E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSA dramatic new study with implications for next month’s presidential election finds that offering women free birth control can reduce unplanned pregnancies -- and send the abortion rate spiraling downward.
When more than 9,000 women ages 14 to 45 in the St. Louis area were given no-cost contraception for three years, abortion rates dropped from two-thirds to three-quarters lower than the national rate, according to a new report by Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis researchers.
From 2008 to 2010, annual abortion rates among participants in the Contraceptive Choice Project -- dubbed CHOICE -- ranged from 4.4 abortions per 1,000 women to 7.5 abortions per 1,000. That’s far less than the 19.6 abortions per 1,000 women nationwide reported in 2008, the latest year for which figures are available.
Among teen girls ages 15 to 19 who participated in the study, the annual birth rate was 6.3 per 1,000 girls, far below the U.S. rate of 34.3 per 1,000 for girls the same age.
The study’s lead author, Dr. Jeffrey Peipert, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Washington University, expected both measures to fall, but even he said he was “very surprised” by the magnitude.
In all, Peipert said, one abortion was prevented for approximately every 100 women who took part (the actual estimate is 1 per every 79 to 135 women).
The results were so dramatic, in fact, that Peipert asked the journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology to publish the study before the Nov. 6 presidential election, knowing that the Affordable Care Act, and its reproductive health provisions, are major issues in the campaign.
“It just has so many implications for our society,” he told NBC News.
Several factors contributed to the declines, he argued. First, a large majority of the women in the study were encouraged -- and chose -- to use intrauterine devices, or IUDs, and hormonal implants over more commonly used birth control pills.
Because birth control pills require strict adherence, and people forget to take them, that method fails about 8 percent of the time. IUDs and implants are over 99 percent effective.
Second, program enrollees included high-risk populations like women and girls who’ve already used abortion services once -- and are more likely to have a second abortion -- and women and girls who are economically distressed and may not have means to obtain contraceptive products and services.
That’s important because an IUD, including the device and the physician’s service to place it in the uterus, can cost between $800 and $1,000. Since an IUD lasts at least five years, it saves money in the long run over a monthly cost of roughly $15-$25 for pills, but the up-front charge is prohibitive for many women.
James Trussell, a Princeton University professor of economics and public affairs and an expert in family planning called the results “terrific, great work, and a very important demonstration project.”
But it’s also politically fraught. The Affordable Care Act requires insurance plans to cover contraceptive costs. That’s led to conflicts among the Obama administration, the Catholic church, and the church’s political allies who argue that requiring a Catholic employer to provide such insurance contradicts the church’s teaching and represents a breach of religious freedom.
Conservatives have also objected to contraceptive coverage on cost grounds. Some have focused their anger at Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown University law student who agitated for the Catholic school to offer an insurance plan that covers contraception. Radio host Rush Limbaugh famously called her a “slut” and a “prostitute.”
But experts, including Peipert, point out that no-cost contraception saves money.
According to a 2011 study from the Guttmacher Institute, unplanned pregnancies costs the United States a conservatively estimated $11 billion per year.
“The way I look at it as a gynecologist with an interest in women’s health and public health and family planning, is that this saves money,” Peipert said. “When you provide no-cost contraception, and you remove that barrier, you finally reduce unintended pregnancy rates. It doesn’t matter what side one is on politically, that’s a good thing.”
The Catholic Church is unlikely to be moved. “If, as supporters of the contraceptive mandate argue, it will pay for itself in reduced medical expenses, so will free embryo engineering and other eugenic services, including infanticide, doctor-assisted suicide, organ harvesting, and genetic manipulation,” wrote Thomas Joseph White, director of the Thomistic Institute at the Dominican House of Studies in Washington, D.C., and R.R. Reno, in the conservative journal First Things.
But to academic experts, the results of CHOICE are clear. “What the study suggests to me,” said John Santelli, professor at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, “is that it’s totally supportive of the president’s provisions on reproductive care and preventive services for women in the Affordable Care Act.”
In a 2009 study, Trussell and colleagues reported that long-acting contraceptives like IUDs were far cheaper than an unintended birth, an abortion, and especially an ectopic pregnancy.
Trussell argued that cost savings go “well beyond” those immediate medical savings. They don’t, for example, take into account costs associated with longer term issues such as economic stress on the mother and family, a teenager who doesn’t finish high school or skips college because she’s had a baby.
Research has also shown that neglect, stress, anxiety, or simply a low level of nurturing in early life has effects on a child that can last far into adulthood. It may influence, for example, the cycle of teen pregnancy and crime.
“It’s hard to imagine how politicians wouldn’t like to spend a dollar to save four,” Trussell said. As to the objections like those of White, he concluded that “it makes no sense whatsoever. Regardless of your views on abortion, virtually everybody says preventing unintended pregnancies is smart.”
Brian Alexander (www.BrianRAlexander.com) is co-author, with Larry Young Ph.D., of "The Chemistry Between Us: Love, Sex and the Science of Attraction," (www.TheChemistryBetweenUs.com), now on sale.
Related stories:
- IUDs, implants best for birth control, even for teens, docs say
- Botox bladder injections might stop the 'gotta-go' urge in women
Leave a Comment:
If men got pregnant, birth control would be free and handed out on the streets to them 24/7.
True. I agree with you on that..lol.
Saysyou, seyzyou!
STOP WITH THE FACTS!
Evangelists are very upset by you using them to report news. So is the Pope.
We needed a study to show that easy access to contraception reduces abortion rates? Duh!
In the Republican fantasy world of course contraception is murder so I'm not sure a scientific study will convince them of anything. They don't live in our universe, they have their own. Republicans (right wing evangelicals) and Teabaggers believe that the ONLY option is abstinence or choosing to be a single teen-mom. They have no interest in compromise.
can sandra fluke pick me up some free viagra ? NO.......... it's calm be down. i have a medical need.
And, if men got pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament!
Wow they had to do a study to figure that out.
Republicans should love that. Oh wait, we're just supposed to not have sex. :( Party of "Freedom!"
Where are all the ANTI-CHOICERS ???? Doesn't this make them happy ? Why wouldn't they DEMAND Free Birth Control become a reality since it's been shown to lower abortion rates.
Why are Republicans even trying to outlaw birth control and make it unavailable ??
- Because they want to load families up with unwanted pregnancies, too many mouths to feed with parents scrambling to feed the kids. Parents working 2 and 3 jobs. At lower and lower wages just to feed all those kids. And not having the time to read and see the Republicans stealing our country out from under us.
The GOP wants to do away with Birth Control and Abortions too
Hey, it also increases promiscuity. Wake up, Morals are the only way to save people from making a huge mistake.
Stop the Republican WAR ON WOMEN!
Shoosh. Don't tell the Catholic Taliban.
Citation? I didn't see that reported in this study. Nor do I think it's any of your business what another FREE American does with their body.
Sezyou truer words have never been written. I totally agree. You would think those who appose the right to choose would agree that prevention is the answer. There were clothes hanger, knitting needles and back alley's for way to long and they want to end us back there. Do we have a third world government and mentality.
Be it free or not when will these right winger nuts realize that it still is choice. No one is being forced to use birth control. If your church is against it and you believe in what they say, then don't use it. No one is forcing you too, but don't think you will force your views on others. We have freedom of religion as written in the Constitution which means I don't have to follow your church's teachings.
Getmadstaymad, whose morals are you wanting to impose on everyone else? I've seen many so called religious people who have the morals of a hyena and many atheists who were very moral people. Morals are a subjective thing from one person to another.
I'm sure that your solution is "just say no" and that you believe abstinence only sex education is sufficient. News flash: IT DOES NOT WORK. Isn't it time to concentrate on what works rather than push your own version of morality on everyone else. Your morals are your business and you ain't going to change the world with your holier than thou attitude.
So let's get rid of Planned Parenthood and let the slaughter begin! Right wing nuts make me want to puke!
Women at the poverty level can already get free birth control and those at up to double that level receive it at a reduced cost under Title X. Yet women in this group account for 70% of unplanned pregnancies.
Sandra Fluke is going to step out of college and into a 6 figure salary, can someone please explain to me why she should get free BC??
Very logical and factual proposition. The republicans will hate it with a vengeance.
If obama wasn't in charge the last 4 years, we would be much better off today! Statistics don't lie folks!
Gedmadstaymad,
Get a life and skip church occasionally and be a part of the real world. Oh, I don't see any report saying what you said would happen. As a young person, I would have told you, "So what is wrong with that. As an old man I wish I could do it all over again!
If Obama hadn't stopped the slide from the republicans and bushwhacker, losing 750,000 jobs a month to gaining 169,000 a month, a stable banking system that was about to collapse, a stock market now double what it was from its low point and near the end of bushwhackers term, we would be in a real mess. Oh, statistics???? How can anybody tell what might have been you fool?
A dubious, self-serving study at best, I'm sure. But Free birth control? Right. And just what manufacturer is producing birth control at no cost?! What you 'take no personal responsibility' people really mean is getting the rest of us to pay for your birth control reduces abortions.
Free Market Fan,
It is nice that you have the gift of ESP!
Starting 15 Oct 2012, Thailand is selling generic Viagra @ 1/10 the cost of prescription Viagra...
50mg for those that need a little help and 100mg for those that need a bigger lift...
Thailand has had declining birth rates for years...
Maybe it is that Atrizine, over used sense 1970, that is causing the increasing numbers of 'Lady Boys'...
$487 million goes to planned parenthood for abortions each year. It is crazy to put that kind of money into something that is totally preventable. That half billion bucks SHOULD be used for cancer, MS, diabetes, ect. patients and research. That money should be used to help the disabled, and to the children that have life threatening diseases.
On the other hand, if the person is that irresponsible to not have birth control, then that person will more then likely abuse and neglect the child. I do have an answer. Each tax payer funded abortion should come with a penalty. Tie the tubes, problem solved.
if vomitt romnut is in charge there will be no birth control or abortion
STOP THE REPUBLICAN WAR ON WOMEN!
KevinT--unless you live in a state that funds abortions, there are no tax-payer funded abortions. There most certainly are no federal-tax supported abortions and have not been for a while. Planned Parenthood focuses on wellness care for women (which is not something that can be "prevented")--and the only way to prevent pregnancy for women who are married without birth control is for these women not to have sex with their husbands. How many men are going to get married if they cannot have sex with their wives?
In any case, the total funding for PP from the government is about 11% of $350 million, which is nowhere near the figure you quote. The rest of the money comes from donations--and people can do whatever they darned well please with their donation money. You don't want to donate, don't--but don't tell others what to do with their own money.
Backcountry164--The program being discussed here is very likely part of Title X. What do you think it is part of?
