PDA

View Full Version : The silliness of the contraception policy



Starbuck
02-08-2012, 03:51 PM
The headlines loom large over this issue, with each side daring the other to cross the line in the sand.

What the Hell, People??!!

In the first place, no one is going to be forced to take a contraceptive. If you don't want it, don't take it.

In the second place, the government has no business paying for ANYONE's contraceptives! Anyone at all! Ever! Pregnancy prevention is our (We, The People) responsibility, not the government's!

This whole subject makes me crazy because every news media reporting on this has missed the point. It is assumed by everyone that it is somehow the not the individual's responsibility to determine when she get's pregnant.


We, The people, are doomed. Unconsciously, we have turned to the government for absolutely everything. Even those of us who lay claim to being conservative.
The teeter-totter has tipped.:mad:



Boehner: Congress to overturn birth control policy if Obama does not reverse course

WASHINGTON House Speaker John Boehner says if President Obama doesn't reverse a new policy requiring religious schools and hospitals to provide employees with access to free birth control, the Congress will.

Boehner, a Catholic, said Wednesday that the rule is an attack on religious freedom in the country. The Ohio Republican, speaking on the floor, said the rule "cannot stand, and will not stand."

The speaker said the Energy and Commerce Committee will move ahead on legislation.

The issue has roiled the presidential race and angered congressional Republicans. The White House signaled this week that it is searching for ways to allay the concern of Roman Catholics who say the birth control mandate would force them to violate their religious beliefs against contraception.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/08/boehner-congress-to-overturn-birth-control-policy-if-obama-does-not-reverse/#ixzz1loi9iX00

BadCat
02-08-2012, 03:58 PM
Gee, did not the Catholic Church SUPPORT obumble on illegal immigration?

When you sleep with the devil, don't be surprised when he rolls over and wants to fuck you.

Lanie
02-08-2012, 05:40 PM
Why should Viagra be paid for, but not contraception?

fettpett
02-08-2012, 05:41 PM
Why should Viagra be paid for, but not contraception?

tell that to the Milwaukee Public School system


why should the government tell anyone what they have to pay for when they get insurance?

Novaheart
02-08-2012, 05:47 PM
Why should Viagra be paid for, but not contraception?

Why should Viagra be paid for at all? If it's broken, it's God telling you that you abused it.

Lanie
02-08-2012, 05:50 PM
Why should Viagra be paid for at all? If it's broken, it's God telling you that you abused it.

lol!

JB
02-08-2012, 05:55 PM
In the first place, no one is going to be forced to take a contraceptive. If you don't want it, don't take it.I think you're missing the point, because that's not the point.
In the second place, the government has no business paying for ANYONE's contraceptives! Anyone at all! Ever! Pregnancy prevention is our (We, The People) responsibility, not the government's!Again, not the issue. In this case the government is not paying. The government is forcing Catholic institutions to pay. Against their will.

Lanie
02-08-2012, 07:01 PM
tell that to the Milwaukee Public School system


why should the government tell anyone what they have to pay for when they get insurance?



Pregnancy is a healthcare matter. It can lead to high blood pressure, toxemia, and other physical problems. Birth control pills are actually a form of prevention. Birth control is health care just like anything else.

Now, on to the religious schools and hospitals, there should be an option to allow them not to receive any government funding in exchange for being allowed to run things as they please.

fettpett
02-08-2012, 07:34 PM
Pregnancy is a healthcare matter. It can lead to high blood pressure, toxemia, and other physical problems. Birth control pills are actually a form of prevention. Birth control is health care just like anything else.

Now, on to the religious schools and hospitals, there should be an option to allow them not to receive any government funding in exchange for being allowed to run things as they please.

have you ever looked at whats the side effects for birth control are?


side effects: (http://birthcontrolsideeffects.biz/)

Hormonal birth control pills will never be prescribed to females suffering from underlying medical conditions like liver cirrhosis, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and tumors, cancers in general and more specific of cervix or breast tissues, to those having clotting defects of any kind or those having genetic predisposition for rheumatoid arthritis etc.

Side effects are common after starting the pill as the body tries to initially adjust to increased estrogen and progesterone levels, most of these side effects transient and go away after the body recalibrates itself to the change in hormonal levels commonly observed side effects are:

Having a constant feeling of nausea

Morning sickness

Irregular menstrual cycles

Loose bowel and bloating

Mood swings

Palpitation

Depression (in rare cases)

Irregular vaginal discharges and increased susceptibility to infections as the changes in hormonal levels affect the endometrial tissue in a deleterious manner.

