- Joined
- Nov 20, 2009
- Messages
- 4,733
- Reaction score
- 2,439
- Location
- here
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
It doesn't; it was a response to the usual tactic of taking an issue and making about something else. Admittedly, it is easy to do with this particular topic because the issues of religouis freedom and birth control are intertwined.
Tim-
Friesse is a sexist idiot. If people decide not to use contraception in their own relationships, fine and dandy. But to even hint that government should prevent everyone from using contraception simply because some people don't is ludicrous. And hinting that government should prevent everyone from using contraception because of the religious belief of some sounds downright unconstitutional.
The religious are not trying or hinting that no one should be able to use contraception, they simply do not want to pay for it. Whether you agree or disagree with the objections, they are not trying to prevent anyone from using contraceptives.Friesse is a sexist idiot. If people decide not to use contraception in their own relationships, fine and dandy. But to even hint that government should prevent everyone from using contraception simply because some people don't is ludicrous. And hinting that government should prevent everyone from using contraception because of the religious belief of some sounds downright unconstitutional.
Both sides are attempting to do that with this issue. Conservatives want it to be about religious freedom. Liberals want to make it about women's health. It's not fully about either. If the church gets its way, it won't have a big impact on women's health and won't curb most people's access to contraception. Otherwise, the no one will be forced to practice contraception or directly facilitate anyone else's practice.
Personally, I find the church's objection anachronistic and, frankly, silly. My wife and I have practiced birth control regularly and, now, permanently. Insurance facilitated that -- as it should, as I pay a lot for the access. The idea that someone else should be denied that on the basis of their employer's religious beliefs seems absurd.
Both sides are attempting to do that with this issue. Conservatives want it to be about religious freedom. Liberals want to make it about women's health. It's not fully about either. If the church gets its way, it won't have a big impact on women's health and won't curb most people's access to contraception. Otherwise, the no one will be forced to practice contraception or directly facilitate anyone else's practice.
Personally, I find thechurch'sMuslims' objection anachronistic and, frankly, silly. My wife and I havepracticed birth controleaten pork regularly...Insurancemy grocery store facilitated that -- as it should, as I pay a lot for the access. The idea thatsomeone else should be denied thatthe new Muslim grocer on the street would refuse to carry pork on the basis of their employer's religious beliefs seems absurd.
huh. interesting.
There is no shortage of birth control, nor is access limited. Some individuals are simply too stupid to use it.And also still correct, even with the changed parts.
The lack of birth control causes serious quality of life issues for a huge number of people, while pork rarely does. However, in a hypothetical cases where there is an allergy or other meats to highly expensive, then accommodations should be made.
And also still correct, even with the changed parts.
The lack of birth control causes serious quality of life issues for a huge number of people, while pork rarely does. However, in a hypothetical cases where there is an allergy or other meats to highly expensive, then accommodations should be made.
Foster Friess: In my day, women "used Bayer aspirin for contraceptives" - Political Hotsheet - CBS News
Foster Friess, a prominent backer of Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum, raised eyebrows Thursday when he offered up his own idea for a possible contraceptive method: "This contraceptive thing, my gosh, it's so... inexpensive. Back in my days, they used Bayer aspirin for contraceptives."
Friess's implication is that if women hold aspirin between their legs, they won't open them.
OMG OMG OMG OMG. Wait for it.... Andrea Mitchell, what could she have said?
huh. interesting.
And if part of the Church's accomodation were to refund a portion of health insurance back to the consumer because they do not provide contraception coverage, what would be wrong with that?
This administration didnt even try to be accomodating is my point. There are solutions that are decent and acceptable to everyone, the administration choose the most narrow and when pressed feel back to a position that was only slightly less narrow when they could have presented a variety of solutions and sent them to the hill to be voted on. I dont think Sebellius and Obama should have "decreed" this, it goes to show what a terrible piece of legislation the Affordable Health Care Act really is.
When I was in HS, there was a very prevalent rumor that if a woman douched with coca-cola after sex, she would not conceive. I never heard the one about aspirin, but it may have been part of the mythology.
This idiot needs a class on contraception, and Santorum needs to tell his crazy people supporters to STFU.
Foster Friess: In my day, women "used Bayer aspirin for contraceptives" - Political Hotsheet - CBS News
Foster Friess, a prominent backer of Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum, raised eyebrows Thursday when he offered up his own idea for a possible contraceptive method: "This contraceptive thing, my gosh, it's so... inexpensive. Back in my days, they used Bayer aspirin for contraceptives."
Friess's implication is that if women hold aspirin between their legs, they won't open them.
OMG OMG OMG OMG. Wait for it.... Andrea Mitchell, what could she have said?
People need to lighten up... it was obviously a joke.
Well, the Progressives will latch on to absolutely anything right now to keep eyes off Obama's record, Hell, they are digging thirty years back and further....It is sad really.
Chris Matthews was frothing that Friess was Santorum's lead spokesman....heh, heh...What a joke the drooler is....
j-mac
Wait a minute here...so, if Obama doesn't get to force the catholic church to provide contraception, either directly, or indirectly, against their doctrine, then contraception will be illegal?
Nonsense
J-mac
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
The religious are not trying or hinting that no one should be able to use contraception, they simply do not want to pay for it. Whether you agree or disagree with the objections, they are not trying to prevent anyone from using contraceptives.
You're right, the first sentence of your post is nonsense. However, it had nothing to do with what I said.
The church does not pay for contraceptives. Medical insurance pays for contraceptives. The church, however, doesn't want medical insurance for church employees, regardless of the employees' religion, to pay for contraceptives. Therefore, the church is dictating insurance terms to the insurance company, thereby forbidding any of their employees access to contraception unless they pay full price for the prescriptions themselves. Oddly enough, the church has no problem with medical insurance covering viagra.
The church should not be in the insurance business. The church should not be in the business of dictating personal medical decisions. The church should be in the business of telling their own parishoners how the church wants them to behave. And that should be the limit of the church's authority. Period.
I mean, it does sound like a joke, but it doesn't really make any sense.
When I was in HS, there was a very prevalent rumor that if a woman douched with coca-cola after sex, she would not conceive. I never heard the one about aspirin, but it may have been part of the mythology.
This idiot needs a class on contraception, and Santorum needs to tell his crazy people supporters to STFU.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?