conservative push to ban contraceptives

in case anyone doubts that the conservative agenda in the US includes banning contraceptives, read this article. those who think they will stop at banning abortion and the morning after pill are sadly mistaken. they continue to inch closer to their ultimate goal, counting on the american public not paying attention. the longer they stay in power in this country, the more rights women will lose to make their own reproductive decisions.

http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSN1536910620080715?virtualBrandChannel=10112

 

:nopity:

 

yeah, i read that, but it seems to me they're primarily fringe groups and one guy in congress who supports the right of a doctor or pharmacist to refuse to give out contraceptives, not the banning of contraceptives altogether.

 

this is the type of response i've come to expect in the 'women's issues' forum.

 

Of course, because only people who buy into your hype are true supporters of womens' rights. It's all the conservatives' fault; they're out to take away womens' right to choose what to do with their bodies!

 

There is a conservative push to limit contraception.

People should push back. If the religious right gets its power from delivering voters, their opponents should deliver at least as many.

 

Document in question: HHS pdf

 

we're going to continue to see women's reproductive rights pushed back towards the 50's as long as someone's right to religious 'conscience' trumps a woman's right to choice in reproductive health care. the roll backs have been steady and consistent since the 70's. the ongoing administrative semantics and cuts in funding for women's healthcare will see to that. we will continue to see more and more women unable to get access to birth control, the morning after pill, and abortion. we will contine to see huge numbers of women and children living in poverty as a result, so those that approve of these policy decisions should shut up about all the 'welfare moms' on public assistance. and all the guys that can't get laid should shut the hell up too, if they refuse to support a woman's reproductive rights. :tongue:

 

I'm with you lady.

There is no place for the government to be in the bedrooms of the people, or inside the uterus of a woman.

Shame on you government. SHAME!

 

it's not so much that some people are meddling and being stupid, they always have. it's more that this is not a very well respected group of people, and they don't have a great deal of power or influence.

 

have you read the article i posted? don't you think the president and his administration have power and influence?

 

..the president who's about to walk the plank?


With overpopulation, underemployment, inflation, ect. ect. ect...I think the last thing that's going to happen is a Catholic revolution.

 

they're counting on you thinking that. it can't happen. but it is happening, and it has been happening for a long time. women's reproductive rights are under attack, just as all our other rights are under attack. complacency on the part of the american public just guarantees they will be successful.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/15/washington/15rule.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

 

seperation of church and state is a viciously sharp double edged sword, eh?

 

what are you getting at?

 

I think that all of these little issues are part of a much larger thing. "they" make up ridiculous little things for people like you to worry and trip over about to blind you to the real issues.

Nobody's taking your uterus. They're just distracting groups of people. Why not target women? Blacks? Immigrants? People who want the immigrants to leave? Large groups of people. So its easy for them to create issues for activists to concentrate on so that they're too busy shadowboxing to really DO anything of any importance.

They want you on a soapbox over stuff like this.

 

again, you're minimizing the problem. this is not a 'ridiculous little thing' to the millions of children who are born every year unwanted, abused, neglected, homeless, parentless. neither is it a 'ridiculous little thing' to the millions of women who live in poverty due to unwanted children they could not prevent. besides the humanitarian concerns, there are the ecological concerns. humans must get control of their reproductive capacity. if we don't, the long range impact to the environment and quality of life is huge.

 

in order to recieve government money, groups that receive those money are not allowed to discriminate on basis of religion in their hiring practices. and if those people they're basically being forced to hire through constitutionally dictated rights to religion do not agree with abortion or contraceptive usage, you've got a nasty pickle, don't you? what a pain.

 

well, if they're (for example) going to say you have to hire right-to-lifers at abortion clinics (to do nothing apparently), i'd say that's bending logical interpretation of the law to the breaking point.

 

that only happens if those abortion clinics received government funding. wouldn't that be a bitch?