Liberal Forum

Misty » 30 Oct 2014 7:51 pm » wrote:Ask any Republican about climate change, and their standard talking point is, "I am not a scientist."
But that doesn't seem to stop them when it comes to being experts on Ebola and Birth Control.

In a debate for the governor's race in Colorado, Republican candidate Bob Beauprez referred to the IUD as an 'abortifacient.'
Dr. Stephanie Teal, an OB/GYN from the University of Colorado Hospital in Aurora was asked if IUDs can be accurately characterized in this way.
Teal's unambiguous answer was NO. She added that there's no disagreement about this distinction in the medical community and suggests that the only dispute comes from politicians who thrive on what she politely called "differences."

After the debate, Beauprez told The Denver Post: "Do you understand how IUDs work? The egg is fertilized and never allowed to impact. That's why people who consider that life begins at conception believe (IUDs) are an abortifacient."

Impact? ROFL I think the word he was looking for was implant, but even then he would be wrong.
That is not how the IUD works.

There are two types of IUDs, the copper and the hormonal known as the Mirena.
Both types of IUDs work primarily by preventing sperm from fertilizing an egg.
The copper IUD releases copper into the uterus, which works as a spermicide.
The Mirena releases a form of the hormone (progestin) into the uterus.
Hormonal IUDs may prevent the egg from leaving the ovary. Pregnancy cannot happen if there is no egg to join with sperm.
Progestin also prevents pregnancy by thickening a woman's cervical mucus. The mucus blocks sperm and keeps it from joining with an egg.

So they do not prevent a fertilized egg from 'impacting' in the uterus.
The only thing they 'impact' is the sperm by preventing it from fertilizing an ovum.
These far right pinheads would have you believe that any woman who uses the IUD is a walking abortion clinic having abortions all the
time.