Women at the poverty level do not necessarily get free birth control and up to double that level do not necessarily recieve it at a reduced cost under Title X. There is a program called Title X--it is funded with about 300 million dollars. Only about 30-40% of women who qualify can be given these services because that's all the money that the clinics have. In some states (such as Texas), these services are being radically cut because the state doesn't choose to use the funding or ask for the funding (hence, Texas has a higher rate than average). So, yes, in a state where only 30% of the women who qualify are getting the service, those women are going to represent around 70% of the women who have unplanned pregnancies.
You have a kind of weird idea here that just because there is a program that is supposed to do something, that all the people who qualify for the program actually get whatever it is they are supposed to. You might want to get checked for that--being quite that literal is not a good sign.
Sandra Fluke was not trying to get "free" birth control. She was talking about how she was paying for student insurance (all she could afford--it's expensive), but that insurance did not provide birth control and she would have to pay extra for it. Her main point was that a friend of hers could not afford the birth control, and needed it for a medical condition unrelated to pregnancy (a lot of women use birth control to control menstruation because it causes a lot of health issues). The friend wound up having to have surgery because she couldn't get the birth control--that is, a lack of birth control can lead to life-threatening illnesses. The kind of birth control needed isn't the $5 a month kind, either.
There is a distinct difference between getting birth control for "free" (which is what we see in this article) and getting it at no additional cost as part of the insurance that one is already paying for (which is what Fluke was talking about and what is in the Affordable Health Care Act). This program is trying to address the issue with women who can't afford health care at all--and, yes, it is probably part of Title X. This is an argument for expanding funding for Title X so that all women who qualify can get free contraception.
Ms. Fluke will step out of college into a world where most college graduates (including those with law degrees) are lucky to get jobs at all. Beginning lawyers make around $60,000 dollars, if they are lucky enough to be employed. After a while, they might (or might not) step up to around $75,000 dollars. They often graduate with around $100,000 of debt. The median pay for lawyers is $112K. That's "median," dear. The median salary is not what a person starting out gets.
The job prospects for lawyers are poor because there are more lawyers graduating than there are positions for them that open up. In any case, Fluke was a student when she made her case--the financial situation of a student is not the financial situation of a person who has graduated and found a job.
So, basically, you really don't have a firm grasp of the facts here, so why not try to learn a few?
Stop the war on taxpayors!
It's much better to send our teenagers out into the world without the proper knowledge and means. Just like giving a 10 year old a loaded, cocked and safety off pistol. What could go wrong? Just say no doesn't work. Not for sex or drugs. It never worked and never will. The problem with morals is yours and mine differ. Moral superiority claims are BS. If they weren't no Catholic priest would ever molest a child.
Stupidest thing I've heard today. Please, don't ever open your mouth again.
Janita,
The taxpayer is paying the lowest tax amount and rate that is has since 1958. Get real and know the facts. Don't watch FOX!
It is hard to believe we are still having this debate in 2012. In 1914, Margaret Sanger, a public nurse working in New York City, witnessed the suffering due to consecutive pregnancies and self-induced abortions. Sanger's mother was pregnant 18 times in 22 years and died of tuberculosis and cervical cancer. Sanger saw that the only way women could lift themselves out of poverty was to have access to SAFE birth control to prevent unwanted pregnancies. She is credited for the foundation of the first birth control clinic in NYC and for establishing Planned Parenthood.
If husbands and fathers learned how to control their wives and daughters and teach them to keep their faces and bodies covered up, they'd be little need for birth control pills. We have become to damn lenient with our wives and daughters regardless how much shame they bring upon us, we still let them go out the door dressed like jezebels. It's no darn wonder thy neighbors sons find it difficult to think in schools or at work in the fields when they have these harlots prancing around in corks and bandaids or dresses so short they seem to forget that when they accidently drop their pencils in the schools and work places and bare their butts in your face when they go to pick it up with that all knowing side smile. We need to address this now before all our daughters are living on birth control pills and killing off all that potential blessings from God.
/sarcasm Damn! I'd make a good republican!!!
Voodkokk: Unfortunately, yes. However, they are probably going to say that Obama ordered the study to say that. *sigh* I have been saying "Educate and Medicate, not Legislate" as a way to reduce the NEED for abortion, and thus lower the abortion rates, to eventually do away with abortion all together. You can't legislate morality no matter how hard you try - unless you are Iran or Taliban.
Getmadstaymad: You got that in church, didn't you? You know, it won't increase anything. Those women who are going to do it are going to do it regardless of whether or not they get free birth control, and those that aren't won't. I can tell by your response that you are A) male, and B) over 55 years of age (probably Republican, and probably wishing you were back in the 50's). We have to reduce the number of children born to children - first, it's not healthy for the mother or the child, and secondly, when you have someone who is immature raising a child, you will get an undisciplined child that will be more apt to repeat the mother's mistake (or the father's)(in most cases). If it takes giving out free birth control to break that chain, then do it.
uh, men can get pretty damn good birth control, vasectomy. and too the liberals, so what's the difference between an abortion and birth control, as I understand it from you, it's pretty much the same.
Did the study show if STD's increased and what the additional cost of those are. I don't believe encouarging teenagers to have careless sex is the best answer no matter your political party or religion. Careless sex cost cannot be measured in dollars and cents. The issue is parents are not active in their childerns lives and should be teaching them to have self worth.
Kevin T.
No federal money can be used to pay for abortions or haven't you been around for the last few years/? It is called being informed and not FOX polluted! That money goes to pay for breast cancer screenings for senior women and women who can't afford it or don't have money for health insurance. They would rather eat I guess! It goes to planning and contraception workshops and methods to prevent pregnancy. I guess you think more self inflicted abortions and unwanted kids running around America at the taxpayers expense would be better. The right wing extremist are always complaining about government spending and wast. A pill is better than 1,000's of unwanted kids. The average child placed in foster homes or other homes until adopted, if adopted, runs about $500,000 up to age 10.
Mike-42425: Holy Hannah! Listen to you. You sound like one of those extremists in Iran or Iraq talking about honor killings and making their female children wear a burqa. I honestly hope that was supposed to be sarcasm, because if that's how you actually believe, then I hope you don't breed. We certainly don't need any more of that kind of thinking around here!
Swampeople,
Go back there! Think with your heart and mind and not with religion clouding everything. Jesus, did the later.
Birth Control reduces abortions. Glad someone told me. That was something that I was totally in the dark about!
Mike, Evan now at 67 my raging hormones tell me that your comment is crap! What are a follower of Islam?
debnran
Thus the sarcasm remark. I actually had a hardcore, what they called themselves christian say to me. I have 9 children. I teach them to live and let live.
clwyd-2621393
Me a follower of islam? Not by a long hair chance. Nor am I a christian or any other practiced religion. I believe if there is a God, he put you here to prove yourself and yourself alone. Dun need no gospel or donation plate to do that.
frenchconnection,
Just to let you know that there are others here who are also in the dark! THE DARK AGES!
Balance in SD: I don't think they did that study, but giving free birth control doesn't increase the sexual promisquity of the girls because if they are going to have sex, they will do it whether or not they have birth control. I think the first step is to work on reducing the birth rate, then work on education. The main issue is that children have not been taught respect for themselves and others. Instead of a guy telling a girl "If you loved me, you would." He should be saying "Let me protect you and me." That could either be by waiting or by using contraception. BTW - IUDs do NOT prevent STDs. The study was probably done because people were looking for proof that if birth control was available for free that it would reduce the numbers of abortions - it did. It's the first step in removing the NEED for abortions which is the first step in doing away with it. It won't work to just make it harder or make it illegal - that just forces it back into the back alley. Until we can get a handle on it, I wish the churches would back that program (free BC - which doesn't include abortion, and never did). However, I doubt the Catholic Church will ever agree to anything that will give women ANY power.
Mike
So be it! I was hoping it was done tongue in cheek!
Swamppeople: Men have had control over birth control for eons - condoms, not doing it, no ejaculation, vasectomies etc and they haven't. Maybe what they needed was the fathers (or mothers) of the girls to take care of their birth control method BEFORE the date. I know at least one father that would have used castration as a birth control method. lol.
So if free birth control cuts the abortion rate, then why doesn't free birth control cut down the birth rate?
We have so many people who qualify for free birth control yet they have 3 plus kids and the tax payers are paying for them.
I have one in my family, my niece she gets free medical, free dental, free birth control, free housing, food stamps, welfare, it goes on. She is pregnant with baby #5 yes #5. In my book she is a loser and she disgust me. Free birth control may have cut down the abortion rate but in her case it is costing the tax payers a lot of money because we are footing the bill....will there be free birth control and baby #6? More money for momma!
It says "Can" not "Does", so they are saying they don't really know or they would already have facts to prove it. Besides, nothing is free. Why should taxpayer dollars go to support women and men who can't keep their pants on. Typical PMS-DNC bullcrap reporting.
The moral of this story is, have a great sex life as mankind has devised a way that will prevent human nature from taking it's course compliments of Barack Hussein Obama and paid for by the US Government (taxpayers).
Mike is very clever, he had me till the very last sentence. News from the front, the Republican party is the American Taliban. Many believe as Mike has written. Just listen to them.
stull,
In Thailand one of their methods to reduce birth rates was, Free Vasectomies On the Royal Birthday, even to tourist...
Mechai Viravaidya, who is known as Asia’s family planning genius, uses unorthodox efforts to banish the stigma associated with condoms and other methods of family planning. A few of Mechai’s unusual approaches include; condom-blowing contests, free cab insurance for Bangkok cabbies who bring in passengers for free vasectomies, and free pigs for farmers who limit their number of children. His efforts helped cut Thailand’s population growth rate in half in less than 10 years.
BTY - Abortions are still illegal and medical care for a Thai is FREE...
The Right isn't really interested in stopping abortions or unwanted pregnancies. They are interested in stopping SIN, and failing at that being sure the sinners are punished by being forced to bear unwanted children, never mind the health of those children.
I read awhile back that in Norway, they had a similar % of young women having children. And they passed a law that read "any person, male or female, regardless of age has free access to all forms of birth control " Their abortion rate dropped to almost zero! These Conservatives that are fighting against any abortions should take heed that giving free contraception to everyone will take that abortion fight completely away. If young women have free access to birth control, they can then begin to plan increasing their education, getting a better job, getting out of poverty, etc. Sure, there are young women that have gone on to get a degree, after having a child, but its very difficult to do. Its far easier if one can plan their children so you can have children at a time you can afford them. I think its a win/win proposition. However, the conservatives seem to think that offering contraceptives makes innocent young female children into sluts. So they would rather preach abstinence instead of contraception.
So how do you control it in men? Because lets face it fellas, we are usually the ones pressing women for sex. I hardly ever hear a guy saying, "Her hands were all over me! I kept trying to tell her that I'm saving myself for marriage..."
Seems to me the problem, if there is one, is not with the people taking the birth control, at least for the most part. So that whole argument that it make women feel like they can give it up all the time, does not really sound valid to me.
Free food and housing would end homelessness too!
O'bama gaves me a frees phone!!!
