sell morning-after pill like a condom

Wolverine · Post by **Wolverine** » Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:29 pm

By the end of August, the FDA will decide whether women can buy the morning-after pill without a prescription. That should be allowed.

The pill should be as easy to purchase as condoms, which, likewise, are pregnancy prevention tools and are readily available on drug-store shelves.

The FDA has the power to put age restrictions on the pill, which would force stores to "card" buyers or keep the drug behind the counter. Such restrictions might have the effect of discouraging stores from even carrying the pill, thus limiting access.

That makes no sense when the goal of all Americans should be to prevent unwanted pregnancies- which is what the Morning-After pill does. Yet people continue to confuse it with the abortion pill, RU-486. That confusion has created a controversy over a birth-control option that shouldn't be controversial.

The mornin-after pill is essentially a birth-control pill with a higher dose of estrogen and progestin or just progestin. The surge in hormone levels delays and egg's release and may block a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. If an egg is already implanted, the pill will not terminate the pregnancy. That is what RU-486 does.

The morning-after pill prevents pregnancy, and it's safe, according to FDA scientists. Therefore, it should be freely available.

But I'm just a dumb Iowa Farmkid... what do I know.

nvalleyvee · Post by **nvalleyvee** » Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:38 pm

I am personally against abortion but I do not in any way, shape or form think I can decide what is right for another woman or a couple. I think, in my heart, that not having to go through an act of abortion by being able to get a morning after pill has to be a kinder and far more gentle way of assuring birth control for the people concerned. It acts as birth control - not abortion - and should be treated as such.

Wolverine · Post by **Wolverine** » Mon Aug 15, 2005 6:05 pm

nvalleyvee wrote: I am personally against abortion but I do not in any way, shape or form think I can decide what is right for another woman or a couple. I think, in my heart, that not having to go through an act of abortion by being able to get a morning after pill has to be a kinder and far more gentle way of assuring birth control for the people concerned. It acts as birth control - not abortion - and should be treated as such.

exactly.

Nuthrday · Post by **Nuthrday** » Mon Aug 15, 2005 8:57 pm

Americans get choices on a lotta lotta other stuff. Birth control and/or abortion seems to be just another choice among the millions, tho I surely do NOT treat the issue lightly!

Wolverine, where ya been buddy?

Nuthrday · Post by **Nuthrday** » Mon Aug 15, 2005 8:59 pm

Americans get choices on a lotta-lotta other stuff. Birth control and/or abortion seems to be just another choice among the millions, tho I surely do NOT treat the issues lightly! Morning after pill? I'll go for that as long as people use it correctly...

Wolverine, where ya been buddy?

Nuthrday · Post by **Nuthrday** » Mon Aug 15, 2005 9:00 pm

well, crud!!! Never mind...ha...

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 4:05 am

I was sold on your arguement until you revealed you're an Iowa farm boy.

Seriously, though, too many people think it is the government's job to decide what we should do, and then legislate it as what we must (or must not) do. That job belongs to the church, not the government.

What I think of this pill is irrelevant. What anyone else thinks of this pill should be irrelevant. It is safe. It does not cause the user to harm others. Therefore, it should be allowed.

abbey · Post by **abbey** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 5:35 am

If it saves unwanted pregnancy's the FDA surely has an obligation to allow it.

Here in Britain you can buy it over the counter without a prescription already.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 5:41 am

abbey wrote: If it saves unwanted pregnancy's the FDA surely has an obligation to allow it.

Here in Britain you can buy it over the counter without a prescription already.
Truth is not very relevant in cases like these, when it comes to politicians. 1st thought: What can I say about it to get more votes?

2nd thought: What will Joe Voter think of me if I support/reject this?

Truth, research, benefit, ... all these receive consideration only as a coincidence of the two main thoughts.

minks · Post by **minks** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 10:59 am

Wolverine wrote: By the end of August, the FDA will decide whether women can buy the morning-after pill without a prescription. That should be allowed.

The pill should be as easy to purchase as condoms, which, likewise, are pregnancy prevention tools and are readily available on drug-store shelves.

