I feel certain that Ms. Talento and Mr. Bowman were vetted by Mike Pence's people. This is why the so-called religious right backed Trump. An ugly deal that prioritizes imposing the misogynist views of religious charlatans over the right of women to make their own decisions.
14
Two Americans enforcing Sharia Law on Women
13
I helped to dismantle women's reproductive healthcare in the South in the 1980's. I am sorry. I especially want to apologise to the poor black girls and women in my city that were shamed, hurt, and kept in poverty and even jailed because of my selfish, racist religious beliefs.
As a teen white girl, I patrolled black women's healthcare clinics as part of our church's community activities in our Southern city.
Our church, pro-segregation Anglo Southern Baptist, was made up of families that had been employed in the Jim Crow system and farms. They had been the "straw bosses" who patrolled the black workers on the city road crews and prison farm crews. Many of the older men had spent their entire working lives as a lone Anglo " straw boss" among black men, women and children workers.
And these white men were always armed with a rifle or pistol on the job. In many Dixie cities, it was part of their duties as a white assistant manager to be armed. Every Anglo trolley and bus driver was armed to defend against sudden violence from " the Negros".
With the end of segregation, their way of life was turned upside down. They had been taught by elite Anglos ( their bosses and pastors) that they were an important part of our Southern way of life. Without their actions as AngloSaxon Christian warriors, the South would be destroyed by sexually deviant and violent black women and men.
They were going to get their power back " By Any Means Necessary", and they did.
As a teen white girl, I patrolled black women's healthcare clinics as part of our church's community activities in our Southern city.
Our church, pro-segregation Anglo Southern Baptist, was made up of families that had been employed in the Jim Crow system and farms. They had been the "straw bosses" who patrolled the black workers on the city road crews and prison farm crews. Many of the older men had spent their entire working lives as a lone Anglo " straw boss" among black men, women and children workers.
And these white men were always armed with a rifle or pistol on the job. In many Dixie cities, it was part of their duties as a white assistant manager to be armed. Every Anglo trolley and bus driver was armed to defend against sudden violence from " the Negros".
With the end of segregation, their way of life was turned upside down. They had been taught by elite Anglos ( their bosses and pastors) that they were an important part of our Southern way of life. Without their actions as AngloSaxon Christian warriors, the South would be destroyed by sexually deviant and violent black women and men.
They were going to get their power back " By Any Means Necessary", and they did.
3
Nobody is pushing birth control pills down Ms. Talento's throat. Why have someone trying to save me from cancer (really!) but not from the dangers of becoming pregnant. The chances of dying from giving birth are a lot higher than dying from birth control pills--especially among poor women. Women's reasons for not having children, for which they may be on birth control, are NONE of Ms. Busybody Ms. Talento, and it their decisions that count. So, Ms. Talento, whatever your motivation may be, religious or otherwise, butt off. I hope you donate lots of money to women who are in need trying to pay for their medical bills and feed their children.
14
The Handmaid's Tale coming to a town near you!
8
Pregnancy may not be a "disease" but it sure is a health condition. So is a broken back, infertility, or (OMG) impotence, Bowman, you moron. They are health conditions that affect the life, welfare, and safety of patients.
8
This is a big "thank you" to the "religious" right and a big "drop dead" to the women this would help. Right wingers want to deny women birth control assistance. Then they want to deny parents and newborns affordable health care.
7
I am starting to think that any newly formed ACA should have mandatory mental health coverage for people who would deny others birth control.
9
IF sex is only for pro-creation then insurers should not pay for Viagra unless the male meets the profile: married, good income, home-bound wife, and of a reasonable child rearing age. Anyone else should pay for their own Viagra since obviously, birth control is a sin in the eyes of these people. So, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
10
I wish I could get into the hearts and minds of these people who lie about birth control in the name of concern for women's health. They are completely against abortion but want to deny women affordable birth control? This is obviously ridiculous. So they want no sex until marriage, as many births as possible after marriage, women at home caring for multiple children, no decent way to avoid pregnancy while married if it endangers a woman's health and thus the entire family? The husband must support the family in this world of increasing wage stagnation. Are these people idiots or cruel or both? And they lie!
12
Talento didn't learn much about science in school. She is an enemy of most women and her religiosity is offensive in public office. I have learned to despise people who pretend they are God - or his translator.
15
When I was in college, my OBGYN provided me with free "samples" of my prescribed birth control pills. He knew I was sexually active (like most college-aged women) and on a tight budget (like most college students). I wasn't going to depend on a man, or abstinence, or whatever else these pro-life people claim as an alternative. I would go in for my yearly checkup, and he would provide me with as many samples as he could. At that time, my birth control pills were $50 every 3 months.
My doctor had my back. Too bad my own government does not.
My doctor had my back. Too bad my own government does not.
16
Q. What right do men have in determining how women lead their lives?
A. None.
A. None.
11
Get the names of these people and hold vigils in their offices. Since the Republicans are not doing anything to help women it is the citizenry that should do it.
Third world countries with poor governance seem to succeed in getting themselves heard by isolating individual law makers and holding them responsible for their actions.
We find withered old men standing and holding placards in front of women's clinics protesting against abortion etc. They have no idea about what unwanted pregnancies lead to, what breast cancer does to women etc.
Third world countries with poor governance seem to succeed in getting themselves heard by isolating individual law makers and holding them responsible for their actions.
We find withered old men standing and holding placards in front of women's clinics protesting against abortion etc. They have no idea about what unwanted pregnancies lead to, what breast cancer does to women etc.
8
"Pregnancy is not a disease." An unintended pregnancy is a disease on society. Until we have universal health care, HeadStart for all children, and free daycare centers, making sure that women have access to free reliable birth control is a benefit to society that coverage for erectile dysfunction (NOT a DISEASE) is not.
13
This comes about principally because in the insane conservative universe the highest and most important role women can (and should) ever aspire to is that of breeder. Self-determination? Dream on.
10
All the more reason that a universal Medicare together with the extra coverage of a Medicare supplement Plan F is needed. It is time to separate healthcare coverage levels from the whims a private parties! Thanks to the Hobby Lobby decision, it will be hazardous to work for a company in which the Boss is a Jehovah Witness member (because of prohibition by the cult for receiving blood transfusions or treatment involving blood products), a Scientologist if you have kids or plan to have a family (because of the cult's disdain for any form of mental health treatment) or if you are a women that needs birth control material to provide continued management of her endometriosis with a Hobby Lobby like company. Don't they realize that imposing results of their religious believes takes away the religious freedom of others?
7
And people still delude themselves into thinking that Ivanka is a force for good (and for women!) in this horrifying White House.
12
In my opinion, tax dollars should not go to elective supplements or procedures.
Having to deliver a baby because you couldn't get contraceptives isn't elective.
12
No Birth Control? Who is going to take care, feed, cloth and school all the unwanted children that will be left on "corner door steps"?
Not your Grand Old Party!
As our grand leader has stated many times: Sad, so sad!
As an aside, who is watching the store while he blissfully tweets away the days and nights?
Not your Grand Old Party!
As our grand leader has stated many times: Sad, so sad!
As an aside, who is watching the store while he blissfully tweets away the days and nights?
12
Having a baby is not a risk free experience for women. If they want a baby, they weigh that risk. But if they do not want a baby, or do not want one now, they should not be made to use less reliable contraceptive options or just give up sex. Insurance usually provides vaccines, including flu vaccines, free of cost because they know that in the long run, it is cheaper than dealing with the illness. Even though the risk of dying or disabling complications from the flu are slight. Women seeking contraceptive medications or devices deserve the same consideration.
11
Mind your own business, busybodies. Or, move to Kansas, where the prevalent hobby is spying on and gossiping about your neighbors, co-workers and anyone not white, republican, straight and obedient to their church, husbands, families. In that order. I'm very serious.
Life in the fifties. The 1850's.
Life in the fifties. The 1850's.
14
Conservatives and Republicans planted Gorsuch onto the stolen US Supreme Court seat for many reasons, one of which would be to overturn the landmark 1965 High Court decision, Griswold v. CT. Once that ruling is overruled, each state will have the constitutional power to recriminalize all birth control medications and devices. But of course, Fox Propaganda (Hate TV) & Rush Limbaugh / Sean Hannity (Hate Radio) will put their alternative "facts" out there and preclude any meaningful, thoughtful, informative, critical debate between their base and the rest of us.
If you don't believe that this is a distinct probability, you might want to reread the historical, legal, and constitutional tea leaves for the past 36 years. This is the direction that Conservativism has been heading towards, and by extension, the Republican Party. Women will have no constitutional rights to privacy, control over their bodies and medical decisions, and the consequences will be devastating.
At some point, those who consider themselves "moderate" Republicans will need to decide whether to remain within the new American Conservative Party or permanently exit from it. The baggage from the collateral damage emanating from Conservative Republicans beggars comparison.
As for the rest of us (and I have been a lifelong progressive Democrat), we shall need to decide whether we have reached our tipping point. The rest of us Americans have options too. We are veering towards fascism & civil war. G-d help us.
If you don't believe that this is a distinct probability, you might want to reread the historical, legal, and constitutional tea leaves for the past 36 years. This is the direction that Conservativism has been heading towards, and by extension, the Republican Party. Women will have no constitutional rights to privacy, control over their bodies and medical decisions, and the consequences will be devastating.
At some point, those who consider themselves "moderate" Republicans will need to decide whether to remain within the new American Conservative Party or permanently exit from it. The baggage from the collateral damage emanating from Conservative Republicans beggars comparison.
As for the rest of us (and I have been a lifelong progressive Democrat), we shall need to decide whether we have reached our tipping point. The rest of us Americans have options too. We are veering towards fascism & civil war. G-d help us.
8
So these people don't want to help women get effective contraception, but they want abortion to be illegal and don't want any public money spent on health care for mothers or children and don't even want to make insurance companies offer maternity benefits. And they're the same folks who generally oppose any government spending on daycare and childhood development programs.
Why don't they come out and say it. They want to punish women for having sex while poor or middle class, and the children are just collateral damage. "All life is precious," but only before it's born, right? Sounds like a creepy blend of Puritanism and the Taliban, doesn't it?
Why don't they come out and say it. They want to punish women for having sex while poor or middle class, and the children are just collateral damage. "All life is precious," but only before it's born, right? Sounds like a creepy blend of Puritanism and the Taliban, doesn't it?
15
The full hysteria of so-called "progressives" is on display here. The absurd proclamations of far-right pseudo-science and religious fanatics are a sideshow; contraception is not going to be outlawed or made unavailable. The real issues are who provides contraception and who pays for it.
I have read that about 15% of women have a medical need for contraceptive medication other than birth control. Whatever the actual number is, they should certainly have it included in their insurance plans, but no insurer should be required to provide it for free to those who can afford to pay for it as they do for other medications. To mandate that it be free for all is simply exploitation.
And for the remaining group who do not have a need for it, other than birth control, requiring insurers and institutions to provide it - whether with or without cost - is requiring them to subsidize people's sex lives, not providing "health care". And yes, the same rules should apply to such medications as Viagra that are the equivalent for men.
I have read that about 15% of women have a medical need for contraceptive medication other than birth control. Whatever the actual number is, they should certainly have it included in their insurance plans, but no insurer should be required to provide it for free to those who can afford to pay for it as they do for other medications. To mandate that it be free for all is simply exploitation.
And for the remaining group who do not have a need for it, other than birth control, requiring insurers and institutions to provide it - whether with or without cost - is requiring them to subsidize people's sex lives, not providing "health care". And yes, the same rules should apply to such medications as Viagra that are the equivalent for men.
2
In erroneously viewing this entire issue through the lens of sex, you have forgotten something important, Carl: Requiring insurers & institutions to provide birth control is NOT subsidizing people's (in your perception, that should read "women's") sex lives any more than any other types of major medical insurance "subsidize" coverage for medical treatment & medications. How many married women are trapped within an abusive marriage relationship where they cannot say "no" to their husbands, where they cannot prevent their husbands from raping them? How many women then face the decision whether to bear an unwanted child which they did not seek to conceive but which was forced upon them? Where they cannot find an escape outlet by fleeing the relationship?
Your response that most women need to purchase their own birth control leaves me with the more suitable alternative: that any man who forces himself upon a woman who says "no" should be castrated. Would you like that instead? Why, Carl, do you make the monumental blunder in always assuming that the woman is to blame?? Your "solution" would further punish women who are already victims. That's unconscionable. As for your "means test," that women who can afford to buy birth control should pay for it themselves, insurance coverage does not discriminate with income or wealth being the determining factor. Finally, unwanted pregnancy is a medical, life-&-death issue for many women. Don't allow your "sex" lens to distort your vision.
Your response that most women need to purchase their own birth control leaves me with the more suitable alternative: that any man who forces himself upon a woman who says "no" should be castrated. Would you like that instead? Why, Carl, do you make the monumental blunder in always assuming that the woman is to blame?? Your "solution" would further punish women who are already victims. That's unconscionable. As for your "means test," that women who can afford to buy birth control should pay for it themselves, insurance coverage does not discriminate with income or wealth being the determining factor. Finally, unwanted pregnancy is a medical, life-&-death issue for many women. Don't allow your "sex" lens to distort your vision.
8
Well, the idea that sex has nothing to do with birth control would be very amusing if this were not a serious discussion about policy.
I agree completely that allowance must be made for rape, incest, and other sexual crimes, but that is a small portion (if not small enough) of the whole picture. Most sex is voluntary and optional. I would suggest, with all due respect, that you are making a monumental blunder in proposing that the crimes be the central factor in determining the policy. That's rather like saying that robbery and embezzlement should be the central factors in determining our banking policy - i.e., it's absurd.
I don't have a clue as to why you're accusing me of "always assuming that the woman is to blame". (To blame for what, by the way?) As to castration, you brought that up so I'll leave the discussion of it to you.
Finally, with regards you to the "means test", it is you who is proposing to discriminate, not I. I believe that contraceptives should not be treated any differently than any other medications in regard to payment - including other medications which are far more critical for the health needs of many people of both sexes.
I agree completely that allowance must be made for rape, incest, and other sexual crimes, but that is a small portion (if not small enough) of the whole picture. Most sex is voluntary and optional. I would suggest, with all due respect, that you are making a monumental blunder in proposing that the crimes be the central factor in determining the policy. That's rather like saying that robbery and embezzlement should be the central factors in determining our banking policy - i.e., it's absurd.
I don't have a clue as to why you're accusing me of "always assuming that the woman is to blame". (To blame for what, by the way?) As to castration, you brought that up so I'll leave the discussion of it to you.
Finally, with regards you to the "means test", it is you who is proposing to discriminate, not I. I believe that contraceptives should not be treated any differently than any other medications in regard to payment - including other medications which are far more critical for the health needs of many people of both sexes.
1
Is the White House at least going to be handing out hangers?
13
All of the organizations that are against providing any support for contraception should stop paying anyone who works for them, since there is a risk that their beliefs will be trampled by some woman who works for them and still dares take part of her pay to buy contraceptives.
OR they grow up and realize that owning a company does not make you the parent of your staff, and it doesn't make your staff minors who can't make their own decisions.
OR they grow up and realize that owning a company does not make you the parent of your staff, and it doesn't make your staff minors who can't make their own decisions.
6
The secret to the GOP having a total win-win situation on this issue is for them to revive and pass the moderate GOP senators' efforts to legalize over the counter birth control pills. That would be an anti-regulatory slap in the face to the Obamacare supporters in Planned Parenthood who have been opposing OTC BCP because then healthy young women would more easily decide against participating in overpriced plans for the opportunity to get "free" birth control pills.
The BCP scam of overpriced prescriptions for birth control that should be over the counter should come to an end and the GOP should be the ones to do it if they want to pull this off and own it as a public policy win for women, too.
The BCP scam of overpriced prescriptions for birth control that should be over the counter should come to an end and the GOP should be the ones to do it if they want to pull this off and own it as a public policy win for women, too.
1
I think the reason that birth control pills need to be prescribed by a physician or nurse practitioner is that they can have serious side effects (like other medicines) and patients need to be evaluated to determine an appropriate dosage and/or combination of chemicals. These are powerful hormones, not aspirin.
4
Thanks Cathy, BC dosage and monitoring is essential. Women are not all alike. BCPs and all are a medical issues. It's important to have all the other checks as well. STDs, PCOS, Cancer screenings, etc. My Gyn even asked me if I had been physically, sexually or emotionally abused. I was surprised anyone ever asked me that. I wish they had decades ago. I would have said yes. And gotten help.
3
Effective birth control for women is *not* inexpensive; I called my local Walgreen pharmacy for the amount I would pay for Ortho Miconor 28 without insurance: $106 for one month.
For an entire year's worth, that adds up to $1272.
Can I repeat that? One year of oral contraceptives costs about $1272.
I can hear rebuttal arguments already: why not rely on something cheaper, such as condoms? First of all, a woman can only ask that a man use a condom. Secondly, condoms are not a particularly effective form of birth control: on average, a condom is only about 82% effective at preventing pregnancy, which translates into approximately 18 out of every 100 women, who rely on their partner to use a condom, becoming pregnant each year. In contrast, birth control pills are about 95% effective. Plus, one of the most important differences is that by using a contraceptive pill, women can decide for themselves whether or not they want to become pregnant.
