This public debate on whether or not the Obama administration's sensible policy on covering birth control has turned into a boys against the girls fight. And the boys are out of touch and out of line.
Are Chris Matthews, Joe Scarborough, Mike Barnicle, EJ Dionne and George Will etc. going to run around the country telling men to wear condoms? And by the way, pay for them themselves? Because if that isn't their plan for the next few years, they need to keep quiet.
Guess what folks, people have sex. And when they do, unless women want to get pregnant, they need birth control. How dare these guys or anyone say that the young cleaning woman or secretary who just happens to work at a hospital or university owned by the Catholic church should not be able to get birth control paid for by her employer. And if she has a medical problem like endimetriosis where her doctor prescribes birth control pills for that, if they had their way she would have to buy them herself as well.
This issue isn't about religious freedom. 99% of Catholic women already use birth control. This issue is about men deciding that their medical needs are purely "medical" and yet women's medical needs are somehow subject to a political equation. If Catholic Bishops want to make their own rules as employers, then they can stop taking federal government subsidies for Medicaid and Medicare patients in their hospitals, or have their schools subsidized by government sponsored student loans. Church employees are already exempt under the administration guidelines. But they won't. Instead they will try to use political pressure to legalize their discrimination and corral their Democrat and Republican male acolytes to do their bidding for them.
America must not let political opinion be swayed on this issue by a bunch of male pundits spelling some sort of political doom for a president who wants to stand up for women's health.
Follow Hilary Rosen on Twitter: www.twitter.com/hilaryr
Rev. Dr. James A. Kowalski: Religious Freedom or Freedom of Choice?
Terry Sanderson: The Catholic War on Democracy
Va. House says no exceptions on ultrasound viewing before abortion
http://www.newsleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012120214007
RICHMOND — House of Delegates Republicans have rejected a last-ditch bid by Democrats to allow women seeking abortions to opt out of an invasive ultrasonic procedure under anti-abortion legislation set for a final House vote Tuesday.
Legislation that has advanced on the strength of a GOP majority would force women to undergo a “transvaginal ultrasound” that produces fetal images.
An amendment by Del. David Englin, D-Alexandria, would have allowed medical professionals to determine whether images can be obtained without being penetrated by equipment used in the ultrasound.
Women would have to give written consent to such a probe under Englin’s amendments, but not to sonograms that are not invasive. The amendment failed on 64-34 vote, setting the bill up for final House passage.
And I'm quite sure this will not get posted because it doesn't agree with the new age liberal point of view!
it's still boys & girls, and the boys are winning. in fact, they're so powerful some would rather join them as a queen bee than fight them.
of course, MB was the only repub pres nominee who never enjoyed a surge. she got a taste of her own medicine...
"Your charity must support Planned Parenthood or we'll hack your website, trash you on Facebook, assault you in the media, and scorch the ground so you can't raise funds in the future."
All this...against a women's breast cancer charity. Whew.
They've been trying for over a century and its been before the supreme court twice. Lost every single time.
The first amendment does not mean what you think it means.
If this matter makes it to the Supreme Court they will rule in favor of The Catholic Church. There is recent and clear precedent for this.
The Amish vote, so they don't stay completely out of politics.
My point is that The Catholic Church is opposed to abortion and contraception, it is against their religious beliefs and everybody has known this for a very long time -- they should be exempted from this law too. That will settle that. If the women they employ want contraceptives they are free to get them, but pay for it themselves. If they have a problem with that they can find another job because the Catholic Church is NOT required to employ anyone. These women still have options.
Creating life is the MOST POWERFUL thing one can do.
That's why women don't have to do stupid things to prove they are powerful. They KNOW they're powerful.
It's like how big dogs ignore the bark of a little dog. Women are secure in their ability to create life, and you betcha men are jealous...this is why they over-compensate. And it's also why they devalue women.
If a woman wants to prevent pregnancy, her male partner has nothing to say. If a woman wants to become pregnant and have a child, her male partner has nothing to say but is responsible for the decision made by the woman. How is this in any way fair?
When a woman becomes pregnant, she alone has the power to decide whether or not she carries the child to term. The father has no legal or practical way to alter her decision. If she wants to abort the fetus, the father cannot stop her. If she wants to deliver a child, the father cannot require she abort the fetus. The woman can then make the father an indentured servant, requiring him to support a child he does not want.
Women claim all the rights with regard to childbirth, abortion and contraception. Why are men in any way held responsible for the decisions made by women?
As for pregnancy the comparison you are looking for is organ/tissue/fluid donation. And you are absolutely correct. Nobody may force anybody to donate organs/tissue/fluid to anyone else for any reason.
This is a good thing. And the day we change it people like you are going to be the first people on the menu for forced donation.
So, what do you suggest, remove all legal parental responsibilities from men or remove all reproductive choice from women?
"Nearly 70 percent of Catholic women use sterilization, the birth control pill or an IUD, according to the Guttmacher Institute research."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/14/98-percent-catholic-women-birth-control_n_849060.html
Because it would be sexist to do otherwise. Furthermore, the word "men" no longer has predictable meaning.
No doubt, but how many of you are in there?
But so are blood pressure medications.
Why shouldn't we as a society all pay for everyone's heart medications? Shouldn't they be free, too?
When copays increase medical costs by moving us from cheap prevention to expensive treatment then removal of them lowers medical costs.
We are trying to lower medical costs.
I have to laugh with the whole getting men to buy birth control. Like women need the government to help in that. If the man won't buy birth control for you DON'T HAVE SEX WITH HIM. Maybe its just me, but that seems like a red flag.
That should be your choice; just as others should have their choices.
Birth control isn't expensive. You can get a version of the pill for $9 per month. A woman can only get pregnant for 48 hours or so per month. So the "need" of birth control can be fulfilled by simply not having sexual intercourse during that time, using condoms, or doing whatever you can think of to avoid the sperm and egg from coming into contact during that time. It certainly doesn't need to be provided on a health insurance policy that costs hundreds if not thousands per month.
that their intimate partners are using birth control ?
Or controlling your right to freedom of religion by not giving you a ride to church.
Or controlling your right to freedom of speech by not buying you a megaphone.
Or controlling your right to freedom of assembly because no one else shows up.
You furthermore know that unplanned pregnancies cost everyone so contraceptive access saves everyone money.
They are trying to violate their employees first amendment rights AND waste everyone money.
But wrong. I suppose it is okay to give someone credit for excellently saying something that just isn't quite true.
If you read the headline, it is "98 percent" of catholic women use contraceptive. This author adjusts it up to "99 percent" because that's a nice round number that matches "99 percent" for everything good, and 1 percent for everything bad.
But on reading the story, one learns it is a wee bit less than 70 percent.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/14/98-percent-catholic-women-birth-control_n_849060.html
"Nearly 70 percent of Catholic women use sterilization, the birth control pill or an IUD, according to the Guttmacher Institute research."