The same problem exists if you are trying to justify abortion on the grounds of motive though.

If someone claims to believe that abortion is simply a matter of personal choice, and then thinks that it is not okay to choose abortion under certain circumstances, then they don’t actually believe that abortion should be a matter of personal autonomy – instead they think that it should only be available in certain situations.

But, here comes the problem, the only real reason that you could think that abortion should be limited to only certain motivations is if you instinctively know that abortion is actually wrong, but you are willing to accept recourse to that wrong under certain situations.

I mean, if it’s okay for a 17 year old teen to have an abortion, then why is it wrong for a 28 year old married women to have an abortion?

Or if it is okay for a poor person to have an abortion, then why is it wrong for a rich person to have one?

Etc, etc

People could potentially believe that it is right in some situation and not others. Therefore the high number of abortions might be seen as an indicator that women are having abortions for the wrong reasons. With those sort of beliefs it isn’t such an incongruous position. You’d need to go right back to explaining why it is a black and white situation to show the errors in thinking.

As for contraceptives causing strokes, in the 1970s I was told by an aunt, who was a retired hospital matron, that when women died from a blood clot caused by oral contraceptives it was attributed to another cause when documented.

Hi mzhuz,

It isn’t actually that simple at all.

Firstly, the Gardasil vaccine is not a well tested product, and there is no long term data about its safety or efficacy.

In fact, some research is now suggesting that immunity actually wanes quite early after vaccination, and that a booster shot may actually be required.

Secondly, Gardasil is associated with a higher rate of adverse effects than other vaccines are.

Thirdly, Gardasil does NOT protect against all cervical cancer, instead it is designed to protect against the two strands of HPV which cause 70% of cervical cancer, but this still leaves a woman open to the other strands which cause 30% of cervical cancers.

I recommend that you check out the following Q&A guide to Gardasil:
http://www.fli.org.nz/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=9c3qirx1EMU%3d&tabid=2163&language=en-US

Just so no one thinks I was a wild child and it caught up with me, I was raised in the church, “wait till your old enough to participate in adult activities”, and was spoken to at the age of 14 about sex. I did wait until I was 19, and contracted HPV from my first partner. 2 years later, I was diagnosed with cervical cancer. Had this vaccination been around when I was a preteen, it could have saved my health, my life, and my future. Now, as an advocate for the education of HPV and cervical cancer, I speak with parents all the time who tell me that while they’d like to think they were open with their children about sex and shared with them the necessity of being responsible and waiting (waiting doesn’t stop this disease), they hadn’t done it, or hadn’t gotten their point across.

In this day, every child, regardless of their family or upbringing, feels a need to be loved and receive more attention. They get that through friends, boyfriends, and “teen love.” I have 3 siblings in their early teen years and I hear it from them all the time.

The ONLY way to protect your children, and potential future grandchildren, is to vaccinate your kids. Are the minute side affects that much more important to protect your children from than SAVING THEIR LIVES?? If you don’t want to protect your children, you shouldn’t have been parents.