The FDA has the power to put age restrictions on the pill, which would force stores to "card" buyers or keep the drug behind the counter. Such restrictions might have the effect of discouraging stores from even carrying the pill, thus limiting access.

That makes no sense when the goal of all Americans should be to prevent unwanted pregnancies- which is what the Morning-After pill does. Yet people continue to confuse it with the abortion pill, RU-486. That confusion has created a controversy over a birth-control option that shouldn't be controversial.

The mornin-after pill is essentially a birth-control pill with a higher dose of estrogen and progestin or just progestin. The surge in hormone levels delays and egg's release and may block a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. If an egg is already implanted, the pill will not terminate the pregnancy. That is what RU-486 does.

The morning-after pill prevents pregnancy, and it's safe, according to FDA scientists. Therefore, it should be freely available.

But I'm just a dumb Iowa Farmkid... what do I know.

Nope I am with ya on this one, As a mother of 2 teen girls, this pill should be readily available out there especially if it is proven successful, and reasonably harmless. I am all pro choice and for my girls It is MY choice ahahahahahaha

Tooo many unwanted pregnancies in this world and solutions should be there for everyone.

Horrah now another 10 years till it is approved in Canada bah....

actionfigurestepho · Post by **actionfigurestepho** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 11:51 am

We had a lot of propeganda out in my area against the morning after pill because some Catholic group had it confused with the abortion pill. I fear that if it even makes it to the pharmacy we're going to have boycotts and picketing because people can be so ignorant! That being said, I'm absolutely in favor of it being made available. We have too many babies being born to unprepared mothers in my part of the PJs.

minks · Post by **minks** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 1:11 pm

actionfigurestepho wrote: We had a lot of propeganda out in my area against the morning after pill because some Catholic group had it confused with the abortion pill. I fear that if it even makes it to the pharmacy we're going to have boycotts and picketing because people can be so ignorant! That being said, I'm absolutely in favor of it being made available. We have too many babies being born to unprepared mothers in my part of the PJs.

Pity we try and educate the young men and women / children but this seems to be failing, and what is real frightening is they seem to see no wrong in teen pregnancies and babies are seen as oh so cute. UGH!! So the easiest way is to supply them with drugs, seems so sad.

Jives · Post by **Jives** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 1:32 pm

As I sit here reading this...I'm registering a 13-year old girl who has a 1 year old child. She came to me last year, but was too young to attend the Academy. I remember her because her little skinny body (still very much that of a child's) looked like a beach ball attached to a popsicle stick. The forlorn look in her eyes was haunting and spoke to me these words nonverbally:

"I know that my life will never be the same again, my childhood's gone and I have to face raising a child as a young teenager. Can you help me get the education I need to support myself and my baby?"

How much better would her life be if this pill had been available? Would this encourage kids like her to be more promiscuous? I don't honestly know. There's also the chance that she will pull herself up by her bootstraps, educate herself, and end up with a wonderful life and a wonderful family.

But the odds are stacked against it.

I'd have to say, I'm for this pill. (Sigh) And I wish it werren't even necessary to invent such a thing.

minks · Post by **minks** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 1:38 pm

Jives wrote: As I sit here reading this...I'm registering a 13-year old girl who has a 1 year old child. She came to me last year, but was too young to attend the Academy. I remember her because her little skinny body (still very much that of a child's) looked like a beach ball attached to a popsicle stick. The forlorn look in her eyes was haunting and spoke to me these words nonverbally:

"I know that my life will never be the same again, my childhood's gone and I have to face raising a child as a young teenager. Can you help me get the education I need to support myself and my baby?"

How much better would her life be if this pill had been available? Would this encourage kids like her to be more promiscuous? I don't honestly know. There's also the chance that she will pull herself up by her bootstraps, educate herself, and end up with a wonderful life and a wonderful family.

But the odds are stacked against it.

I'd have to say, I'm for this pill. (Sigh) And I wish it werren't even necessary to invent such a thing.

Oh Jives that is heartbreaking isn't it. You have to wonder too, if her parents were the rigid sort who said NO PILL FOR YOU just don't have sex. Gosh I think I would like to yell at parents, this is the 21 century we can NOT control our children 24 7 or other's children, so let's help these girls out let's have that pill out there and let's be open and honest with our kids, it isn't about NOT having sex, the reality is about NOT having babies so young.

