In the year 2012 this issue will not go away. UFB. I simply do not understand why we are still having a discussion over contraception. It should be a part of health care. Period. It should be in every grocery, drug and Target-type store.
I think maybe too much is taken for granted by some of you young people. FYI, ‘Young People” covers a lot of decades if I am saying it. When I was a girl/young woman it was an issue. It shouldn’t be now. I have passed the torch. You folks have to get out there and fight for it yourself. Censored and I both did it for our generation. Frankly, we are now more worried about defending upcoming social security.
Your reproductive rights are in serious danger. No one commented on the ERA. That speaks volumes, right there, that you don’t think it can happen to you. Can one of you imagine at age 20 being told you had to have parental permission to get contraception? That’s just the way things were. The old time TV sets weren’t just a prop. It looks like things are headed right back that way.
Don’t worry whether you like a president or not. You will never have to rub elbows with that person. Think Supreme Court appointment. That is any president’s true legacy. A Supreme Court Justice is a gift that keeps on giving and giving and giving, over the decades. Men, if you have daughters, do you want them to have to come ask you for permission to get contraception at age 20? Didn’t think so.
It is hard for many of you folks under 55 to even imagine what some of this would be like. Everyone is used to being their own boss about such issues, which you should be. However, that could all come to an end. You all have been warned.
You don’t understand why we are still having the contraception discussion? That’s an easy one… because the left desperately needs something to focus on other than Obama’s record.
@pokie, I actually wish you were correct. But you aren’t. Who is the engine driving this train?
The failure of the ERA put me off the Republican party back in the 70’s. That was cemented by decades of racially intolerant, anti-women, and pro-police state rhetoric. I suspect that the Republicans are in the process of alienating another generation of women during the current campaign cycle.
“It is hard for many of you folks under 55 to even imagine what some of this would be like.”
So if us under-55’ers don’t agree with your sense of alarm, it’s because we’re too young and dumb to get it. Check.
@Emma, not too young and dumb. You have no experience with not having certain rights in place. Censored and I do.
By the same token, I have no experience with high button shoes, like my grandmother did. Intelligence has nothing to do with it. Where I fit in on life’s time line does.
People who turned 18 in 1975 faced a different set of rules than those of us who were earlier baby boomers.
JUST IS
Emma,
why are you so defensive? Moon makes an excellent point about “life” experience. I did not live in Virginia when legalized discrimination existed. Suggesting I don’t understand what it was really like to live under that rule is just speaking the truth.
I find it so ironic that certain conservatives in this country want to make us quake in our shoes in fear of “extremist muslims” taking over, hysterial about sharia law. And yet, those same people have no problem rolling back the clock on women and their economic freedom? Nah, no credibility from my perspective.
Oh, please …. election-year drivel. The argument in the 60s was over the legality of contraception, which is firmly established in all fifty states. Now the argument is over who will pay for it. Apples and oranges.
Prove to me that you are truly equal and independent by buying your own contraception. This debate reminds me of a teenager who claims to be independent and then asks for $40 to gas up his car.
Kelly, you are my first piece of evidence.
I don’t think you have to be truly equal and indepedent to be able to use contraception. That might be sort of the point.
You obviously haven’t been denied the use of contraception. It obviously has always been available to you.
What if it isn’t available to you, regardless of who pays for it?
let’s move to the high ticket items like a vasectomy. Should a person have to pay out of pocket for that kind of surgery just because your boss doesn’t believe in vasectomy? Do you think that is right? Why should your boss get to decide that? Bull Puckey!
Yes. A person should pay for any elective surgery, regardless of what his boss thinks.
You speak of vasectomy like it is a nose job. Most insurance companies perfer to pay for sterilation for males and females rather than maternity charges.
Traditionally, companies have paid for permanent contraception. My husband’s company did over 30 years ago.
Why should your boss decide if you get snipped?
Kelly,
It isn’t the insurance companies that don’t want to pay, its the “religeous” exemption that employer want to assume so they can push THEIR value system onto other people.
cosmetic surgery is not anything like getting your tubes tied or having a vasectomy! I know women that, due to difficult pregnancies, chose tubal ligation after their second child was born. Furthermmore, I also know women who had endometrial ablation because they had horrible menstrual bleeding, like soaking towels while they slept. Want anymore womanly reproductive education, I am happy to oblige.