Without health insurance, the yearly cost of effective oral contraception is out of reach for many women, and this fact is why it needs to be covered by health insurance.
For an entire year's worth, that adds up to $1272.
Can I repeat that? One year of oral contraceptives costs about $1272.
I can hear rebuttal arguments already: why not rely on something cheaper, such as condoms? First of all, a woman can only ask that a man use a condom. Secondly, condoms are not a particularly effective form of birth control: on average, a condom is only about 82% effective at preventing pregnancy, which translates into approximately 18 out of every 100 women, who rely on their partner to use a condom, becoming pregnant each year. In contrast, birth control pills are about 95% effective. Plus, one of the most important differences is that by using a contraceptive pill, women can decide for themselves whether or not they want to become pregnant.
Without health insurance, the yearly cost of effective oral contraception is out of reach for many women, and this fact is why it needs to be covered by health insurance.
10
Let's just call it what it is: a prejudice against sex. After centuries of being taught that sex outside marriage is a sin, that casting seed anywhere except in a womb is a sin, that even when a woman is married, her sexual relations with her husband should be designed for breeding, not pleasure, why is it a surprise that these misinformed and usually scientifically illiterate critics, abhor birth control? We are living in a modern world with an overpopulation problem, a rise in STD's, and all forms of birth control should be available, inexpensive, and accepted.
And as for the argument that "the pill" causes cancer, many women die or have permanent physical problems as a result of pregnancy and childbirth.
Ignorance is dangerous and will kill us. Too many people have closed their minds to reality.
And as for the argument that "the pill" causes cancer, many women die or have permanent physical problems as a result of pregnancy and childbirth.
Ignorance is dangerous and will kill us. Too many people have closed their minds to reality.
7
i'm always dumbfounded by the hypocrisy of those who seek to restrict access to birth control and cut off the availability of abortion entirely as they claim no responsibility whatsoever, despite their purportedly Christian beliefs, for helping to care for, feed, and emotionally support unwanted children. "am I my brother's keeper" indeed. the haughty nonchalance of cain after killing his brother writ large in the new administration. as Christians, we are supposed to answer this question in the affirmative but talento, bowman, and their adherents probably won't.
6
While some studies have shown a possible link between oral contraceptives such as birth control pills and breast cancer, they are more than 20 years old and the National Cancer Institute (NCI) states that there is only a slightly higher risk that disappears after discontinuation of oral contraceptives. The contraceptives studied then contained much higher levels of hormones than are in today’s birth control pills. These studies also show a reduced risk for other reproductive cancers such as ovarian and endometrial cancers. In addition, millions of women use birth control pills to control and treat medical conditions, such as intrauterine bleeding, mood swings, and the effects of premenstrual syndrome. The proposed executive order appears to not only honor the wishes of religious objectors, but it would apparently allow for “moral” objections to the contraceptive mandate. Now any employer, regardless of religious beliefs can restrict a woman’s access to contraceptives. Dr Talento’s remarks are particularly disheartening because they ignore the fact that unintended pregnancy rates are at their lowest since the 1990’s. This is because of access to contraceptives.
6
Every child a wanted child, every mother a willing mother. Hard to imagine women wanting to drag other women back to the days of back street abortions and a multitude of babies born into poverty which assures according to research in the area, an absolutely predictable ultimate rise in the crime rate. And they lie to promote their ridiculous abusive stance! Let all who vote for this sort of idiocy be made financially responsible for all the unwanted children born as a result. Then see how firm their commitment!
6
The so-called "Pro-Life" movement lost all its moral credibility by their failure and refusal to support contraception. This is not about saving the "baby" or "protecting" women. It's about a minority of aging white males and their Stepford Wives, desperately attempting to hold onto their privilege and relevancy by controlling the fertility and sexuality of women.
8
"Religion Poisons Everything." C. Hitchens.
With 7.5 billion people now living on our planet and counting, we need birth control! Religious people, you worship a false god who apparently has an IQ of 80. Mind your own business, grow up, read, study science. You may discover a hint of a God that will blow your mind. Why be satisfied with less?
With 7.5 billion people now living on our planet and counting, we need birth control! Religious people, you worship a false god who apparently has an IQ of 80. Mind your own business, grow up, read, study science. You may discover a hint of a God that will blow your mind. Why be satisfied with less?
10
America is a democracy. As for birth control and abortion we should all be free to do as we believe. Laws governing a woman's body have no place in contemporary society. They belong to the dark ages. Even Neanderthals had more sexual freedom than what moronic Republicans offer American women.
3
Hmm, I guess Harvard must have given up on science and how research is done if Talento is truly a "Harvard Trained epidemiologist", if she represents what they teach then all those hunkering to get in might want to think twice about that.....
Epidemiology requires being able to separate out correlation from causality, something she apparently cannot do (and more importantly, doesn't want to).Like the debate over HRT, birth control pills have many factors involved around them, and the science doesn't back her claims, and a lot of what evidence there is about cancer and birth control was older generation pills that used things like conjugated animal estrogens, the current generation are very different, but she cites 'facts' about drugs no longer used.
Her argument isn't science, it is religion, her objections are based in some notion of right wing Christianity, and it is obvious.Among other things, she strongly supports the notion that being gay is a choice driven by abnormal pyschology, that transgender people and their supporters are 'altering the natural order we were given", this is not a scientific argument but a religious one.
Epidemiology requires being able to separate out correlation from causality, something she apparently cannot do (and more importantly, doesn't want to).Like the debate over HRT, birth control pills have many factors involved around them, and the science doesn't back her claims, and a lot of what evidence there is about cancer and birth control was older generation pills that used things like conjugated animal estrogens, the current generation are very different, but she cites 'facts' about drugs no longer used.
Her argument isn't science, it is religion, her objections are based in some notion of right wing Christianity, and it is obvious.Among other things, she strongly supports the notion that being gay is a choice driven by abnormal pyschology, that transgender people and their supporters are 'altering the natural order we were given", this is not a scientific argument but a religious one.
6
While I think of myself being more on the "pro choice" than on the "pro life" side of the abortion debate, I fully understand the reasons why so many people are vehemently against abortion. I can even understand why some are against the contraceptive coverage mandate included in the ACA. It is beyond my comprehension, however, why someone, i.e., Ms. Talento, would be against the use, simply the use, of the birth control pill, or, for that matter, any form of contraceptive. Without contraceptives the world would have dealt with overpopulation many times over. Can you imagine the many wars that might have been going on right now for the world's rather scarce food resources if humanity had no access to contraceptives? I would expect an argument made by Ms. Talento to come from the clergy, but most certainly NOT from Harvard-trained epidemiologist (which what Ms. Talento is).
7
It is a very small step from outlawing both contraception and abortion to the dystopia of re-"domesticizing" women to Make America Tyrannically Patriarchal Again.
I suppose for some women it's a fantasy to re-enter that matrix in which their only concern and goal is to have babies and run the household, but their drive to control and limit everyone else's choices to return to some imagined golden age is sociopathic and psychotic.
I suppose for some women it's a fantasy to re-enter that matrix in which their only concern and goal is to have babies and run the household, but their drive to control and limit everyone else's choices to return to some imagined golden age is sociopathic and psychotic.
8
If the Republicans want to eliminate legal abortions AND birth control, just who is going to adopt all the children created by this, AND cover their health are costs? Anyone who supports this should be required to adopt.
8
I hope all of you complaining here VOTED in the last election, and VOTE in the next one.
7
If they are going to propose these ridiculous bills, then it needs to have mandatory requirements that all biological fathers pay for at least 50% of the cost to raise each child though at least 4 years of college. Those that preach other than public schools, also need to require fathers to pay for the private and religious schools. ( My state does not mandate and private k-12 schools payment in a divorce. The voluntary 1/2 of Catholic School my ex paid for for one of my children, was later deducted from other years child support owed). Right now so many Biological fathers are not held for the minimal child support state laws require now.
My ex owed over $120,000 the last time I took him to court. I had him served in jail and the sheriff let him out without paying any of it. He promptly fled to Canada and then called and said Ha Ha!
My ex owed over $120,000 the last time I took him to court. I had him served in jail and the sheriff let him out without paying any of it. He promptly fled to Canada and then called and said Ha Ha!
7
These same people who are plotting to restrict access to birth control are the same ones lobbying to reduce Medicaid and kill Planned Parenthood. Sitting in lofty towers telling someone else how to live. Now we have these poor innocent children being abused and killed because the parents or mother did not want them in the first place. God will judge both attitudes. If you can't build sufficient safe orphanages to care for these children and believe government needs to stop providing health care (personal decisions between patients and their doctors), you need to hush and live your life. Those decisions work for you, but not for all. Greed driving eliminating health care, and near-sighted/short-sighted pious and self-righteous people are zealously interfering with personal health care decisions. Enough of this uncaring zeal hiding behind religion. True religion cares for all - rich and poor alike.
3
So, choice is just for the "Christian" conservative? If a (gasp) religious employer has an employee of a different faith then the employer can dictate to that employee? There is nothing that says any employee has to use contraception but evidently these companies and lawyers don't believe in equality of choice. Sad.
3
Ok, make contraception hard to access, but I want the sperm donors held accountable. Use DNA testing to determine paternity and make daddy-O pony up to a tune that actually covers the cost of raising a child. If daddy can't come up with the money - military or jail. It would be interesting to watch the fall out if men's lives were destroyed by unplanned pregnancy for a change.
6
Or community service. I could use a crew of deadbeat dads to mow my lawn, shovel my walks and wash my windows. If they are going to foist the rearing of their offspring onto the public dole, they can work it off.
3
I believe that a year or so ago there was a NYT article (op ed or column - can't remember or find it) made an excellent argument looking at it from the view of employee compensation. The core point I remember is employer-provided health care is part of the compensation for time workied, like salary. Why should an employer have special control over contraception choices made with that compensation? Employees make choices with the cash compensation all the time that may go against the beliefs of a company's magagement. Purchasing a certain car, book, alcohol, gambling, etc.
3
The issue is not whether a woman has the right to use any contraceptive she wants. The question is "Who pays for it?" I don't see why I should share the cost of contraception for anyone that could afford it themselves.
1
Do you have health insurance? Why or why not?
Do you drive on public roads? Why or why not?
Have you ever attended, or do your children attend, a public school? Why or why not?
Do you see where I'm going with this?
Also, because health insurance is a part of employee compensation and employees should be able to use that compensation as they see fit. Because insurance is premised on the concept of shared risk, and every body pays for everyone else. We've decided this is one way we can live in a civilized society.
Do you drive on public roads? Why or why not?
Have you ever attended, or do your children attend, a public school? Why or why not?
Do you see where I'm going with this?
Also, because health insurance is a part of employee compensation and employees should be able to use that compensation as they see fit. Because insurance is premised on the concept of shared risk, and every body pays for everyone else. We've decided this is one way we can live in a civilized society.
6
Are you aware that, without health insurance, one year of oral contraceptives cost about $1200? We're not talking about pocket change here. And why exactly should only women bear the cost of this expenditure?
3
Obviously, you have no idea how much contraceptives can cost without insurance! Lots of women (single and married) can't afford it without insurance!
2
While I don't agree, I can respect someone who has a taken a principled stance against abortion. But if you simultaneously oppose birth control, you should be laughed out of the room. This is a profoundly un-serious stance. It reeks of Puritanical idealism.
4
Is it moral to bring a child into this world without being able to provide care for the child?
5
It's "Go_ds plan" don't you know!? Doesn't matter, "He" blessed you with that child for a reason! Now HAVE IT and DON'T ask for any assistance!!
2
Mr. Bowman said when he filed suit for March for Life in 2014, “If the government can punish organizations simply because they want to abide by their beliefs, there is no limit to what other freedoms it can take away.”
What if we swapped some nouns to make this read:
"If an employer can punish an employee simply because they want to abide by their beliefs [or, say, their doctor's medical advice?], there is no limit to what other freedoms it can take away."
I'm tired of my individual rights as an American taking a back seat to the rights of corporations and religious groups. It's tyranny and its unconstitutional.
What if we swapped some nouns to make this read:
"If an employer can punish an employee simply because they want to abide by their beliefs [or, say, their doctor's medical advice?], there is no limit to what other freedoms it can take away."
I'm tired of my individual rights as an American taking a back seat to the rights of corporations and religious groups. It's tyranny and its unconstitutional.
9
Contraception coverage should be linked irreversibly to Viagara coverage. Remove one, and the other is automatically removed as well. How many people realize that Viagara has always been covered, through all this attack on women's ability to decide if they want to become pregnant or not from having sex? (And also be protected from pregnancy in case they are attacked.) Seems really logical to me--no contraception coverage, no Viagara coverage either. Maybe the votes would change then...
5
Not just Viagra. Abolish corrective surgery for ED, implants, pumps and any other therapies that enable impotent men to enjoy sex. Unless they first undergo a vasectomy.
4
SCOTUS' Hobby Lobby decision gave a false empirical belief--that ovulation-suppressing medication caused abortion--constitutional protection under freedom of religious belief. This "belief" has been demonstrated false in repeated clinical trials, and no evidence to the contrary has emerged. Yet SCOTUS protected the "right" of private employers to deny health insurance coverage on the basis of a "belief" that flies in the face of science.
Here we have more of the same idiocy: "'Pro-life organizations must be free to operate according to the beliefs they espouse,' Mr. Bowman said when he filed suit for March for Life in 2014." Mr. Bowman and his colleagues have a right to believe whatever obvious falsehood they choose, but no right whatever to interfere with everyone else's right to equality under the law. That means equal health insurance for any medically-relevant condition for which we are at risk. Oh, right . . . pregnancy is not a "risk" in the minds of these evangelicals; it's a woman's destiny, decreed by God in a revelation made known to evangelical Christians alone. No woman should have any choice with regard to pregnancy.
How odd that is, that God should decree that women (but not men) be coerced into obedience to male-interpreted divine will. The God I know about wants us to enter into relationship with the divine only by our free choice, but free will is precisely what Mr. Bowman wants the govt to suppress--for the sake of his "religious" belief.
Here we have more of the same idiocy: "'Pro-life organizations must be free to operate according to the beliefs they espouse,' Mr. Bowman said when he filed suit for March for Life in 2014." Mr. Bowman and his colleagues have a right to believe whatever obvious falsehood they choose, but no right whatever to interfere with everyone else's right to equality under the law. That means equal health insurance for any medically-relevant condition for which we are at risk. Oh, right . . . pregnancy is not a "risk" in the minds of these evangelicals; it's a woman's destiny, decreed by God in a revelation made known to evangelical Christians alone. No woman should have any choice with regard to pregnancy.
How odd that is, that God should decree that women (but not men) be coerced into obedience to male-interpreted divine will. The God I know about wants us to enter into relationship with the divine only by our free choice, but free will is precisely what Mr. Bowman wants the govt to suppress--for the sake of his "religious" belief.
5
News from today: Trump sadly has hired competent professionals to push the agenda of eliminating birth control from insurance. AR proposed law requires women to get permission from fetus' father prior to an abortion, even in rape or incest. Trump Jr. confirms he accepted meeting with Russian government lawyer to receive dirt on HRC, just part of Russia's support to Trump Sr. Trump's supports collectively yawn and say "get over it".
Government based on religion is Theocracy. One based on the control of a few big businesses is Oligarchy. Dictatorial rule and suppression of dissent is Fascism. I believe we are on the verge of developing a new form that combines the most caustic elements of each of those. This is how a minority, white males of limited intellect or independent thought, cling to power over the majority for another generation. They should be careful. The 35% who consistently support Trump may discover they are merely useful tools, not the tiny handful of families who actually benefit from an Oligarchy.
Government based on religion is Theocracy. One based on the control of a few big businesses is Oligarchy. Dictatorial rule and suppression of dissent is Fascism. I believe we are on the verge of developing a new form that combines the most caustic elements of each of those. This is how a minority, white males of limited intellect or independent thought, cling to power over the majority for another generation. They should be careful. The 35% who consistently support Trump may discover they are merely useful tools, not the tiny handful of families who actually benefit from an Oligarchy.
6
OK, this is what needs to happen:
Every American male must be DNA-tested. For men currently over 18, no renewal of driver's license, passport, professional/trade license, etc. without submitting to a swab. That should catch us up in a couple of years. No medical treatment or Rx refill without a swab.
From then on all males reaching the age of 18 must submit to a swab when registering for selective service. A national database will be created and that way each and every baby born in the US can have paternity assigned from birth onward, just as we know the ID of the mother from birth onward.
Then the responsible male can be held financially and legally responsible for the rearing of the child.
I guarantee you that if the above were implemented, the GOP would become Planned Parenthood's biggest donors in six months. They don't want themselves, their sons and bros held accountable for the actual raising of the human beings their miserable policies spawn.
Every American male must be DNA-tested. For men currently over 18, no renewal of driver's license, passport, professional/trade license, etc. without submitting to a swab. That should catch us up in a couple of years. No medical treatment or Rx refill without a swab.
From then on all males reaching the age of 18 must submit to a swab when registering for selective service. A national database will be created and that way each and every baby born in the US can have paternity assigned from birth onward, just as we know the ID of the mother from birth onward.