Ohhhh my heart goes out to that young woman and she is very right in her comments what a sad sad shame.

Jives · Post by **Jives** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 2:00 pm

minks wrote: Oh Jives that is heartbreaking isn't it.

Like you can't believe. I keep a positive attitude, and I tell them they will be OK, that I'll bring them up to speed, but even though I'm a wizard at teaching math, I can't solve their emotional and financial problems for them. And those problems are devastating.

it isn't about NOT having sex, the reality is about NOT having babies so young.

I couldn't have said it better myself. Things have changed, and although Anastrophe will disagree with me, I blame Hollywood and the commercialization of sex. These kids are exposed to it almost on a 24 hour basis.

When I was young, it wasn't on TV, it wasn't in movies (other than a little kissing) and the only sexy thing I saw as a young man were some soft-focus shots in Playboy. Parents had a different attitude, too. You were well aware of the boundries of acceptable behavior, and sex as a teen was not it.

minks · Post by **minks** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 2:15 pm

Jives wrote: Like you can't believe. I keep a positive attitude, and I tell them they will be OK, that I'll bring them up to speed, but even though I'm a wizard at teaching math, I can't solve their emotional and financial problems for them. And those problems are devastating.

I couldn't have said it better myself. Things have changed, and although Anastrophe will disagree with me, I blame Hollywood and the commercialization of sex. These kids are exposed to it almost on a 24 hour basis.

When I was young, it wasn't on TV, it wasn't in movies (other than a little kissing) and the only sexy thing I saw as a young man were some soft-focus shots in Playboy. Parents had a different attitude, too. You were well aware of the boundries of acceptable behavior, and sex as a teen was not it.

Holywood and the media both. The glorification of something that can be terribly wrong. Seems it is ok to splatter teen pregnancy all over the Theaters, Daily gossip shows and Gossip paper but who is taking the time to tell these kids about the change in their futures, the struggles they WILL face, the financial troubles, the social struggles, the list is endless. Sure all the power to those who do make it and do manage, but........ they are far and few between. Ohhhh I am going to cut and paste this entire thread in email to my oldest daughter. And how just how do they think they can get a good education, good job and support a child OMG OMG I get so worked up over this, daycare alone is near $1000/mo alone, Tell me what 13 year old makes that in a month. Never mind food, diapers, medical, clothing, shoes, toys, car seats, strollers it goes on and on and on,,,,, not to mention how mature are you as a teen to raise a baby!!!!

Ok getting off my soap box now.

abbey · Post by **abbey** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 2:26 pm

When i first saw this thread i had to Google as i did'nt know much about the pill, (never needed anything like this, as i dont have the tackle).

One of the reports i read said that 5 deaths had been attributed to the morning after pill in the States.

I would imagine that certain groups that are against the pill will use this as ammunition for their argument against the bill

minks · Post by **minks** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 2:36 pm

abbey wrote: When i first saw this thread i had to Google as i did'nt know much about the pill, (never needed anything like this, as i dont have the tackle).

One of the reports i read said that 5 deaths had been attributed to the morning after pill in the States.

I would imagine that certain groups that are against the pill will use this as ammunition for their argument against the bill

As with all things, there seems to always be a risk, and people just feed off that. I have to wonder if the deaths happened to those with additional medical problems did it say. I am not saying that in an unemotional way and those deaths are insignificant, but.... if we were to poo poo everything that was possibly tied to "deaths" we would not drive because cars kill, we would not eat as food poses possible choking hazzards etc. I just wonder how in depth those stats are. Pity mind you that folks have to die when things are being developed to help us out.

buttercup · Post by **buttercup** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 3:39 pm

hmmmmm contriversial, children bringing up children

as abbey says its already available in uk, does this make it too easy for them, possibly yes, however im more concerned with the diseases that can be passed on through unprotected sex as a child concieved in any manner should be a gift, if not to the parents, to the adoptive parents

nvalleyvee · Post by **nvalleyvee** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 4:01 pm

