Contraception: strange election year issue.

[Days]

Contraception is all about women's health. 99% of American women use it. So, it is health care, plain and simple. Extremely popular, extremely wide used health care. As such, it is covered by the latest health care laws... extremely contested health care laws, but, as yet, still the law of the land. I can understand the arguments against "obamacare" ... but the singling out of contraception as an election year issue, is the strangest political discourse ever. 99% of American women use some form of contraception and we are debating whether it belongs in the health care coverage? It obviously is already there. This is like arguing whether we should have air around the earth... when everybody is breathing it. Crazy.

Birth control has a wide range of costs

Does government have a vested interest in preventing unwanted pregnancies? I would say, absolutely. Is contraception preferred over abortion? I would say, universally. I can understand the arguments against abortion ... but arguing against contraception is beyond strange. Are GOP candidates arguing that American women should have the right to choose - to not get this healthcare - (that they all want)? No. So is this a freedom of religion issue for we the people? No. In what is the most twisted paradigm ever to enter the political discourse - the GOP is arguing for religious freedom for corporations (corporations are people, my friend) to deny healthcare - to we the people - that we all want. That's called financial freedom for religious organizations; it is not religious freedom, which is different. Religious freedom is the right of individuals to follow their personal faith. Corporations are legal entities, not human beings, corporations are employers, in America, corporations are health care providers, and government passes laws to govern that health care. Contraception is women's health care. Women are free to follow their religion, the law does not force women to choose contraception, that is an individual's decision, and they are free to follow their faith in making that decision. The employer's provision of health care, on the other hand, is not a freedom, it is a corporate responsibility, governed by law.

At a time when the nation is in great financial peril ... in an election where the #1 issue is the economy ... the political discourse has side tracked onto mundane stupidity. As a born again evangelical minister, freedom of religion is the most important right provided me in our Constitution. But the current health care debate is not about freedom of religion... it is about corporations trying to duck providing health care - ongoing health care that is already in universal demand. The candidates understand this, but they are talented Liars. All politicians are. The people, we the people, not corporations, but individuals, the real living human beings who enjoy the freedom to worship the God of their choice... the people are just stupid... too stupid, helplessly stupid, to figure out how they are being lied to.

 

[Jen]

Kind of funny that the Obamites realized they had stepped into a big old squishy cow pie with their eager trampling of Church rights, so they turned it into a "womens health" issues a la contraception..............enter hired player and womens activist........Sandra Fluke.

It worked.

And the only question that remains now is how many Americans are stupid enough to fall for it.

 

[Zam-Zam]

Contraception is all about women's health. 99% of American women use it. So, it is health care, plain and simple. Extremely popular, extremely wide used health care. As such, it is covered by the latest health care laws... extremely contested health care laws, but, as yet, still the law of the land. I can understand the arguments against "obamacare" ... but the singling out of contraception as an election year issue, is the strangest political discourse ever. 99% of American women use some form of contraception and we are debating whether it belongs in the health care coverage? It obviously is already there. This is like arguing whether we should have air around the earth... when everybody is breathing it. Crazy.

Birth control has a wide range of costs

Does government have a vested interest in preventing unwanted pregnancies? I would say, absolutely. Is contraception preferred over abortion? I would say, universally. I can understand the arguments against abortion ... but arguing against contraception is beyond strange. Are GOP candidates arguing that American women should have the right to choose - to not get this healthcare - (that they all want)? No. So is this a freedom of religion issue for we the people? No. In what is the most twisted paradigm ever to enter the political discourse - the GOP is arguing for religious freedom for corporations (corporations are people, my friend) to deny healthcare - to we the people - that we all want. That's called financial freedom for religious organizations; it is not religious freedom, which is different. Religious freedom is the right of individuals to follow their personal faith. Corporations are legal entities, not human beings, corporations are employers, in America, corporations are health care providers, and government passes laws to govern that health care. Contraception is women's health care. Women are free to follow their religion, the law does not force women to choose contraception, that is an individual's decision, and they are free to follow their faith in making that decision. The employer's provision of health care, on the other hand, is not a freedom, it is a corporate responsibility, governed by law.

At a time when the nation is in great financial peril ... in an election where the #1 issue is the economy ... the political discourse has side tracked onto mundane stupidity. As a born again evangelical minister, freedom of religion is the most important right provided me in our Constitution. But the current health care debate is not about freedom of religion... it is about corporations trying to duck providing health care - ongoing health care that is already in universal demand. The candidates understand this, but they are talented Liars. All politicians are. The people, we the people, not corporations, but individuals, the real living human beings who enjoy the freedom to worship the God of their choice... the people are just stupid... too stupid, helplessly stupid, to figure out how they are being lied to.

The issue isn't contraception; that's the cover story. No one has made the case that contraception should be illegal or abolished.

The real issue is who should pay for someone else's contraception. And who should be compelled to pay for someone else's contraception, even if it is in conflict with their moral dictates. It's about a sense to entitlement.

Contraception is not outrageously expensive. You can get a month's supply for less than ten dollars.

Contraception is not difficult to obtain. Available at Wal-Mart. Target. Walgreens. CVS. Rite-Aid. Planned Parenthood. Clinics. Hospitals.


Don't fall for the cover story. It was never about that.