Tenderness of breasts

Loss of libido

Hypertension and changes in the lipid profiles

Increased fluid retention attributing on some level towards weight gain

Decreased calcium retention in kidneys leading to bone loss and osteoporosis

Hair and follicular changes are also seen.
Long Term Birth Control Side Effects And Risks

No clinical correlation as of yet has been observed between breast cancer and oral methods of contraception. But there are certain birth control side effects with prolonged and indiscriminate usage these include:

Depression

Optical problems like increased susceptibility for cataract

Increased number of gallstones

Cardiac failure and transient ischemic attacks in very rare cases.

Decreased resistance towards seasonal infections.

In females the risk of ectopic pregnancies is exponentially related to the period of usage of hormonal contraceptives.

Increased susceptibility towards endometrial and cervical cancers because of poor nutrition and lack of hormonal balance in endometrial tissues.

Jaundice, clotting and thrombosis on rare circumstances.


It is designed to mimic pregnancy. Depo shot is worse.

The mandates for health coverage is what has driven up prices, not to mention the massive litigation costs from malpractice suits.


I'm also not saying that insurances shouldn't cover it. Only that it should be left to the company/individual/organization purchasing the insurance. This is NOT a government issue, other than to step in and make sure they are providing what they promise to provide when you purchase the insurance.

Rockntractor
02-08-2012, 07:50 PM
I am always amazed that ugly isn't more effective than it is!:confused:

Madisonian
02-08-2012, 08:40 PM
I am always amazed that ugly isn't more effective than it is!:confused:

And aren't you sincerely relieved it isn't?:D

NJCardFan
02-08-2012, 10:22 PM
I see our resident libs are behaving like adults over this matter. :rolleyes:

Novaheart
02-08-2012, 10:25 PM
I am always amazed that ugly isn't more effective than it is!:confused:

alcohol and low light is the temporary antidote for ugly

Rockntractor
02-08-2012, 10:36 PM
alcohol and low light is the temporary antidote for ugly

Good point, it really does explain a lot of these pregnancies.

Bailey
02-09-2012, 08:12 AM
If liberals want us out of their bedrooms in regards to abortion/gay marriage why then do they want us to fund their contraception which they will use in said bedroom? :confused:

txradioguy
02-09-2012, 08:59 AM
If liberals want us out of their bedrooms in regards to abortion/gay marriage why then do they want us to fund their contraception which they will use in said bedroom? :confused:


Because they are unabashed hypocrites.

Lanie
02-09-2012, 11:43 AM
have you ever looked at whats the side effects for birth control are?


side effects: (http://birthcontrolsideeffects.biz/)


It is designed to mimic pregnancy. Depo shot is worse.

The mandates for health coverage is what has driven up prices, not to mention the massive litigation costs from malpractice suits.


I'm also not saying that insurances shouldn't cover it. Only that it should be left to the company/individual/organization purchasing the insurance. This is NOT a government issue, other than to step in and make sure they are providing what they promise to provide when you purchase the insurance.

I realize how bad birth control can be. I wish scientists could discover something other than hormonal forms of preventing pregnancy. We have condoms, but they're not as effective. Meanwhile, too many guys think they're too good for a condom. :mad:

Birth control isn't perfect, but women need some way to keep from having baby after baby. And no, waiting until marriage doesn't solve the problem because women still don't want to be baby machines after they get married.

As for whether government should be involved, that's hard to say. On one hand, it is important for companies to stay independent. On the other hand, they're about to get a lot of business thrown their way because the government is about to give some people more money back to buy. There's also the issue that many people feel like they're putting a lot of their savings so to speak into healthcare insurance and it just isn't giving them much back in return. They don't cover birth control. They don't cover pre-exising conditions. They'll find a way to not cover your critical illness. People feel like they're getting robbed.

linda22003
02-09-2012, 11:44 AM
I realize how bad birth control can be. I wish scientists could discover something other than hormonal forms of preventing pregnancy. We have condoms, but they're not as effective.

Diaphragms are more effective; I don't know why there is resistance to using them.