Then the responsible male can be held financially and legally responsible for the rearing of the child.
I guarantee you that if the above were implemented, the GOP would become Planned Parenthood's biggest donors in six months. They don't want themselves, their sons and bros held accountable for the actual raising of the human beings their miserable policies spawn.
5
Is there a way we can respond to this draft rule? I would like to know who to contact. It seems to me that a woman should be able to consult her physician on the risks and benefits of legal contraception without government agents and their handmaidens using specious arguments to undermine her and her physician's freedoms.
3
I have been working with women, men and couples helping them with their contraceptive choices on and off since 1976. There is one line in this article which stands out to me more than any other - “Pregnancy is not a disease,” she said. “Pregnancy is a sign of health.”
The ignorance behind this statement is exactly why I went into family planning - couples and women should have the option to sort out their own decisions about the appropriate contraceptive choices in private. This is why the Supreme Court voted to affirm the Griswold v. State of Connecticut decision.
It is an egregious act that our government would on one hand support remedies for erectile dysfunction but then not provide any coverage for contraception. This is just a backdoor way of subjugating women, especially poor women from being able to control their fertility. The eventual upshot will be an increase in abortions but wait, each state is enacting nuisance laws placing restrictions on women ultimately leading them to choices they made in the 1950's - backdoor abortions.
This administration is showing an ever increasing misogynistic approach to women both in the United States and around the world.
The ignorance behind this statement is exactly why I went into family planning - couples and women should have the option to sort out their own decisions about the appropriate contraceptive choices in private. This is why the Supreme Court voted to affirm the Griswold v. State of Connecticut decision.
It is an egregious act that our government would on one hand support remedies for erectile dysfunction but then not provide any coverage for contraception. This is just a backdoor way of subjugating women, especially poor women from being able to control their fertility. The eventual upshot will be an increase in abortions but wait, each state is enacting nuisance laws placing restrictions on women ultimately leading them to choices they made in the 1950's - backdoor abortions.
This administration is showing an ever increasing misogynistic approach to women both in the United States and around the world.
6
This crowd doesn't view women as autonomous human beings, but rather "hosts" for the babies they carry. Did you see that in this article? This was also the opinion of a legislator in Texas....the bastion of independence. Women don't have to ask permission to use birth control. It is none of the government's business and if the people Trump hire into these positions don't like it, too bad.
3
Thus, Planned Parenthood is an even greater necessity than it was before.
And, I have just a few questions:
If babies and children are so valued, why would providing health care; affordable, high-quality, early childhood education and excellent public education not also be on the agenda?
It's because forcing pregnancy is the goal, not what is best for the child.
And, I have just a few questions:
If babies and children are so valued, why would providing health care; affordable, high-quality, early childhood education and excellent public education not also be on the agenda?
It's because forcing pregnancy is the goal, not what is best for the child.
3
I do not understand what gives an employer the right to know the medical treatment of an employee in order to refuse insurance for hormone therapy to female employees. I thought there was some kind of medical privacy law. And what makes an employer a medical expert, to be able to deny treatment to an employee? I thought that was the purpose of insurance companies. Health insurance must be removed from the control of employers and for profit insurance companies.
3
First, let me say that I am yet another man commenting on the rights of women to have sole dominion over their bodies. ( obviously, this is an issue which should be determined by AT LEAST a majority of women )
Secondly, reproductive rights ( with access to abortion AND birth control ) is the law of the land, but the press gives the direct opposite point of view too much weight in describing their demands. ( Putting things in quotes is not enough )
Thirdly, the subjugation of women continues unabated via economic means. Making women pay more for insurance, because of the pre-existing condition that they are a woman, is well, obscene. To further erode their access and affordability to health care, while at the same time subsidizing little blue pills for men, even more obscene.
President Obama and Democrats ended all of that discrimination, yet republicans want to go back to even before 1973. ( especially under the guise of religious ''freedom'' )
Whatever happened to separation of church and state as the founding fathers intended ?
Secondly, reproductive rights ( with access to abortion AND birth control ) is the law of the land, but the press gives the direct opposite point of view too much weight in describing their demands. ( Putting things in quotes is not enough )
Thirdly, the subjugation of women continues unabated via economic means. Making women pay more for insurance, because of the pre-existing condition that they are a woman, is well, obscene. To further erode their access and affordability to health care, while at the same time subsidizing little blue pills for men, even more obscene.
President Obama and Democrats ended all of that discrimination, yet republicans want to go back to even before 1973. ( especially under the guise of religious ''freedom'' )
Whatever happened to separation of church and state as the founding fathers intended ?
4
And this is why women are flocking to the doctor for five year IUDs right now. WE ARE TERRIFIED.
2
Let the pro-lifers have their babies but they have absolutely NO right to impose their choices on the majority of Americans who don't agree. Their wishes are undemocratic and out If sync with the rest of the earth. But I agree that they should do what they believe as long as they leave us to do what we believe. Having or not having babies isn't a political issue anyway---at least not in grownup countries. So drop it! The Pope has!!
3
These arguments about religious objections to paying for contraception are bogus. If a worker buys her birth control does the employer dock her pay?
2
"Contraceptive coverage mandates have not necessarily lowered rates of unintended pregnancy". That is like saying that mandatory home smoke alarms have not necessarily lowered rates of people dying in house fires or mandatory seat belt laws have not necessarily reduced traffic accident mortality. I wouldn't hire Bowman to close on a residential real estate deal.
One question no one has the nerve to ask is how many abortions did the Donald pay for before he became the hero of anti-choicers.
Finally, it is hideously hypocritical to be against abortion and also against contraceptive services.
One question no one has the nerve to ask is how many abortions did the Donald pay for before he became the hero of anti-choicers.
Finally, it is hideously hypocritical to be against abortion and also against contraceptive services.
5
You're darned tootin' life matters. The lives of mothers, families, and the children themselves, after they leave the womb. But apparently these pure little nonpersons are more important to you, once they're born they're on their own. And you'd deny birth control and family care to mothers, fathers, and children.
Jesus would not support this single-minded focus on unborn babies without the care and concern for the whole community or living breathing humans.
Please stop the hypocrisy. This is not an isolated issue. Children matter, and their families matter, and their health matters. Your scorched earth hatreds are not the solution.
Jesus would not support this single-minded focus on unborn babies without the care and concern for the whole community or living breathing humans.
Please stop the hypocrisy. This is not an isolated issue. Children matter, and their families matter, and their health matters. Your scorched earth hatreds are not the solution.
15
Any politician who votes against contraception should have to pay 85% of their pre tax earnings (wages, investments, & bribes [make it a felony not to put every cent in bribes on your tax returns, with a 10 year sentence for each dime] to a fund that will pay to raise children their parents can't afford, but, were not allowed to get contraception for. Oh, once you vote once, the charges will stay until after the politician is dead and 85% of his/her pre tax estate goes to this fund. He/she can do what they like with the other 15%.
22
How could anyone ever think that human reproductive biology —our most basic healthCare responsibility —could be a frivolous lifestyle choice, I do not understand?
For all of us, HealthCare starts in a womb. Planned Parenthood is a foundation for safe society. Our very lives depend on women's health. Through their lives.
Starting by puberty, at least, every young woman should have yearly health exams. And any necessary help or treatments. Young men too. Not just for the rich kids.
All kids should be encouraged to Plan ahead for their futures and their children's futures. HealthCare should be consistent.
Ms. Talento and Mr. Bowman are not doctors, they are zealots. Just as weird as the anti-vaxxers. Trump has no ethical position that should ever, ever affect woman's health.
For all of us, HealthCare starts in a womb. Planned Parenthood is a foundation for safe society. Our very lives depend on women's health. Through their lives.
Starting by puberty, at least, every young woman should have yearly health exams. And any necessary help or treatments. Young men too. Not just for the rich kids.
All kids should be encouraged to Plan ahead for their futures and their children's futures. HealthCare should be consistent.
Ms. Talento and Mr. Bowman are not doctors, they are zealots. Just as weird as the anti-vaxxers. Trump has no ethical position that should ever, ever affect woman's health.
46
History repeats itself. In the U.S., many states outlawed contraception for women outright until the late 1960s. Talento and Bowman's argument of medical risks is a red herring. The underlying rationale is misogynistic. Contraception frees women of the fear of unwanted pregnancy. For those like Talento and Bowman, this allows women a sexual freedom they disapprove of. It's fine for men, but not for women.
41
More nonsense from the right. I was prone to ovarian cysts at a young age. The pill was prescribed to me and they never returned until I stopped the pill for a time. When I stopped I developed a cyst the size of an orange. I had to have the cyst and the ovary removed. I'm sick of the lies perpetrated by these right wing buffoons.
49
Sigh, I'm just so tired of these people. I volunteered for Planned Parenthood in my 20s, my son was a clinic escort in his 20s. I'm in my 70s now and he's staring 50 in the face. Aren't those people done trying to push their religion on the rest of us yet?
53
Shall we stop paying for Viagra or prostate cancer surgery? Maybe women should just deny sex to any man who refuses to wear a condom, including her husband. How ridiculous can this debate get? This is not so much a right to life issue as a freedom to live a life question.
31
I suggest that all women who are forced to go through an unwanted pregnancy drop their babies off at their congressperson's office and make he or she pay to raise them.
41
Back to the early 1950's...
Keep our women safe!
Barefoot and pregnant!
No more married flight attendants!
No more older than 30 flight attendants!
Don't let a woman take a man's job!
everyone know their place!
Keep our women safe!
Barefoot and pregnant!
No more married flight attendants!
No more older than 30 flight attendants!
Don't let a woman take a man's job!
everyone know their place!
22
Look at all those smug women telling me what to do. Telling me what medicine I can and can't have. Telling me how and why I should have sex. I wonder how they would like it if I told them what to do with their bodies. Unbelievably rude nonsense. It's just none of your business. I need laws to protect my life from these overbearing hypocrites.
43
I continue to fail to understand why religion is allowed to seep into our healthcare decisions when no one makes any woman take the birth control pill. What ever happened to the separation of church and state? Why are we STILL having this debate? It's clear that we need to stop the religious intrusion in our healthcare decision making once and for all.
97
I agree with you but what we're talking about here is not the right to abortion. This is about birth control.
Why should I pay for your birth control? When you want to get pregnant am I supposed to pick up the tab for your dinner, drinks and a show?
Why should I pay for your birth control? When you want to get pregnant am I supposed to pick up the tab for your dinner, drinks and a show?
2
Mike. That's a phoney argument. It's much much cheaper to give away birth control for free than deal with an unplanned pregnancy, or worse, unwanted and neglected children. Your tax dollars most certainly ARE getting spent on other people's mistakes. The economy and individuals do better if birth control is given away for free. Money is saved. Isn't that what so called conservatives want?
4
Everyone, the US gov't included, stay out of a woman's uterus.
It is a woman's private body to do what she chooses with it.
Not yours to own, monitor or control-get it?
It is a woman's private body to do what she chooses with it.
Not yours to own, monitor or control-get it?
24
Fine. Don't support contraception but don't support any fertilization technology. One thing we don't need is more people on this planet.
17
Abortion is not something the Republican Party should call for the abolition of, by legal means or by any other means. There is no way in the world that abortion is going to be abolish. It has been going on ever since men and women lived together on this earth.
Who said that? Barry Goldwater who opposed Proposition 110 a pro-life ballot measure banning abortion except to save mother life. That proposition was defeated in a referendum in Arizona in 1992. Goldwater was a conservative Republican.
Who said that? Barry Goldwater who opposed Proposition 110 a pro-life ballot measure banning abortion except to save mother life. That proposition was defeated in a referendum in Arizona in 1992. Goldwater was a conservative Republican.
12
They are 'pro-life' until the child is born to a woman who cannot afford to raise the child -- then the woman is on her own or shunned as a 'welfare queen'
24
Ah, but contraception works for both sexes. So will you also bar condoms and vasectomies? How about the withdraw method? Will you regulate that as well? Under your umbrella of "life counts", will you work to ensure that men who rape become good dads to the women they impregnate? How far will you go, exactly?
Don't forget there are also animal rights. Will you begin to work towards protecting the lives of millions of slaughtered animals and shut down meat packing plants?
No? Oh that's right. This is about shaming and attempting to regulate WOMEN. If that is not oppression, I don't know what is.
Don't forget there are also animal rights. Will you begin to work towards protecting the lives of millions of slaughtered animals and shut down meat packing plants?
No? Oh that's right. This is about shaming and attempting to regulate WOMEN. If that is not oppression, I don't know what is.
31
These same anti-science political appointees are currently dismantling the Office of Adolescent Health, which funds evidence-based pregnancy prevention programs for the country's highest-risk kids. Why on earth would they do that, when early pregnancy has so many bad outcomes for both the young parents and their children??? What's happening to us as a country?
25
Ms. Talento may have an epidemiology background but please don't characterize her as an epidemiologist. Epidemiologists rely on evidence and science, not on conjecture, religious opinions, distorted interpretations, or personal views. Public health professionals work all their lives using science to overturn these ideas Calling her an epidemiologist degrades my work and those of my colleagues.
44
Why can't they just say they don't believe in contraception based on their religious beliefs? Why do they hire lawyers to come up with ridiculous pseudo-science? It's very sleazy.
13
Let's remind everyone that the holier than thou Hobby Lobby Corporation, whose lawsuit successfully reached the Supreme Court to stop providing birth control through employee insurance, was recently fined for the very shady, illegal act of smuggling 5,500 precious Iraqi antiques.
Christian company? These were priceless cuneiform tablets. Money wiring, misrepresentation, misleading officials in Iraq, and lying about the origin of these antiquities. The Justice Dept. has been investigating them since 2010.
So there there's Hobby Lobby---stealing from a country to stock its Bible Museum. The newly imposed 3 million fine is not enough. Let's see arrests for theft/deceit/money laundering.
Call out hypocrisy when you see it. This is it.
Christian company? These were priceless cuneiform tablets. Money wiring, misrepresentation, misleading officials in Iraq, and lying about the origin of these antiquities. The Justice Dept. has been investigating them since 2010.
So there there's Hobby Lobby---stealing from a country to stock its Bible Museum. The newly imposed 3 million fine is not enough. Let's see arrests for theft/deceit/money laundering.
Call out hypocrisy when you see it. This is it.
28
Contraceptives reduce unwanted pregnancies and rates of abortion. If the goal of the pro-life movement is to reduce abortions, why do those who describe themselves as pro-life not advocate for wider access to contraceptives?
20
Unintended pregnancy rates have not "necessarily" declined as a result of contraceptive mandate she said. The operative word being "necessarily." They have absolutely declined to historic lows, and by some miraculous and apparently coincidental chance this happens to have coincided with the contraceptive mandate. You tell me..? Correlation does not always equal causation but.....sometimes it does! Thank you birth control.
17
As always, they care about life until the baby is born. Thereafter, no concern whatever to the GOP.
15
There is so much that is wrong with the point of view of Mr. Bowman and Ms. Talento I hardly know where to begin. But to take a stab at it, birth control, while primarily affecting women, is also a men's issue. Men, like women, benefit from planning the size of their families and also wish to be able to have sex without reproduction. I also object to the well-meaning argument that birth control is justified on the basis that it is not used only for birth control -- because that buys into the notion that there is something unseemly about using birth control for birth control. Birth control is a positive advancement and necessary for modern society. Everyone should have access to it regardless of the opinions of their employers. Employers don't get to intervene in other personal decisions outside of the workplace (who your friends are, what color you paint your living room, what you name you child), birth control should be the same. The fact that the employer funnels the insurance plan to the employee is irrelevant (they rarely pay for all of it). It is, however, a good argument for single payer health insurance that is separate from employment so this nonsense isn't an issue.
20
Where do you stop allowing those with "religious or moral" beliefs to be exempt from civil laws? Beliefs are just that, and people can and do have a wide range of beliefs that should not be allowed to impact secular laws as they choose. For example, would we see these same groups supporting a Quaker shop owner for refusing service to a member of our military forces since they are trained to kill if ordered to do so? Would they also support Muslim business owners who follow strict religious laws from serving women wearing traditional summer wear?
9
How many times do we have to tell people that birth control may be used for other medical purposes? It was prescribed to me for non-reproductive reasons, and I know many, many women who have been in the same situation.
These people are not qualified to tell me what the right treatment is for me.
These people are not qualified to tell me what the right treatment is for me.
9
So, are Christian Scientists to be allowed to eliminate medical care for their employees?
16
Guess it makes sense if MAGA refers to the 50s.
I like it in 2017.
I like it in 2017.
5
I'm always struck by the number of men who seem so eager to dismiss this as women's problem, something they have to pay for..."they (they) are entitled to birth control, as long as they (they) are willing to pay for it -- they have no right to put a gun to our (men's) heads to demand that we (men) pay for the consequences of their (women's) actions" -- as if somehow men have nothing to do at all with conception? I might just as well say to all straight men that if they don't want to support women's reproductive rights and freedoms, they should...what's the polite phrase?...remain celibate.
11
Get Trump out of the White House!!! Contraception is a women's health issue. Any woman who opposes a woman's right to consult and determine her own health decisions must be out of her mind!!! You don't have to use contraceptives or have an abortion. If you want to advocate for life, do it. But why would you try to tell women what to do regarding their health? If that isn't government overreaching, I have no idea what is. Wake up. We are free people, men and women. Stop telling women what to do.
11
Now the curtain has been pulled back and we can really see what the Religious Right is up to. Women should not be in control of their bodies, men should be. It's all about Patriarchy.
12
This did not have to come to pass. The Obama administration could have allowed (didn't some voices within it even argue this) an opt-out from the contraceptive mandate for groups beyond houses of worship and seminaries. In short a slightly wider exemption from the mandate for religiously affiliated insureds.
But instead, the activists and feminists and those who, just as a matter of ideology, hate even those of us in liberal churches said no, indeed screamed no. This was not just about women's health or pregnancy, important and significant as those considerations are and must be. This was, and is, about the culture wars. Reasonable people could have worked this out. Now our country is in the hands of different culture warriors who are not feminists or movement people of the left. They are hard-right ideologues brandishing fundamentalist faith as their sword. Chickens do come home to roost.
But instead, the activists and feminists and those who, just as a matter of ideology, hate even those of us in liberal churches said no, indeed screamed no. This was not just about women's health or pregnancy, important and significant as those considerations are and must be. This was, and is, about the culture wars. Reasonable people could have worked this out. Now our country is in the hands of different culture warriors who are not feminists or movement people of the left. They are hard-right ideologues brandishing fundamentalist faith as their sword. Chickens do come home to roost.
3
Wonder if any of the fresh faced young women in the photo accompanying this article are sexually active yet? If so, are they prepared to "Baby Host" a dozen pregnancies?
8
I think that these folks ned to supply the billions necessary to fund the pregnancy care, delivery and pediatric care. Also, they need the billions to create orphanages for these unwanted children. They need to supply the money for the many unwed mothers or abandoned mothers. They need to assure child care for these mothers that are willing to work. They must supply money to educate these "unwanted" children. They need to be prepared for the may social problems unwanted children bring to society. If they can fund and administer all of this then they have a somewhat reasonable argument. There is still the contradiction that the government does not have the right to interfere in our lives which is a firm belief of theirs. .
4
What it comes down to is that they want to enforce their religious beliefs on others. If the government was forcing them to use contraception, then, they could rightly claim infringement of their religious liberty, but really, they want to deny others the practice of their beliefs regarding contraception.
An interesting aside, while denying them contraception, these will be the same people who will complain about the poor having too many children.
An interesting aside, while denying them contraception, these will be the same people who will complain about the poor having too many children.
11
In the 70s, I had rocks thrown at me when I was escorting women into Planned Parenthood. It saddens me to see that almost half a century later, nothing has changed.
It's time for women (and the men/others who care about us) to rise up and say--loudly and in one united voice--KEEP YOUR LAWS OFF MY BODY. No one is forcing these people to use birth control. I fail to understand what gives them the right to prevent me or anyone else from making a choice about my own body?
It's time for women (and the men/others who care about us) to rise up and say--loudly and in one united voice--KEEP YOUR LAWS OFF MY BODY. No one is forcing these people to use birth control. I fail to understand what gives them the right to prevent me or anyone else from making a choice about my own body?
63
Thanks Mom!
3
I'd like to have statistics regarding all of these anti-abortion and anti-contraceptive demonstrators. I'm sure none of them take birth control pills or have abortions-NOT!
15
All of the women I know who have had abortions are catholic. Go figure.
8
I can not understand why the right is so against planned parenthood and contraceptive protections!!! They want to gut everything about prenatal care, and post delivery support for families, women, child care and, and, and, and! Wasn't it Jesus who espoused love, inclusion, and caring for our brother man and woman? They are so worried about a how a woman uses her uterus and vagina they call to see the forest from the trees; I mean the child from the children growing up in underfunded schools, from broken homes, from, human trafficking, from child abuse, from medicaid's overwhelming support for disabled Americans. Who are these legislators? They are not my neighbors!!! Oh, by the way, they are fighting in favor of a religious belief, and religious doctrine! What ever happened to separating that church and state argument? By the way, is that the same church and religion that shuffled around priests the leaders knew where abusing children, the same children from the families that were indoctrinated against abortions.!!! I guess that religion was looking for new younger blood to get their hands on???? Just saying! We have a president who is a contradiction filled with half truths..... i guess everyone else should come out of the double talk closet as well into the light of day also!!!!!
24
Pregnancy is a life-threatening condition for the mother, and allowing women to control their own fertility is life-saving. But since we're going to restrict contraceptives for health reasons, it's only fair to restrict Viagra and Cialis. Neither of these drugs are necessary for health.
63
From a father of two daughters and a wife that have terrible monthly cramps, I know first hand that birth control pills are not used strictly for birth control. They should be covered under our medical plans as they do serve medical purposes that go beyond birth control. In addition birth control pills prevent contraception, they do not terminate life. If the Christian right activists feel so strongly about this issue then don't use birth control pills, but they do not have the right to force their beliefs on others that want to prevent an unwanted pregnancy.
60
Why do the religious right like to play God? Why do they assume they know the mind of God & can act for Him by inserting themselves into the lives of other individuals? How is any of this legal?
This arrogance of those who would put on the mantle of a Supreme Being is not only obnoxious, it is also dangerous when it walks the halls of power bestowed by the people, for the people.
This arrogance of those who would put on the mantle of a Supreme Being is not only obnoxious, it is also dangerous when it walks the halls of power bestowed by the people, for the people.
32
If no birth control, then no Viagra
34
Another religious nutjob mansplaining to women what is right for them and their bodies.
37
Global warming is not real and not happening and it's all a big conspiracy. Vaccines are deadly autism poison promoted by an evil big-pharma conspiracy. Birth control is cancer abortion. Universities are poisoning the minds of our students. I should be able to send my child to whatever school I choose at the taxpayer's expense. Evolution is a Satanist lie. The Earth was created 5000 years ago exactly as it is today.
I would have less of a problem with these people if they walked the walk. Science is fake and evil? Fine. Have your baby out in the barnyard and die in agony if he's breech. Treat your infected wound with dried donkey dung and prayer. Give away all your guns and kill the infidel unbelievers with a sharp rock as God intended. Grow your own food with the help of a scratch plow and an ox. Live in a mud hut and burn peat for warmth.
But no. For people who hate science and modernity, they sure seem to love its fruits.
I would have less of a problem with these people if they walked the walk. Science is fake and evil? Fine. Have your baby out in the barnyard and die in agony if he's breech. Treat your infected wound with dried donkey dung and prayer. Give away all your guns and kill the infidel unbelievers with a sharp rock as God intended. Grow your own food with the help of a scratch plow and an ox. Live in a mud hut and burn peat for warmth.
But no. For people who hate science and modernity, they sure seem to love its fruits.
56
It is environmentally unethical. Fish and other semi aquatic wildlife are transgender due to birth control in the water and even WHO says it is affecting humans, as was warned over 50 years ago by microbiologists. These are gonadal steroidal hormones, they affect males more than females. They cause immune suppression. They cause roid rage. No one should be forced to pay for such an unethical drug that much like opoids is wreaking havoc on society.
2
I remember seeing articles that claimed that it was the hormones used dairy and the meat industry that was causing environmental issues for aquatic wildlife. Adding another billion or so to our population will also have a disastrous effect on far more tha "aquatic wildlife".
4
Transgender describes a gender identity, people who feel that they have a different gender than the biological sex they were born with. Also, recent studies have demonstrated that synthetic estrogen in the water supply is negligible. The largest contributors are crop fertilizers, estrogen from livestock, and industrial chemicals.
7
I suppose you are strongly against our president's support of coal too!
1
When do the laws come to keep women barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen?
43
They are actively being written.
4
As long as the fetus remains in the womb, that is fine. Once a woman gives birth, forget about help of any kind from Republicans.
53
Belief is not science and many of the statements in this article are patently false or perhaps I should say fake or alternative
Women are meant for far more than "baby-hosting" (what a ridiculous phrase - ruining your uterus for baby-hosting and "pregnancy is not a disease, pregnancy is a sign of health) Please stop making such incredibly idiotic statements
Cherry picking the science to defend the end of mandated rights to birth control is as always self-serving and ignorant
If you want children, feel free to have them. There are those of us who have chosen not to and my right to not have them is a valid as Talento's right to have them. Contraception works and is an individual right
Calling all contraceptives as dangerous and carcinogenic is not science based and utterly stupid
Just because something is available does not mean one must use it, so please stop stomping on my rights and the rights of all women
Viagra and Cialis are covered and I do not see one conservative complaining about those drugs and their coverage
Please stop interfering with my life. You want government to stay out of our lives, then stay out
Women are meant for far more than "baby-hosting" (what a ridiculous phrase - ruining your uterus for baby-hosting and "pregnancy is not a disease, pregnancy is a sign of health) Please stop making such incredibly idiotic statements
Cherry picking the science to defend the end of mandated rights to birth control is as always self-serving and ignorant
If you want children, feel free to have them. There are those of us who have chosen not to and my right to not have them is a valid as Talento's right to have them. Contraception works and is an individual right
Calling all contraceptives as dangerous and carcinogenic is not science based and utterly stupid
Just because something is available does not mean one must use it, so please stop stomping on my rights and the rights of all women
Viagra and Cialis are covered and I do not see one conservative complaining about those drugs and their coverage
Please stop interfering with my life. You want government to stay out of our lives, then stay out
53
I'm 66. My husband & I chose to not have kids. We could neither afford them moneywise nor healthwise. We started out using (well I started out with, & he concurred) 'the pill'. That was in the old high dose days. Made me suicidal. Hubby was in the Navy so our health care was too & no Navy doctor had ever heard of birth control takers getting suicidal. It took my Mother talking to the mother of an old friend of mine, who had the same thing happen to her, to get me off the pill. Didn't take me long to get my head on straight again. We went back to condoms. A birth control type that lets you know right away if it fails. Both of us got good lessons in them. When my parents were first married all birth control was illegal. Even condoms. But my grandfather was a doctor & kept them supplied. They had 2 children, spaced not exactly how they wanted, but, world wars cause lots of problems, including gaps in getting pregnant. She lost a third before she was even sure she was carrying, when Dad's mother pushed her down the stairs in jealousy. She wanted all the attention. A second child would have ruined that. No child needs to be born into a family without love. No adoption isn't a good enough reason to carry a child to term. Unless the child never finds out they are adopted. Which if they look different than other members of the family is impossible. Children are not commodities for use as toys of couples who can't have children together. Find new spouses.
If these women are so concerned about carcinogens, they could do a lot of good by talking to Scott Pruit about reducing them in the environment.
71
You don't want an abortion, don't have one.
You don't want to take birth control, don't take it or use it.
Go have your babies. And please take care of them. Make sure you have enough money too!
Oh, and stay out of my bedroom while you are at it.
You don't want to take birth control, don't take it or use it.
Go have your babies. And please take care of them. Make sure you have enough money too!
Oh, and stay out of my bedroom while you are at it.
70
If we find out they aren't taking care of their children 1. They will go up for adoption (anywhere between newborn & 18, never to be able to find out what defectives had them in the first place, all records destroyed. 2. Both parents will be sterilized, forbidden to adopt, be foster parents, or even take in relatives children. But they will have to turn over 85% of all earnings to the new parents of that child or children, for life & all their estate. No contraception needed. No equipment left in place to need it. In either former parent.
Ban contraception, ban all viagra like drugs. They are just toys for men. They don't need.
Ban contraception, ban all viagra like drugs. They are just toys for men. They don't need.
Life counts until they are born and you take away their healthcare. Such hypocrisy!
40
They do it because they think it's their ticket into heaven. It's also an ego boost for them "what a great person I am I'm protesting in front of Planned Parenthood" and if they convince anyone to not go through with an abortion, after the child is born they won't be around to help support the child. At that point it's out of sight, out of mind.
6
Does anyone know how many children Katy Talento has?
16
Good question. I tried to find out but could not.
I wonder what form of contraception she recommends. Perhaps all those who are concerned about women's health suffering from hormones should invest more money in researching temporary male contraception and also promoting vasectomies.
I wonder what form of contraception she recommends. Perhaps all those who are concerned about women's health suffering from hormones should invest more money in researching temporary male contraception and also promoting vasectomies.
Yes! Pence and his wife should provide full disclosure regarding how they went years without her getting pregnant, and how they only have three children. I calculate that they ought to have at least six.
4
There was a story here in Dallas about a guy who was killed (I forget how) who had 18 children with several different women. With no provision for poor women to have free and easy access to birth control and abortion, is this the kind of world pro-lifers want for our country? With Trumpcare cutting Medicaid over the next few years, this could be the pattern.
19
I am so tired of ignorant people with their superstitious, irrational beliefs in magical invisible beings and ancient goatherders' tales still dominating public discourse. It's 2017 note 1350!
31
Welcome to the Theocratic Republic of America.
29
Though generally conservative, think I can safely say that I have never met a man who opposed birth control. Many oppose abortion, but frankly, the pill made the sexual revolution possible and men, conservative, liberal, lunatics, all love the fact that birth control is possible.
16
Ms. Talento is no doubt aware that back in the "bad old days" unmarried women had no legal access to contraception and even married women needed to have a sympathetic practitioner if they wanted to limit the size of their families to something manageable. Affluent women usually succeeded in accessing contraception, but poor women did not, and their lives and health were blighted by multiple pregnancies they could neither afford nor manage.
Who knew that with the GOP overseeing women's health, that song from 1921- "Ain't We Got Fun?" would seem so relevant again? You know, the one with the lines - "there's nothing surer, the rich get rich and the poor get children..."
Who knew that with the GOP overseeing women's health, that song from 1921- "Ain't We Got Fun?" would seem so relevant again? You know, the one with the lines - "there's nothing surer, the rich get rich and the poor get children..."
27
And abortions, too. Dangerous ones.
4
Mr Bowman is a bit bonkers then. Anyone who has actually been through a pregnancy, intended or unintended, knows that there are health consequences. It isn't a correlation. It most definitely a causation.
From basic ripped and torn genitals to depression, haemorrhoids, incontinence or constipation, damage to back muscles, basic problems around weight gain, the general stress upon your body of carrying a babe to term etc.
I don't know a single woman who hasn't had some physical or mental consequence as a direct result of giving birth. It is absurd to suggest otherwise.
From basic ripped and torn genitals to depression, haemorrhoids, incontinence or constipation, damage to back muscles, basic problems around weight gain, the general stress upon your body of carrying a babe to term etc.
I don't know a single woman who hasn't had some physical or mental consequence as a direct result of giving birth. It is absurd to suggest otherwise.
33
Healthcare should not be tied to employment, but while it is, Health insurance is part of the overall compensation package you receive from your employer. Your employer should not get to dictate how you use your health benefits any more than they can dictate how you spend the money in your paycheck. What happens if your employer is a Jehovah’s witness who does not want to cover blood transfusions? Or possibly a Scientologist who does not believe in psychiatric care? Where do we draw the line? Employers should be required to offer a comprehensive healthcare package that does meet certain minimum standards. There is clear evidence of the benefit to women of having access to affordable birth control, and it is appropriate that this is included. If you don’t want to use birth control, don’t use it. Employers should stay out of the personal healthcare decisions of their employees.
34
Why do I have to pay for your birth control? When you want to get pregnant do I have to pick up the check for dinner, drinks and a show?
3
you do realize far more taxpayer money (your money) will go toward the life of a child that is born than toward the contraceptive preventing an unwanted pregnancy. the taxpayer (you) will contribute to that child's education, healthcare, infrastructure, for the rest of its life, as we did for you and all citizens. i'd say paying a little up front makes more financial sense...if that's really all you're concerned about in this debate.
7
Why do I have to pay for your 1. Viagra 2. Type 2 diabetes treatment and coronary disease as a result of poor life style choices. 3. Asthma from living in an urban environment ???
2
Why do I have to pay for your car to be repaired when it gets wrecked? This is how insurance works.
If everyone paid exactly for what they themselves used, we could get rid of auto, health, and life insurance.
If everyone paid exactly for what they themselves used, we could get rid of auto, health, and life insurance.
1
From the obscure perch of a Dark Ages' institutionalized moral hypocrisy comes this backwards Christian legal duo. Corrupt, rotting stench from the vaunted halls of Christian education, more of which to come under Trump/Pence/DeVos.
Forty percent of all births in this country are paid by Medicaid, i.e., "the government" via taxpayers. And "54 out of 1,000 women had an unintended pregnancy between 2006 and 2010, compared with only 45 out of 1,000 in the more recent period. [data collected as part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Survey of Family Growth]….[U]nintended pregnancies have been associated with worse health outcomes for children. Research has found that infants of unintended pregnancies are less likely to receive prenatal care or be breastfed, and more likely to have low birth weight….A big part of the reason for the decline, at least so far, is the 'pretty significant increase in women using long-acting contraceptive methods like the (intrauterine device) in recent periods'….42% of unintended pregnancies ended in abortion between 2009 and 2013.... One study of women seeking to terminate their pregnancies found that 40% reported having difficult accessing contraception." http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/02/health/unintended-pregnancy-rate/index.html
= compelling government interest
Medicare for all, please. Stop tying healthcare to employers. Get religious institutions out of our bedroom, family, and economic decisions…and government.
Forty percent of all births in this country are paid by Medicaid, i.e., "the government" via taxpayers. And "54 out of 1,000 women had an unintended pregnancy between 2006 and 2010, compared with only 45 out of 1,000 in the more recent period. [data collected as part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Survey of Family Growth]….[U]nintended pregnancies have been associated with worse health outcomes for children. Research has found that infants of unintended pregnancies are less likely to receive prenatal care or be breastfed, and more likely to have low birth weight….A big part of the reason for the decline, at least so far, is the 'pretty significant increase in women using long-acting contraceptive methods like the (intrauterine device) in recent periods'….42% of unintended pregnancies ended in abortion between 2009 and 2013.... One study of women seeking to terminate their pregnancies found that 40% reported having difficult accessing contraception." http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/02/health/unintended-pregnancy-rate/index.html
= compelling government interest
Medicare for all, please. Stop tying healthcare to employers. Get religious institutions out of our bedroom, family, and economic decisions…and government.
19
Great comment
2
If you think Medicare is now for every elderly person, you are wrong. There are occupations where they are not entitled to pay premiums for SS & Medicare every pay period. They will never be entitled. The military 'lifers' & families, federal workers, supposedly elected national officials, others.
Those who qualify have to pay certain amounts every pay day. Don't work? If you don't have a spouse who does, you don't qualify.
Once you have worked enough 'quarters' (undefined), you better keep working, cause you must keep that number of 'quarters' within a certain time limit until you hit 65, or you lose them. And you no longer qualify. That is not going to help people who can't work due to health, people who can't get relatively permanent jobs. People who can't get a job that pays enough for day care, so one spouse must stay home & care for the children, then once they can leave them, they have probably had all their 'quarters' expire & have to start again.
Doesn't sound to me like what you want. Medicaid (with a different name) for everyone, is that more like it?
Those who qualify have to pay certain amounts every pay day. Don't work? If you don't have a spouse who does, you don't qualify.
Once you have worked enough 'quarters' (undefined), you better keep working, cause you must keep that number of 'quarters' within a certain time limit until you hit 65, or you lose them. And you no longer qualify. That is not going to help people who can't work due to health, people who can't get relatively permanent jobs. People who can't get a job that pays enough for day care, so one spouse must stay home & care for the children, then once they can leave them, they have probably had all their 'quarters' expire & have to start again.
Doesn't sound to me like what you want. Medicaid (with a different name) for everyone, is that more like it?
2
The headline calls this a mandate, as if the US government was enforcing birth control, like China did with their one-child policy.
This is wrong and misleading. The birth control coverage is a BENEFIT that women and their families can choose to use or not. That means more freedom for Americans -- something certain other Americans are apparently determined to take away.
This is wrong and misleading. The birth control coverage is a BENEFIT that women and their families can choose to use or not. That means more freedom for Americans -- something certain other Americans are apparently determined to take away.
30
I'd recommend this ten times if I could. I'm covered for flu shots, but that doesn't mean I have to get them. I'm covered for heart surgery, but that doesn't mean I have to have it.
3
A mandate for the employers who must offer it. A benefit for the women who wish to use it. If not, don't. But, you damn well better have 20 years of pay in the bank when you get pregnant, cause I'm not going to pay for you to raise your ill gotten progeny.
I think every one should have implantable contraceptive devices implanted as they hit puberty. That they must get them refilled every year or face sterilization. If they eventually marry someone, have a stable marriage, well paying jobs & can pass a psyc test, then they can have it shut off (not removed) & have 3 cycles to get pregnant. If they don't they will be turned on again. If everything stays the same, they can try again in a year. Try 3 times, no baby, remove all baby making equipment from both. So pick your spouse wisely. Some just can't get pregnant with that person, find a compatible one & you can. As of now there is no way of telling if the person who gives you the hots is one that can help you have a baby. There should be licenses. Good for 3 months. Right now we just need an implantable device for men. Both should have them implanted.
I think every one should have implantable contraceptive devices implanted as they hit puberty. That they must get them refilled every year or face sterilization. If they eventually marry someone, have a stable marriage, well paying jobs & can pass a psyc test, then they can have it shut off (not removed) & have 3 cycles to get pregnant. If they don't they will be turned on again. If everything stays the same, they can try again in a year. Try 3 times, no baby, remove all baby making equipment from both. So pick your spouse wisely. Some just can't get pregnant with that person, find a compatible one & you can. As of now there is no way of telling if the person who gives you the hots is one that can help you have a baby. There should be licenses. Good for 3 months. Right now we just need an implantable device for men. Both should have them implanted.
what's missing from this debate is when women use contraceptives for reasons other than birth control. I have PMDD - Pre menstrual dysphoria disorder, and it effects my mental & physical health every month. It was on the advice of a psychiatrist that I went on the pill - and the pill , now IUD have helped enormously. Before them, I was losing 10 days a month to the symptoms of this disorder. I would like Talento to explain to me and the thousands of women like me why she considers our menstrual- related disorders 'healthier' than taking the Pill. This is discrimination, nothing more.
19
Women should be able to use contraceptives for any reason whatsoever.
5
In Jr High school I had a friend with endometriosis. She was Catholic. At that time the one way to control it was the pill. If she didn't take it she ran the risk of bleeding to death internally. But, her priest said NO. No good Catholic girl would take the pill for ANY reason. She was 12. Her mother made one of those motherly decisions, so it was on her head, not her daughter's. Didn't make her promiscuous, or even have sex young. Did keep her alive. But, for all it's anti contraception, anti abortion, it's OK to force 12 year old (or less) girls to risk dying every month because the only treatment can also be used as contraception.
1
We really need, as a nation, to get harsh about what "freedom of religion" means. How does paying for birth control prevent you from practicing your religion? It does NOTHING to you, personally, as an employer. You are not being forced to take the birth control yourself. You can have as many babies as you want, regardless of what your employees' insurance plan covers - and they also do not have to use it. It doesn't keep you from going to church, feeding the homeless, dancing naked in the woods around a bonfire, or however you practice your religion, because it is based around others, not you.
It's horrific how sexualized women's basic biology has become. Just having a uterus is sinful. Our bodies are literally legislated, and it makes me sick.
It's horrific how sexualized women's basic biology has become. Just having a uterus is sinful. Our bodies are literally legislated, and it makes me sick.
28
How does this comport with the right's "freedom" to choose healthcare if choices are eliminated?
9
These people are woman-haters, disgusting creeps, and they are the problem in this world. Abortion and contraception without apology, and damn those who want to take that away.
16
I believe that your readers should also be reminded that the use of birth control has some other beneficial effects on women's health other than as a form of family planning. It also reduces blood loss during menses. I have personal experience with this fact from my own family. So the religious objections of an employer entity trumps (no pun intended) women's health again because we have a few catholic Supreme Court Justices. I don't think I even need to say what the result would be if we were talking about mandated Viagra coverage.
10
I am a staunch Democrat and progressive and I have to AGREE with this article.
I was on birth control for years and when we decided to have a baby, I found out during one of my prenatal visits that my baby had a kidney problem (hydronephrosis) where her urine could not drain from her kidney into her bladder. It was diagnosed early (in utero) and she required surgery when she turned 1. I am POSITIVE that this was caused by my taking of birth control pills previously. Also, after I had my baby I changed to the Depo shot for birth control and I BECAME PREGNANT. It ended up becoming an early miscarriage. Obviously the Depo shot had something to do with this. I don't drink alcohol or do drugs, never took medicines during my pregnancy and never had a family history of kidney diseases. Birth control DOES have it's risks and is not safe, the doctor at the end of the article is simply not informed (or indebted to the birth control INDUSTRY) I know from personal experience because it happened to me. There was no other factor that could have caused these problems. I consider myself very lucky because my daughter's surgery was successful, we had the insurance to pay for it, and I didn't have any more children after the miscarriage, and thank God I didn't have any children with birth defects or anything worse. But please do not believe the "common misperception" that birth control is perfectly safe, it's NOT.
I was on birth control for years and when we decided to have a baby, I found out during one of my prenatal visits that my baby had a kidney problem (hydronephrosis) where her urine could not drain from her kidney into her bladder. It was diagnosed early (in utero) and she required surgery when she turned 1. I am POSITIVE that this was caused by my taking of birth control pills previously. Also, after I had my baby I changed to the Depo shot for birth control and I BECAME PREGNANT. It ended up becoming an early miscarriage. Obviously the Depo shot had something to do with this. I don't drink alcohol or do drugs, never took medicines during my pregnancy and never had a family history of kidney diseases. Birth control DOES have it's risks and is not safe, the doctor at the end of the article is simply not informed (or indebted to the birth control INDUSTRY) I know from personal experience because it happened to me. There was no other factor that could have caused these problems. I consider myself very lucky because my daughter's surgery was successful, we had the insurance to pay for it, and I didn't have any more children after the miscarriage, and thank God I didn't have any children with birth defects or anything worse. But please do not believe the "common misperception" that birth control is perfectly safe, it's NOT.
3
I am very sorry for the difficulties that you have experienced. It is, I suppose, possible that your use of birth control could have the effect that you describe - but more likely one of those things that just happen. Hard to accept, but not everything is in "our" control. Moreover, it is known (not a shock) that no birth control is 100% effective - again - not everything is in "our" control.
More importantly, you cannot generalize from one experience. You have to look across broad populations. The risk to the life of woman and child is far greater when birth control is not available. Statistics are there; you just have to look for them.
More importantly, you cannot generalize from one experience. You have to look across broad populations. The risk to the life of woman and child is far greater when birth control is not available. Statistics are there; you just have to look for them.
2
No one has very said there were no risks with any type of birth control. I am sorry if you think your child's kidney was damaged by the birth control you used but millions of women worldwide use pills, IUDs, diaphragms and foams without complications. Ther is no reason any government should place restrictions on what form of birth control a woman wants to use as long as it's legal.
1
Sorry for your troubles, but interpreting your personal experiences in this way is kind of crazy. This is how something like the anti-vaccine movement got started. You may be positive yourself, but it doesn't mean you are correct. Lots of factors affect pregnancies. People have miscarriages and babies with birth defects who never used contraceptives or drank or smoked. I personally know some. It could be genetic as well, you know.
6
Indeed it is touching the Harvard trained Katy Talento is moved to warn us against the perils of hormonal contraception - such blatant hypocrisy is rare in these times. As long as Katy feels so strongly about public health, she can enlighten us about the health effects of the public availability of assault rifles along with their specially modified ammunition? Perhaps she can also enlighten those of us who do not have a degree from Harvard about the health effects of cutting Medicaid funding? As a government employee, Katy has total health coverage (probably includes contraception too). Perhaps she can clearly explain to us, who are paying for her gilt-edged health care insurance, why can't we also have the same for ourselves? Can she enlighten us about the health encphancing effects of risking personal bankruptcy to pay for inadequate health insurance?
38
One thing I would like these religious radicals to answer:
If human biology was designed by their "lord" and their "lord" thinks every embryo is sacred, why did their "lord" design things to that about 50-75 percent of fertilized eggs are discarded -- ABORTED -- naturally by the human body?
If abortion is ok with "him" why isn't is ok with them? If my body can reject a fetus, why can't my mind reject it?
Do they want us to breed ourselves into oblivion? Because even with 50 years of reliable birth control, that is what is happening now. I don't think their "lord" ever intended every zygote to end up a human being, or this planet would be about 10x the size it actually is.
If human biology was designed by their "lord" and their "lord" thinks every embryo is sacred, why did their "lord" design things to that about 50-75 percent of fertilized eggs are discarded -- ABORTED -- naturally by the human body?
If abortion is ok with "him" why isn't is ok with them? If my body can reject a fetus, why can't my mind reject it?
Do they want us to breed ourselves into oblivion? Because even with 50 years of reliable birth control, that is what is happening now. I don't think their "lord" ever intended every zygote to end up a human being, or this planet would be about 10x the size it actually is.
19
Of course we all agree that "Life Counts" as depicted in this article the question is how do we define that statement? With a world at 7 billion people and heading to 10 billion by the end of the century those who oppose birth control, including christian organizations, seem not to understand this serious human, environmental, and ethical issue. These unenlightened individuals whose philosophies seem to be more rooted in the pre-enlightentment era, are foolish and simple minded and are promoting a philosophy that will have the opposite effect of what they profess and that is to be "pro-life".
9
They are not pro-life... Republicans stop caring for babies, I mean not millionaires babies, just after they are born.
2
The vice-president, billionaires and the anti-science evangelicals are running the government. No more has to be said about what is going on inside our government and unfortunately is a presage of what we will see in the future. Sad.
8
Trump's executive order promoting "free speech and religious liberty" is false.
They have successfully squelched free speech world wide preventing NGOs and other health centers from talking about family planning. They are not Pro-Life - they are Pro-unwanted-Life, pro-misery, starvation and abandonment of newborns and infants globally. And they want to impose their religious beliefs on other religions and non-religious people too.
How unholy is that?
They have successfully squelched free speech world wide preventing NGOs and other health centers from talking about family planning. They are not Pro-Life - they are Pro-unwanted-Life, pro-misery, starvation and abandonment of newborns and infants globally. And they want to impose their religious beliefs on other religions and non-religious people too.
How unholy is that?
12
Sad, so Sad!
Vote 2018
Vote 2018
8
A minor criticism for the author. The proponents of the ban are making claims that strongly contradict established science. The burden of proof is on the claimant, and the evidence required to support the claim should be proportional to how strongly it disagrees with existing evidence. The article does contain statements supporting the existing science, but the first such mentioned is quite a ways down. The reader gets nine paragraphs of what is really propaganda before any skeptical analysis is presented. I'd suggest leading with the skepticism to place the extraordinary nature of the claims in their proper context. Thank you.
11
I noticed this as well. Talenti has the first half of article devoted to her unsubstantiated claims. Scientific pushback is only in the last 3 paras of article. NOT like NYTs usual investigative self.
4
In one sense this fits right in with the Republican ruling class' agenda to keep a majority of Americans poor and desperate. Rules like this won't affect the wealthy, because they will simply pay to obtain birth control and abortions elsewhere. These rules would mainly affect poor, working-class, and middle-class women, who will continue then on the downwardly mobile social slide that having too many children engenders.
Ultimately, this provides plenty of low-wage slave labor for the oligarchs, because, of course, they will insist that all of these unwanted babies work for their survival. And they will continue to push their agenda to withhold education from those who are unable to pay. This ensures steady growth of a servant class, which will counteract the effects of stemming immigration. The rich need to get their servants from somewhere. Why not grow them at home?
Study after study has shown that the best way to get women to have fewer babies is to educate them. The more babies a woman has early in life, the less likely she is to obtain an education that might help her rise in the world. So this also puts a nail in the coffin being built for women by the misogynists in this country, and these theocratic women are perhaps unconsciously setting the stage for their own demotion from the ranks of the employed, as the misogynists gain the upper hand by preventing women who might otherwise gain power by being in the workforce from advancing, due to multiple pregnancies.
Ultimately, this provides plenty of low-wage slave labor for the oligarchs, because, of course, they will insist that all of these unwanted babies work for their survival. And they will continue to push their agenda to withhold education from those who are unable to pay. This ensures steady growth of a servant class, which will counteract the effects of stemming immigration. The rich need to get their servants from somewhere. Why not grow them at home?
Study after study has shown that the best way to get women to have fewer babies is to educate them. The more babies a woman has early in life, the less likely she is to obtain an education that might help her rise in the world. So this also puts a nail in the coffin being built for women by the misogynists in this country, and these theocratic women are perhaps unconsciously setting the stage for their own demotion from the ranks of the employed, as the misogynists gain the upper hand by preventing women who might otherwise gain power by being in the workforce from advancing, due to multiple pregnancies.
6
I feel that this is all about a woman's right to choose for herself when she wants to have a child and when she doesn't. In the original draft it said that woman were to promiscuous and that BC contributed to that. One reader suggested that condoms are affordable and people can use those. Well how about woman with latex allergies like my daughter who can't. And if you have insurance that covers prescriptions then you are charged the insurance price for your prescription so if this mandate goes through BC will cost around 160$ to 200$ a month. How do I know, again, my daughter lost her insurance went to fill her BC and she was charged insurance price because she had insurance even though she lost it. They told her there was nothing she could do but pay the 160$ it would cost for her BC. That's about half of what her Obamacare care payments were. Now of course the insurance company doesn't pay 160$ but that's the starting point the pharmacy starts with when they negotiate.
When they also defund planned parenthood the rise in unplanned pregnancies will skyrocket and when insurance companies stop covering maternity care and women stop going for prenatal care, women and babies will die by the droves. This is an irresponsible and could be devastating policy that will harm women of both parties that only serves one purpose which is to put women in their place. Which is back in their homes waiting on husbands, boyfriends and or fathers. This is truly sad.
When they also defund planned parenthood the rise in unplanned pregnancies will skyrocket and when insurance companies stop covering maternity care and women stop going for prenatal care, women and babies will die by the droves. This is an irresponsible and could be devastating policy that will harm women of both parties that only serves one purpose which is to put women in their place. Which is back in their homes waiting on husbands, boyfriends and or fathers. This is truly sad.