The day my daughter asked me "Hey Mom doesn't my butt look cute in these jeans" I took her to my gynecologist for the first time. I made the appointment, paid the bill and left the two of them to talk. It wasn't that my daughter was uninformed about sex or baby making as we had many talks about it. I was afraid she would become sexually active and not tell me and get pregnant. I wanted her to have the privacy that goes on between doc and patient without MOM. 2 years later (at 16) she told me she was in love with her boyfriend and they were active (TMI - that boy had "taken" my baby). BTW - they are married now. She never got pregnant. She did tell me when she was having "woman" problems or needed advise. She told just a few weeks ago that taking her to the doctor and NOT being in the room for their discussions really helped her to be more proactive in not not having sex sooner.

minks · Post by **minks** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 4:41 pm

nvalleyvee wrote: The day my daughter asked me "Hey Mom doesn't my butt look cute in these jeans" I took her to my gynecologist for the first time. I made the appointment, paid the bill and left the two of them to talk. It wasn't that my daughter was uninformed about sex or baby making as we had many talks about it. I was afraid she would become sexually active and not tell me and get pregnant. I wanted her to have the privacy that goes on between doc and patient without MOM. 2 years later (at 16) she told me she was in love with her boyfriend and they were active (TMI - that boy had "taken" my baby). BTW - they are married now. She never got pregnant. She did tell me when she was having "woman" problems or needed advise. She told just a few weeks ago that taking her to the doctor and NOT being in the room for their discussions really helped her to be more proactive in not not having sex sooner.

yup done similar with my oldest one.

Wolverine · Post by **Wolverine** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 6:04 pm

Jives wrote:

...I'd have to say, I'm for this pill. (Sigh) And I wish it werren't even necessary to invent such a thing.

you are absolutely right, Jives. it is sad that its necessary.

and yes, this could make it even easier for people, not just teens, to have sex. and if they're thinking that they can just get a pill afterwards:

"what's the point of wearing a condom, baby?"

so following that pseudo-logic, we might be looking at an outbreak of STDs in young people. even worse than it is now.

nvalleyvee · Post by **nvalleyvee** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 6:18 pm

Ok - I have to say that AIDS among the US young people is not accelerating. As parents we have to make some very difficult decisions on how to educate our CHILDREN. WE have to give them a way to make responsible decisions since talking to parents has not seemed to change over the years. I think oncew you open up communication and don't denigrate but allow some privacy - our kids tend to think "ok Mom or Dad can accept this".

Wolverine · Post by **Wolverine** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 6:30 pm

nvalleyvee wrote: Ok - I have to say that AIDS among the US young people is not accelerating. As parents we have to make some very difficult decisions on how to educate our CHILDREN. WE have to give them a way to make responsible decisions since talking to parents has not seemed to change over the years. I think oncew you open up communication and don't denigrate but allow some privacy - our kids tend to think "ok Mom or Dad can accept this".

well i'm not talking just AIDS. i'm thinking Clamydia, Herpes, Gonnorhea, genital warts and so on.

from what i have seen and conversations i have listened to, pregnancy seems to be the biggest scare to kids. not the spread of STDs.

so it is possible that teens won't use condoms as often or with as much regularity as they "are" now.

nvalleyvee · Post by **nvalleyvee** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 6:40 pm

Wolverine wrote: well i'm not talking just AIDS. i'm thinking Clamydia, Herpes, Gonnorhea, genital warts and so on.

from what i have seen and conversations i have listened to, pregnancy seems to be the biggest scare to kids. not the spread of STDs.

so it is possible that teens won't use condoms as often or with as much regularity as they "are" now.

STD's a major problem - it happened when my daughter and her boyfriend split up for a short time and she decided to try other guys. My daughter didn't have enough sense God gave a **** ant to protect herself. My daughter got an STD that led to a pre-curser of cervical cancer. She ended up having to have her cervical cells "frozen" in the docs office. I was happy she learned from the experience and it was very scary when it happened. I don't think our children think about the other bad STD's except for AIDS. That was my point.