Lanie
02-09-2012, 11:47 AM
If liberals want us out of their bedrooms in regards to abortion/gay marriage why then do they want us to fund their contraception which they will use in said bedroom? :confused:

Good point. Now, if we backed off, would your side stay out of the bedroom? I doubt it. They'd still be telling us what we should do, who we should marry, etc. If you don't want abortion, then you need to be part of the effort to keep women from getting pregnant in the first place. It's not fair to say "You can't have an abortion, we won't help you get birth control with your company, and if you get married, you have to marry a man who will get you pregnant." What? Wanna doom women to become baby machines?

txradioguy
02-09-2012, 11:54 AM
Good point. Now, if we backed off, would your side stay out of the bedroom? I doubt it. They'd still be telling us what we should do, who we should marry, etc. If you don't want abortion, then you need to be part of the effort to keep women from getting pregnant in the first place. It's not fair to say "You can't have an abortion, we won't help you get birth control with your company, and if you get married, you have to marry a man who will get you pregnant." What? Wanna doom women to become baby machines?

:rolleyes:

Lanie
02-09-2012, 11:54 AM
Diaphragms are more effective; I don't know why there is resistance to using them.

Some women find it hard to use, making it less effective.

http://www.youngwomenshealth.org/femalebarrier4.html


How effective is the diaphragm against pregnancy?
If women use the diaphragm every time they have sexual intercourse and follow instructions every time, it is 94% effective. This means that if 100 women use the diaphragm all the time and always use it correctly, 6 women will become pregnant in a year.

It's obvious that the diaphragm is most effective against pregnancy when it is used correctly and every time you have sexual intercourse. The typical woman may not use the diaphragm every time she has sexual intercourse and/or may not always use it correctly. If women use the diaphragm, but not perfectly, it is 88% effective. This means that if 100 women use the diaphragm, at least 12 women will become pregnant in a year.

Earlier in the article, it says you need a prescription to get the diaphragm in any case, bringing us right back to square one.

Now, birth control pills are 99% effective if taken correctly.

http://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/birth-control-pills

The shot if 97-99.7% effective.

http://contraception.about.com/od/prescriptionoptions/a/depoprovera_2.htm

BadCat
02-09-2012, 11:55 AM
Good point. Now, if we backed off, would your side stay out of the bedroom? I doubt it. They'd still be telling us what we should do, who we should marry, etc. If you don't want abortion, then you need to be part of the effort to keep women from getting pregnant in the first place. It's not fair to say "You can't have an abortion, we won't help you get birth control with your company, and if you get married, you have to marry a man who will get you pregnant." What? Wanna doom women to become baby machines?

Why are you moonbats even worried about contraception?
Most of you are sexually ambiguous and keep hooking up with members of the same sex, and a lot of you are truly too unattractive to lure a member of the opposite sex.

Lanie
02-09-2012, 11:57 AM
Why are you moonbats even worried about contraception?
Most of you are sexually ambiguous and keep hooking up with members of the same sex, and a lot of you are truly too unattractive to lure a member of the opposite sex.

See? you should be for gay marriage. It prevents abortion and the need for contraception. lol.

If the only women who need contraception are conservative women who are supposedly more responsible and wait until marriage, then you should want to accommodate them. You do want a happy wife, don't you?

txradioguy
02-09-2012, 12:00 PM
See? you should be for gay marriage. It prevents abortion and the need for contraception. lol.

If the only women who need contraception are conservative women who are supposedly more responsible and wait until marriage, then you should want to accommodate them. You do want a happy wife, don't you?


http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/9928/kirkgeezus.jpg

linda22003
02-09-2012, 12:08 PM
Earlier in the article, it says you need a prescription to get the diaphragm in any case, bringing us right back to square one.

Now, birth control pills are 99% effective if taken correctly.



Of course you need a prescription for the diaphragm; it has to be sized for each woman by diameter. And you certainly need a prescription for the pill.

I took the pill back in the late '70s and early '80s, and expected to pay for it myself. It was no small expenditure, either - when I was first out of college, I paid $250/month for rent, which left me with between $250 and $300 for all other expenses. The pill cost $30 per month at the time, which was a really noticeable line item in my budget.

I saw it as cheaper than abortion or motherhood, so I willingly paid for it.

Lanie
02-09-2012, 12:15 PM
Of course you need a prescription for the diaphragm; it has to be sized for each woman by diameter. And you certainly need a prescription for the pill.

I took the pill back in the late '70s and early '80s, and expected to pay for it myself. It was no small expenditure, either - when I was first out of college, I paid $250/month for rent, which left me with between $250 and $300 for all other expenses. The pill cost $30 per month at the time, which was a really noticeable line item in my budget.

I saw it as cheaper than abortion or motherhood, so I willingly paid for it.

