Most oral contraceptives sometimes act as an abortifacient. This is not just a matter of Catholic Church discipline, but of natural law.
Seems like a common sense idea to me.
There is no reason whatsoever that the birth control cannot be sold over the counter.
Except that Obama wants women to get it for free.
There is nothing in BC pills that causes anything life-threatening on an immediate basis. Most womens go to a GYN annually, that’s good enough.
But the medicos....hey, when you offer this sort of thing OTC...THEN THEY LOSE APPOINTMENT MONEY!!
If Fluke and her sisters want to get angry, raise a ruckous over the silly rule that birth control pills require a prescription. That’s a joke.
We need more pubs coming out with this, make Americans stop and think.
I agree with Jindal. No reason the birth control pill can’t be sold OTC. Of course, Obama would rather use it as a government freebie to buy votes.
Contraception is an entirely settled issue, so the Catholic church will just have to deal with the fact that this stuff is legal anyway.
I understand what Jindahl is trying to do politically, but these drugs are not over-the-counter safe. (Actually they are not safe anyway over the long term, but that’s a different argument).
Women need a doctor’s supervision and advice in taking these drugs. There is not just one “pill”. There are hundreds of different concotions and several delivery methods. He seems to be sacrificing women’s safety to make a political point.
The only argument that he could make that would not do this is to say that ALL pharmaceuticals should be over-the-counter. That way both men and women would bear the same risks.
Lovaza is nothing but tripple strength fish oil, $100 for 30 tabs a month, high co-pay, TRICARE LIFE refused to cover it and rightly so. A bottle of triple strength fish oil with Omega -3's 90 tabs can be gotten for about $14 a bottle and most drug stores run BOGO sales and there are coupons in the Sunday paper or at Coupons.com. Or stores like Kroger's sends you a $2 off coupon.
Just as there are only a few factories that make bread, soups, canned veggies, milk, ice cream. Just a store label is slapped on some of them, and name brand on others..
I will concede that there might be some medical concerns and reservations about having the pill OTC, but I just don’t understand why anyone would be upset on moral grounds. Morally, I don’t see the difference between the pill and condoms. They are both used to help prevent pregnancies. The fact that condoms might, or might not, also reduce the spread of some STD’s is not the revelent issue. Anyone who takes issue with Jindal on moral grounds should also fight for the removal of condoms from the bathrooms of almost every bar, truck stop, and gas station in the country, where they are available to anyone with a couple of quarters in his pocket. I just don’t see the difference.
Politically, this is genius for conservatives. Glad someone thought of it.
(Medically its not so great because if the woman is already pregnant she could seriously affect any baby. Also, some women tend to clots that could kill, as well as progestin can cause cancer. But the truth is that free clinics and most docs hand the pill out without full blood counts and ultrasounds anyway so it’s kind of moot.)
Politically, this is genius for conservatives. Glad someone thought of it.
(Medically its not so great because if the woman is already pregnant she could seriously affect any baby. Also, some women tend to clots that could kill, as well as progestin can cause cancer. But the truth is that free clinics and most docs hand the pill out without full blood counts and ultrasounds anyway so it’s kind of moot.)
Politically, this is genius for conservatives. Glad someone thought of it.
(Medically its not so great because if the woman is already pregnant she could seriously affect any baby. Also, some women tend to clots that could kill, as well as progestin can cause cancer. But the truth is that free clinics and most docs hand the pill out without full blood counts and ultrasounds anyway so it’s kind of moot.)
Politically, this is genius for conservatives. Glad someone thought of it.
(Medically its not so great because if the woman is already pregnant she could seriously affect any baby. Also, some women tend to clots that could kill, as well as progestin can cause cancer. But the truth is that free clinics and most docs hand the pill out without full blood counts and ultrasounds anyway so it’s kind of moot.)
Politically, this is genius for conservatives. Glad someone thought of it.
(Medically its not so great because if the woman is already pregnant she could seriously affect any baby. Also, some women tend to clots that could kill, as well as progestin can cause cancer. But the truth is that free clinics and most docs hand the pill out without full blood counts and ultrasounds anyway so it’s kind of moot.)
Politically, this is genius for conservatives. Glad someone thought of it.
(Medically its not so great because if the woman is already pregnant she could seriously affect any baby. Also, some women tend to clots that could kill, as well as progestin can cause cancer. But the truth is that free clinics and most docs hand the pill out without full blood counts and ultrasounds anyway so it’s kind of moot.)
Politically, this is genius for conservatives. Glad someone thought of it.
(Medically its not so great because if the woman is already pregnant she could seriously affect any baby. Also, some women tend to clots that could kill, as well as progestin can cause cancer. But the truth is that free clinics and most docs hand the pill out without full blood counts and ultrasounds anyway so it’s kind of moot.)
Obama should have been the one to come up with this idea, not Jindal.
Obama, if he wanted, would have been seen as making an accommodation to the Church and their mission organizations, regained some of that Catholic vote that he lost over the religious freedom issue, and the issue of birth control would be on the shelf, de-politicized.
However, the idea coming from Jindal serves, masterfully, political purposes that are not all that charitable. It is the Ends vs. Means arguement Catholics are generally trained up to recognize.
While it brilliantly does take the issue away from the sex Marxist Democrats, and it does come off as defending religious liberty, the Catholic can not broaden the use of contraceptive abortifacets in the process.
As a practicing Catholic, on this Jindal surprises as one might assume he knows better, regardless of the general opinion held by a now quite heathen, relativistic nation.
“Women should self-screen for most contraindications to OCs using checklists.”
Yeah, I sure don’t see how anything could go wrong with a fourteen year-old girl doing that...
I used a birth control pill to treat acne I developed as an adult. It completely fixed the problem. It sure would have been nice to get it OTC!