Wolverine · Post by **Wolverine** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 6:43 pm

nvalleyvee wrote: STD's a major problem - it happened when my daughter and her boyfriend split up for a short time and she decided to try other guys. My daughter didn't have enough sense God gave a **** ant to protect herself. My daughter got an STD that led to a pre-curser of cervical cancer. She ended up having to have her cervical cells "frozen" in the docs office. I was happy she learned from the experience and it was very scary when it happened. I don't think our children think about the other bad STD's except for AIDS. That was my point.
right. mine too. Pregnancy and AIDS, pregnancy and AIDS. There are more scary things than just those two.

i think we are on the same page nvalley

nvalleyvee · Post by **nvalleyvee** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 6:52 pm

Condoms, after morning pill, birth control, lets get these kids what they need.

:-4

Wolverine · Post by **Wolverine** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 6:56 pm

nvalleyvee wrote: Condoms, after morning pill, birth control, lets get these kids what they need.

:-4
which would be...?

more education? i think we need more candid conversations with our kids.

Jives and I went rounds about education.

the more someone knows about a subject and the better they can relate to it, the more likely they are to remember it and take it to heart.

did that come out right?

nvalleyvee · Post by **nvalleyvee** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 7:05 pm

My daughter knew EVERYTHING. It was uncomfortable for me but she never had a problem. She talked all the time........ LORD PROTECT ME FROM TOOO MUCH INFORMATION :-6 . It's very difficult when your child feels what we felt. Now let me ask you Wolf - when was the first time you got yourself off.............that is my point.

Wolverine · Post by **Wolverine** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 7:16 pm

nvalleyvee wrote: My daughter knew EVERYTHING. It was uncomfortable for me but she never had a problem. She talked all the time........ LORD PROTECT ME FROM TOOO MUCH INFORMATION :-6 . It's very difficult when your child feels what we felt. Now let me ask you Wolf - when was the first time you got yourself off.............that is my point.
ahh and the point emerges. sorry i was lost for a moment.

i understand now. sorry for the confusion Nvalley

nvalleyvee · Post by **nvalleyvee** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 7:29 pm

No bad..... really like your thoughts on the subject

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Aug 17, 2005 4:06 am

Beware the law of unentended consequences:

Telling them nothing and demanding abstinance risks them getting their information elsewhere - probably inaccurate or incomplete - and not speaking up when they have questions or get in trouble. They may not use condoms & get pregnant and/or diseased. They may try to hide a pregnancy and not get prenatal care, may turn to drugs to deal with the issue rather than turning to you, I could go on.

Giving them condoms risks them seeing that as permission to be sexually active.

Giving them RU486 risks them seeing that as permision to be sexually active. They may also get the idea that if they forget to take the pill in time, abortion is a viable alternative. They may think that the pill is all they need and not use other protection, such as condoms. They could get the idea that drugs are the solution to serious problems and experiment with other drugs.

Educating them and telling them everything about pleasures, dangers, and alternatives risks them being desensitized about sex. It may lose the emotional quotient for them and become simply a physical act. They may become even more promiscuous than they might have otherwise.

Even getting them jobs in clinics to treat STDs and see all the ugly swelling, sore, and pus risks some to think that they can take sexual risks because there is treatment readily available.

Life's hard. I don't envy parents. Every possible solution risks a negative outcome, but doing nothing may be the worst alternative.

minks · Post by **minks** » Wed Aug 17, 2005 8:32 am

Accountable wrote: Beware the law of unentended consequences:

Telling them nothing and demanding abstinance risks them getting their information elsewhere - probably inaccurate or incomplete - and not speaking up when they have questions or get in trouble. They may not use condoms & get pregnant and/or diseased. They may try to hide a pregnancy and not get prenatal care, may turn to drugs to deal with the issue rather than turning to you, I could go on.

Giving them condoms risks them seeing that as permission to be sexually active.

Giving them RU486 risks them seeing that as permision to be sexually active. They may also get the idea that if they forget to take the pill in time, abortion is a viable alternative. They may think that the pill is all they need and not use other protection, such as condoms. They could get the idea that drugs are the solution to serious problems and experiment with other drugs.

Educating them and telling them everything about pleasures, dangers, and alternatives risks them being desensitized about sex. It may lose the emotional quotient for them and become simply a physical act. They may become even more promiscuous than they might have otherwise.