O'bama/Biden 2012!
It would be so logical to provide free birth control. Less abortions should make the church happy. It should also be cheaper as unwanted kids of poor women end up supported by the government dole. That would lessen the number of children on the dole and therefore save tax dollars, something that should make Republicans very happy. Birth control means less poor people born which equals money saved. The Republicans should embrace the idea of funding birth control with open arms! The dollar spent on this would save ten dollars down the road...at least!
Let's face the facts, folks. Many women are sluts and many men are leches. They want to have sex because it's fun and it feels good. I'd rather have my tax dollars used to pay for birth control for sluts and leches than have it paying for abortions and illegitimate spawn. Paying for birth control is so much cheaper, since so many sluts and leches will do it without regard for personal responsibility and then expect the rest of us to pay for cleaning up the mess afterwards. So, yes, pay to give these sex-crazed losers birth control. The other alternative is more money draining this economy to pay for the results.
And, if people don't avail themselves of free birth control, and pregnancy results, then they're on their own. Can't afford an abortion? Tough. Can't afford to raise a child? Tough. Give it up for adoption. We've done our job. Now you do your own.
The illogical behavior of the Catholic Church on the subject of birth control reveals it to be a present-day fertility cult. Think about it.
Nothing is free. Now that is logic
That would only make sense if you were a rational person and weren't trying to stop other people from having non-procreative sex.
Remember, the people who need an injection of logic are the ones who consider themselves to be the Morality Police.
Damn, pass the popcorn and make it a large one. The Right Wing, Evangelical Dogma Monkeys are going to work themselves into a full-blown piss & @!$%# spewing/throwing War Dance! One can only hope they will hurt themselves in their oral-excrement excitement. Should be a good movie, waiting on the edge of my seat for the ending.
Frankly this study just proves that the abortion rate is going down. What is doesn't prove is why the abortion rate is going down. Free birth control might be one of the causes but a lot more reason is that teens aren't having as much sex as before. Blame that on the economy.
This is OLD NEWS. I know you want to contribute the decrease to free birth control c/o of Obamacare , but let's be serious.
http://www.examiner.com/article/are-teens-having-less-sex-yes-but-more-females-becoming-bisexual
More female teens are becoming bisexual.
http://thestir.cafemom.com/teen/142072/teens_are_having_less_sex
More teens are having oral sex.
Shrekk, yes, I know who the illogical ones are...church types usually. They gotta weigh it. Which is worse: naughty sex or death (more abortions). I'd think the first would be preferable to the second. I grew up in the church. That is how I saw it even then. Just because you are a Christian you don't have to park your brain at the door. In fact, I got so sick of Christian irrationality that I left the church.
"Unhappy" sounds like one of the Morality Police.
He must not be getting any.
Unhappy, I guess bisexual and gay are probably the best forms of birth control? That explains a lot. I have read that scientists say that during times of over population and scarcity, organisms mount the same sex rather than the opposite sex in order to cut down on populations.
Obama shows his inability in the first debate and his Pravda buddies in the media have to bring up anything they can to change the subject. FREE contraceptives have been available to women who can't afford them for literally decades. This whole Bs is just that a line of crap to claim a war on women when Conservatives defend the freedom of religion guarenteed by our Constitution. Get back to how stupid your main man really is. Get back to how he has wasted our money, destroyed our credit rating by refusing to curb spending, embarrased us and made us a wimp laughing stock of the world and is trying to destroy our military after failing to protect our borders or our citizens surving in other countries. Get you own free pills from the local free clinic and stop the spin to war on women. The only war on women is Obama using medicare cuts to wipe out our seniors women more than men because they tend to live longer and cost more.
Empress
The problem is that nature may limit the traditional sex roles by making more gays during overpopulated times, but our liberals let gays have children through serogates or invetro so the count doesn't drop. Shouldn't fool with mother nature.
...As if that's a bad thing. If more people got laid, (especially uptight, repressed conservatives) the world might be a better place.
This stupid article suggests basically that we give free birth control mandated even for those who find such things abhorrant to thier religion so that people can screw around as much as they want or else when they get knocked up (the term only they would use) they will kill the baby. Well, who will that guilt be owned by? Not me.
What "count doesn't drop"? The number of gays?
You are aware that most gay folks have straight parents, right?
Wow, are posted here ever political - wow! One guy points out that 'free' birth control isn't really free, it's paid for by everybody else, and his comment get's ''collapsed by the community''. What part of that isn't accurate? Did he 'sound' to much like a Republican for a second, so he must be silenced?
Don't misunderstand me, I'm totally in favor of preventing unwanted pregnancies, and free access to contraception is obviously one strategy that works. That being said, FREE stuff isn't free, and pointing that out is a simple truth, and it shouldn't get your comments 'collapsed'.
Shaking, Um no. It doesn't say that. It isn't mandating that YOU have it, it is mandating the CHOICE to have it. And why would someone who finds it "abhorrent to their (or thier in your language)religion" to use birth control "screw around" (the term only someone like you would use) "as much as they want". You make absolutely no sense. People who find BC abhorrent probably aren't 'screwing around' unless they want a child. I doubt they'll kill it.
Also, there is no guilt in birth control, in normal sexual desire, in choosing not to be a parent and using reliable prevention, and frankly no guilt in an abortion that has nothing to do with you. If you have an abortion then you get to feel apathy or guilt or whatever. If you believe its murder, fine, but suggesting you - so wholly unconnected to it are even capable of harboring guilt, is like you feeling guilty for people dying in Sierra Leone.
Bean@home,
Your response to Backcountry164 was a tad too long for him, you see he has a very short attention span and doesn't enjoy reading about a topic before making his comments.
Oh please, no one was FORCED to accept the contraceptives. So the people who think it is a sin, don't have to use any. I think the State/Federal governments should offer free GYN visits, IUDs ,implants and condoms for every female who wants them. It would save money as it is less expensive than abortions and help cut back on welfare roles. Too many families are caught in the trap that welfare has become.
I think every public school should offer classes on birth control; everything from how to use them to where to go for birth control and check-ups, PLUS all the information on STD's, from causes to signs to treatments. I am not an advocate for teens having sex; I just don't want them to have unplanned pregnancies or catch diseases
Bean@home "don't tell others what to do with their own money."
my thoughts exactly!
Abstinence worked so well for Sarah Palin's kids. Unfortunately, they turned out to be normal.
Simple fact is that people are going to have sex, kids are going to experiment. With contraception, less unwanted pregnancies, less abortions. The savings far outweigh the cost, so if you don't like it, just hold your Bible between your knees.
Oh Steve! That was delightfully funny
Or be an abstinent single mother - *cough, cough* Bristol Palin *cough, cough*
Shrekk: This is the best you could come up with?
Our country is turning our girls into whores.
My question is why do taxpayers have to pay for the whores? Shouldn't responsible men on the liberal left-* cough* cough* pay for it as well?
Something is considerably wrong when the first statement of the article directly contradicts the headline. Birth control can, doesn't mean that it does. No pill in the world reduces a woman's thoughtless concern for a life she was partially responsible for bringing into the world. For all you pro-choicers out there, I have a question: which part of a woman's reproductive system is a fetus?
@Bean@home
Sandra Fluke is a lying democratic puppet who manipulated congress with biased facts and half-truths, who by the way failed to disclose her prior affiliations. Experts disagree on the use of birth control for ovarian cysts. She's even stated that her whole reason was specifically to challenge Georgetown's policy. Spare me. Saying you had an "Unplanned pregnancy" is double spoken meaning you're either too lazy to use contraceptives, ignorant of proper application, or they didn't work. Either way, you're responsible for what goes between your legs. The whole purpose of having sex, the end goal, whether or not you wish to face it, is to produce babies…No contraceptive is 100% effective, so you're playing Russian roulette if you decide to have sex. The ambiguity of the language is in essence asking for "free" birth control, since not all contraceptives are used to stop menstruation, oral contraceptives mainly are. Don't even get me started on her retarded calculations. How do you have up to 3000$ dollars to spend on contraceptives IN LAW SCHOOL again? If a burden is being alleviated by the health care act, somebody, somewhere is getting something.
@Sezyou
Not really. Some men can keep it in their pants.
Hmmmmm, I still can't seem to find where Article 1, Section 8 gives the federal government the power to provide free contraceptives for recreational sex.
But not to belabor the point about Constitutionality, because the Liberal cabal believes that elitists are more able to run a government on emotions rather than specified laws, let's see if there are other reasons to promote abstinence.
-Teens make up about one quarter of the 12 million STD cases reported annually.
-Every year about one in four sexually active teens contract an STD, about 3 million people.
-In a single act of unprotected sex with an infected partner, a teenage woman has a 30 percent risk of getting genital herpes and a 50 percent chance of contacting gonorrhea.
-Chlamydia is the most commonly reported infectious disease in the United States, and may be one of the most dangerous STDs among women today.
-An estimated one in four sexually active teens have Chlamydia. Seventy-five percent of infected women, and 50 percent of infected men have no symptoms.
-The number one risk factor for cervical cancer is early sexual activity, the second is multiple sex partners.
-Human Papalloma Virus (HPV) is likely the most common STD among young, sexually-active populations.
-One in six sexually active teens contract HPV, which can cause pain, genital warts and cancer.
-Half of all sexually active young women end up contracting HPV — 20 percent eventually recover, but 80 percent are afflicted the rest of their lives.
Of course none of this is ever included in these studies that promote morality be stricken from society.
I’m sure as these STD’s increase the government will just tax us to pay for the treatments needed so that young teens can continue to be irresponsible and promiscuous.
Responsibility is not promoted in the “Life of Julia”.
Of course only in the convoluted mind of the Liberal/Progressive will contracting disease be acceptable so long as you are guaranteed your “right” to recreational sex.
Bean@home
Really? You think it is weird to expect people to actually seek out and get the help that is made available to them?
I really don't care what Sandra Fluke was trying to do. What I asked was why someone who is going to have a 6 figure salary can't be expected to pay for BC themselves. Did you actually not understand my question?
marklepew
My attention span is just fine, I just don't bother wasting my time when it comes to inane rambling.
The collapsing comment syndrome is not a political conspiracy as much as it is bad web design. You can easily give a thumbs up to a comment but a thumbs down is "inflammatory" "no value" or "advertising" resulting in a "collapsed by community." We need a down arrow so we can politely tell somebody there opinion is cow dung. Plus a third tier of commentary would be nice, that way we could comment on the comments on the comments, sorta like a hemi-demi-semi-quaver in music.
As to the topic at hand, I feel statistical proof that the promotion of protected sex reduces abortion will carry little or no weight with the religious right who seem to have their self-worth all wrapped up in the ideas that self-control is the only path allowed to solve all of our counties problems.
That's why the cell phones were supposed to be free...... to reduce abortions. If you stay busy enough blogging, tweeting and texting you don't have as much time for sex. Studies prove this!