7
Attacking birth control and maternity benefits at the same time exposes the issue as one squarely on cultural vs. scientific grounds. If the contraceptive mandate is eliminated, doctors may just write the prescription based on the need to regulate the woman's menstrual cycle, perhaps as an off-label but covered expense. Who will know, the period police?
3
These folks have 'finely honed their arguments to allow employers to avoid the costs of birth control coverage. These employers obviously would much rather have higher premiums and more mandated paid time off for pregnancy, than pay much less to assure women do not have unplanned pregnancies. These employers also want to play god, with the help of government to control women's bodies and their family planning.
It is slick language, but in the end, it is theology attempting to inflict itself on our national governance which is based on constitutional protections.
It is slick language, but in the end, it is theology attempting to inflict itself on our national governance which is based on constitutional protections.
6
Once again the political party which claims to be against big government, wants to do the most Big Brother thing possible, that is control the most intimate aspects of women's lives. Pregnancy is a health issue, in spite of the claim set out in this article. Women die because they get pregnant, they get diseases because they get pregnant, diabetes, and other diseases. When pregnant, women throw up because their immune system is being attacked by the fetus. Additionally, only 25% of fertilized eggs actually become an embryo, and a certain percentage of those are miscarried. Women undertake a lot of risk in becoming pregnant, and that decision is just as important as any other in their lives. There are people who think that the anti-abortion folks care only about abortion and nothing else. I firmly believe that these folks won't be satisfied until every woman is barefoot and pregnant.
6
I believe that as long as the prolife philosophy is one that forces women to carry their pregnancies to full term, they should advocate for the use of birth control, make insurance coverage mandatory for pregnancies, Medicaid coverage for children born with disabilities, free daycare so women can work outside the home, food stamps to defray the cost of feeding a large family and the list goes on. In closing, I want to note that I have no say on how my tax dollars are used to wage war which results in the loss of lives of many innocent civilians. I am tired of the tunnel vision of the Republicans who refuse to look at the bigger picture
7
Classic GOP, caring about human life until they're born. Then it's time for some good old-fashioned Social Darwinism, children included.
2
Without contraception, women are not human beings. We are animals, totally at mercy of out reproductive biology which evolved to facilitate natural selection, with lots of babies born, lots of them dying, and the female discarded once her fertility is over. Evolution does not care for individuals, only the species. But I am an individual, with my own dreams, ambitions and desires that will be shattered if I become a brood mare. If I haven't used the pill throughout my entire life, I'd have no life at all. So if you think that your nonsensical theology counts for something compared to my survival, think again. Contraception and abortion are human rights and like all rights, have to be fought for to acquire and retain.
6
Talento summed it up with her statement, "ruin your uterus for baby-housing". That is how these people see women--as baby housers. For someone who graduated from a top university with a degree in epidemiology, she bases her arguments on non-science. Bowman is cut from the same cloth, claiming that there is no evidence that when contraceptives are made more readily available unintended pregnancy rates drop. He also needs to return to a remedial statistics course to review the concepts of correlation and causation. The republican war on women continues.
5
They are lying for jesus
1
What I object to is the clear attempt to foist one religious belief on others.
6
SINGLE PAYER SYSTEM
We need our elected officials to demand we move to a single payer system like every other industrialized country and enough with this nonsense. Insurance companies should not be involved in our health care.
We need our elected officials to demand we move to a single payer system like every other industrialized country and enough with this nonsense. Insurance companies should not be involved in our health care.
2
This is not about the questionable health hazards of the pill; this is about taking away reproductive choice from women. Women are vessels to have babies and that's it.
If it were so easy to prevent pregnancy without the pill, as Talento claims, the pill wouldn't be necessary.
The reason Obamacare included the contraception mandate is that unwanted pregnancy is the fastest way for a woman to become impoverished. Family planning has allowed women to move into the work place, become healthier, and have more control over their lives.
If it were so easy to prevent pregnancy without the pill, as Talento claims, the pill wouldn't be necessary.
The reason Obamacare included the contraception mandate is that unwanted pregnancy is the fastest way for a woman to become impoverished. Family planning has allowed women to move into the work place, become healthier, and have more control over their lives.
96
Republicans want to undo the Healthcare part that covers birth control for women. Many males, especially Republicans, say they should not be required to pay for something that only women use.
I think that is wrong on the part of these males.
I am a woman. As part of my healthcare coverage, I must pay for male related problems that will never affect me such as Viagra for declining male sexual ability, prostate cancer and enlarged prostate drugs and surgery.
I do not have a prostate nor will I need Viagra and related drugs. Therefore, I should not be required to pay for this coverage.
If males can be exempt from paying for birth control drugs or devices, I should be exempt from paying for male impotence drugs and possible surgery.
I think that is wrong on the part of these males.
I am a woman. As part of my healthcare coverage, I must pay for male related problems that will never affect me such as Viagra for declining male sexual ability, prostate cancer and enlarged prostate drugs and surgery.
I do not have a prostate nor will I need Viagra and related drugs. Therefore, I should not be required to pay for this coverage.
If males can be exempt from paying for birth control drugs or devices, I should be exempt from paying for male impotence drugs and possible surgery.
74
No American citizen should be paying for someone else's erectile dysfunction pills. Just like we shouldn't be paying for in vitro fertilization. Birth control is another subject. There are too many people in the world. Women who don't want their children treat them poorly and all too often these children end up in foster care and ultimately in the criminal justice system. Big difference since the taxpayers are ultimately going to be paying for those unwanted children. I have worked in the Criminal Justice system since the mid-seventies just after the Roe v Wade decision and have seen first hand what I am talking about.
3
If men claim to have to no obligation to participate in women's healthcare, then they are abrogating rights as fathers.
And Ms. Talento- not only does the pill NOT damage the uterus, the pill gives signifcant protection against ovarian cancer. Really don't make things up to accommodate your ideology.
And Ms. Talento- not only does the pill NOT damage the uterus, the pill gives signifcant protection against ovarian cancer. Really don't make things up to accommodate your ideology.
4
There's confusion here.
There's a big difference between opposing contraception and opposing the contraceptive mandate in the ACA.
Some object to contraception on religious grounds, for example, the Catholic Church. But, in the US, very few oppose making contraception easily available to the general public. What is under discussion is whether the government should mandate that all medical insurance must include coverage for any and all forms of contraception approved by the FDA, with the cost shared by all.
Just about everyone can afford list price contraception: condoms are not expensive, and have the benefit of also preventing most sexual transmission of disease.
There's a lot to be said for more expansive public funding of contraception. But there are two arguments against. Some do have religious objections to contraception, and don't wish to fund it for others. And some feel that too many coverage mandates are why ACA insurance is so expensive, and policies are becoming unavailable.
The latter is probably a short sighted argument, given the high costs to society of unwanted pregnancy; the former argument has some merit.
And, again, the discussion described in the article is not about forbidding contraception, rather, it is about whether or not is is appropriate to mandate unlimited public reimbursement for contraception, in a time when health insurance is skyrocketing in cost.
There's a big difference between opposing contraception and opposing the contraceptive mandate in the ACA.
Some object to contraception on religious grounds, for example, the Catholic Church. But, in the US, very few oppose making contraception easily available to the general public. What is under discussion is whether the government should mandate that all medical insurance must include coverage for any and all forms of contraception approved by the FDA, with the cost shared by all.
Just about everyone can afford list price contraception: condoms are not expensive, and have the benefit of also preventing most sexual transmission of disease.
There's a lot to be said for more expansive public funding of contraception. But there are two arguments against. Some do have religious objections to contraception, and don't wish to fund it for others. And some feel that too many coverage mandates are why ACA insurance is so expensive, and policies are becoming unavailable.
The latter is probably a short sighted argument, given the high costs to society of unwanted pregnancy; the former argument has some merit.
And, again, the discussion described in the article is not about forbidding contraception, rather, it is about whether or not is is appropriate to mandate unlimited public reimbursement for contraception, in a time when health insurance is skyrocketing in cost.
23
Condoms are probably not covered anyway because they are sold over the counter in drug stores, just like aspirin.
4
I am SO sick of hearing people say they shouldn't have to pay for (or in this case require) something they don't like or agree with. I don't like war, tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy, public taxes paying for religious and private schools, paying for judges who rule that corporations are people, paying for security to protect a billionaire's multiple houses and large family, politicians' travel to get re-elected if they spend one hour on actual US business, and on and on.
So, to the neanderthal religiosity of ThugTrump's appointees, keep your hands off other women's bodies and what they choose to do with them. Focus, instead, on supporting public education, affordable housing, good health care, affordable colleges, and safe day care, for all those children you want to require be born to women who are not ready to have them.
So, to the neanderthal religiosity of ThugTrump's appointees, keep your hands off other women's bodies and what they choose to do with them. Focus, instead, on supporting public education, affordable housing, good health care, affordable colleges, and safe day care, for all those children you want to require be born to women who are not ready to have them.
8
So, according to this logic, those who object to their taxes going to war or funding capital punishment should be deferred to because of their moral objections; okay, I'll buy that.
1
Absolutely remarkable that these idiots think it's a good idea to withhold healthcare and birth control from woman. Number one problem in the world - too many people. A big problem in the US - too many people relying on social services to feed their families, at the expense of tax payers. You want to moan about the $25/mo expense of birth control? How about the tens of thousands of dollars tax payers will spend on feeding some of these kids, and how many of them will end up being wards of the state?
Women sometimes make mistakes, and sometimes they are in bad situations that they cannot extricate themselves from, and they want to MAKE them have a child? Unbelievable.
Women sometimes make mistakes, and sometimes they are in bad situations that they cannot extricate themselves from, and they want to MAKE them have a child? Unbelievable.
83
You say "women sometimes make mistakes". I think you left out half of the conception equation.
3
You know the old saw: If men got pregnant, there would contraceptive ATM machines. Oh, and probably just as many place to get an abortion.
121
Actually if men got pregnant, abortion would be one of the Sacrements!
1
The abortion issue is just one component of the "religious right" agenda to suppress sexual behavior, let's get down to brass tacks. Nobody is pro-abortion. The pro-choice movement is not pro-abortion, it is about keeping the option safe for those whose circumstances in life--whether economic, trauma or health-risk--ultimately direct them to that decision. Now the "religious right" is going after contraception, as we knew they would, because if you're having sex without the intention of procreation, well, that's sinful and dirty. Contraception allows you to have sex while inhibiting pregnancy; so contraception is sinful and dirty. The message the "religious right" is attempting to legislate is, if you don't want to get pregnant or can't afford to get pregnant, then don't have sex--"there are other ways to avoid pregnancy and to space children's birth if necessary and appropriate, if a family or a woman wants to do that." If necessary and appropriate? What does that mean? "Baby-hosting?" The most sterile and horrific reference I've ever heard pregnancy and parenthood. Very "Handmaid's Tale" of you, Ms. Talento.
98
Thus, if a woman is married, her husband expects and demands sex every night, and the woman either for health or economic or her choice does not want to get pregnant, what is she to do? Should she just throw him out of the house and refuse to see him?
That is what the religious right appears to want. I suppose that would give those males a perfect excuse to have some fun with some other woman.
That is what the religious right appears to want. I suppose that would give those males a perfect excuse to have some fun with some other woman.
10
Isn't it odd that they can't make the connection between their belief that women are promiscuous if they have sex for anything but procreative purposes and what their lives would be like if women stopped having sex for non - procreative purposes?
1
Federal over reach but Ms Talento has no compunction to shove her baseless beliefs on the rest of the citizenry in this country , love her referral to having a child as baby hosting , she'd be a perfect character for The Handmaids Tale , in this bizarre universe that she seems to inhabit. No talent Talento.
56
That baby hosting statement is truly chilling and disgusting. I guess when I was younger I was a baby host not a human being.
3
But you can be sure viagra is covered!
53
There are so many needy children, adopt, don't procreate.
9
Ok, but what about Viagra? It's not risk-free and there's zero legislative initiative to take it away or make it unaffordable.
https://www.viagra.com/learning/what-is-ed
https://www.viagra.com/learning/what-is-ed
36
I suspect that women will not have rights until we all refuse to have sex for anything other than procreation. At that point, men will be marching in our place and demanding fair and equal health services for women.
4
Wow I've always been impressed with the Conservatives use of sound bites to control the narrative and twist the truth to something unrecognizable but "abortion pill mandate" takes the cake. No one is forcing anyone to take oral contraceptives however if birth control is outlawed as it seems Ms Talento would like then we would have a "forced pregnancy mandate".
51
This is all based in a very narrow misogynist perspective about the sinful behavior of women having sex for pleasure and not for procreation. The Evangelical religious belief that pregnancy and giving birth should be the necessary punishment for women who have sex. Don't want to have a baby? Then don't have sex. Apparently, men have no part in this equation.
I'd venture a guess that all of Donald Trump's 3 wives took birth control pills. As did all of the other women he's had sex with while he was or wasn't married.
I'd venture a guess that all of Donald Trump's 3 wives took birth control pills. As did all of the other women he's had sex with while he was or wasn't married.
76
It's unfortunate that male contraceptive (condoms and vasectomies) are not covered by ACA. This would have delegitimized much of this inane position.
11
I didn't realize that vasectomies were not covered. That's just plain stupid.
1
Exclude Viagra and Cialis from coverage also...that will hit Trump supporters especially hard. Cash only at retail prices.
33
Government Medicare is years ahead of you. It does not subsidize the cost of Viagra, Levitra, or Cialis.
1
The "right " to birth control from government implies a duty on the part of tax payers or other employees to pay others for avoiding the "natural" consequences of their actions. I suppose it's like paying for treatment for smoking induced lung cancer or alcohol induced liver cancer. Try going up to someone on the street demanding such payments. Voting the money from the strangers pockets changes nothing, except now the stranger will have to pay, or face the coercion of state power, which ultimately is a gun to the head.
7
A woman's ability to control her own fertility is as basic to her health care as are immunizations, control of blood pressure, blood glucose monitoring, cancer screening, etc. There's no medical or ethical rationale for disadvantaging contraception in an insurance plan, beyond the ulterior motives of culture warriors like the social misfits quoted in this article. Denial of this reality is willfull ignorance.
79
The ACA says insurance companies have to cover birth control. Which means women pay for it as part of their health insurance plan.
If there weren't so many people trying to deny women birth control on moral grounds the law wouldn't have needed to specifically include it. It would just be on the insurance company drug formulary. Ever looked at one of those? It's a few hundred pages listing all the medications they cover. All of us strangers help pay for all of those drugs including your Viagra, cholesterol medication, insulin, painkillers and antibiotics. That's how insurance works.
If there weren't so many people trying to deny women birth control on moral grounds the law wouldn't have needed to specifically include it. It would just be on the insurance company drug formulary. Ever looked at one of those? It's a few hundred pages listing all the medications they cover. All of us strangers help pay for all of those drugs including your Viagra, cholesterol medication, insulin, painkillers and antibiotics. That's how insurance works.
8
Oh for goodness sake , the mandate is not forcing any other citizen woman to take birth control pills , only to make it available thru their plans , so your problem is that others are having to pay for the natural consequences of their actions but it's okay for health plans to pay for viagra and other aids for men for natural consequences of their acts ? Men are just as much a part of this , only difference is they don't have to host babies( as was stated elsewhere in this article ) in their bodies , your reasoning is very skewed and yes , sexist .
6
These contraceptives were approved by the FDA, right? So this is just another way to control a women's ability to make their own choices in life. Not only do they want to deny women the right to an abortion, but they want to control every aspect of the lives of others. They think they know best and the Trump administration is OK with taking away the rights of women to make their own decisions with their bodies and lives. As long as that's what a section of their voters want.
People that support Talento and Bowman's plans should try just minding their own families, and stay out of the lives of others. I wonder just how many unwanted children will be created if these people have their way.
People that support Talento and Bowman's plans should try just minding their own families, and stay out of the lives of others. I wonder just how many unwanted children will be created if these people have their way.
32
Read the story of Margaret Sanger's work in NYC in the early 1900s. That will tell you how many unwanted children can be produced. Those babies often starved or died early due to infections and diseases that a healthy, well fed child would not get.
7
Look at the developing world...
This is misogyny in practice.
Deny women the ability to control their fertility, and you deny them the ability to live full, productive lives, on their terms.
Why more people aren't outraged angers me deeply.
Deny women the ability to control their fertility, and you deny them the ability to live full, productive lives, on their terms.
Why more people aren't outraged angers me deeply.
102
There is no outrage because women and men are still allowed to use inexpensive contraceptives, some of which are available without a prescription. The government however, won't compel private companies to pay for them. Social organizations and community organizations can step up and provide the low cost items for free.
As usual, don't bother these people with scientific facts. This crossing the line over and over again, for the so-called sake of religious beliefs, will continue to drag women backwards. I'm glad I'm not young and don't have to worry about being pregnant. I certainly hope young women understand what is at stake, but I'm concerned that many do not.