Well, of course. Women will pay for it. However, they're already spending thousands of dollars on a health insurance policy. Don't you think it's unfair that they won't cover what women often very much need to have? Birth control?

And nobody ever answered my question. What about Viagra? I think it's bull that Viagra is getting covered, no problem (despite the fact it can cause a heart attack), but birth control can't. I can't help but think if birth control were for the men, then we wouldn't be having this conversation right now.

Starbuck
02-09-2012, 12:15 PM
.............. There's also the issue that many people feel like they're putting a lot of their savings so to speak into healthcare insurance and it just isn't giving them much back in return...........

No one gets a 'return' on a real insurance premium, like the one you pay on your car and your house. But the genie is out of the bottle with regard to health care insurance; those who have it feel like they should get to use it, thereby driving up costs, which they feel entitles them to more use, which drives up cost.....

My view of health care insurance is evidently greatly different than yours. I view it as a wall around my financial fortress, just like the other insurances that I have.

It's odd: People who have no form of insurance on anything they own will demand health care insurance.

Novaheart
02-09-2012, 12:32 PM
Of course you need a prescription for the diaphragm; it has to be sized for each woman by diameter. And you certainly need a prescription for the pill.

I took the pill back in the late '70s and early '80s, and expected to pay for it myself. It was no small expenditure, either - when I was first out of college, I paid $250/month for rent, which left me with between $250 and $300 for all other expenses. The pill cost $30 per month at the time, which was a really noticeable line item in my budget.

I saw it as cheaper than abortion or motherhood, so I willingly paid for it.

You could have shared the expense, could you not? I mean, calculate the number of times you planned to have sex in a given year, figured out the "per target cost" of the maintenance, and then split the cost with the other beneficiary.

Now let's do the math. If the Pill costs $30 per month that's $360 per year. Adjusting for inflation, that would come out to about 7 events at regular rates. SO the trick should leave $25 on the dresser unless he also paid for dinner, but either way he should pay for cab fare.

linda22003
02-09-2012, 12:43 PM
Well, of course. Women will pay for it. However, they're already spending thousands of dollars on a health insurance policy. Don't you think it's unfair that they won't cover what women often very much need to have? Birth control?



Since I have a sizable copay for any medications I receive in my current policy, I don't see it as the absolute entitlement you do.

linda22003
02-09-2012, 12:46 PM
You could have shared the expense, could you not? I mean, calculate the number of times you planned to have sex in a given year, figured out the "per target cost" of the maintenance, and then split the cost with the other beneficiary.

Now let's do the math. If the Pill costs $30 per month that's $360 per year. Adjusting for inflation, that would come out to about 7 events at regular rates. SO the trick should leave $25 on the dresser unless he also paid for dinner, but either way he should pay for cab fare.

Interesting calculation. I never thought of any of the men I had relationships with (which usually lasted several months to a few years at a time) as "tricks". I also never had a year with as few as seven "events" - never have, never will. :p

Rockntractor
02-09-2012, 12:55 PM
Odd but I can't find out how much woman cost insurance companies compared to men, there seems to be no statistics available for that.

linda22003
02-09-2012, 12:56 PM
Odd but I can't find out how much woman cost insurance companies compared to men, there seems to be no statistics available for that.

I think it varies according to time of life; women are more expensive earlier, during childbearing years, and men tend to be more expensive as they sail into heart attack and stroke territory.

txradioguy
02-09-2012, 12:56 PM
Odd but I can't find out how much woman cost insurance companies compared to men, there seems to be no statistics available for that.

Chauvinist :p

Rockntractor
02-09-2012, 01:10 PM
If Viagra was removed from the menu perhaps the ugly factor could do it's work again.:confused:

Lanie
02-09-2012, 03:07 PM
Odd but I can't find out how much woman cost insurance companies compared to men, there seems to be no statistics available for that.

There has been a point made recently in a Prevention magazine article I read a while back about how women visit the doctor more than men do. Men like to tough things out more often, from where women don't. I do think that's the most legitimate argument I've found against women regarding healthcare and its costs. Both men and women get critical illnesses though, which can be caused by Viagra, birth control, pregnancy, bad eating, etc.

fettpett
02-09-2012, 03:10 PM
There has been a point made recently in a Prevention magazine article I read a while back about how women visit the doctor more than men do. Men like to tough things out more often, from where women don't. I do think that's the most legitimate argument I've found against women regarding healthcare and its costs. Both men and women get critical illnesses though, which can be caused by Viagra, birth control, pregnancy, bad eating, etc.

women spaz about things and men don't take it seriously enough.

