funjumper101 15 #1 July 15, 2014 It is about time something was done to stop the bullshit regulations inflicted upon providers of medical services for women, services that can include abortion. The House members who vote against the bill can explain to 1/2 of their constituents what their reasoning was. Slate has a nice write up here - http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/07/15/women_s_health_protection_act_a_brilliant_bill_to_protect_women_s_abortion.html The bill itself can be viewed here - https://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/1696 Freedom from oppressive government regulations is supposed to be a Conservative value. The reality is that this value only applies to males of white, northern European ancestry. Women and people of color are not included. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cgriff 0 #2 July 15, 2014 funjumper101 The reality is that this value only applies to males of white, northern European ancestry. Women and people of color are not included. Just couldn't resist throwing in some of the party-approved parrot points, could you? It was perfect right up until the last sentence. Why muck it up pretending this is a sexist or racist issue? It's the attempt to codify their religious beliefs into law. Nothing more, nothing less. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #3 July 15, 2014 I think it's an excellent idea and what I've thought should be done all along - leave it to the states and treat it like a medical procedure. Of course, I SERIOUSLY doubt you want it treated like any other procedure. Nor to liberals want it to get rid of its special status. Because it would mean parenta consent for a minor to have a medical procedure - just like everything else. So if you're honest, you will not be happy with what you claim to want, will you? Depoliticized is bad if it strips the benefits and good if it strips the costs. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cgriff 0 #4 July 15, 2014 lawrocket Of course, I SERIOUSLY doubt you want it treated like any other procedure. Nor to liberals want it to get rid of its special status. Because it would mean parenta consent for a minor to have a medical procedure - just like everything else. So if you're honest, you will not be happy with what you claim to want, will you? Depoliticized is bad if it strips the benefits and good if it strips the costs. Guessing that was for the OP, but I'll answer anyway. I would be thrilled. I have no qualms with parental consent... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydiver30960 0 #5 July 15, 2014 lawrocket leave it to the states My take on the best answer for many of the issues that are completely overloading our federal gov't. Elvisio "down ladder!" Rodriguez Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #6 July 15, 2014 Quote Of course, I SERIOUSLY doubt you want it treated like any other procedure. If it's treated like the outpatient procedure that it is, I have no problem. Currently, states are closing clinics by claiming it's like open heart surgery. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
funjumper101 15 #7 July 16, 2014 That would be why this bill needs to pass Congress, and be signed into law ASAP. The bullshit regulations on a legal medical procedure need to end NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
regulator 0 #8 July 16, 2014 What a bunch of hypocrites. I am outraged! This is truly a 'war on women'! excuse me while I laugh at your hypocrisy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,076 #9 July 17, 2014 >Brilliant idea to stop unneccesary abortion clinic regulations Better access to contraception? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #10 July 17, 2014 billvon >Brilliant idea to stop unneccesary abortion clinic regulations Better access to contraception? What?? There is unfettered access now What the heck else do you want Someone else to pay for it?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #11 July 17, 2014 Cost is an aspect of access. Would you say you have unfettered access to Lamborghinis? - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #12 July 17, 2014 DanG Cost is an aspect of access. Would you say you have unfettered access to Lamborghinis? If it cost less than $300 per year? Yes"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #13 July 17, 2014 DanG Cost is an aspect of access. Would you say you have unfettered access to Lamborghinis? No. Billionaires don't, either, because they are finite. I'd say that classes are an important aspect of education. Would you say that being waitlisted for a class means that you aren't getting educated? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #14 July 17, 2014 Quote If it cost less than $300 per year? Yes Magnitude of cost is not at argument right now. I still say that cost is one aspect of access. And to respond to your magnitude argument, even $300 a year can be a lot of money for someone making minimum wage. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #15 July 17, 2014 DanG Quote If it cost less than $300 per year? Yes Magnitude of cost is not at argument right now. I still say that cost is one aspect of access. And to respond to your magnitude argument, even $300 a year can be a lot of money for someone making minimum wage.So it boils down back to who pays for life choices. I think you should be forced to buy these people cars and housing"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #16 July 17, 2014 Quote No. Billionaires don't, either, because they are finite. Way to intentionally miss the point. How very lawyerly of you. If there were a lot full of unsold $250,000 Lamborghinis sitting across the street, do you think a billionaire would have more access to them than a minimum wage earner? Quote I'd say that classes are an important aspect of education. Would you say that being waitlisted for a class means that you aren't getting educated? I don't see how your analogy relates to the current discussion. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #17 July 17, 2014 Quote So it boils down back to who pays for life choices. Not having babies you can't afford is a life choice that society would be smart to subsidize. Quote I think you should be forced to buy these people cars and housing Who's talking about cars and housing? - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #18 July 17, 2014 Why stop with birth control? Seems like the next logical step"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #19 July 17, 2014 Quote Why stop with birth control? Seems like the next logical step Birth control keeps people from having babies they can't support, and keeps people from having abortions. Both of these are things you've said you disapprove of. Can you at least agree that subsidizing birth control can prevent the greater evil of unwanted babies and abortions? - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #20 July 17, 2014 DanG Quote Why stop with birth control? Seems like the next logical step Birth control keeps people from having babies they can't support, and keeps people from having abortions. Both of these are things you've said you disapprove of. Can you at least agree that subsidizing birth control can prevent the greater evil of unwanted babies and abortions? No I support people being responcible for their actions and choices"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #21 July 17, 2014 rushmc *** Quote Why stop with birth control? Seems like the next logical step Birth control keeps people from having babies they can't support, and keeps people from having abortions. Both of these are things you've said you disapprove of. Can you at least agree that subsidizing birth control can prevent the greater evil of unwanted babies and abortions? No I support people being responcible for their actions and choices Oh, come on. That's a non-answer answer, especially when it comes to teenagers. I'm not even going to take the time typing the obvious longer form of the answer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #22 July 17, 2014 Quote I still say that cost is one aspect of access. Of course it is! Another such aspect, especially for teenagers still living at home, is physical access. Even if they have money, if they can't get, say, condoms very easily and with complete privacy (read: not in a public drugstore or supermarket somewhere), they're not going to get them at all, to avoid risking embarrassment and/or being discovered. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,076 #23 July 17, 2014 >There is unfettered access now Well, except for right wing efforts to ban education on how to use it and where to get it. And except for right wing efforts to shut down clinics that provide it. After all, the GOP wants to end "consequence free sex." Women who do want birth control to be covered are "sluts" and "prostitutes." Solve that problem, and make birth control the standard for a couple that doesn't want to have kids, and the abortion problem gets much, much smaller. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #24 July 17, 2014 When analyzing a decision you need to look at both the costs and benefits. Subsidizing birth control has a cost. It costs money, and it creates some intransigent damage to the idea of personal responsibility. But it also has a benefit. It prevent unwanted pregnancy, and prevents abortions. For some reason you are only willing to admit to the cost. You can think the cost is too great, that's a valid opinion. But if you're not even willing to admit that there is a benefit, then you're just not discussing this honestly. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #25 July 17, 2014 billvon >There is unfettered access now Well, except for right wing efforts to ban education on how to use it and where to get it. And except for right wing efforts to shut down clinics that provide it. After all, the GOP wants to end "consequence free sex." Women who do want birth control to be covered are "sluts" and "prostitutes." Solve that problem, and make birth control the standard for a couple that doesn't want to have kids, and the abortion problem gets much, much smaller. I look forward to the stories that verify all you posted here"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
