Hibblette, on Jun 28 2008, 03:22 AM, said:
Oh my! that emphasis just means so much! Good grief. You've been dismissive all through this thread.
, as I've already pointed out, nobody has given me a single example of being dismissive. You've even brought things down a level by trying to attack me on word definitions, and failed. Add to this the fact that you, yourself have clearly
been dismissive and it just makes your posts look childish.
A pharmacist goes through the schooling he/she goes through for the people. It is not about the money.
Guess again. Pharmacists make over $60,000 a year; many job listings that you'll find put it in the $80,000 and above range. Why do you think my friend became a pharmacist?
Or a woman says I am tired of feeling like my life's blood is draining out of me everytime I have my menstrual cycle or it doesn't come in a regular way so that I can live a normal life in the day to day working world that we live in today.
Repeating something over and over doesn't make it true. Why do you keep on making the argument that 5% of the women need when we're talking about 95% of the women who take the Pill who are saying nothing more than "I don't want to have babies". And why can't
someone own a pharmacy and sell what they want and not sell what they don't want. I'm sorry, but you still have not supported your thesis.
Again-I say study up on the pill it does not rewrite anything. It doesn't change anything.
Does it stop a woman's "life's blood is draining out of me everytime [she has her] menstrual cycle or it doesn't come in a regular way so that [she] can live a normal life in the day to day working world that we live in today"? It does
? It changes
her menstrual cycle?
And I ask again - why do you insist on playing these word games? That fact that you're wrong about a "change" has nothing to do with the argument
and only makes your statements foolish, so why do you continue?
You do not even understand what the process is.
I will thank you to not make false statements about what I do and don't understand.
All you can do is argue about how someone wants to buy a pinto in a pharmacy.
I hate to break this to you, but most people understood the concept that I was bringing in my example.
If you really wanted to argue about the pill in the fashion of what it is doing then you would be coming back and talking about how there is chances of breast cancer or other type risk.
No; I wouldn't, because that has nothing to do
with the reason that the owners of the pharmacies don't want to stock the Pill! They're not refusing to stock it because of health concerns; they're refusing to stock it because it goes against their beliefs! Unlike other people in this thread, I'm not going to try to make strawman arguments or ad hominem attacks to try to justify a position.
I never took the pill because I didn't want to run those risk. But that doesn't mean I fault other women for using the pill if they didn't have a problem with that.
And these pharmacy owners aren't faulting women; they're simply not being part of a process in which they do not believe.
I am a woman and I know that is nothing to be dismissive about.
You keep using that word as if I actually was dismissive. Why not actually keep to the topic?
These people are silly about the whole thing. No where does their God which by the way seems to be the same God that I whole heartedly believe in says that we are suppose to have children till we can't feed them.
OK, where do I begin on this? Saying that people are silly because they follow a different religion than you is dismissive and, to put it mildly, ignorant. Giving an argument that they're treating this as if "we are suppose(d) to have children till we can't feed them" is a strawman argument - it suggests that we're exactly one baby away from having so many children that we can't feed them and that everyone using contraception is trying to prevent that last baby.
The bible has many
instances where God indicates that He does not condone contraception
Sodom and Gamorah
Genesis 28:3 "And God Almighty bless thee and make thee fruitful and multiply thee that thou mayest be a multitude of people"
Gen 38:8-10 "Then Judah said to Onan, ‘Go in to your brother’s wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her; raise up offspring for your brother.’ 9But since Onan knew that the offspring would not be his, he spilled his semen on the ground whenever he went in to his brother’s wife, so that he would not give offspring to his brother. 10What he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also."
1 Chronicles 25:5 "All these were the sons of Heman (E)the king's seer to exalt him according to the words of God, for God gave fourteen sons and three daughters to Heman."
Hosea 9:1 "Do not rejoice, O Israel; do not be jubilant like the other nations. For you have been unfaithful to your God; you love the wages of a prostitute at every threshing floor."
Hosea 9:11 "Ephraim's glory will fly away like a bird— no birth, no pregnancy, no conception.
We are suppose to use our brains and realize there is a time to stop having the children and if our brains can come up with ways to do it other then abstencia (which actually goes against nature) then I say God meant for it to happen.
Again, where to start? "God meant for it to happen"?! Are you speaking for God now? Can you show me where in the bible it says something about God striking down one man for spilling his seed, but sees another man doing the same thing and saying "Oh; it's OK; he and his wife are too old to have children, but I still want them to get it on"?
I'm sorry, but your post has got to be the biggest rationalization I've ever heard. And I've heard a lot of rationalizations.