Lanie
02-09-2012, 03:13 PM
No one gets a 'return' on a real insurance premium, like the one you pay on your car and your house. But the genie is out of the bottle with regard to health care insurance; those who have it feel like they should get to use it, thereby driving up costs, which they feel entitles them to more use, which drives up cost.....

My view of health care insurance is evidently greatly different than yours. I view it as a wall around my financial fortress, just like the other insurances that I have.

It's odd: People who have no form of insurance on anything they own will demand health care insurance.

Really? I have collision insurance on my car. I don't have to have that. I got insurance on my phone. I've got AAA in case I get stranded. Just because one wants to be able to use their health insurance doesn't mean they don't get it on other items.

In any case, the things you might think insurance should be used for (like critical illness) is often denied to a person when they need it. It's often not denied, but there are too many cases where it is denied. So once again, what are people paying for?

Imagine if you got collision insurance on your car and then they found a reason not to pay if you got into a wreck. Wouldn't you be upset? Imagine getting protection agreements on your appliances and then they're hardly ever willing to fix your washer when it has a problem. Or better yet, imagine if your protection agreement on your washer only covered regular wear and tear in relation to men's clothing. If it's women's clothing that you're using the washer for, then your protection agreement doesn't cover it. Does this sound ridiculous yet?

Rockntractor
02-09-2012, 03:15 PM
There has been a point made recently in a Prevention magazine article I read a while back about how women visit the doctor more than men do. Men like to tough things out more often, from where women don't. I do think that's the most legitimate argument I've found against women regarding healthcare and its costs. Both men and women get critical illnesses though, which can be caused by Viagra, birth control, pregnancy, bad eating, etc.

Why am I unable to find actual statistics as to the cost to the insurance industry of males compared to females.
You made a complaint as to fairness earlier, but I ca n find no statistics to verify it.

Starbuck
02-09-2012, 06:07 PM
Really? I have collision insurance on my car. I don't have to have that. I got insurance on my phone. I've got AAA in case I get stranded. Just because one wants to be able to use their health insurance doesn't mean they don't get it on other items.

In any case, the things you might think insurance should be used for (like critical illness) is often denied to a person when they need it. It's often not denied, but there are too many cases where it is denied. So once again, what are people paying for?

Imagine if you got collision insurance on your car and then they found a reason not to pay if you got into a wreck. Wouldn't you be upset? Imagine getting protection agreements on your appliances and then they're hardly ever willing to fix your washer when it has a problem. Or better yet, imagine if your protection agreement on your washer only covered regular wear and tear in relation to men's clothing. If it's women's clothing that you're using the washer for, then your protection agreement doesn't cover it. Does this sound ridiculous yet?
OK. So how many of those insurances listed above have you collected on?

* Collision insurance for when your car is damaged, but not when it needs to be maintained. That's your responsibility

* Insurance for when you lose your phone, but not for when it needs batteries. That's your responsibility.

* And I am saying health insurance should be used when you are sick or injured. Period.

The rest of what you suggested is just hypothetical "what if" stuff. You have built a straw man and skewered him nicely. Congratulations.:rolleyes:

fettpett
02-09-2012, 06:18 PM
* And I am saying health insurance should be used when you are sick or injured. Period.

exactly, and I'll go one step further and say that taking or going to the ER for every little sniffle and cough is not using health insurance responsibly and also drives up costs. Since those can be taken care of with OTC drugs or seeing the Doctor in the morning. Unless the temp is over 103-104, there is NO reason to go to the ER.

MrsSmith
02-09-2012, 09:27 PM
Point 1. Health care insurance is like any other insurance...it's for the major expenses, not the vitamins, cough syrup, birth control, pregnancy tests, etc. A huge number of us made it all the way through our fertile period without having anybody else provide birth control.

Point 2. This isn't about what's "Fair to Women," (which many women seem to think is getting everything they've ever wanted with no effort or expense), it's about the fact that the Catholic church has a 2000 year old prohibition against birth control by any means except natural. They even teach people how to avoid pregnancy if they choose, remember Blessed taught those classes.

Point 3. The policy does not include just birth control, which would be bad enough, it also forces all religious owned businesses and business owners to pay for abortifacient drugs. The fact that the left values cats, dogs, fish, snails, trees, and every other thing on earth more than they value children does NOT give them the right to force Christian organizations to provide drugs that murder children. It's bad enough they murder their own children, the least they can do is pay for it themselves.