Ewww…no thanks but I am sure those women who are writing to their anti choice congressmen would love to sign you up.
Don’t want “religious values” shoved on you by your employer? Feel free not to go to work for a religious employer. See, I believe in choice too. I just believe the “choice” happens slightly upstream of where liberal women think it does.
The whole debate shows how stupid employer provided health insurance is. My employer should have about as much to do with my health insurance as they do with my car insurance, which is to say, nothing.
“It should be in every grocery, drug and Target-type store.” Last I checked, contraception WAS available in all these places. This isn’t about availability, this is about wanting free stuff. Stop trying to muddy the waters here. If diabetics aren’t getting insulin and test strips for free, are they being “denied access”?
CeeTee, stop testing my good will and manners.
So you are saying that a good Catholic like Tom Monaghan should be able to opt out of providing contraception because he doesn’t believe in it? Are we now supposed to interview our employers and get their opinion on religion and on birth control?
Actually contaception isn’t available at all stores. Often it is inaccessible and grown women have to go ask pimple faced store clerks for it. Some pharmacies have given permission for a conscience clause refusal to fill certain types of birth control. Maybe you should check more closely before making sweeping statements.
This issue really isn’t debatable. Those who provide health care need to provide full service health care. No cherry picking.
We aren’t talking free. We are talking availability. I don’t think it is too much to ask for insurance to pay for surgeries. People just don’t write a check for a tubal.
Are you one of those people who doesn’t believe in birth control?
Ah, the left’s favorite debating tactic. Declaring that debate can’t happen.
Did it work?
/actually, someone else deciding if women can have access to contraception is not debatable. I would tell you the same thing if I were so conservative I was a kkk woman. It simply isn’t debatable. Not in 2012.
This isn’t a Left or Right thing , It’s radical politicians who want their belief’s to be law and it’s all our fault for electing Megalomaniacs.
Unfortunately, the meglaomanias have convinced perfectly normal people, who should know better, that contraception is a product of the evil liberals, even though they use it themselves. 95% of all Americans have used contraception at some time in their reproductive lives.
Cee,
allow me to illuminate for you the totality of the war on contraception. These new laws allow for ANY employer(not just religeous employers) to prevent contraception from being covered. I hope this helps you understand the totality of all these new regulations being proposed.
The arguement over who pays for contraception is stupid. The same people who are caterwauling over people paying for their own contraception are also the anti abortion people.
So the more people who use contraception, the fewer pregnancies. The fewer pregnancies, the fewer abortions. If reduction of the number of abortions is the real goal, then let’s have a talk about the birds and the bees and what we can do to prevent abortion.
You can play it smart or you can play it stupid.
While I am being insulting, and without apology, Let’s look at this same subset of people who don’t get it, the same set of people howling about increased taxes, especially for medicaid and help for poor families. Has it occurred to the nay-sayers that these are the people that can’t afford reliable contraception?
Fine, upstanding conservatives telling the poor what they should and should not be doing hasn’t worked since time began. Somehow ” you all should be using condoms to prevent disease” just falls on deaf ears, as does, if you can’t afford contraception, then don’t have sex.
This is really very easy to understand. I am going to start calling on anyone who doesn’t want to fund contraception and who hates abortion and wants to outlaw all abortion to simply stop being stupid.
@Moon-howler
No one is saying your boss can decide if you can be snipped or not. The question is if your boss is forced by the government to pay for the snip.
@Freddie
If your boss provides health care benefits, then yes. That insurance should have snip coverage. There should be some standards.
Ever tried to figure out Medicare for a parent or spouse? The bridge policies are all standardized. An F policy with AARP has the same coverage as an F policy with Aetna.
Freddie,
What is the cost benefit analysis for insurance companies to include contraception in their coverage? Since you assume to speak from a place of knowledge, is there a substantial discrepency?
I don’t care about any cost benefit analysis. It’s irrelevant. The question is if the government should require certain types of medical coverage, regardless of what the first amendment says.
Freddie,
Contraception coverage is preventative health care, period. That in 2012 women will need to bring a note to work explaining why they need contraception is crazy. Personally, I think a single payer system will be unavoidable in the future so your point will be moot.