30
I no longer need birth control - I'm 70 now. I've been there, done that and struggled with the various forms of what was available for 30+ years. It was hit and miss. I had an abortion when it didn't work (I actually wasn't using it consistently - my fault). After my second child, I had my tubes tied - that was the end of all of that. I lived the last 10 years of my reproductive life without ever worrying about getting pregnant again. If was like a constant burden was finally removed. Just not to have to think about it was so liberating. I didn't vote for this administration, but I don't really care anymore. For all the people who stayed home on election day, for all those who 'voted their conscience' because Mrs. Clinton was a 'flawed' candidate, for all the Bernie Bros who would vote Bernie or nothing, you all voted for this. And you all get what you deserve. And for any women who voted for this, there's just nothing I can say. You want old white men to determine your reproductive life, well here they are. You live with it. I'm so done with all that.
75
You nailed it. I agree wholeheartedly about how this country got in the mess we are in... the immaturity, ignorance and greed of the voters.
1
You can get pregnant even after having your tubes tied. In fact, the failure rate is about comparable to implantable birth control.
I think of the lengths and subterfuge it tool to get birth control before the pill was legalized for unmarried women. The underground was not necessarily a safe place . Thank god for Bill Baird, among others who fought for the availability of the pill- and went to jail for that activism! Young women may not know our history...the "crimes against chastity' that may still be on the books in Massachusetts, the stigma around sex for unmarried women, the ostracism of single mothers. Why must women be punished for female sexuality? Oh. The Christian bible.
3
A cornerstone of Republic party orthodoxy is that every fetus must be born. No exceptions for rape, incest, the life or health of the mother, a fetus with fatal deformities - all must be born. After that, you're on your own. If you can't afford health care, that's your problem. And if you can't make it on your own, you have a duty to die and get out of the way.
34
To build on that cornerstone (and your metaphor), now we have "every potential fetus must be conceived."
2
Hypocrisy has a mansion in these minds , since they also don't want to help support all those unwanted births , no chips , food stamps etc , since they equivocate the reproductive act to immoral acts , they of the righteous minds or more likely narrowed minded, judgmental and uncharitable hearts , they would bring the scarlet letter into fashion again .
3
The other cornerstone of Republican orthodoxy is that one the child is born, the government should not spent a penny to raise the child. Abortions are murder but its OK to execute people.
1
What's next after this? What about women who choose celibacy? How long until they want laws forcing women to have sex with men and get pregnant?
Perhaps there should a be push for legislation forcing sexually active heterosexual couples to use birth control, and limit them to one child to prevent over-population of the earth.
Or how about we just let people decide for themselves. Help them to afford and choose what is right for them.
Perhaps there should a be push for legislation forcing sexually active heterosexual couples to use birth control, and limit them to one child to prevent over-population of the earth.
Or how about we just let people decide for themselves. Help them to afford and choose what is right for them.
9
Women are certainly entitled to get access to any sort of birth control they want, as long as they are willing to pay for it.
Why is this product different from any other product ?
Why is this product different from any other product ?
16
First, your comment places the sole responsibility of birth control on women. Their problem, so they have to pay for it. Leaves out 50% of the world and their responsibility. Second, if I need chemotherapy for my cancer, shouldn't my health insurance cover the cost? Using your logic, birth control IS like any other health care product and insurance should cover my costs associated with it.
The harder we make it for women to get birth control, the more unwanted children will enter the government dependency pipeline. Is this what you have in mind?
Many, many women of childbearing age simply cannot afford to pay for anything more than their rent, food and utilities. So if they get pregnant, they get more goodies from the government in the form of rental support, health care, etc. Is this what you have in mind?
When women do not have access to birth control because of barriers such as financial need, more unwanted children are born. These women are less likely to have time to read to their children, are more likely to move often and are far more likely to be single. Social scientists can now identify children as early as the third grade who are likely going to be in the criminal justice pipeline and they are likely to have been the result of a lack of access to birth control.
This is why this product is different from any other product. Is this what you have in mind?
Many, many women of childbearing age simply cannot afford to pay for anything more than their rent, food and utilities. So if they get pregnant, they get more goodies from the government in the form of rental support, health care, etc. Is this what you have in mind?
When women do not have access to birth control because of barriers such as financial need, more unwanted children are born. These women are less likely to have time to read to their children, are more likely to move often and are far more likely to be single. Social scientists can now identify children as early as the third grade who are likely going to be in the criminal justice pipeline and they are likely to have been the result of a lack of access to birth control.
This is why this product is different from any other product. Is this what you have in mind?
2
Because for certain cancers and conditions, hormone treatment is healthcare not "a product". Unless you consider your heart med "a product".
Defining things according to ignorance does not get a pass sorry.
Defining things according to ignorance does not get a pass sorry.
2
As President Barack Obama famously said, "Elections have consequences..."
As reported recently in the Daily Caller:
“Elections have consequences,” he told then number two Republican Rep. Eric Cantor. “And at the end of the day, I won. So I think on that one I trump you.”
An ironic choice of words by the President.
As reported recently in the Daily Caller:
“Elections have consequences,” he told then number two Republican Rep. Eric Cantor. “And at the end of the day, I won. So I think on that one I trump you.”
An ironic choice of words by the President.
1
Well, Obama did have a mandate, which clearly Trump did not. There is that...
1
@JW, what makes you think Obama had a mandate, any different than Trump does ?
Because you happen to agree with Obama's position ?
Because you happen to agree with Obama's position ?
There is great irony in the picture accompanying the article. The women are fighting for the "right to life" that they lost and want other girls and women to lose, at the moment of birth.
5
E. Connors - What are you talking about? Contraception and abortion happen long before life occurs and certainly before the "moment of birth," but nice hyperbole.
If conservative Christians were really serious about ridding the world of abortion, then they would make all forms of preventative birth control widely available without barrier and free of cost for all. They'd require age-appropriate, fact-based sex education mandatory in all schools. They'd created a massive support structure to assist single moms who choose not to abort, rather than treat them as objects of scorn.
You can't have it both ways, people. If you attack birth control, then you promote abortion. That is a million times more true if you push an agenda of faith-based abstinence-only classes in schools, preventing kids from obtaining the information they need to make informed decisions.
You can't have it both ways, people. If you attack birth control, then you promote abortion. That is a million times more true if you push an agenda of faith-based abstinence-only classes in schools, preventing kids from obtaining the information they need to make informed decisions.
284
Reading this comment makes me think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of why people oppose abortion. Promoting birth control in order to decrease the number of abortions makes no sense to someone who is pro-life. Both are ending lives that would otherwise come to be. If you want to reach bipartisan solutions or convince others of your viewpoint, at least start by understanding the other side's thought process (even if you disagree with it). I don't think anybody opposes abortion or birth control out of hate or a desire to control others or limit freedoms - it's a genuine moral concern that someone who would otherwise have a life not having the chance to.
YES!
"I don't think anybody opposes abortion or birth control out of hate or a desire to control others or limit freedoms"
Dig a little deeper into the "pro-life" movement. I assure you that's not the case.
Dig a little deeper into the "pro-life" movement. I assure you that's not the case.
I hope this effort to undue the Obama birth control legacy succeeds. I support birth control in the most extreme cases, but I do not believe that employers should be required to provide it to their employees, especially if the employer has a religious or moral objection to it. I support TG he freedom of religion, the separation of church and state. Under Obama, government became the religion as the liberals worshiped government. Government is the false idol of liberalism.
2
You believe that employers should be able to force employees to practice the employer's faith, even when not at work. Does that employee still have freedom of religion?
1
As someone wisely noted, if an employer's religion abhors anti-biotics, should the be able to deny them to his employees under their work-related health plan? If an employer is a Christian Scientist, can none of his employees see a doctor? If an employer has a prejudice against childhood vaccinations, should none of his employees' children be able to get childhood vaccinations?
2
Perhaps you'd feel differently, Boy, if YOU could get pregnant.
3
Why doesnt the GOP provide 2 healthcare systems at the same cost: one for regular American citizens who want decent preventative care and fairly priced hospitalization that is science-based and one that can be bought by the orthodox or fundamentalists who do not want to be tempted with what most Americans consider basic care? They can compile whatever fertilized egg/contraception cancer stories they like and leave everyone else out of their need to control healthcare to suit a do or die spiritual requirement.
I am tired of being told that women need to look up the obscure belief systems of fundamentalists or political hypocrites to know what the day to day healthcare laws will be. It is ridiculous.
I am tired of being told that women need to look up the obscure belief systems of fundamentalists or political hypocrites to know what the day to day healthcare laws will be. It is ridiculous.
48
Yes, your plan in it's simple logic would force the Religious Right to finally have to state their end game; they want to control women.
1
This article is lazy journalism that conflates (dubious) concerns about birth control pills with the much more heinous effort to punish women for being sexually active. What about IUDs, implants, and long-lasting injections? This article seems to assume the ONLY female birth control is pills.
9
Those people opposed to the "Pill" are also opposed to all other forms of birth control, so I don't understand your comment.
I wonder what Ms. Talento would argue is the problem with Paraguard- the non hormonal IUD? No hormones means no increased risk for breast or any other type of cancer. I suspect we would then see her objection to birth control has little to do with protecting women and much to do with her desire to impose her religious beliefs on others, yet someone still cite "religious freedom". Theocracy is poison.
29
These people are no different than the religious extremist leaders in the Middle East, decrying what women can wear and do.
American Sharia law. Obsessed with what adults do with their genitals in the privacy of their own home.
American Sharia law. Obsessed with what adults do with their genitals in the privacy of their own home.
One young woman I know suffers greatly without taking the pill. She experiences two debilitating menstruations every month and migraines. She requires the very lowest dosage of hormone -- and yet she cannot now afford it. What young person, trying to build a career has $500/mo for such relief?
12
Foes of birth control? We had BETTER discussion adoption with not only the Russians but every other country in the world to improve the safety net we are going to need when we ban birth control AND abortion!
6
It is plain that Donald Trump and his henchmen want one thing more than any other: To unravel completely the legacy of Barack Obama. If they could--and they might try--they would wipe his name from the history books. As part of this strategy, they will hire anyone and pursue any policy that tears down what President Obama built, even if it endangers and even kills people.
13
theocratic ignorance! people of intelligence and discernment need to quit 'respecting" the views of theocrats and return this nation to rationality.
17
Should we be glad that Trump isn't a Christian Scientist? A Jehovah's Witness? With all due respect, whose religious beliefs should take precedence in deciding what MY insurance should cover? What about automobile insurance: should my auto insurance cover your blood transfusion? Where does all this end?
15
The real motivation for people opposed to availability of birth control as a health care service is their desire to return women to their social roles of the early 20th Century. They are not really concerned with alleged "cancer causing" side effects of birth control pills (factually wrong assertion), because they also oppose availability of condoms and IUD's. No, they have a moralistic agenda of denying women the right to control their own lives.
BTW, the Bible has no comment on whether birth control conforms to Christian beliefs. And it bears repeating that the Bible also does not say life begins at conception. What the Bible actually says is that life begins at first breath. Extreme conservatives mis-represent the words of the Bible to justify their regressive political and moral agenda.
BTW, the Bible has no comment on whether birth control conforms to Christian beliefs. And it bears repeating that the Bible also does not say life begins at conception. What the Bible actually says is that life begins at first breath. Extreme conservatives mis-represent the words of the Bible to justify their regressive political and moral agenda.
52
The Torah states that life begins at first breath. That's birth at the gestational age of viability.
The New Testament has not statement about when life begins. The belief that life begins at conception is based on the Catholic belief that the soul enters the body at conception.
The New Testament has not statement about when life begins. The belief that life begins at conception is based on the Catholic belief that the soul enters the body at conception.
2
Separation of Religion and State. When was it completely lost? It is so wearisome to see the "my way or the highway" trying to take over this personal choice. Over and over.
9
I just don't understand what drives these people. Certainly unwanted pregnancies are the reason for probably 99% of abortions. Do they imagine that denying people contraceptives will decrease the amount of unchaste sex that goes on ? I can see the need to respect, or at least try to be polite about people's religious choices, but being forced to adopt them is fundamentally unamerican.
16
We are beyond the point in history when a man can tell a woman what she's allowed to do with her body and her life. Birth control hurts absolutely no one.
11
Dr Espey, whose 'authoritative' perspective is cited at the end of the article, is an abortion advocate who serves on the board of NARAL New Mexico. She's as much a partisan as the subjects of this story! Whether one agrees with NARAL's advocacy work or not, I'm disappointed that the Times positioned her as an unbiased authority (revealing only her UNM credentials), particularly given the contentious nature of this debate.
Anyone who opposes theocracy is now a "partisan." They used to be just Americans.
1
M Salisbury Given that the research is readily available for public consumption that backs everything she says, I'm not sure what your complaint is with her.... oh "her." Would it be more believable for you if it were a man pontificating about women's health?
1
There is no such thing as an abortion "advocate".
There are people who advocate for women not dying in back alleys at the hands of untrained practitioners.
We are never going back to that. Never.
There are people who advocate for women not dying in back alleys at the hands of untrained practitioners.
We are never going back to that. Never.
4
Always the same old reaction from these "meta" group of conservative people who lost the moral control of the American society : weeding for all is here, rights for transgene people are increasing, the black males is starting to be considered as human by withe cops, add the failure of the area which they controls : rate of teenager pregnancy, suicide, "opiate" consumption in the bible belt, we find this type of people, unable to understand that they lost their fight, they prefer to burn and destruct than to change their mind.
But the last bombs launched are always the dirtiest.
But the last bombs launched are always the dirtiest.
1
Birth control, bad. Abortion, badder. Medicaid and subsidized insurance premiums for children, baddest. Go figure.
22
Extremists driving our country into theocracy by determining that women's sole function is to be a "uterus for baby-hosting" no matter their age, health, financial wherewithal, etc. Dear God please save us.
17
Mandating one person's religious liberty is ensuring another person's tyranny.
16
Another argument for single payer. Get employers out of health care decisions.
We must find and support candidates for Congress who promise to support HR 676 and get rid of those who don't. We can do this.
We must find and support candidates for Congress who promise to support HR 676 and get rid of those who don't. We can do this.
23
The position that the government has provided no evidence that providing birth control coverage will reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies is what we now call a false equivalence. We used to call it nonsense. To gather date for such a result would require an invasion of privacy both medically and personally. At the least it would call for identifying and interviewing all woman who ever took birth control provided through their government connected health care and then insist they reveal how many "unwanted" pregnancies they avoided due to that choice. Even the Supreme Court would be all over that intrusion is y bet.
3
So they don't want to pay for birth control. Then when the child is born they don't want to pay for medical care, human services or education. Yes, they are willing to pay for going into the military, buying a gun, and/or going to jail. Sad
22
"If any connection exists between unintended pregnancy and bad health consequences, it is based on mere correlation, not causation."
Apparently this Harvard-educated epidemiologist believes that if a woman dies in childbirth, she just happened to drop dead at the time she was pushing a baby out of her body.
Apparently this Harvard-educated epidemiologist believes that if a woman dies in childbirth, she just happened to drop dead at the time she was pushing a baby out of her body.
20
Back to barefoot and pregnant for women. This goes well with DeVos' agenda of de-funding public schools (an uneducated populate is easily manipulated), and Ryan's of killing off the surplus population (once we get a good headwind on unintended pregnancies). Make America white/male again.
24
"For some of the Trump administration officials tasked with reversing President Barack Obama’s legacy, the path forward has been somewhat rocky." Were they tasked with "reversing Pres. Obama's legacy" or fixing what they believe to be flaws in the existing law?
4
To reverse Mr. Obama's legacy, obviously.
1
Thank you for real news. Information about the destruction of our rights and the very fabric of our country should be what occupies the front page, rather than the ramblings of an incoherent president. Daily we are losing ground in areas of Women's rights, protections for our earth and water, rules against worker abuse, and the right to have a healthy life. We all need to wade past the daily "garbage" being used to occupy our space and time, to get to the real "work" of this administration. Namely, to turn America into a repressive, so-called Christian state.
22
Birth control pills do not alleviate pain or extend life. They are lifestyle drugs in the same category as Viagra and should be treated as such. Forcing insurers to provide birth control pills raises the cost of health care by an average of $25 per month. Forcing persons with disabilities--who are the most likely to be indigent but who MUST have health care insurance--to pay for a lifestyle drug is unacceptable.
Maturity care costs way than birth control. Just saying.
5
...... yes they do. They treat a number of painful health conditions and also-guess what- unplanned pregnancy is painful
" Forcing insurers to provide birth control pills raises the cost of health care by an average of $25 per month."
Citation needed. It's common knowledge that insurance coverage for birth control saves money because unintended pregnancy (or any pregnancy) is MUCH more expensive.
Allowing a woman to control her fertility and protect her health from an unwanted pregnancy is not a question of lifestyle and it's insulting to trivialize that as such.
" Forcing insurers to provide birth control pills raises the cost of health care by an average of $25 per month."
Citation needed. It's common knowledge that insurance coverage for birth control saves money because unintended pregnancy (or any pregnancy) is MUCH more expensive.
Allowing a woman to control her fertility and protect her health from an unwanted pregnancy is not a question of lifestyle and it's insulting to trivialize that as such.
7
Actually, birth control pills can and do alleviate pain. For women with crippling menstrual periods, and women with challenging conditions such as polycystic ovary syndrome, birth control pills are often the only thing that manages their conditions and enables them to function and live their lives. I should know - I'm one of those women.
