Why is it?

[Tam]

Today at the Congressional hearing Issa brought in 5 clergy to talk about the Obama's UNCONSTITUTIONAL infringment on RELIGIOUS LIBERTIES and the Dems wanted to bring in a third year law student to testify. WHY?

The hearing was about RELIGIOUS FREEDOMS being infringed upon not Womens rights that she was to testify on.

Why is it the Democraps can't understand the resistants against Obama's Birth Control MANDATE has nothing to do with Birth Control and Womens health issues it is about The Government MANDATING something that they do not have the right to MANDATE under the US CONSTITUTION. :x

I believe in Womens rights too but why if the woman feels she needs birth control insurance, can't she pay for it HERSELF? What gives her the right to believe the Government should have the POWER TO MANDATE someone else pay for her insurance to cover something that goes against their religious beliefs? :roll: :x

What will they be mandating next? :x

 

[hypocritexposer]

They should have brought in Flounder to testify on the risks associated with BST and other synthetic hormones


Maybe OT could even testify, and let them know that the lack of free birth control is restricting a woman's right to advance, because she is too busy at home caring for 20 kids, against her choice :wink: :lol: :lol:

 

[Steve]

I believe in Womens rights too but why if the woman feels she needs birth control insurance

why is it even covered under insurance.. there is no risk or medical uncertainty .. so why is it a covered cost under insurance..

really what is the rationale? since there is no adverse risk to hedge against,.

to not pay for it yourself..

the only cost savings is what the insurance company can negotiate with the pharmaceutical supplier. and how the cost can be spread to those who do not purchase the pill every month..

do liberals actually not think it isn't priced into the cost of the insurance?

why not eliminate the insurance company and just force the drug store to supply it for free? [/quote]

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Why not just have the post office distribute it?

There is one in just about every town.

Might even get more people writing letters again. :lol: :lol:

 

[Steve]

Why not just have the post office distribute it?

There is one in just about every town.

Might even get more people writing letters again. :lol: :lol:

direct mail from the big huge mega pharmaceutical corporation to your home would cut out everyone.. and we could tax them on the pill they have to give away for free... to pay the postage..

solving three problems .. getting the pill to everyone for free..

saving the post office..

and taxing the bloodsucking corporations enough to drive them to china as well..

three little steps to a liberal utopia.. :?

 

[hypocritexposer]

I thought Planned Parenthood had drive thrus

$2 Billion is already spent, at present, by the US taxpayer for "family planning"

 

[okfarmer]

Since we have ditched personal responsibility all together. How long until you see the Fed government mandating contraceptive usage?

If we are going down the road of what is best for the masses, what is the difference in them saying- contraception is mandatory for the health of our society. "We" have paid for the medication, and if you don't use it, you will be fined or incarcerated?

 

[hypocritexposer]

Since we have ditched personal responsibility all together. How long until you see the Fed government mandating contraceptive usage?

If we are going down the road of what is best for the masses, what is the difference in them saying- contraception is mandatory for the health of our society. "We" have paid for the medication, and if you don't use it, you will be fined or incarcerated?

They'd first have to have a reason to blame the policy on, oh wait........

So is birth control policy and access the answer to the environmental challenges of our time? So argues an editorial in The Lancet, as well as recent research from the London School of Economics, and statisticians at Oregon State University, just to name a few recent examples.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=is-birth-control-the-answer-to-envi-2009-09-23

Consumers in the developed world are to be offered a radical method of offsetting their carbon emissions in an ambitious attempt to tackle climate change - by paying for contraception measures in poorer countries to curb the rapidly growing global population.

The scheme - set up by an organisation backed by Sir David Attenborough, the former diplomat Sir Crispin Tickell and green figureheads such as Jonathon Porritt and James Lovelock - argues that family planning is the most effective way to reduce the likelihood of catastrophic global warming.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/03/carbon-offset-projects-climate-change

A study published last year in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences showed how slowing the country’s population growth rate to 1.5 births per woman from 2.0 could result in a 10 percent drop in greenhouse gas emissions by midcentury and a 33 percent drop by the end of the century.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/01/science/earth/bringing-up-the-issue-of-population-growth.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

 

[Steve]

Since we have ditched personal responsibility all together. How long until you see the Fed government mandating contraceptive usage?

If we are going down the road of what is best for the masses, what is the difference in them saying- contraception is mandatory for the health of our society. "We" have paid for the medication, and if you don't use it, you will be fined or incarcerated?

it would at least get rid of the liberal sheeple. ..

 

[Steve]

I thought Planned Parenthood had drive thrus

$2 Billion is already spent, at present, by the US taxpayer for "family planning"

contraception spending is hidden all over the budget.. so much so that I doubt any one person knows exactly how much..

it would be cheaper to cut out all the middle-woman and just go straight from the pharmaceutical corp your mailbox..

and probably save a billion or more..

 

[hypocritexposer]

I thought Planned Parenthood had drive thrus

$2 Billion is already spent, at present, by the US taxpayer for "family planning"

contraception spending is hidden all over the budget.. so much so that I doubt any one person knows exactly how much..

it would be cheaper to cut out all the middle-woman and just go straight from the pharmaceutical corp your mailbox..

and probably save a billion or more..

Steve, the $2 B figure is from a recent study. the point is that the money is already being spent, to claim otherwise is a "wedge" during an election year.

Even Romney and Gingrich are criticising Santorum for voting for bills supporting a "woman's health" and her ability to advance career wise :wink: