Posted on 02/02/2013 10:08:03 AM PST by NYer
In evaluating the Obama administration’s “logic”, how long before it requires that lesbians have birth control coverage?
But why? Why shouldn't women who want contraceptives, etc., pay some of the costs? Women who want knee surgery or diabetes drugs pay some of the costs, and men, apparently, will still be required to pay for their own contraceptives or sterilizations, as well as actual medical care.
Do we, as a society, really think sterile sex for women is the most important aspect of medical care, such that it should be totally cost-free to the user? I don't think we do.
Insteresting how Obama presses on female rights. Will Obama make condoms a freebie for the male?
The Sisters Of Perpetual Frustration will be very happy with this dictate from the Obama regime. (snicker)
Correct me if I am wrong, but it requires it now. Where is in the HHS ukase (in either version) an exemption for people whose sexual practices cannot result in a pregnancy? I can start a company and hire 50 Sebelius-certified lesbians, and I still will have to pay for the mandate.
Because sex without children is a positive human right.
Then shouldn't anti-child measures be cost-free to all, not just to women?
(I'm just beating my head against this idiocy because I'm in a bad mood, not actually trying to get reasonable answers ;-).
You're asking the wrong question. What you should be asking is What difference does it make?
Here is what I’m up to ;
Democrats and RINOS
GOD DENIERS AND CONGENITAL LIARS
ARE REDISTRIBUTE WEALTH INCITERS/
FOR FIRST YOUR MONEY THEN YOUR GUNS
AND BE DEFENSELESS WHEN CROOKS COME
It’s time to get government out of Your face
Your religion and your pocketbook
(The above is designed to be printed up and passed around your precinct and your friends and neighbors as a (index sized) palmcard.
You have to look at it from the perspective of the socialistic government we have in place, not from the perspective of the woman. The current American government believes in population control and simply does not want women to have babies. It’s not so much that they believe women should pay for their own contraception as it is they don’t TRUST women to pay for their own contraception. The idea is if it is provided for free than they will use it and there will be fewer American babies.
To a liberal socialist children are a great burden to both the feminist movement and to society in general. The priority is to prevent their conception and if that doesn’t work abort them, then the government won’t have to provide for them when they age. It is the way to achieve the ever elusive utopia.
Beam me up, Scottie......
That is already the case, without the HHS mandate. U.S. on Pace for Slowest Decade of Population Growth Since 1930s
In fact, Americans are now turning their attention to ...
You are correct, but they desire to slow population growth even more than it has been slowed. In their minds ( warped as they are) there are still too many children being born. Remember Cass Sustein? He advocates for adding contraceptives the the water supply. The best way to get Americans to comply is to force them into it without their knowledge.. scary stuff.
Wow ... never heard of Cass Sustein. His reasoning may be off, though, given that so many people prefer to drink bottled water. Still, adding contraceptives to the water supply is alarming. Thanks for the ping.
Lets see how the White house likes my idea:
I would like to make a birth control device. It will be hermietically sealed, and it will branded as “Catholic Church only”
Follow me here for a minute...
Each one of these mystery devices costs $20,000. The United States Government will have to buy one or more per week.
100% of the money recieved is donated to the church.
Upon receiving the $20,000 package, the owner opens it and eats it’s content: A celebratory mint that freshens your breath and reminds you of how you just beat the anti-christian, communist scum bags at their own game.
Who’s with me ?
Welcome to Acirema, where everything is backwards. Apparently, neither of my two Senators or my Rep have any problem with rewarding criminals and punishing law-abiding citizens. But then again, they are al Communists.
The bigger question is, why do you only have religious freedom if you are a religous worker or religous employer?
Why does a parishoner have fewer religious liberties in the eye of the state than the priest?
Demolsheviks have no respect for any of the numerated rights. Except of the right to marry your dog and kill babies, I can’t think of any rights that the left supports at all.
That will be right around the same time that females get mandatory prostate exams starting at age 16... and men are mandated to be immunized with Gardasil.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.