At least abortion declines
The positive is abortions decline. However, there is much more to discuss here. Handing out free contraceptives suggest that those women needing this "free" service cannot pay for it themselves. According to this article it costs less than 1 dollar a day to be on birth control pills. I think if you asked a few more question of these women in this study you would find that many support other habits that cost a lot more. So if they smoke they could easily spend 10/pack if they live in NYC. If they love their specialty coffee drinks they might spend 4/day. Soda? There is no way that just about every woman could not pay for this service themselves if they so desired. It is a matter of priorities.
Another issue is that birth rates are actually down in the US and in fact we are not even replacing ourselves. Our birth rate is under 2. That might please many, but actually a declining birth rate in any country is a big worry since it will take a larger population to support the one in retirement. Recently I found out that Austria pays 500/mo to women to have children. That is because one day there will not be nearly enough people to work in that country and thus immigrants will be needed.
Lastly, when are we going to set a higher standard for responsibility. Right now it is birth control, but a year from now what other personal matter will our population believe they have the right to get free. Will we someday feel that we should pay for free transportation to all since paying for gas is becoming a huge burden. CA is now paying 6/gal. ????
I paid for my own birth control pills. I didn't need any help paying for it even though I was a college student working part-time. My mother DID not pay for my pills. She didn't even know I needed them. I took it upon myself to go see a doctor and I felt like a grow-up taking care of business.
Sorry, we are enabling our society more and more every day. Pretty soon getting up will be just too hard.
No birth control, no abortion, no sex without intent of procreation, no so-called Constitutional rights. You do exactly what I say and that's all there is to it. My right to tell you how to live trumps your right to live the way you want to. Signed, a Republican a-hole.
Most aborted babies are black. Why do you guys hate black people?
I had an abortion in college after a drunken one night stand with a friend. I KNEW better. ONE TIME without birth control and I paid for it. I have never gone without again.
I think less abortions is a great thing. I am now married and have the Paragard IUD. I LOVE IT. It's birth control you don't have to think about for 10 to 12 years. Although, according to the Life Amendment nut bags, if I conceive on it and my uterus is too hostile for implantation, I am a murderer.
Let's get something straight people. A fertilized egg is NOT A BABY nor is it when pregnancy begins. Pregnancy begins at implantation. (FACE PALM) Oh, and one more thing. Regarding the STD portion of our program, herpes CAN be contracted even with condom use as can HPV. As a single woman, I made sure I got the HPV vaccine.
BC also saves money by reducing the number of children born to mothers who can't care for them. No. Brainer.
If you don't like sex don't have it. There's no downside to this entire thing.
The researchers are highly educated people who used scientific methodology to reach logical conclusions about the value to society of free or low cost contraception. Unfortunately, they didn't factor in the closed minds of the conservative element, the ignorance of legislators like Todd Akin and Paul Ryan, and the Catholic Church's vested interest in keeping those babies coming to fill the pews and the collection plates. (Nevermind into the hands of their priests.)
They forgot that, behind all the false "right to life" sentiment, lies a stubbornly misogynistic (Rush Limbaugh) and sanctimonious group of hypocrites (Rick Santorum) who want to impose their so-called 'family values' on others. Meanwhile, they commit serial adultery (Newt Gingrich) and then proclaim that they have gone to god for forgiveness.
They forgot that conservatives don't care about babies or children, only fetuses.
They left out that at bottom, the entire 'anti-birth control/ anti-abortion' crowd is about controlling women and their equal right to freely exercise, as men do, their own sexual choices.
We are dealing with an element in our society that cares nothing about over-population and its dire consequences to our planet. We are dealing with people who believe the universe is six thousand years old, and that man and dinosaurs walked the earth together. Some of them are our legislators.
Good luck convincing those loons of anything worthwhile based on science. If someone could convince them that god created birth control, we might have a shot.
theboys:
Did you read the article? Providing free or low-cost birth control SAVES EVERYONE MONEY. We're already paying for poor women to have babies, which is a lot more expensive than paying for their birth control.
Don't worry about birth rates in the U.S. If it comes to the point where immigration is not enough to expand our population, we can change our policies. There are seven billion people on Earth. No shortage of humans.
Birth control is expensive, but it's a lot less costly than a country full of unwanted, neglected, abused and even murdered babies (read the news).
As far as personal responsibility goes, I'd focus on the obesity epidemic if I were you. That will have terrible consequences that are now becoming clearly apparent. You could start with the governor of Snookieland.
So, "free" (which is a lie because tax payers pay) birth control cuts abortion rates. "Free" food cuts hunger. "Free" housing cuts homelessness. "Free" electricity cuts darkness. blah blah blah
Nothing is free. Tax & spend...simple....until your taxes go up and then you whine about it.
Someone mentioned planned parenthood and their funding...Why not CLOSE Planned Parenthood to pay for free birth control? After all, with free birth control, PP wouldn't be necessary, would it?
@jim spence:
OK, please tell us how you would promote personal morality in a culture that is materialistic and hedonistic to the core. Please tell us how we can prevent unmarried sex in our young population when everywhere they look, everything they see throws sex in their faces 24/7. TV shows and advertisements, movies, magazine covers, billboards...sex is used to sell everything. It's almost insane.
Yes, there are high rates of STD's. Good luck stopping teenagers from having sex. So educate them, provide them with protection and healthcare, and teach them to have self respect and respect for others.
Please don't tell me that religion is the answer. We have one of the most rabidly religious populations on Earth and yet you see what else we've got: high rates of violence, poverty, drug and alcohol abuse to name a few. Religion hasn't worked. Let's try reality.
The Catholics don't want to pay for that either, and the fundies hate it, too. After all, it means they'd have to admit that unwanted pregnancy is as much a man's fault as a woman's.
kwilson, you are a daft idiot if you think sex should only be used for procreation. I am pretty sure I never want kids and there are many out there who don't. There is nothing wrong with that. Sex is messy, dirty fun with the right partner.
And as I pointed out before, God gave me and other women an organ that is SOLELY for sexual pleasure. In case you don't know what it's called, it's the clitoris. You might want to look it up. Oh, and even though I am happily married with a great sex life, I still love my vibrator. We have a great relationship too. I pity your partner.
The Republican, sorry, Catholic view is not about abortion, it's about control.
One way to become powerful is to threaten one with eternal pain (read: fear). Check.
One way to become powerful is to collect lots of money (read: mandated donations). Check.
One way to be come powerful is to increase in numbers (read: ban birth control and abortion). Check.
When are you all going to wake up and truly free your minds? How much more obvious does it need to be?
Read the article! The women in the study were given IUD's and hormonal implants.
Even among married couples, many pregnancies occur by accident, i.e. not planned.
It takes two for a pregnancy to occur. Where is the man in all of this? Where is HIS responsibilty? Too many 'studs' use women for their own selfish pleasure, impregnate them, give them STD's and then walk away. And they call the woman a slut.
Why did the debate totally overlook women? Healthcare and economics: Pay $1000 now for IUDs for women, and avoid paying $200,000 for unwanted children. Women also need equal pay for equal work. That should have been in the first debate, because it affects HALF THE POPULATION, and is certainly about economics. The kitchen table is as important as Wall Street and the bank accounts of candidates: the kitchen table of every family is what makes Romney's low tax return so frustrating for most people.
When people of religion (and yes, I am religious) do not realize they are human, they sometimes think that close proximity of others in their community will somehow prevent them from sexual relations. Back in the day, they used to teach about two kinds of love: Agape (friendship) and Eros (lust). Somehow, it was thought that those who practiced Agape would be immune to Eros. These people missed the whole point of religion: it is not for the already righteous, but to save sinners, so expect churches to be full of sinners, not perfect people. While we are at it, religion is not to congratulate the rich, but to lift up the poor, and all the rich that bash those who are trying to make our country a little more charitable are simply not aware of what Scripture saith.
There is one truth about lust that is very strange: it is brought on by brain hormones from the hypothymus, and as the desert fathers of the 5th century said (St. Anthony), it can take a person by surprise. St. Anthony mentions that even a monk has to fight against lust; St. Basil said that the only people who have achieved full chastity, which is no thoughts of sex, have been very few, such as St. John the Apostle. Because of this, some think that teaching about contraception brings lust to mind, which starts a train of thought that is unstoppable and dangerous. Well, for those who are interested in celibacy, once one has a contraceptive plan in place, it is less likely that the mind will dwell on the subject. Anybody can choose to be responsible and not have affairs; having contraceptives have nothing to do with that.
It is surprising and wrong-headed that some Dominicans, "dogs" (Domini - cani) would make a connection between contraception, embryo research and eugenics; the Dominican Order started in reaction to the Albigensians... or maybe it is just a fetish of the Dominicans, because the Albigensians practiced free love while they claimed to be the most pure, a very strange heretical group that claimed that the Old Testament God was not the same as the New Testament God (but the Dominicans also stopped saying Old Testament Psalms around then, and they became very similar in thought and dress to the Albigensians). A little church history is needed to understand all the ramifications of the churches' positions; America teaches none of this history, so we are doomed to repeat some of the errors that some historical religious groups have had. I wouldn't believe anything that came out of a Dominican.
PAWS93: Planned Parenthood DOES NOT DO ABORTIONS. It does give out birth control (although it can't afford those free IUDs, that would need other funding). It does give health checkups, including heart, lung, and breast examinations to prevent cancer. They have to keep careful records of who they see and treat for what. They can PROVE what they do. You are saying they do something just because some radio or TV show personality says so. Is that where you get your education? If you think you will get a diploma or degree from listening to Fox News, you won't be qualified. I doubt that your wife lets you wash the dishes.
Come on, people. Don't you realize the only purpose for sex is to reproduce? No one should be allowed to have sex unless you're intending to produce another "soul" for the greater glory of God.
How do we know this? God (through the church) told us. Read some of the comments in this thread and you'll understand.
Right?
(Man, I hope I didn't need a sarcasm tag here, but I'm going to add one anyway, just in case one of the previously mentioned religious nutcases takes me seriously.)
Scenario for you both;
Married couple decide thy want to have kids, are financially capable of raising a child, get pregnant. Then find out the child has a genetic defect and will only live a few years on life support in agony and die before their fifth birthday.
Would you approve of an abortion for them?
Jerry: While they would be financially capable of raising a normal child, the costs of keeping a child on life support until the child dies is beyond their means, and everyone knows that special-needs children rarely ever get adopted, let alone children who will spend their entire brief life on life support. Also, the child will spend the entire time in pain.
KevinT: taxpayers wouldn't be funding the abortion, the parents' insurance will. Also, would allowing a child with an incurable genetic defect to live in pain also not be a form of abuse if the means to prevent it--through an abortion, thus ensuring the child never even has to face the possibility--is available? And if this is a one in a million defect, and the doctor says it is unlikely to happen again, shouldn't they get a chance to try again?
As to your recommendation that tubes be tied after an abortion--the government of (I think it was South Carolina) already tried that a while back. Young black girls who came in pregnant and wanting an abortion were secretly sterilized without their knowledge or consent after the procedure--one story I read was of a girl who was being molested by her uncle, got pregnant, had an abortion and was sterilized--and years later when she got married and tried to get pregnant her doctor informed her she'd been sterilized. If I remember correctly, the government of SC now owes that woman a lot of money.
After I had my first son I asked my doctor to tie my tubes--I didn't want anymore. He told me I was too young to make that decision (23) and gave me birth control pills. When I went in for my three month checkup we found I was pregnant again despite those pills. Eleven months later I had m second--and he is autistic.
I love both my boys, I can't imagine life without either of them, and their teachers all say both are polite, friendly, sweet,charming, helpful little men, even my autistic son. But he puts up with so much teasing at school, he tries so hard to do what he's being told and gets so frustrated when he can't that there are times when I wonder if I had insisted that my tubes be tied, would he have been 'normal' if he'd been born to someone else?
I realize it was the Great Mother's will that I had him, and She gave him to me because She believes my hubby and I are the best parents for him. I do my best, and I see other kids like him in his special ed class at school whose parents show little concern for their child's progress, not even trying to teach their kids manners because 'oh he's retarded, there's nothing that can be done about it' but I still wonder sometimes.
Are the pharmaceutical companies GIVING away the birth control??? There's no such thing as a "free" ride -- so that leaves the TAXPAYERS paying for the "free" birth control. Another government giveaway of the peoples money.
Please stop talking until you do real research. The cost of the contraceptives comes out of the insurance companies' profits.
@ Paws: taxpayer funded birth control gives a net positive return to the taxpayer.
@ Kaybee: This isn't about assigning blame right now, it's about helping people.
Wow Elizabeth...So impressed by the "Fox News" attack. Never heard that one before. Sorry, wrong label. I don't pay for tv because I'm fiscally responsible and don't throw away my money on products or services that do not add value.
According to factcheck.org, Planned Parenthood says that 3% of their services were abortions. Notice how I did not reference Fox anywhere. I wonder where you get your "facts".
Your "entitlement" mentality shows. I believe in personal responsibility and if you chose to engage in those activities then you do so at your risk. It is not up to my tax dollars to pay for you. No one is "entitled" to a lifestyle or sexual activity. Nothing is "FREE". Someone has to pay for it.
The govt gets enough in taxes and they should spend it wisely. Funding for free birth control could be found in cutting Pelosi's flight alcohol bills, maybe Obama could quit giving Obamacare tax waivers to his friends, cut defense spending like the DOD doesn't want the tanks, stop giving loans to solar panel companies that can't compete with China, or maybe Obama's GSA and other govt groups could stop throwing themselves lavish parties on the tax payers.
You want free birth control...Sorry, your govt spent it on parties instead of doing what you wanted them to do. You should be upset with Obama.
"relaxdontdoit"...NOTHING the govt does is a net positive to the taxpayers because they will spend it elsewhere. How do you think we got $16 Trillion in the hole?
I don't care if you give birth control, but don't raise my taxes to do it. By your own statement, the funding is already there since it's a net savings and the savings should be used to save Social Security.
Elizabeth was incorrect in her wording of the statement. The truth is that yes, they perform abortions rarely, but they are never paid for by public funds (per the law).
Again, do some research. The contraceptives are not paid for by anyone, they are funded by the insurance companies taking a small hit on their profits.
What I asked was why someone who is going to have a 6 figure salary can't be expected to pay for BC themselves. Did you actually not understand my question?~backcountry164
So based on the ssumption of future income you spend beyond your means? Isn't that how you get into debt and isn't this what you rail against everyday in your inane ramblings? Are you related to Romney? Maybe you can buy a Ferrari based on your belief that you'll find your dream job..........wow so very predictable flawed logic........small attention span for sure
marklepew
No, once you start making 100k+ why can't you pay for your own BC? Sorry there is no crayon font to make my questions easier for you to comprehend.
She is still in college genius, so I guess you don't have to have money to pay for esentials like food and prescriptions BEFORE you have that great job. How many years do you think it takes to go to college and then law school? I'm sure you don't feed your kids now because once they start making 100+K they'll pay for their own food..............why am I even taking to time to respond to such inane ramblings??
Sandra Fluke is going to step out of college and into a 6 figure salary, can someone please explain to me why she should get free BC??~BC164
What I asked was why someone who is going to have a 6 figure salary can't be expected to pay for BC themselves.~BC164
Hey professor tell me you go to the store and try to pay for esentials by saying "I'm going to have" the money real soon. Go ahead maybe you can draw me a picture with the crayons.
@marklepew
As I've already made note of women at or near the poverty line, which would obviously include college students, can already receive free or reduced cost BC through Title X, making all of your "points" null and void. Now why don't you explain why she shouldn't have to pay for it after she is making 100k+ per year.
The study shows impressive results but the results are not representative of what insurance paid for contraception will mean. In this study, the majority of women were set up with IUD's or implants which are virtually a no maintenance forms of contraception. Other more common types require a commitment to the proper and regular use, like the pill, condoms, etc. With the coverage available for contraception, it does not mean that we will see similar results nation wide. First and foremost, people will have to actively seek out contraception, second, Teens will still need to go through parents to receive contraception even though it is covered by insurance. So now those stunning numbers start to become a little less stunning. Add to this that the majority of contraception that will be used will be probably in the form of the pill or condoms both which require the will to use them regularly and the numbers will diminish again. This is a controlled study that does give favorable results but our society is anything but controlled.
I am a Catholic Christian, but still believe in a woman's right to choose. Contrary to my church's doctrine, I think that contraception is a sensible alternative to unwanted pregnancy. The problem with covered contraception for me is with the message it sends and financial burden it spreads. Parent roles in children's lives are fast becoming diminished. There are two reasons for this, first the necessity for the parents to work more than ever before and second, is the growing reliance on educational institutions to be parents while educating students. I find both of these problems to be horribly wrong. The decision to bring a child into this world also means a decision to be responsible for the child's well being, education, and values. Unfortunately the weight of these decisions is not fully considered by many and the thought of child being the end result of sexual activity is the farthest thing from many minds. Abortion is only an extension of the throw away society we now live in. Everything today is made to have a certain lifespan and then to be easily discarded and though that is not true of children, the attitude surrounding the former is becoming fixed on the latter as well. Once the people who view abortion as murder are silenced, this attitude of throw away lives will then extend to other parts of our human race. The elderly, those with severe handicaps, and those with genetic diseases or deformations that would make their lives difficult at best. It will come packaged as a kindness to the unfortunate and the suffering but will continue to grow from there. Genetic engineering and cloning in human beings is fraught with similar perils. Science and technologies that allow us these opportunities are great and wondrous things, however just because we can do something doesn't mean we should. Some of our greatest successes have turned into our greatest potential evils all one need do is look at atomic energy as an example.
spin the original question you posed to try to fit your narrow ideas about women and the article? Since you have no interest in what she said, as you mentioned earlier....I must assume you had a short attention span and didn't read the article or what she actually said.....how can you even intelligently discuss this topic? It was about insurance coverages...........paid for but yet denied....not the ability to pay for medical prescriptions after graduating college. I will humor you though, how about after she graduated and had that great job with the attendant income she choose to purchase health insurance through her employer. The insurance company then denied her coverage offered to others employees that also paid for the same plan........would that be fair in your dimension? Do you get sidetracked easily when having a short attention span?
@marklepew
This was my original post, notice how I make BOTH points in the same post-
So where is the spin? I start out by saying women who can't afford BC can get it for free now, and then I asked why someone making 6 figures should get it for free. You just pick and choose what you want to whine about because you've got a hard on for me. Get help.
@Paws93, let me repeat, BC SAVES TAXPAYER MONEY.
Where do you want your refund from not paying for welfare for 18 years per non-BC prevented birth?
Think about how and why BC saves a taxpayer money. It's the exact same reasons BC saves single people, or couples money. Think about it before you reply, please.
Kornfed:
You are missing the obvious. "Free" birth control would end up saving billions of dollars in the long run. Free food and housing, while being altruistic, does not have that benefit. Free birth control should be embraced by Republicans. The fact that is not proves that Republicans have some other agenda than wanting to eliminate abortions. I suspect that agenda is wanting to keep women barefoot and pregnant and unable to participate in politics or the work place.
This bit of news was known over 50 years ago. In the 50s, I used to sell condoms through the mail, mostly to folks that had just had a child and did not want another pregnancy too soon or at all. Then the pill came on the scene and it was well established that a program of giving them away, as was tried in some developing countries, would be a good thing as abortions would be minimized and the cost of out of, or even in, wedlock of children folks could not afford would be good for them and the country.
Enter religious fanatics and legislators whoring for votes and more than a half century later we are still having debates over this issue.
Is it my imagination or are people regressing and actually getting dumber?
Not your imagination at all. LOL We are actually regressing now instead of progressing in many ways. Thanks to technology we are losing our social skills and many of us are losing our ability to think without the aid of some electronic gizmo or another. A friend of mine ran across an article that mentioned the term "devolution" and he laughingly renamed it "devil-ution" because he blamed much of it on the religious extremists that you mention for trying to drag us back into the 17th century.
As for me, I tend to lay most of the blame on misused technology. Frankly I think that all electronic gadgets from television on up should be withheld from children until their are 18 and fully capable of doing basic math on paper and in their heads and capable of hand writing a comprehensible thesis without the aid of a grammar/spell checker and for it to ultimately display considerable independent and critical thought processes. They should also be able to use their imagination to create their own entertainment instead of simply waiting to be entertained. Once they have mastered those skills then they can move on to using the tech. stuff to enhance their productivity. I have seen this with Amish children who are not particularly sophisticated in their education but the quality of what they got was superb and once they are on their own they do very well in future self development because they learned how to learn from the very beginning.
Mike- Your wives and daughters didn't make a baby by themselves. If nasty men would stop wh@re mongering there wouldn't be anyone to impregnate them! Men are equally as responsible for preventing pregnancy as women. And if you are using abortion as your primary method of birth control, maybe you should consider taking a frikkin pill or something rather than pay hundreds of dollars to kill a fetus every time you get knocked up. durrr
Easy access to birth control lowers the number of unplanned pregnancies? Of course! It was so simple! Why hasn't anyone figured this out before? /Sarc
Sure, laugh if you like, but apparently many groups still haven't figured this out. They still fight against having it available at all. So of course it seems obvious, but apparently it isn't to some.
But the bigger problem to most right wingers is that Birth Control automatically leads to sex crazed sluts. And apparently sex crazed sluts are more of a problem than abortion is to them.
Or at least it seems so to the Limbaugh and others of his ilk.
