Does the birth control debate...

[TexasWife25]

make America look foolish? I was just curious, looking for a different prospective on the issue. The fact that Americans are currently debating whether women have the same rights to prescription coverage as their male counterparts in this day and age, makes me, as an American, feel foolish. So, how does it look from an outside prospective?

 

[evesdream]

make America look foolish? I was just curious, looking for a different prospective on the issue. The fact that Americans are currently debating whether women have the same rights to prescription coverage as their male counterparts in this day and age, makes me, as an American, feel foolish. So, how does it look from an outside prospective?

Barely cognizant of your debate.

 

[Ishmael]

make America look foolish? I was just curious, looking for a different prospective on the issue. The fact that Americans are currently debating whether women have the same rights to prescription coverage as their male counterparts in this day and age, makes me, as an American, feel foolish. So, how does it look from an outside prospective?

There is NO debate.

Ishmael

 

[breakwall]

I avoid criticizing Americans as much as possible. Canadians and Americans are close cousins and have enjoyed a mutually beneficial friendship.

But I have to admit that there are some discussions that happen in the US that don't happen here.

We understand that abortion is a hot button issue. We aren't immune to it.
But birth control? That's not controversial. We teach it in schools.

What we don't teach in schools is Creationism. Or Intelligent Design.
And we have more guns per capita than the US (look it up), but they are all long guns. We generally don't own fully automatic rifles or handguns, because the former ruins the venison, and the latter lets the venison get away.

 

[richard_daily]

Barely cognizant of your debate.

Be thankful for that.

 

[islandman]

Funny part is that most women I've spoken to (small sample size) don't realize that they're being treated as second-class citizens in this regard.

 

[TexasWife25]

What upsets me the most, is the lack of female voice on this issue. Panels are debating it in congress, and they dont have so much as 1 female among them. I dont except men to know off hand the varied and numerous health benefits that the pill provides, but it does much more then prevent conception.

 

[Ishmael]

I avoid criticizing Americans as much as possible. Canadians and Americans are close cousins and have enjoyed a mutually beneficial friendship.

But I have to admit that there are some discussions that happen in the US that don't happen here.

We understand that abortion is a hot button issue. We aren't immune to it.
But birth control? That's not controversial. We teach it in schools.

What we don't teach in schools is Creationism. Or Intelligent Design.
And we have more guns per capita than the US (look it up), but they are all long guns. We generally don't own fully automatic rifles or handguns, because the former ruins the venison, and the latter lets the venison get away.

It's not a 'hot button' here either. The whole scenario was set up and if you bother to observe closely it's a one sided issue of accusations. Politics in its shallowest form.

The democrats have little of record to run on this year and are forced into the position of having to manufacture issues. This is one of those issues, or non-issues as it were. The whole thread of this issue was set up by Stephenopolouos in a question to Romney back in a Dec. republican debate. The question came right out of left field and was posited in the form of a fait acompli format. ie. Do you still beat your wife?

That notion has been latched onto by the democrats, and the media backing them. What has followed has been a deluge of out of context quotes to bolster the one sided assertions.

Go back and read the media quips with a critical eye and you'll see what I'm saying here.

If there is an issue it's simply who should pay for the birth control medication that 12 million US women, less than 10% of US womenhood, choose to take? Those that make the choice, or the general public? But the issue concerning availability is a non-issue.

Ishmael

 

[Ishmael]

Funny part is that most women I've spoken to (small sample size) don't realize that they're being treated as second-class citizens in this regard.

Actually we agree in the general context on this, perhaps not the reasoning though.

In a society where a woman, even within the vows of marriage, are considered to have the power of the word 'No' when it comes to sexual relations, as is fit for anyone that is considered to have dominion over their own body, the mandate for taxpayer funded birth control is an implicit statement on the part of the law makers that, "No, they really can't control themselves." Or an explicit move to buy votes with someone else's money.

Ishmael

 

[mercury14]

What upsets me the most, is the lack of female voice on this issue. Panels are debating it in congress, and they dont have so much as 1 female among them. I dont except men to know off hand the varied and numerous health benefits that the pill provides, but it does much more then prevent conception.

Yeah I saw that in the news today and was floored. The Republican House assembled a panel to discuss women's "health" (code for contraception), and Darrell freaking Issa stocked it with only men.

Democrats: "Umm.. isn't a sausage-fest a little inappropriate here?"
Republicans: "We think it's okay."
Democrats: *long pause waiting for some kind of punchline*
Republicans: "These are good conservative panelists. What else could we ask for?"
Democrats: "wait, you're serious?!?"
Republicans: "Yeah we don't need women in this meeting."
Democrats: "WTF? You really think that?"
Republicans: "Let's get started."
Democrats: "Well in that case we'd like to call a minority party witness. We have a woman named Sandra Fluke here who we'd like to have answer questions for the panel. That way we can have at least one female voice in the matter."
Republicans: "No we're serious, no women allowed in this discussion. In fact we're not going to allow you guys to call any witnesses at all."
Democrats: "Are you fucking serious? Well can we have someone read a written letter from a woman?"
Republicans: "Nope we're not going to let you do that either."
Democrats: "And you wonder why America says you're as out-of-touch as pedophile-shielding bishops lecturing them on sexual morality..."

