On Jul 2, 2014, at 9:24 AM, Michael Peabody peabody...@gmail.com wrote:
(and indeed there's no
scientific consensus as to whether the contraception causes abortion)
Problem with this sentence on two levels: First, contraception is a pretty
broad term, and includes things like abstinence,
Thanks Jean - I was trying to avoid getting into a discussion as to
the particulars of the contraception (which is the vehicle for this
particular case) by relying on Justice Alito's statement on page 9,
footnote 7, which dismissed the dispute over what the drugs actually
do (distinguishing
We’re dealing with some pretty icky stuff, here; zygotes, embryos, fetuses,
menstruation, uterine tissues…but if decisions that affect those icky things
are made, we really should be willing to speak about them.
Now what gets me is there’s an exemption for blood transfusions and
, a form of
contraception that prevents implantation is a problem.
Tessa
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Jean Dudley
Sent: Wednesday, July 2, 2014 12:43 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: How Far Does Hobby
On Jul 2, 2014, at 10:33 AM, Tessa Dysart tdys...@regent.edu wrote:
But IUDs do change the uterine lining,
http://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/intrauterine-device-iud-for-birth-control,
raising the question for some people as to whether they can act to prevent
implantation, assuming
