tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31903680.post1022090304449968454..comments2023-09-26T07:04:43.205-04:00Comments on Alexa Shrugged: Controlling the Birth Control DebateAlexahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09880617700165212223noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31903680.post-24663841415592837552012-02-25T21:51:19.713-05:002012-02-25T21:51:19.713-05:00Cynthia, my post specifically discussed the Obamac...Cynthia, my post specifically discussed the Obamacare contraception mandate and liberals turning it into "REPUBLICANS WANT TO BAN CONTRACEPTION!!!11!," but in your attempt to dispute me, you had to bring up examples outside of the Obamandate religious conscience violation. Nevertheless, I will counter your non-germane points one by one, although it all boils down to your inability to distinguish the difference between "ban" and "not fund" and your apparent disregard for the First Amendment. For clarity, I'll respond to each of your 5 paragraphs by number.<br /><br />#1. If there is no proof that hormonal birth control can cause the abortion of a fertilized egg, then obviously Personhood laws wouldn't make them illegal. Also, there is a difference between something that potentially could unintentionally take a life and abortion which always purposefully ends a life.<br /><br />#2. Blunt's (from Missouri not Montana, btw) legislation undoes the unprecedented Obamacare mandate, restoring the religious and moral protections we've always had in this country, which obviously does not ban contraceptives.<br /><br />#3. In Washington, their law requiring pharmacies to stock popular medicine had exemptions for secular reasons, such as burdensome paper work or increase in likelihood of theft, but not for religious objection. Not forcing pharmacists to sell a drug that goes against their religious conscience obviously does not ban contraceptives because there are other pharmacists or pharmacies that will distribute them with no problem (btw, emergency contraceptives are different from regular contraceptives because they can be an abortifacent).<br /><br />#4. Federal defunding of the biggest abortion business in the country that provides contraceptives as one of its services does not ban contraceptives and there is no evidence that it would even affect Planned Parenthood's (which operates a $1.1 BILLION budget, regularly runs millions in profits and doesn't even need our tax money for its deadly practices) distribution of contraceptives. There are plenty of reasons to defund PP, please see just a few of them in this post: http://www.alexashrugged.com/2012/02/susan-g-komen-for-win.html<br /><br />#5. Again, Republicans do not want to ban contraception, and I explained in this very post how access to them will not change and they are already cheap or free. But I guess if you think not having the government mandate free birth control is more expensive, you have a point.Alexahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09880617700165212223noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31903680.post-73389794630892639722012-02-25T04:58:49.924-05:002012-02-25T04:58:49.924-05:00Republicans are trying to implement "Personho...Republicans are trying to implement "Personhood Amendments" in nine states. Personhood amendments claim that human zygotes are "persons" and have a fundamental right to exist. Although there has never been scientific proof, some claim that hormonal birth control makes it impossible for a fertilized egg to implant in a woman's womb. Personhood amendments threaten access to hormonal birth control because if this legislation passes, manufacturing, prescribing, filling, selling or taking this medication may be criminalized. <br /><br />Republican Sen. Roy Blunt of Montana is introducing legislation that permits any employer to deny birth control coverage in their health insurance plans.<br /><br />U.S. District Judge Ronald B. Leighton declared that Washington state regulation requiring pharmacists to dispense emergency contraceptives unconstitutional because it trampled on pharmacists' right to "conscientious objection" (Admittedly. I don't know whether this judge is republican, but now any pharmacist or pharmacy clerk can refuse to fill or ring up contraceptives in Washington State).<br /><br />In 2011, the U.S. House of Representatives approved Republican Mike Pence’s amendment to cut off funding to Planned Parenthood, the number one clinic low-income women go to for low-cost or free contraceptives.<br /><br />In short, many Republicans want to ban contraceptives, or, at the very least, make it difficult and expensive for women to gain access to them.Cynthianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31903680.post-68234477363894735342012-02-17T01:20:32.260-05:002012-02-17T01:20:32.260-05:00Great post! I'm linking you here http://www.mi...Great post! I'm linking you here http://www.midgroundpolitics.com/1/post/2012/02/good-blog-post-on-the-birth-control-debate.htmlYvonnehttp://www.midgroundpolitics.comnoreply@blogger.com