FormerMarineSgt says:
"But the bigger problem to most right wingers is that Birth Control automatically leads to sex crazed sluts. And apparently sex crazed sluts are more of a problem than abortion is to them."
Of course! You have to control people's sex lives so that you can make them feel guilty about it, and so that they fear damnation and/or social shame. All the patriarchal religions do this.
The plain truth is that Limbaugh and the people he champions are religious police, like the Taliban or tribal leaders in Afghanistan. They will accept ONLY their world-view. Meaning, that sex is ONLY for reproduction and not pleasure (well at least not for women). Women play a subservient role because God want's it that way apparently.
It is either their way or the highway. No compromise on anything their dogma dictates.
The rethuglicans were counting on the aspirin thing to work,...................Sorry Foster Freeze,...................I wonder how Akin will take this news?
As a scientist, sometimes it is very important to actually run a darned study and get some numbers on something that seems obvious.
The decrease in abortion rates may have been kinda predictable; but the huge magnitude of the decrease in abortion rates was unexpected. Now we have numbers to prove it.
On the other hand, sugar DOES NOT actually make kids hyper, contrary to popular opinion; and we know that because somebody took a month or two to actually study that.
TheOverlord....absolutely correct, the Church and the far right are no different than the Taliban in their intolerance and their hatred of women.
@ram-762581
Just like some groups haven't figured out that free BC is already available for people who can't afford it and has been for over 40 years. Also noteworthy is the fact that this was championed and signed into law by republicans, another fact "some groups" seem to have trouble with.
If all liberals got abortions or used birth control... they would disappear as a species in 2-3 generations! Something Mitt should consider for the benefit of our country's future!
Oh, and add same sex marriages to that list! :)
This study was conducted during that same period that is experiencing a over-all drop in pregnancies due to ECONOMICS...
No coincidence I'm sure...
I'm interested in the rates of STD among these people being tested???
Increasing numbers of chlamydia infections have made it the most widespread STD in the USA. In 1997 there were 537,904 reported diagnoses, corresponding to a rate of 205.5 per 100,000 population. However, by 2009 the annual total had more than doubled to 1,244,180 and the rate per 100,000 had risen to 409.2.
In 2009, the rate of chlamydia among blacks was 8 times higher than that in whites. Rates among American Indians/Alaska Natives and Hispanics were also higher than among whites...
Gonorrhea - Although the 2009 rate of 99.1 diagnoses per 100,000 population is one of the lowest ever recorded, gonorrhea remains the second most commonly reported STD in the United States. Moreover, the rate of gonorrhea among blacks was 20.5 times greater than among whites in 2009. American Indian/Alaska Natives and Hispanics are also disproportionately affected...
Syphilis - During 2008 and 2009, the rate of primary and secondary syphilis increased by 11.6% among non-Hispanic blacks, 6.7% among Asian/Pacific Islanders and 4.3% among American Indians/Alaska Natives. Most cases of syphilis have occurred among men who have sex with men(MSM). The rate decreased by 4.5% among non-Hispanic whites and 2.2% among Hispanics...
reference - http://www.avert.org/std-statistics-america.htm
HIV -HIV infections have increased by almost five percent nationally since 2008, fuelled by a jump in heterosexual infections. DOH report shows 2.7 percent of D.C. residents lived with HIV at end of 2010...
HPV - Is often found in young, sexually active people. Over a hundred distinct types of the virus have been identified, potentially causing genital warts, and in some cases increasing risk of cervical cancer. More than half (56 per cent) of women aged 18 to 24 who are attending university or CEGEP in a recent study were infected with at least one HPV type and almost half (44 per cent) were infected with an HPV type that causes cancer...
reference - http://publications.mcgill.ca/reporter/2010/01/high-hpv-rates-highlight-importance-of-screening/
There is more to worry about when having sex, than unwanted pregnancy...
AC,
I don't think anybody is advocating having a whole bunch of anonymous sex and saying birth control will take care of it. Rather, access to birth control prevents unwanted pregnancies. Preventing unwanted pregnancies prevents the need for an abortion. And everybody agrees that fewer abortions are a good thing.
Pragmatic-3918582,
What kind of sex is a teenager having???
BTY - I have four daughters & two sons, from 18 to 40. Three waited to have children until AFTER marriage, obtaining jobs and their 30th birthday. The youngest daughter is still in college and single, the youngest son is still in high school...
An informed person, usually makes the correct decision. They had a choice; no kids, no husband/wife, good grades = FREE college...
AC,
By that reasoning we ought to never have any crime if we simply taught people not to break the law, right? Nope! Human nature is what it is. You can give people access to all the information in the world, some percentage will still go off and do their own thing because it serves their interests. If the interest is getting some action, that's what happens.
I was secure in my job, a home owner, and happily married before I had my first kid. But I also know not everybody has my risk-adverse approach to life.
Pragmatic-3918582,
I'm not suggesting that. I'm just telling what worked for me and has worked for Thailand (see above)...
People should be expected to live with their decisions and not expect OTHERS or the Government to support them...
Bad/Good decisions have consequences...
I'm 64 now and enjoy an active sex life, NO medical conditions, and fit into the uniform I graduated boot camp in 1973. I semi retired in 1998 and fully retired in 2003... The kids have degrees in Chem, Computer, Bio, HR, Nursing, and the sons wife Chem & Lawyer...
Enjoy your GOOD decisions, I'm enjoying mine...
If republican men got pregnant they would push for abortion rights.
ram-762
The point is not that conservatives don't want birth control. We do not want our government sticking thier noses into our religion and telling our religious organizations they have to violate thier religious principals to give out freebies. You liberals can buy and pass out as many contraceptives as you want or get as many of them as you want, that way we will have less liberals in the end. Sounds like a win win to me.
Shaking, the health care mandate did not suggest religious organization had to give out 'freebies'. It required comprehensive health care for women which includes birth control, when a woman is paying her insurance premiums through an empoyee healthcare program.
Are your anti-biotics freebies? Or your lipitor? Or metformin? Why not cut those freebies off since it interfering with gods plan for how your body should function? People choose to eat poorly and not exercise - so why should an employer pay for their sins of gluttony and sloth? Why can't they just pray away their diabetes? Clearly it was a choice to eat carbs, right? They should have controlled themselves, by your reasoning. Clearly if you don't want these very pricey health problems you will live in morally upstanding way that avoids both sloth and gluttony.
Oh ROFL, won't change my vote AND I do NOT think this study is correct or even pertinent. I will still vote for the pro-life party and it sure ain't the Democrats!
The only reason Rush and his buddies are upset is because they are getting any. They can't understand why being loud and obnoxious is not appealing to women ... or men.
Abortion rates are much more common among minority women in the U.S. In 2000-2001, the rates among black and Hispanic women were 49 per 1,000 and 33 per 1,000, respectively, vs. 13 per 1,000 among non-Hispanic white women... see - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States
IMO - Abortions are used to shape the demographics of the USA...
AC check abortion and povery statistics and education. Its a better match. IMO abortion is used to keep poor people from having children, which is only a problem from the perspective of having cheap labor with few options because the same party that opposes abortion also opposes Financial Aid for higher education.
linda why do you not think the study is correct or pertinent? I will never understand the blasphemy of some pro-lifers who take the stance "life begins at conception" you do realize that that by default that turns God into the biggest abortionist of them all.
Oh Linda, can't let those pesky scientific studies or facts get in your way, now can you
Yingspring,
While you are correct the abortion rates match the poverty rates of the demographics...
If any other method was used in another society, the USA would be yelling, "Silent Ethnic Cleansing or Genocide".
Tao of wow,
The belief that 'Life begins @ Conception' is based in many of the World religions (thousands of years) and is also based in scientific/biological FACT... see http://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html
The 'Viable Birth', able to live after birth, is a modern legal/medical term. Babies born earlier than 25 weeks are generally classed as medically “non-viable.” Though medical advancements continue to improve the chances of early survival for infants who leave the womb ahead of schedule. 20 Feb 2007 - Amillia Taylor was born at a Miami hospital one month earlier than the date considered viable for most babies, at just 21 weeks and six days gestation.
Your beliefs, are yours, just make sure they are based on defend-able facts, not emotion or the latest feel good article...
Me - I'm Buddhist - Conception is the beginning of the process of rebirth and marks the beginning of a human being's life. Many Buddhists do not think the state should intervene in matters of conscience.
The Dalai Lama has shown a nuanced and relatively flexible position on abortion. He explained that, from the perspective of the Buddhist precepts, abortion is an act of killing,.[52] He has also clarified that in certain cases abortion could be considered ethically acceptable "if the unborn child will be retarded or if the birth will create serious problems for the parent", which could only be determined on a case-by-case basis.[53]
I love sex. I have loved sex since I was a young teen and only having it with myself. BUT, I always believed, that for myself anyway, high school was too young for making such an adult decision. I knew a young woman who had 3 abortions by the age of 15 years old, all pregnancies by the same boy. Her third abortion was done at appx 24 weeks.
She became pregnant a fourth time and had the kid this time. By the same boy. WTF was her problem? How you not learn after once or even twice? So I waited until the freedom of college to become a promiscuous "slut", always using condoms, save the one mistake I made with a friend. Sex is fun. Sex is relaxing. God gave women an organ that is PURELY FOR SEXUAL ENJOYMENT.
AC:
Would the people be given a choice whether or not to undergo the "other method"?
The reason this cannot be compared to or confused with genocide is that the mother has the choice to get contraception or have the abortion.
The Jews didn't get a choice.
Olivia,
Congratulations on having an ability to learn, common sense, and a sense of responsibility! There is absolutely nothing wrong with having sex, nor is there anything wrong with enjoying it. The problem here is about developing the same type of common sense in other children and adults that you were able to learn. Birth control, contrary to what some people believe is already available and affordable for all. It comes in various forms and all forms can be 99% effective if they are used properly and consistently. Condoms, spermicidal foam, even the pill is not beyond the reach of anyone, especially with groups like planned parenthood around. There really is no need to have an insurance benefit for contraception. Abortion goes into the same category for me in this argument. While I feel that every woman should have the right to choose, they should also accept the responsibility for that choice. My problem is that no one should have to pay for someone else's choices, especially when those choices are the product of irresponsible behavior or poor judgement.
It's not that Republicans and evangelicals and the Catholic leadership haven't figured out that contraceptions reduce abortions; it's that abortions really aren't the problem for them in the first place. Their problem is with sex and people choosing to have sex in ways they disapprove of (which is just about every way you could have sex). They see contraceptives and abortion both as letting people off the hook so they can sin without consequences. That's why they oppose access to birth control and why they really oppose abortions. It's not about life at all; it's about allowing some religious authority to stamp out your personal liberty and to tell you what you can and cannot do in the privacy of your own home with consenting partners.
No @!$%#! Really?
So how come prolifers are not defending FREE CONTRACEPTION... besides aspirin this is.... (sarc)
Because anti-choice kooks are also religious kooks, so they can't endorse anything that would allow for non-procreative sex.