Even getting them jobs in clinics to treat STDs and see all the ugly swelling, sore, and pus risks some to think that they can take sexual risks because there is treatment readily available.

Life's hard. I don't envy parents. Every possible solution risks a negative outcome, but doing nothing may be the worst alternative.

Arm them with as many options as possible, condoms, pills, knowledge, trust and you still are not guaranteed they will be protected. We can only hope while raising our children we taught them the ability to know right from wrong and hope we released them out into the world doing the best we could do. NV I am with you 100% On what you have done, I am close on your heels with my one daughter and the trouble is..... the age comes about where they are responsible for themselves because they stopped letting us have control. And as parents we can merely sit back and watch them stumble through life until they get it.

I don't know if you have kids or not Wolve but they sure can cause you to think differntly than those who do not have kids. And it's a wild living experience being a parent. You start out with all your perfect preconceived ideas on how to raise your children and whamo life hits you in the face, and you are left standing there shaking your head thinking OMG I didn't expect this, Now what.

minks · Post by **minks** » Wed Aug 17, 2005 9:06 am

Giving them condoms risks them seeing that as permission to be sexually active.

No Offence ACC but that is a very 20th Century ideal, and as a parent of teen girls I see that as totally false. In todays society, you have to arm them with a condom. You can talk till you are blue in the face about abstinance, over and over, you can restrict your childs social life over and over, but..... the more you say no the more you risk them going over the top when the time comes, the more you risk them going out there and saying screw you I am going to do as I wish and often times they will take the stupid risks out of spite. Look at Jives student 13 with a 1 year old do the math 12 and she had a baby. OMG....criminal indeed, now some folks can say a)her parents did not care, never talked to her about safe sex, she messed up, others can say b) oooooo they told her about condoms and the pill and that just made her go out and be promiscuoius (sorry bad spelling) HOWEVER, would it have not been in her best interest to have her armed (so to speak) no matter what??? Prevention is my point. Pills and condoms indeed, and we were not blathering on about pill only without regard to STD's on purpose the topic was only the pill. Short of locking up our kids, I think the only other option is prepare them with preventative measures and knowledge.

As well we seem to sell our kids short on things they forget, or how far they take things

Ok really I rambled there I am saying

PREVENTION is the best and further more, we can educate them out the wazoooo but if resources are not available to them for prevention all is lost.

Ok sorry again on my soap box

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Aug 17, 2005 9:15 am

I was just pointing out how fortunate I am. I have no kids; I'm a professional uncle. My job is to wind them up and let them go, and I am very good at my job.

My point was that this whole subject is a landmine of decisions and consequences. My heart goes out to parents. You have my deepest respect just for making any decision at all and not sliding down the wall into a quivering pile of insecurity.

minks · Post by **minks** » Wed Aug 17, 2005 9:22 am

Accountable wrote: I was just pointing out how fortunate I am. I have no kids; I'm a professional uncle. My job is to wind them up and let them go, and I am very good at my job.

My point was that this whole subject is a landmine of decisions and consequences. My heart goes out to parents. You have my deepest respect just for making any decision at all and not sliding down the wall into a quivering pile of insecurity.

Oh I hope I did not offend you in my comments.

Some days I feel folks without children are blessed hehehehehe

Go on and enjoy unclehood hehehehehe

And believe me, I never want to be a granny but know I have no choice ack hehehehe

Wolverine · Post by **Wolverine** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 1:10 am

Accountable wrote: I was just pointing out how fortunate I am. I have no kids; I'm a professional uncle. My job is to wind them up and let them go, and I am very good at my job.

I am right there with you Acc. my niece and nephew are 8 and 9 years old and getting to the age when it is fun to hang out with them. we talk about music, sports, with my niece BOYS, my nephew Spiderman, and stuff they see and hear on TV. i don't talk to them like they are little kids. Sure i sugar coat some things to make sure they understand it, but for the most part i talk to them like grown-ups. they know that they can come to me about anything ad they know that i will always be honest.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 4:36 am

Thanks, Minks. I needed a good laugh. Today starts well!

minks wrote: Oh I hope I did not offend you in my comments.

*Walks away grinning*