CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
March 22, 2014 02:06 PM UTC
5 Comments
It is important not to confuse Plan B with the aborton pill: Here is the link to one website that explains the difference:
http://www.webmd.com/women/guide/plan-b
How Emergency Contraception Works
How are emergency contraceptive pills different from the abortion pill (Mifeprex, also referred to as RU-486)?
The abortion pill, also known as mifepristone or RU-486 ("medical abortion" or "medication abortion"), is a different drug from ella, Plan B One-Step, Next Choice One Dose, My Way and Levonorgestrel Tablets, which are approved for sale as emergency contraception in the United States. Emergency contraceptive pills (also called “morning after pills" or "day after pills") prevent pregnancy primarily, or perhaps exclusively, by delaying or inhibiting ovulation; they do not cause an abortion. For more about how emergency contraceptive pills work, read this comprehensive academic review of emergency contraception.
Good info, dwyer. I was a little unclear on some of that myself. I didn't know, for example, that the "Plan B" or morning-after pills do not work if one is already pregnant.
All of this came along long after my childbearing days were over, but I deal with many young women daily, and it's good to have accurate information.
I would bet real money that Mr. Aricayos doesn't know the biology, either. And probably would crusade against Plan B even if it prevents, but doesn't interfere with a fertilized egg. Good job, DanleySteel.
Hey Dwyer, thanks for the comment re: Plan B versus medical abortion. There are important distinctions between the two, which I'd completely forgotten about, and your links were thorough and helpful. What's most damning to me is that Mr. Aricayos is hiding his real views. Wolves I can deal with–that's democracy–but it's wolves in sheep's clothing that I can stand.
Anyway, it's completely clear that Mr. Aricayos has implied he would support a 4-year prison sentence for a Dr. who proscribed RU-486 to end a pregnancy, but has since begun to realize maybe he doesn't want people to know that. It's a good bit less clear where he is on Plan B, and given his newfound shyness, we may never know.
However, if you read the relevant text of HB 1133, I think you'll agree that the bill appears to establish a 4-year prison sentence at least in theory for prescribing, providing, etc., anything that prevents the implantation of a fertilized egg, which includes Plan B. My reasoning is that the bill defines a "unborn human being" or "unborn child" to begin existing at fertilization and defines "fertilization" as occuring when sperm meets egg. Putting these definitions together, the bill outlaws anything that interferes with a post-implantation pregnancy, or with a fertilized egg that has not implanted. Your own webmd link notes that Plan B can prevent implantation of a fertilized egg. So, since Plan B can prevent implantation of a fertilized egg, it seems to me that the law creates a 4-year sentence for Plan B also.
Maybe I'm misreading the bill, which also has a "specific intent" requirement that I'm not sure what to make of. And, it's hardly clear that Mr. Aricayos was thinking about Plan B versus RU-486 when he gushed about HB 1133, so even if my read of the bill is right, it's probably not fair to assume Mr. Aricayos had the same read of the bill that I do.
What really gets me is when politicians lie to cover up extreme things they actually want to do when they get elected. Definitely Mr. Aricayos appears to be doing that.
@DanleySteel
You are absolutely right that there may be the possibilty that Plan B could prevent implementation. I don' t know if there is medical consensus about that. I believe that now, the medical definition of pregnancy may be that is begins at implementation and not fertilization.
My main reason for posting the distinction was to clarify the role of Plan B. I would hate for someone young or relatively new or re-entering the "dating game" to conclude that if one had a positive pregnancy test, then Plan B could be purchased to eliminate the pregnancy. That could not happen, and could cause real grief.
I know that this issue is really political in terms of how Mr. Aricayos is presenting himself. I certainly don't support him. But, I did think that clarification was necessary.
Thanks all for the discussion.