They seem determined to keep sex dirty and forbidden. Which is only fun for a while.
Yeah, apparently God hates sex so no one is allowed to enjoy it. Except of course priests.
There is a big difference between pre-conception birth control methods and the Morning After Pill which actually aborts a conceived human life. There are a lot of semantics involved in this type of legislation that would need to be clearly defined and the title of this article is very misleading in calling all of it the same under such a broad label of "birth control." Also, some employers believe that even pre-conception birth control is contrary to their faith and they should not be forced to pay for employee's insurance coverage for this. You should know before you accept a job what an employer believes on these issues and whether they are participating. Hopefully, this issue of public health care can be revisited under a new administration that has respect for people's personal faith and moral standards.
The morning after pill does NOT abort life. You are obviously clueless about the science, so forget shining a light anywhere!
What part of "free birth control" did you not understand?
You are proving my point "Wants To Know". My comment above is in reference to Mifeprex (RU-486) which is used to abort a baby in the first seven weeks of pregnancy. Technically, you are right that the Morning After Pill is not Mifeprex but that doesn't end the debate. What about Mifeprex?
Not true. LIFE can exist on its own. Remove the mothers body, and how long does that 7 week old fetus 'live?'
What about Mifeprex? What about not implanting a group of cells in the uterine lining? What about you butt out and leave women, their doctors, and their god - to chose - within the Law.
"Could have implications for the presidential election"? Birth control costs about $9/month and that's a major issue?
We have a $16 trillion deficit, heading to $20 trillion if Obama is re-elected. Obama's Mideast policy is in shambles and the administration has covered-up a terrorist attack on our embassy in Libya, which included the torture and killing of our ambassador and several Navy Seals, claiming the nonsense that it was a spontaneous demonstration causes by a video from two months earlier. Where is the reporting on this? NBC is a leftist joke and an Obama shil. Why not do some honest, relevant, fair reporting of the issues that really matter to this country.
So stick to Faux where your ignorant preconceptions aren't challenged.
Mike V's avatar has some kinky ideas (r u pitcher or catcher Mikey?). Neither is my preference but I'm an open minded guy... just keep away from me Mikey!
There are "morning after pills" that do abort life, breaking/causing the egg to release itself from the wall, and flushing it away. They might be called another term now (people and their f***ing terms), but they used to be called "morning after pills" too. I guess they are called "abortion pills" now?
Why do they even call them morning after pills when that gives 8 to 10 hours (next morning) for the sperm to make their way to an ALREADY released egg to fertilize it? The only thing the pill does is to prevent an upcoming egg drop, and that is hardly an effective form of birth control. I wonder how many women would not have even gotten pregnant in the first place had they not taken the pill, since sperm are not guaranteed to fertilize an egg, and some men shot blanks?
They do nothing to prevent the spread of STDs either.
At the next debate President Obama should ask Mr. Romney what he thinks of this study. End of debate, Mitt's head spinning around like Linda Blair for the next ninety minutes.
Bill T., Michelle Bachman eating a corn dog gets you that excited? Just kidding, it is pretty funny whoever you are!
Just because it lowers the rate of abortion doesnt make it more "right"
Well you can look at this way: you can deal with human nature in a sensible way that harms the least number of persons, or you can dictate a moralistic society where nobody ever does anything morally wrong. One is pragmatic, the other is pie in the sky.
Let's look at the two approaches from the stance of crime. You can either punish criminals with jail time, or you can teach people to not break laws. One option addresses human nature, the other won't do a dang thing.
Pragmatic-3918582,
The USA has the highest incarceration rate in the world, but put less than 45+people to death in 2010...
China put over 470 to10,000+people to death in 2010 (depending on your source), more than the entire world put together, but have a very low incarceration rate...
"Every year China has nearly 10,000 cases of the death penalty that result in immediate execution. This is about five times more than all the other death penalty cases from other nations combined," said Chen Zhonglin, a National People's Congress (NPC) delegate from Chongqing municipality.
Which country has the lower crime rates??? see http://www.infographicsinsights.com/2011/06/crime-infographic-china-vs-usa.html
Human nature recognizes, results of bad decisions...
If God did not want you to have sex, it would not be any fun.
Yes that is great, but not comparable to the situation. The problem is that contraception only promotes lack of responsibility for ones actions, and though it reduces abortions, it is only denying the right to life on a shorter schedule. Everyone is okay with teaching someone that to break the law is wrong, but all of a sudden that theres a possibility of having a child when you have sex, everyone starts thinking that their rights are being infringed upon.
By that logic, abstinence also denies the right to life on a shorter schedule. And all the women who got pregnant in the past few months are denying the right to life to the babies that could have otherwise been conceived tonight. And think of all the lives that could have been conceived during prom season last year if only those prissy teenage girls had given it up to their dates. Nuns and priests deny the right to dozens of lives they could have created as proper, sexually active adults.
The idea that failing to conceive denies the right to life is logically absurd.
No. From what youre saying, we might as well kill everybody before anyone has the chance to commit a crime, which is logically absurd. To abstain from sex does not deny the possibility of a chilld in the sexual act, but to alter the action of sex itself does.
NYPoster:
Did you read the article? Yes, some of the less reliable forms of BC are not too expensive, but to get the kind that works 99% of the time costs money:
..."free birth control can reduce unplanned pregnancies".
OK, this is just me, and I'm not a woman, but doesn't birth control of ANY KIND reduce pregnancies?
I hope none of my tax dollars were spent on this!
You are missing the point. Yes, consistently used effective birth control reduces pregnancies, but since some groups insist that it shouldn't be available and they are upset with the idea of insurance covering it or having it available free or low cost, this backs up the idea of preventing the need for abortions or unwanted children. It's ridiculous and hypocritical if you don't want people to get abortions, but there it is. And Ram, they don't because they do feel they are the sex police as Cappy said below. This is good so that there is more evidence to back up the idea.
...BUT, you'd spend yer dollars on trying to legislate MY morality, now wouldn't you????
Um, you bet your A$$ he would, it's the bubble, nothing gets inside the freaking bubble, certainly not common sense or anything resembling it..........
Unfortunately we need to fund studies f the obvious since evangelicals and Teapublicans want to believe that birth control is as evil as abortion. They want insurers to provide them with viagra bit not pay for birth control. They want to force women back to the middle ages.
What good will a scientific study do for the religious nuts? They shun science and generally do not believe in the facts that come out of such studies.
Studies show global warming is caused by man, what do the right wingers think about those studies? Of course they are all conspiracies to promote the liberal agenda.
I have a feeling the right wing extreme think the devil has arrived and it is called the internet.
I am now 100% convinced the right wing extreme are Pawns of Evil.
Demons? probably not - but ya never really know.
I guess we shall "Know them by thier Deeds".
Considering this study, if you're anti abortion and you do not support free birth control, you're really just the sex police.
Cappy, so right you are!
The Taliban by any other name is still the Taliban.
Very direct and to the point, Cappy. Well said.
Yes, they pretty much feel they are the sex police.
This is a surprise to whom?
Paul Ryan and Rick Santorum to name two folks. The Pope, to name another.
Don't forget Romney Wants to Know
Its not a surprise to anybody. But just because it lowers what people perceive as an evil (abortion) with another evil (contraception) it doesnt make it any more "right"
Some people don't subscribe to the same morals as you. And even if everybody did, what do you do about the ones who are aware but don't follow it? Shame doesn't work. Threat of eternal damnation doesn't work. I suppose you could lock them up, but then you need police in people's bedrooms and that's kinda the antithesis of small government.
Regardless of ones moral standing, one is incorrect to think that they are making progress in this way. If one is aware but doesn't follow it, that is there choice and there is no reason or way of "shaming" anyone into anything. And clearly if they think that contraception is the key to lowering abortion rates there no sense in even talking to them about damnation of their souls (if they believe they have one.) And yes that would defeat the purpose of a small government, but i believe as you said in another post, "You can either punish criminals with jail time, or you can teach people to not break laws. One option addresses human nature, the other won't do a dang thing" so you've made that decision yourself.
Mmontana,
Did you just advocate for "sex police"?
Should we place cameras in everybody's bedroom (and kitchen, living room, bathroom or anywhere else one might have sex) to capture these "criminals" so we can punish them with jail time?
Do you understand what you just supported?
I did not and do not support any such thing; just quoting what another person of a different view has said. Ill be the first one to tell you that attempting to be the "sex police" is completely wrong. What needs to happen is that people need to realize the implications of having sex (such as a baby, imagine that) and not treat such a thing as a disease. Society is taught, and even Obama supports abortion as a solution to a problem, when it is far from that. This article showed statistics that abortions are reduced through birth control, no surprise there, but people commenting on this article seem to be rejoicing as this somehow proves the right wing and those that are pro life wrong. Far from it. By increasing the levels of birth control provided to people, one is basically saying, "here do whatever FEELS right to you" thats never going to solve a problem and will only push society into further decay. Theres a stupidly easy solution to this whole problem that people have of potentially having a baby come into the picture when of all things, they have sex. Well it seems to me they shouldnt have sex then. And even then, there are ways of having sex without contraceptives, and having virtually zero chance of conceiving. I dont promote a sex police. I promote an informed moralistic society.
But you're never going to have "an informed moralistic society," especially if we cannot even agree on whose morals we would be following.
And the only way to enforce "an informed moralistic society" is to police what people do in private, since that when people are most often "immoral".
So how do we solve this dilemma?
P.S. Society is not in decay, and I'm sad you feel it is.
If society didnt have a problem, this conversation wouldn't take place then would it? The very point of having a moral self informed society is that it wouldnt have to be policed at all. If you consider the distribution of free birth control a private matter, then the problem is even bigger. Sure a true perfect society is a Utopia (literally, no-place) but there's no point to life without something to strive for.
Duh!!! Prostitutes who have birth control don't have to kill their babies. Who are prostitutes - women who have sex with a male that they don't plan to have a baby with.
So Jamie, because my wife and I dont plan to have a child that makes her a prostitute? Apparently your parents were brother and sister, or did your parents have any children who lived?
Are you high on paint thinner Jamie? Your comment makes no sense whatsoever. I suspect few prostitutes intend to have a child with their clientele.
Skookum Jim
You must not have been listening when Limbaugh proclaimed that women who want birth control free are sluts and prostitutes. OR when many of the right wing agreed with him (or at least didn't call him on his absurd lies).
Big Trouble
You apparently don't get sarcasm. Go get an understanding of it and then read Jamie's comment.
[female] prostitutes don't have babies with their "clients" because a woman's body can tell when they are being paid for sex (once the transaction goes through it becomes a legitimate transaction) and the woman's body then creates a basket that scoops up any released egg like those arcade games so that the egg cannot become fertilized by a paying client in her uterus-thingy. At least, that's what I was taught in school. I think I have that right. So there is no need for free birth control for anyone!