 

[TexasWife25]

Yeah I saw that in the news today and was floored. The Republican House assembled a panel to discuss women's "health" (code for contraception), and Darrell freaking Issa stocked it with only men

ok I lol'd

 

[mercury14]

It's not a 'hot button' here either. The whole scenario was set up and if you bother to observe closely it's a one sided issue of accusations. Politics in its shallowest form.

The democrats have little of record to run on this year and are forced into the position of having to manufacture issues. This is one of those issues, or non-issues as it were. The whole thread of this issue was set up by Stephenopolouos in a question to Romney back in a Dec. republican debate. The question came right out of left field and was posited in the form of a fait acompli format. ie. Do you still beat your wife?

That notion has been latched onto by the democrats, and the media backing them. What has followed has been a deluge of out of context quotes to bolster the one sided assertions.

Go back and read the media quips with a critical eye and you'll see what I'm saying here.

If there is an issue it's simply who should pay for the birth control medication that 12 million US women, less than 10% of US womenhood, choose to take? Those that make the choice, or the general public? But the issue concerning availability is a non-issue.

Ishmael

Wait, so you think the Democrats manufactured conservative outrage for conservatives? The GOP presidential candidates keep pounding it. Segment after segment on Fox News we see them spamming the topic 24/7.. They're busting at the seams doing interviews with angry righties talking about this crap. Hannity is speed-talking in order to have more time to talk about it. The conservative blogosphere is in a tizzy. And Boehner and McConnell want to have meaningless but well-publicized official votes on the matter.

Democrats are forcing them to talk though? BWAHAHAHA!

The democrats have little of record to run on this year

Actually they're trying to run on the economic recovery.

 

[Ishmael]

Wait, so you think the Democrats manufactured conservative outrage for conservatives? The GOP presidential candidates keep pounding it. Segment after segment on Fox News we see them spamming the topic 24/7.. They're busting at the seams doing interviews with angry righties talking about this crap. Hannity is speed-talking in order to have more time to talk about it. The conservative blogosphere is in a tizzy. And Boehner and McConnell want to have meaningless but well-publicized official votes on the matter.

Democrats are forcing them to talk though? BWAHAHAHA!




Actually they're trying to run on the economic recovery.

Wasn't talking to you moron.

Ishmael

 

[islandman]

Actually we agree in the general context on this, perhaps not the reasoning though.

In a society where a woman, even within the vows of marriage, are considered to have the power of the word 'No' when it comes to sexual relations, as is fit for anyone that is considered to have dominion over their own body, the mandate for taxpayer funded birth control is an implicit statement on the part of the law makers that, "No, they really can't control themselves." Or an explicit move to buy votes with someone else's money.

Ishmael

Healthcare is healthcare, not "healthcare insofar that it must affect both sexes in order to qualify as such." I would also add that birth control has other uses than just pregnancy prevention.

 

[mercury14]

It's not a 'hot button' here either. The whole scenario was set up

I agree. The January BLS economic report came out with a quarter-million jobs added and *BAM* Republicans jump in our line of sight, waiving their arms and squawking about birth control.

Well it worked to some extent. The cost though is that the overwhelming majority of America, including a huge heap of conservatives, opposes the Republican stance. It makes you wonder why they didn't pick an issue like abortion where at least they could rally a decent chunk of support.

This whole debacle is an embarrassment for the GOP. Best-case scenario is that two weeks from now this whole thing gets tossed into their big ol' bin of discarded issues that never mattered. Worst-case scenario, Obama just sits quietly with rising poll numbers while America becomes even more turned-off by the Republican Party.

 

[mercury14]

Wasn't talking to you moron.

Ishmael

Yes that's right, you stopped talking to me after you claimed that "Obamacare is about to wipe out the insurance industry"... And I replied with something like...

STOP RUNNING FROM MY QUESTION:

WHY DID WELLPOINT'S STOCK GO FROM $30 TO $80 AFTER THE PASSAGE OF "OBAMACARE" THAT YOU INSIST IS ABOUT TO WIPE OUT IT'S ENTIRE INDUSTRY?

The whole health insurance industry has seen their stock prices soar since Obama's reforms yet according to you they're about to go under. I've had to ask you five times to back your claim and five times you've run like hell from the question.Now you're giving me the silent treatment?

You're a pussy.

 

[ChinaBandit]

I do see it in the context of an intrusion on religious freedom.

Why should a religious entity, in this case the Roman Catholic Church, be required to finance something that they don't believe in?

I also question why contraception should be covered by insurance but can accept that it is.

Mostly, I am definitely against tax dollars covering contraception. Why should I pay for some chick's birth control pills? Fuck her (no pun intended), not on my dime/s.

 

[Ishmael]

Healthcare is healthcare, not "healthcare insofar that it must affect both sexes in order to qualify as such." I would also add that birth control has other uses than just pregnancy prevention.

