnancy is a result of rape, incest, there is extreme danger to the woman and all necessary precautions were taken but still failed to stop the pregnancy.

However a person who has a one night stand and falls pregnant after using NO contraception. The pro choice started at deciding to have sex. Should we “condemn” (could not think of another word) the woman to an unwanted pregnancy. Probably not, but what a shame. The emotional and physical impact will be there.

What about pushing contraceptive education even harder. When was the last article discussing increased and better education. From what I saw out of the thousands of abortions each year only a small proportion (1%) is a result of incest rape etc. The rest are in what I would see as pro-choice category. That is shocking if right? The pill is known to be NOT 100% effective. Do people know that? Shouldn’t the pill and condom be used at the same time. Other options? Stopping unwanted pregnancy first and foremost is a win-win for the Pro choice and Pro Life.

So Senator Lyn Allison, Democrat spokesperson on health and incoming Democrat Leader you can continue pushing for this drug but unless you start discussing another issue it just shows your shallow thinking and looking for political point scoring”.

For the sake of clarity, I would like point out a discrepancy between Lyn Allison’s article on RU486 and my own.

Lyn Allison stated that 99 percent of women have no adverse reaction to this drug. I claimed US trials showed 99 percent did have an adverse reaction.

I invite readers to have a look at the FDA website on RU486 http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/infopage/mifepristone/mifepristone_historical.htm

If you click on the “Mifepristone Label” pdf and look through the document you’ll read: “Nearly all the women who receive Mifeprex and misoprostol will report adverse reactions, and many can expect to report more than one such reaction” (p11)

Furthermore, the FDA’s Medical Officer’s Review on this drug states that 99 percent had an adverse reaction. The reference for this is:

FDA “Medical Officer’s Review of Amendments 024 and 033: Final Reports for the US Clinical Trials Inducing Abortion up to 63 days Gestational Age and Complete Responses Regarding Distribution System and Phase 4 Commitments” Appendix A at 11.

jimoctec: I am in fact an atheist, but I hold human life in the highest regard. I don’t care about arguments saying that pregnancy is natural; such things do not concern me.

What does concern me is that we as a society allow humans to kill other humans for the horrid crime of existing. As far as I am concerned, the act of voluntary conception is an implied contract that you will allow the baby to occupy a place in your womb until it has reached its full term. After that point, you can give the baby up for adoption for all I care.

i am assuming you are a man DLC, because you show absolutely no understanding of what it is to be pregnant. Those nine months produce enormous and often irreversible changes to a woman's body, and in many cases adoption can be more traumatic than abortion. By saying a woman is obliged to carry a foetus to term makes her a prisoner in her own body. And is it just the woman who is under this 'contractual obligation' towards the foetus, or should the man also be forced to support the woman while she is pregnant and unable to work? Because it would be patently unfair to burden only one of the people who participated in the 'voluntary conception'.

I am pro-choice, but i also agree with many that the current level of abortion is too high, and like Big Fish i think pro-choice and anti-choice people should have common ground in desiring a decrease in unwanted pregnancies. I think the answer is in education and the promotion of contraception- we should try and emulate the policies of the scandinavian countries who have low levels of teenage pregnancies and abortions. But i would always advocate that women deserve a choice because of things such as contraception failure, and seeing as abortion is legal in this country, it makes no sense to have RU486 banned if the medical community believes it to be safe.