Spin, too funny...lol
Spin -
ca-ching! There goes another one! Best laugh of my day - thanks!
And what planet or rock did you crawl out of?
1. Birth control is used for several medical issues, NONE of which make a woman a prostitute. Only an IDIOT and PIG thinks so.
2. Women take BC also because they don't want children. MARRIED WOMEN. So, PIG, does that make married women prostitutes?
JKLD, It was heavy sarcasm man, thats all, haven't you been following any of the crazy statements from the right on womans health issues? Trust me, he's on our side.
Uh, that was obviously sarcasm...
Guys,
I don't think Jamie's statement was sarcasm. Have you looked over some of his older posts? He's pretty far to the right of reason.
What??
Jamie, prostitutes are people (female or male) who have sex for money, not women who have sex without intent to procreate.
Ann Romney and Melania Trump are prostitutes who have had children.
And again, this was a great decision from President Obama ! Democrats are the ones with good common sense ! This has been so beneficial to so many women !
Democrats, the right choice for america !
Obama/Biden 2012
Yes, we know this already. But the Republicans ignore facts. So it doesn't matter still.
And this is surprising to anyone with at least minimal intellect?
It's surprising to those who are uneducated on the issue or those who are willing to believe whatever lies they are being told. Usually this happens by those who are trying to influence people for their own investments (ie, insurances companies, medical productions, politicial agendas).
State....huh?
this is sorta a non issue, for liberals abortions are a form of birth control, what it doesn't say is if it stops a young woman from getting pregnant without any ability to fund the raising of the child
Ignore the troll...
Shhh - don't tell the anti-choice movement. They think they only way to reduce abortions is to bomb clinics and murder doctors. The truth just makes them look like a bunch of fools.
I'm glad they've got some good data to back this up. For some of us, birth control isn't just about sex, or babies, or elective abortions. If I get pregnant, I run the risk of dying because of a pregnancy condition - I've lived through it twice and it was horrible. Risking a third time, it could actually kill me (or leave me with damaged kidneys among a host of other issues), so I am done having children, married, and under 35. In my situation, birth control is literally a matter of life and death, and not just for me. The last thing I would want is to get into a situation where I would have to abort a baby to save my own life, so I choose to never ever get pregnant ever again.
I hate how whenever anyone talks about this issue, they only think about people for whom pregnancy is normal. There are many women like me for whom birth control is much more than a sex issue.
Then do what my wife did when told she could not survive another pregnancy, get your tubes tied. Remember people, sterilization works every time and you still get to have sex. (But then sterilization isn't free and apparently people can only use contraception if it's free)
Sterilization isn't reversible tiny. Not useful if you are 18 and trying to be RESPONSIBLE about when you have children.
Tiny..........Brain, perhaps?
How about you getting a vasectomy?
Hey, I'll go along with that. Every male child born in America can be circumsized and sterilized at birth. Absolutely perfect! Would solve a lot of problems in about sixty years time.
Actually, sterilization can be reversed, but not always. Why go to such an extreme, though? There are MANY reliable forms of birth control out there if you have access, knowledge of how to use it, and can afford it. Abortion (excluding pregnancy from rape) is as preventable as birth control is reliable - 99%
Birth control is a better option for many women. But for those of us who know we never want (more) kids, sterilization is a great option. My husband got a vasectomy 12 years ago, and it has made both our lives so much easier. And I've never had an abortion, so there's that.
True Ying, I should have said it was not reliably reversible.
Except through these cheap little pills that conservatives want to keep people from taking, because they can't keep their noses out of other people's business.
My reaction to the results of the study:
Well, DUH.
It's only the religious kooks who want to prevent access to birth control, still clinging to the idea that humans will only have "holy matrimony" sex - as if that's ever been true in the entire history of the world...
And funny how they're only concerned with the life of a fetus but have no regard when it becomes and adult and is living off the system because it was raised in a piss poor household.
Well Mike, i bet they get concerned when this child grows up in a piss poor house and then goes into crime and robs them... and they they are only concerned (oh Irony!) that the state now pay for it to be killed. Really, it breaks down to when the state pays for the child to be aborted - before or after birth.
why don't you just stop getting laid.
Because getting laid is FUN and HEALTHY, if you are careful.
Why don't folks stop worrying about others' sex lives?
Why should you want to? (stop getting laid)
Getting laid is fun...and if the BC is effective and no party has an STD, the long term physical consequences are non-existent.
So there Rick Santorum...up your a$$!
It's good to see the news publicizing this right now, because Romney/Ryan want to restrict access to both. Any woman who is not one of their brainwashed adherents who votes for them will be regretting it if she needs have one or the other, especially with birth control if she is uninsured. Married women need it too, to keep their family size manageable especially in these bad economic times.
I don't understand why any woman would vote for Romney/Ryan. Restrictions on birth control, state-sponsored rape, etc.... I thought that we had moved beyond the notion that women were supposed to be subservient.
I think female conservatives are in the same way as gay republicans... they exist but they confuse everyone. Why on earth would you empower the people who oppress you? Self loathing?
Of course free birth control cuts abortion rates.... but then if you listen to the pope/wingnuts birth control is evil as well.
It seems they would rather have children staving and dying.... so they can keep women's rights, in the stone age.
Where's the study on teaching abstinence? I'd like to see the results of that data!!! Oh wait we do have the results. They're all standing in line for food stamps before going home to their 2-bedroom Section 8 housing with 3 kids in each room.
YES, nicely-stated
Im confussed shouldnt we have to pay for birth controll? Nothing is free sombody has to pay for it. I hope its not the taxpayers having to foot the bill for people to have sex.
Well from a financial perspective when do you want to pay because you will one way or another? Do you want to pay for birth control, or do you want to pay for all the welfare programs that are needed when these women have unwanted pregnancies and can't care for their children? And don't forget when women don't have the means to care for a child that puts the mother (and father if he is still in the picture) on welfare programs too - that YOU pay for. Let's not even discuss the percentage that become a part of the legal system going in and out of jail, that, yep, YOU pay for as well!!!! So unfortunately our taxes pay for a lot of things we don't like - what you need to be thinking about is cost effectiveness because you are paying for it BIG TIME right now every day.
High rolla........paying for birth control is a really great deal for the taxpayers ! Sure beats the results of not providing it, by a ratio of about 1,000,000 to one !
Spoken like somebody who ignores facts High.
High has the typical right-wing way of looking at things. He focuses on one very narrow set of costs/benefits and totally ignores the costs and benefits to society at large.
you would rather pay for unwanted, abused and abandoned kids? or would you just watch them die on the street? that will save lots of money
Why does everyone miss one fact, if you don't want to get pregnant KEEP YOUR LEGS TOGETHER! There is a word for that......... NO!
If you don't want a girl telling you you're gonna be a dad....KEEP IT IN YOUR PANTS!
Instead,most would rather have the morals of a alley cat and kill babies
How much sense does that make?????
Jim....Spoken just like a MAN!!!!!!!!! Don't touch your PeePee, you'll grow hair on your palms and go blind! Jesus Jim get you mind out of the dark ages....................
It makes a heck of a lot more than your misogynistic rant.
Why do you hate other people getting laid?
People will screw whether their married or not. Easily available birth control reduces number of unwanted pregnancies*
Fewer unwanted pregnancies means fewer abortions (which, BTW, doen't kill babies...they evict fetuses and embryos).
SEX (reproduction) is one of the definitions of a living organism
I know I will get bashed for saying this, but I think Jim has a point. And I didn't feel his "rant" was misogynistic, as his post is addressed to both men and women.
Well, Jim the thing is the EXACT same logic can be used in reverse:
Don't want to get pregnant: use reliable birth control!
Don't want a girl telling you that you are a father: use a condom and talk about reliable birth control!
You can decide that sex isn't just for sluts but for adults in relationships that don't want children! You can accept that a healthy body can have sex and understand the consequences intelligently!
How much sense does that make????
I have the morals of an alley cat because I want to have sex with my husband?
It is always the woman's responsibility, lol; Gee, do men ever take responsibility for anything!
Still cannot believe we are discussing this in 2012, we went thru this in the 80's. Why are we going backwards?
Why does everyone miss one fact, if you don't want to get pregnant KEEP YOUR LEGS TOGETHER! There is a word for that......... NO!
Fact: you CAN get pregnant with your legs together. - why do people keep saying that as a method of birth control?!?! Do people really lack that much creativity?
spinfatigue, these are people who deny the fact that rape and incest occur, and that there are females (women and girls) who are having sex against their will.
These are people who believe the argument that "she asked for it" simply by virtue of being female.
These are people who believe that NO means YES, and if she's fighting you, it just means she likes it rough and wants you to work for it.
These are sick people with a tenuous grasp on reality.
...
First thing you'll hear from the RCC is, "Something (we consider) wrong, does not make a right."
Duh! Do we really need a study to know access to birth control prevents unwanted pregnancies, and therefore prevents abortions?
Yes we do. Given that they are reporting what would appear to be common sence, you need studies like this to get people to realize that acess to birth control (for both males and females) is the best way reduce the NEED for abortions.
MOST of us don't, but conservatives and bible thumpers sure need to.
Not that believing science is their strong suit....
OonaOona, I'm betting on sarcasm, I'm right aren't I?
Yes - a real studies. First of all, This study used IUD's which cause abortions since they prevent the fertilized egg from attaching to the walls of the uterus. Second, there have been studies for decades that show wide access to birth-control increases the number of abortions. This article is clearly a BULLY tactic to beat down the opposition to Obama's health care mandate. It's amazing how narrow-minded and ignorant the people who read NBC really are to any facts or studies that aren't published here. I pretty sure that's called GROUPTHINK.
3rd GenT, please do some bloody research before speaking.
@Jerome
Given that they are reporting what would appear to be common sence, you need studies like this to get people to realize that acess to birth control (for both males and females) is the best way reduce the NEED for abortions.
So are you saying that people don't realize that there is already a lot of access to birth control???
How early in the process do you need to go?! Now, preventing implantation is an abortion?!
I'm amazed that you haven't found women guilty of abortion simply by saying NO having sex with you.
This has been known for years. No judgement here, but pro-choice raises the standard of living for all. That is, first-world economies are supported by pro-choice abortions.
They do abortions in Somalia too. Your data is flawed.
Since when? Studies after study has show that this is not true - wider access to birth-control increase abortion. And, in a bizarre twist, women in this study used IUD's which cause abortions since they prevent the fertilized egg from attaching to the walls of the uterus.
Please cite these studies, as you have referred to them in several posts, without providing links to them. It does not seem logical that greater access to birth control would increase abortion, since one would infer that the greater use of birth control would prevent more pregnancies from occurring, thus decreasing the incidence of abortion.
Once again, 3rd GenT, do so damned research before speaking.
Double post -- sorry.