In order to buy into that one must surrender ones thoughts to the notion that sex is NOT a conscious decision. If there is no sex, there is no health questions regarding pregnancy. Further, this is all discussed in the absence of discussion of the contraindications for the woman as a long term consequence of taking birth control. There are NO free rides.

A great deal of this discussion, and beneficial point of view, truly is from the male perspective. After all, if you use hefty rubbers she's relieved of having to take any drugs at all.

Ishmael

 

[mercury14]

Mostly, I am definitely against tax dollars covering contraception. Why should I pay for some chick's birth control pills? Fuck her (no pun intended), not on my dime/s.

Well we're talking about private insurance here, not government insurance. Though Medicare does cover birth control pills.

But for argument's sake, instead of paying for her birth control you'd rather pay twenty times as much for her four pregnancies and the new family of six?

 

[CHNOPS]

In order to buy into that one must surrender ones thoughts to the notion that sex is NOT a conscious decision. If there is no sex, there is no health questions regarding pregnancy. Further, this is all discussed in the absence of discussion of the contraindications for the woman as a long term consequence of taking birth control. There are NO free rides.

A great deal of this discussion, and beneficial point of view, truly is from the male perspective. After all, if you use hefty rubbers she's relieved of having to take any drugs at all.

Ishmael

You're a man with documented erectile dysfunction. Your insurance shouldn't pay for the Levitra your doctor prescribes?

Or the visit during which he prescribes it? The solution is for you just to stop having sex?

Fishmeal

 

[TexasWife25]

The pill is not just a contraceptive!

I know you men love to debate why women should have to fork out the $600+ on their own, but I felt the need to point this out.

Also, why does the company that owns my company have the right to impose their religious beliefs on my health insurance?

 

[Wrong Element]

It's not a 'hot button' here either. The whole scenario was set up and if you bother to observe closely it's a one sided issue of accusations. Politics in its shallowest form.

The democrats have little of record to run on this year and are forced into the position of having to manufacture issues. This is one of those issues, or non-issues as it were. The whole thread of this issue was set up by Stephenopolouos in a question to Romney back in a Dec. republican debate. The question came right out of left field and was posited in the form of a fait acompli format. ie. Do you still beat your wife?

That notion has been latched onto by the democrats, and the media backing them. What has followed has been a deluge of out of context quotes to bolster the one sided assertions.

Go back and read the media quips with a critical eye and you'll see what I'm saying here.

If there is an issue it's simply who should pay for the birth control medication that 12 million US women, less than 10% of US womenhood, choose to take? Those that make the choice, or the general public? But the issue concerning availability is a non-issue.

Ishmael

Who should pay? Isn't that kind the point of having any kind of insurance? I pay for female birth control now; they pay once my prostate gives up the ghost.

And given that the current Republican front runner is on record as saying use of birth control is a bad thing, and that states ought to have the right to ban its use, I don't see how its "availability is a non-issue." If GOP voters are going to vote in huge numbers for a sexist clown, don't say it's unfair when others point that out.

 

[mark_j]

So what exactly IS the debate?

Seems to me that most of the medical plans that I have been under have a provision for female wellness checks (pap and other gynecological tests) the same as male wellness checks. As far as birth control pills and such, they are covered the same as any other prescription medication. You do a co-pay and the plan covers the rest.

No one is denying access to anyone since if YOUR plan does not cover such things. There are always low cost alternatives such as Planned Parenthood, walk in clinics and such.

IF, as I suspect, this is more of a moral debate. Then all I have to say to those with a problem with providing access to birth control is LIVE WITH IT.

You can't return to the "bad old days" no matter how much some of the harbingers of "good moral character" might wish it to be otherwise.

 

[islandman]

In order to buy into that one must surrender ones thoughts to the notion that sex is NOT a conscious decision. If there is no sex, there is no health questions regarding pregnancy. Further, this is all discussed in the absence of discussion of the contraindications for the woman as a long term consequence of taking birth control. There are NO free rides.

A great deal of this discussion, and beneficial point of view, truly is from the male perspective. After all, if you use hefty rubbers she's relieved of having to take any drugs at all.

Ishmael

You're a member of an erotica site, yet subscribe to "sex for procreation only"?

I have to wonder if you'd be so keen to have this discussion if men were the ones to take contraceptives.

 

[mercury14]

Why should a religious entity, in this case the Roman Catholic Church, be required to finance something that they don't believe in?

Let's limit this to Catholic Bishops because polls show almost all Catholics like having birth control.

The thing is, birth control in itself isn't considered immoral by the Catholic Church. It's sex for reasons such as "being in love with your spouse" that they find morally objectionable. They wrongly think that if they cover contraception that it will lead to more sex for non baby making reasons.

They wrongly think that anything some bishop somewhere does is going to have an impact one way or another on people's sex lives. It like they have this notion that they're buying people free sexual experiences.... It's wrong-headed and arrogant as fuck to think that they have any impact on the matter.

(full disclosure: I'm a practicing Catholic)