 

[Days]

The Democrats went there on purpose, had it all mapped out in advance, and led the GOP candidates by the nose into their trap. They also knew enough to go there early on, so that the people would have ample time to figure it out.

you've been snookered.

 

[Days]

contraception is not the issue... its just the cover story?

zam... do you understand what an oxymoron is?

 

[YouCantHandleDaTruth]

...The real issue is who should pay for someone else's contraception...

Just like who should pay for someone else Viagra?

Again, the church leaders who make the sexy with little boys butts really don't care about "church rights" or their position would be a lot less nuanced

 

[Zam-Zam]

The Democrats went there on purpose, had it all mapped out in advance, and led the GOP candidates by the nose into their trap. They also knew enough to go there early on, so that the people would have ample time to figure it out.

you've been snookered.

I have been? Well, if you say so.


Ms. Fluke is the darling of the left for now, I'm not sure how long that will last. This 'poor victim' attends Georgetown Law School. Someone told me that the average starting salary for a Georgetown Law grad is $160,000 a year. Not bad. If that is the case, Ms. Fluke may join the evil 1% club in no time.........

 

[Days]

the 1% club is way above $160K/year. She may join the last vestiges of the middle class, but not all law degrees are equal, and those $160K jobs don't grow on trees any more.

But Sandra Fluke was just a convenient tool, the idea to mandate contraception coverage was aimed squarely at Santorum.

 

[NightSwimmer]

Someone told me that the average starting salary for a Georgetown Law grad is $160,000 a year. Not bad. If that is the case, Ms. Fluke may join the evil 1% club in no time.........

Heh...

Hate to break it to ya Bub, but 160K ain't gonna put you into the 1% club.

No wonder you guys keep falling for the same old crapola. You don't even have a clue.

 

[middleview]

Kind of funny that the Obamites realized they had stepped into a big old squishy cow pie with their eager trampling of Church rights, so they turned it into a "womens health" issues a la contraception..............enter hired player and womens activist........Sandra Fluke.

It worked.

And the only question that remains now is how many Americans are stupid enough to fall for it.

It would seem that Rush and the republicans are the ones who were stupid enough to fall for it, since, as you noted, it worked.

 

[middleview]

Just like who should pay for someone else Viagra?

Again, the church leaders who make the sexy with little boys butts really don't care about "church rights" or their position would be a lot less nuanced

Viagra for unmarried men? Gay men? No problem. Birth control pills for women....big problem. Somebody is going to have to explain the nuances there....

I wouldn't have a problem with making churches shed their ownership of what should be a business....like hospitals.

 

[NightSwimmer]

I wouldn't say "it worked", so much as "it backfired big-time".

 

[Zam-Zam]

Just like who should pay for someone else Viagra?

Again, the church leaders who make the sexy with little boys butts really don't care about "church rights" or their position would be a lot less nuanced

Why should someone else pay for another person's Viagra?

 

[oicu812]

if as sandra claimed, it was not about contraception, but that the "pills" used were also used for other medical purposes, then assuming its a medical problem her doctor will prescribe the "pill" or whatever medicine is appropriate..same as now,,it may be a contraceptive if that is appropriate, or some other drug that is equally effective..if what she wants is the govt. {you and me} to pay for this medicine, then why just one? why not all the different drugs used to treat medical conditions? aspirin, cold medicine, nose spray, hemmorid cream..why just one single drug that is used only by women?

 

[Friday13]

Why is viagra cost-free to men under most health insurance? You ARE paying for it.

 

[oicu812]

Why is viagra cost-free to men under most health insurance? You ARE paying for it.

if you are talking to me, viagra is for a medical condition, and beneifits both male and female...birth control pills are often prescribed for medical conditions, and covered likewise...and since birthcontrol is not a medical condition, and as sandra claimed was not for use as birthcontrol but as a often used medical condition, then she had NO point..it all ready IS covered..just like viagra..i do not see why she has a problem...unless she lied.

 

[middleview]

if you are talking to me, viagra is for a medical condition, and beneifits both male and female...birth control pills are often prescribed for medical conditions, and covered likewise...and since birthcontrol is not a medical condition, and as sandra claimed was not for use as birthcontrol but as a often used medical condition, then she had NO point..it all ready IS covered..just like viagra..i do not see why she has a problem...unless she lied.

What medical condition is it that Hugh Hefner is being treated for? Old age?

 

[oicu812]

the medical condition that viagra is prescribed for is erectile dysfunction disorder...birth control pills are prescribed for some medical conditions when it is the best choice of treatment...both are prescribed by doctors, both for medical conditions...

 

[NightSwimmer]

The issue isn't contraception; that's the cover story. No one has made the case that contraception should be illegal or abolished.

The real issue is who should pay for someone else's contraception. And who should be compelled to pay for someone else's contraception, even if it is in conflict with their moral dictates. It's about a sense to entitlement.

There is a simple solution to your problem. Simply outlaw insurance. Then nobody will be "compelled" to pay for the medical care of others.

 

[oicu812]

uh, preventing pregnancy is not medical care. and still, outlawing insurance does not help sandra get her friend her medication,nor does it stop her, because sandra does not want insurance co. to pay for it..but why just one medication of the millions people need everyday?