Birth control is not a "lifestyle drug" any more than the medications needed by some people with disabilities are "lifestyle drugs". Comparing the birth control pill to Viagra is a tired and invalid argument. If a man in need of Viagra doesn't have access to it then he probably won't have sex, and this only impacts him and his partner. If a woman doesn't have access to birth control it not only impacts her, but it impacts her partner; her family; her employment and educational opportunities; and, in a larger context, the economic and social well-being of the nation - because a nation isn't truly functional when half its population isn't getting what they need in terms of healthcare.
Birth control is not a "lifestyle drug" any more than the medications needed by some people with disabilities are "lifestyle drugs". Comparing the birth control pill to Viagra is a tired and invalid argument. If a man in need of Viagra doesn't have access to it then he probably won't have sex, and this only impacts him and his partner. If a woman doesn't have access to birth control it not only impacts her, but it impacts her partner; her family; her employment and educational opportunities; and, in a larger context, the economic and social well-being of the nation - because a nation isn't truly functional when half its population isn't getting what they need in terms of healthcare.
7
I have been a life long user of birth control due to my polycystic ovaries disease. Because of PCOD I suffered terrible acne and irregular periods since I was 14. Birth control freed me of acne and the pain and did not prevent me from having two beautiful daughters. I'm totally healthy. Birth control should be a personal decision. And it should be available to all. Having too many children is a financial stress as well as a mental stress. Why would you not want to give a woman the right to control when and how she has a child?
54
I also have PCOS. Birth control pills helped me to get pregnant. They kept me regular on a cycle and then I was able to get pregnant easily when I chose to. Other symptoms include very excess hair growth, obesity...BC pills can prevent or minimize them. Especially combined with diet and exercise. (The South Beach Diet Book has a whole chapter on PCOS).
I had excellent very expensive insurance but it wouldn't pay the cost of the pills I needed for a medical condition, because of crazy uptight anti-women people who should not be commenting at all. 20 years at $35 a month. $8400.
I had excellent very expensive insurance but it wouldn't pay the cost of the pills I needed for a medical condition, because of crazy uptight anti-women people who should not be commenting at all. 20 years at $35 a month. $8400.
3
Because contraceptives give women control of their lives -- and being opposed to that is at the heart of the anti birth control movement.
1
These two "experts" are anti-science and in favor of pushing their religious beliefs on the entire nation. The science of birth control is clear yet these two continue to misrepresent. Why? I believe the motivation is NOT religion. Instead, I believe that these two, like many others, are unable to accept the modern reality of independent women who choose their own life course.
The ability to control our bodies has made it possible for us to invest in our professional futures. Yes, this has altered the family dynamic. Some find this frightening and use religion and fake science to push our nation backwards. While they are in the minority, they have great power and they may succeed. The irony is that the result will be more unplanned pregnancies for women who will have a lessened ability to support their children, at a time when our thoughtful Republican leadership is reducing access to health care, foodstamps, and a quality public education. The end game is a mystery to me.
The ability to control our bodies has made it possible for us to invest in our professional futures. Yes, this has altered the family dynamic. Some find this frightening and use religion and fake science to push our nation backwards. While they are in the minority, they have great power and they may succeed. The irony is that the result will be more unplanned pregnancies for women who will have a lessened ability to support their children, at a time when our thoughtful Republican leadership is reducing access to health care, foodstamps, and a quality public education. The end game is a mystery to me.
20
“Pregnancy is not a disease,” she said. “Pregnancy is a sign of health.”
That would be news to my wife and I who experienced a difficult high risk pregnancy, that could have easily ended in a premature birth with life long complications for our child.
Long story short we have a healthy child thanks to medical intervention and decent health insurance. But people should be able to reserve the right to face those risks at a time of their own choosing with affordable contraception.
That would be news to my wife and I who experienced a difficult high risk pregnancy, that could have easily ended in a premature birth with life long complications for our child.
Long story short we have a healthy child thanks to medical intervention and decent health insurance. But people should be able to reserve the right to face those risks at a time of their own choosing with affordable contraception.
25
Pregnancy is medically riskier than abortion.
3
The epidemiological questions thus far seem to be quantitative, not TOO susceptible to number-bending
(disclosure, I am a PhD quant)
What they probably show is trade-offs between relative risks, changing over time, and so for self-administration, each patient is the risk manager, until / unless our FDA decides to manage our risks for us, and we have much discussion about that
=
Mr Trump came to power by existing rules of elections, and was expected to lose BUT had the good fortune to run against a candidate even worse as a campaigner than himself,
and so if democracy chooses to pay/ not pay X or Z, so be it
we have elections regularly, (and spare m the Russians please, your side lost)
=
I am underwhelmed by arguments of efficacy, I grant our legislators, ie myself, full irrationality in policy making, certainly more than the judiciary to substitute ITS judgement over mine, again relative risk and harm to the body politic of democracy, a sort of political epidemiology
=
so I care not if free stuff gets good things done, if I don't want to pay, then that is my call
=
The issues here are more of religious freedom and exceptions of conscience, and on that I vote for exceptions of conscience, and THAT constituency voted strongly for Mr Trump, each exception is handed separately
Go run a better candidate next time, one who knows how to campaign according to the rules (hint: do not insult your voters as deplorables, even privately in fund raisers, there are NO secrets)
(disclosure, I am a PhD quant)
What they probably show is trade-offs between relative risks, changing over time, and so for self-administration, each patient is the risk manager, until / unless our FDA decides to manage our risks for us, and we have much discussion about that
=
Mr Trump came to power by existing rules of elections, and was expected to lose BUT had the good fortune to run against a candidate even worse as a campaigner than himself,
and so if democracy chooses to pay/ not pay X or Z, so be it
we have elections regularly, (and spare m the Russians please, your side lost)
=
I am underwhelmed by arguments of efficacy, I grant our legislators, ie myself, full irrationality in policy making, certainly more than the judiciary to substitute ITS judgement over mine, again relative risk and harm to the body politic of democracy, a sort of political epidemiology
=
so I care not if free stuff gets good things done, if I don't want to pay, then that is my call
=
The issues here are more of religious freedom and exceptions of conscience, and on that I vote for exceptions of conscience, and THAT constituency voted strongly for Mr Trump, each exception is handed separately
Go run a better candidate next time, one who knows how to campaign according to the rules (hint: do not insult your voters as deplorables, even privately in fund raisers, there are NO secrets)
1
Perfect demonstration that having a Ph.D. does not equal having either intelligence or wisdom. Thank you.
This has absolutely nothing to do with health. These people not only oppose contraception but also abortion, AIDS research and the HPV vaccine. Their greatest fear is that someone out there might be having sex without having to pay the consequences. They would bring back the Scarlet Letter if they could.
17
It is stretching things to call Katy Talento an epidemiologist. She has never earned a PhD or conducted independent research. Yes, she has an MS from Harvard Schol of Public Health, but that does not make her a scientist. Indeed, her positions on birth control prove that her education was wasted.
35
She's also seems to be "volunteer faculty" at The Leadership Institute, a conservative advocacy organization.
4
If this gal doesn't like birth control, she shouldn't use it. The companies that are "forced" to offer birth control as one of many health benefits are not forced to use it. They are not forcing anyone to use it. They are simply asked to provide it as an option so that employees have a full range of health care choices. And isn't the ADF and Betsy DeVos always going on about how we need more choices?
33
Mean, mean mean. Reducing pregnancies allows women (and their partners) a better chance at a good life. It lets them get good work and manage their families and their finances but allowing choices for when to have a child. This is another attempt by he anti-choice extremists to interfere in people's lives. (They call themselves pro life, but that only applies to unborn embryos and some fetuses, they don't support life for actual people.) Conservatives want government out of peoples' lives. Why don't they include contraception choice in that?
21
Perhaps the Trump Administration will cut to the chase and simply declare the United States a Christian theocracy.
Dissenters to be imprisoned, exiled, or executed.
Dissenters to be imprisoned, exiled, or executed.
10
These people, and yes some of them are women, simply hate women and want to control them. If women cannot access birth control they cannot succeed, they cannot complete their educations, they cannot move forward in their careers, they cannot control their personal financial outlook, they cannot take care of their other children, etc.
This is a movement having less to do with birth control and abortion and much more to do with a Christian Sharia movement to put women back in the home both for religious purposes and for economic ones (certain men don't like competing against women in the business world).
This is a movement having less to do with birth control and abortion and much more to do with a Christian Sharia movement to put women back in the home both for religious purposes and for economic ones (certain men don't like competing against women in the business world).
35
You said it perfectly.!!!
What happened to that individualist Don't Tread on Me American spirit? The Puritans have squashed it with little fight.
6
It's just so hard to believe that there are still those that oppose birth control. I have always felt that the opposition is really an attempt to control women, and that is no less true in 2017. It's women who are most impacted by births that are too close together, or simply too many births. Women's educational opportunities, finances and quality of life are still hampered by their biology. Society still holds women responsible for controlling sex in a relationship to limit the number of births, but at the same time women are denied the means to help them accomplish it. When Margaret Sanger opened the first birth control clinic 100 years ago, women who had children they could not provide for were stigmatized, and that's still true. As if the children materialized out of thin air and there was not participation from a man, often a man who is long gone. Even when there is a stable relationship, too many children can strain a marriage to the breaking point. Women, especially, must demand that birth control be made available at no cost, or low cost. Their future depends on it.
206
Not to mention the planet can't sustain our ever-growing population. These anti-birth control folks say they are for life but they are promoting action that will ultimately end life on a grand scale. They can't see the big picture - only their own ignorant, narrow-minded, mean-spirited, beliefs.
3
I can't believe that I have been protesting all this since the 1970's.
5
The creepy, perverted Republican right-wing religious war on women's uteruses continues.
Christian Shariah Law is no way to run a country.
Christian Shariah Law is no way to run a country.
92
Organizations do not have 'freedoms,' individuals citizens do. The freedoms of individual citizens, including women, to manage their reproductive lives, and by association their economic lives and their over-all health and their family's over-all well-being, should not be subject to religious-based discrimination by their employers. The arguments made by these right-wing anti-birth control and anti-abortion activists are about more than just "who pays for" insurance coverage, and are certainly not about the welfare of women and children - they attack the very idea that conscious and pharmacologic management of fertility is a viable option for women, and they use bogus non-scientific arguments and moralizing with the ultimate goal of controlling women's bodies and their sexual and reproductive lives - their stated goal of protecting religious organizations 'freedoms' from paying for birth control is a red herring.
171
It is the self determination aspect that sticks in their craw. Women consciously making rational decisions by and for themselves gives these people hives.
5
Exactly. This is what pro life and right women have never understood. This has nothing to do with babies. It has always been about controlling women's bodies and maintaining a male dominated society.
This story terrifies me because it is a perfect example of an issue that won't get the coverage it deserves due to the ridiculous behavior of Trump and his team (Don Jr. collusion, Mika tweets, etc.). How can we really be discussing birth control for women again??? This should be a basic human right. For those that are anti-abortion, there are many more ways to reduce abortions than to force a woman to give birth...just help women stop the pregnancy in the first place! Perhaps if we tied birth control coverage to ED coverage it would get more support?
220
My Bible-thumping family members (as do many other Christians) believe that contraception is sinful because God should decide if the woman gets pregnant...He alone decides if those sperm will fertilize the egg. So they are against contraception AND against abortion.
I would like to highlight this phrase, which I consider to be woefully incomplete:
"According to the National Cancer Institute, some oral contraceptives can lower the risk of endometrial and ovarian cancer ...."
In my memory following this issue, the lowering of risk to a woman using oral contraceptives, especially if she has a high risk profile for ovarian cancer (e.g. family history), can be up to 50% reduction of that risk after 5 years of use of the pill. It is insane not to cover that option to high risk women who want to lower their risk but not eliminate all hope of conceiving by ovarian removal.
Of course, it is also IMHO not for religious zealots to decide how people should conduct their personal relationships prior to deciding to bear children, but it seems that common sense is losing out for now in the Trumpocalypse.
"According to the National Cancer Institute, some oral contraceptives can lower the risk of endometrial and ovarian cancer ...."
In my memory following this issue, the lowering of risk to a woman using oral contraceptives, especially if she has a high risk profile for ovarian cancer (e.g. family history), can be up to 50% reduction of that risk after 5 years of use of the pill. It is insane not to cover that option to high risk women who want to lower their risk but not eliminate all hope of conceiving by ovarian removal.
Of course, it is also IMHO not for religious zealots to decide how people should conduct their personal relationships prior to deciding to bear children, but it seems that common sense is losing out for now in the Trumpocalypse.
94
Suppose my religious beliefs prohibit me to use antibiotics? Can I deny their use to my employees? This religious exemption business is out of control. This is not, or should not be, a theocracy!
345
Or blood transfusions? Or, as with Christian Scientists, all medical procedures....this is insanity...but then again it seems Americans like their insanity with a dash of corruption...
10
Exactly! Or what if your religious beliefs cause you to withhold treatment from those who have lung cancer because they smoked or were exposed to second-hand smoke? And smoking is against your religion. This could go on and on until we cancel out all health insurance.
8
This depresses me. At its core, the movement to limit women's access to safe, effective birth control is mean. As in ungenerous and unkind. I won't get into the religious freedom arguments because I've never understood them. Companies or corporations should not have individual rights and freedoms under the Bill of Rights. Only Individuals should. Equating individual human beings and corporations is bad for democracy.
141
It both depresses and infuriates me. All these self-righteous folks want to impose their religious beliefs on others and seem not to have the slightest bit of insight into what it is they are doing. All of those cited as being against birth control claim to be Christian, and yet they seem to have missed Christ's saying: "And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full." (Matthew 6:5) They are making a show of their religiosity just as those praying on street corners do. They don't see their own hypocrisy at all. I'm not religious but, in general I admire nuns for the hard and caring work so many of them do. But when they join in on these efforts--and that includes the Little Sisters of the Poor in their recent lawsuit--they are not representing the Christ they claim to love, but rather their own belief that they have the right to tell others how to live and that that proves just how Christian they are. They are wrong--it proves they don't understand the teachings they claim to live by.
“Multiple claims in these articles are not backed by science.”
Unfortunately science cannot stand up to this alternative fact-based administration.
Unfortunately science cannot stand up to this alternative fact-based administration.
126
Indeed. Any day now, no doubt Betsy DeVos will announce rules that Geo-Centrism be taught in science classes so children can hear 'both sides'.
At least that won't kill women.
At least that won't kill women.
7
Science CAN stand up to this administration. The tragic fact is that science is simply not doing so --
3
There is no evidence that all pregnancies and births are planned or wanted events. Some are accidental. There is overwhelming evidence that birth control options are wanted as demonstrated by the millions of woman who exercise that freedom of choice.
75
More importantly, some are forced.
Not that the GOP would care. They'd happily kick a woman to the curb (and blame her, as an added punch to the face) for the pregnancy they foisted on her. The Bible thumpers can always Hike The Appalachian Trail for a new, slimmer mistress, after all.
They are not pro-life, they are anti-life. They are pro-birth, because excess births yield more poorly educated GOP voters to roast Earth to their desired Rapture with fossil fuel. They love the poorly educated.
Not that the GOP would care. They'd happily kick a woman to the curb (and blame her, as an added punch to the face) for the pregnancy they foisted on her. The Bible thumpers can always Hike The Appalachian Trail for a new, slimmer mistress, after all.
They are not pro-life, they are anti-life. They are pro-birth, because excess births yield more poorly educated GOP voters to roast Earth to their desired Rapture with fossil fuel. They love the poorly educated.
10
Civil society is being besieged by ancient superstitions in the name of religious imperatives. When will otherwise rational human beings give up these superstitions, or at least stop trying to impose them on those who operate by empirical evidence?
When will the religious get out of the way and stop impeding our efforts to control the overpopulation which leads to increased levels of starvation, overcrowding, and pain in the world.
When will the religious get out of the way and stop impeding our efforts to control the overpopulation which leads to increased levels of starvation, overcrowding, and pain in the world.
142
it is long past time that we quit counting "belief" as empirical evidence.
60
Or, when will those who choose to impose contraceptive restrictions own up to the resultant need for child- and family-friendly policies, generously funded both by employers and the government?
11
I believe the founders of this nation made the separation of church and state pretty explicit. Unfortunately these people are turning the Constitution and the Bill of Rights on its head or worse, into the trash.
6
Birth control should be a legal right for all women and should be available to all women who wish to use it without prescription (but suitable warnings if needed). It should be free or at such minimum cost that is is fully affordable by women regardless of socioeconomic status. Anything else is unacceptable.
285
The subtext here is, women's sexuality and agency in all decisions affecting their lives is scary. Let's go back to the "good old days" when women had no power to decide their futures so they will have to accept their place and fate. We are going to be pre-1972 in a flash and trump and his minions will undo what was so hard-fought. I am too old for this to matter now, but young women out there must rise up! WAKE UP!
11
Yes! I am lucky to have always been able to afford birth control when I chose. It is terrifying to imagine not having that ability.
5
But why should I have to pay for a product for you ?
I can just as easily say that owning a Mercedes Benz should be a legal right for everyone, and if someone cannot afford it, the government (meaning people like you) should pay for it.
I can just as easily say that owning a Mercedes Benz should be a legal right for everyone, and if someone cannot afford it, the government (meaning people like you) should pay for it.