Right to Contraception Act.

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Listen to Tim Scott talk about why he voted against this bill. He never actually talks about why he voted against this bill, he just starts talking about abortion.

When Tim Scott says "I'm not making this stuff up" he is making this stuff up. And contraception actually prevents abortion.

I am sick of listening to this guy twist words beyond their ability to stretch. What a freaking liar. Lacking either honour or dignity.

 

[Pogo]

The Libertarian Party position is that the government should not meddle in healthcare issues. "

Libertarians believe that healthcare prices would decrease and quality and availability of healthcare would increase if providers were freed from government meddling and control."​

Duh, health care costs will go down if we leave it up to people, not the government gets to decide whether or not to use contraceptives.
We libertarians Also believe that it is to our benefit to pay taxes to pave our roads since that ultimately benefits us and in this case providing contraceptives is a cost effective way of limiting those future beggars at our door.

Not all libertarians are blindly selfish.

 

[Pogo]

If the government funds something, it controls it. Which means that a government so disposed could either promote abortion or forbid it. Think about it.

Since we are the government, intelligent libertarians will avoid that governmental action. This bill is specifically about not allowing the government to forbid it.
A good idea from my Libertarian standpoint.
Now if you don't want to use contraception, I support your freedom not to, but don't come looking for a handout when you can't afford another kid.

 

[metis]

It's called the nanny state, a cancer to people's personal and economic freedoms that enables things like this.

Nonsense-- quite the opposite. How much freedom does a family living in dire poverty have? How much freedom does a patient with no insurance have? How much education can a child receive without good schools? How much freedom can a citizen have under a dictatorship as the Donald said he'd create on "day 1"? Etc. Erc.

 

[metis]

And it becomes public when a persons lack of ability to exercise this private matter ends up costing the public in unnecessary support for their lack of basic support.
In this case, it is ultimately a cost to society argument.

Exactly, and the unfortunate reality is that all too many elevate "my hard-earned money" ahead of compassion for those in need, which violates basic human compassion as found in many religions, including Judaism.

 

[Pogo]

Exactly, and the unfortunate reality is that all too many elevate "my hard-earned money" ahead of compassion for those in need, which violates basic human compassion as found in many religions, including Judaism.

You don't even have to be religious, or even a humanist, it is bloody economic if you want to go there, you are wasting your "hard-earned money" by not supporting this. It is more an ignorance of anything beyond a short term emotional response. It doesn't affect me today and I like where I am and this is a evolutionarily maladaptive behavior. It may be cultural and my opinion that it is maladaptive but I think it is more an artifact of prior circumstances where the propagate at all costs was still the still the most advantageous.

Oh, boy I don't even like this mix of evolutionary ideas, but I will post it anyhow.

 

[crossfire]

Let's see: Justice Clarence Thomas said that the right to contraception would be in danger of falling just like Roe v Wade fell if legislation is not enacted, and when legislation is started for it, the GOP vote against it? Really?

 

[Pogo]

Let's see: Justice Clarence Thomas said that the right to contraception would be in danger of falling just like Roe v Wade fell if legislation is not enacted, and when legislation is started for it, the GOP vote against it? Really?

The tone is a bit more positive than the reality.

Spoiler: Cyndi at 70

 

[crossfire]

Let's see: Justice Clarence Thomas said that the right to contraception would be in danger of falling just like Roe v Wade fell if legislation is not enacted, and when legislation is started for it, the GOP vote against it? Really?

The GOP has officially gone off the deep end. (Except for the two Senators who broke with the party and voted for it.)

 

[Shaul]

It would be women's free choice.

No, it wouldn't be. That's the point. If the government has authority over reproduction then it could (and inevitably would) do it in ways that are deleterious. That same authority that provides free contraceptives could impose forced sterilizations.

 

[Shaul]

Quote the text then that says that.

(21) In 2010, Congress enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111–148) (referred to in this section as the “ACA”). Among other provisions, the ACA included provisions to expand the affordability and accessibility of contraception by requiring health insurance plans to provide coverage for preventive services with no patient cost-sharing.

Among other parts.

 

[Shaul]

And it becomes public when a persons lack of ability to exercise this private matter ends up costing the public in unnecessary support for their lack of basic support.
In this case, it is ultimately a cost to society argument.

No it doesn't. Kindly show where in the Constitution it does this.

 

[Shaul]

Duh, health care costs will go down if we leave it up to people, not the government gets to decide whether or not to use contraceptives.
We libertarians Also believe that it is to our benefit to pay taxes to pave our roads since that ultimately benefits us and in this case providing contraceptives is a cost effective way of limiting those future beggars at our door.

Not all libertarians are blindly selfish.

Let me guess, Libertarians that don't agree with you are the "blindly selfish" ones. I just pointed out that Libertarians don't support government involvement in health care. If you don't like that take it up with them.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

(21) In 2010, Congress enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111–148) (referred to in this section as the “ACA”). Among other provisions, the ACA included provisions to expand the affordability and accessibility of contraception by requiring health insurance plans to provide coverage for preventive services with no patient cost-sharing.

Among other parts.

That's requiring healthcare to cover it. Anthem Blue Cross and United Health Care aren't government agencies spending tax dollars.

 

[Estro Felino]

No, it wouldn't be. That's the point. If the government has authority over reproduction then it could (and inevitably would) do it in ways that are deleterious. That same authority that provides free contraceptives could impose forced sterilizations.

There is a enormous difference between giving away free contraceptives to the citizens, and imposing something on them.
However....if a woman has sex without contraceptives and has multiple unwanted pregnancies and multiple abortions, I guess the Ministry of Health might suggest her a surgery of permanent sterilization. Without impositions.

 

[Pogo]

No it doesn't. Kindly show where in the Constitution it does this.

Right at the beginning, it is rather the idea of the whole thing.

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

 

[Pogo]

Let me guess, Libertarians that don't agree with you are the "blindly selfish" ones. I just pointed out that Libertarians don't support government involvement in health care. If you don't like that take it up with them.

No Libertarians don't agree with state coercion (like denying access to contraception as a state policy), not that voluntary association with others cannot be used for mutual good (like making the benefits of contraceptives available to all as an economically sound policy).

"Libertarian philosopher Roderick T. Long defines libertarianism as "any political position that advocates a radical redistribution of power from the coercive state to voluntary associations of free individuals", whether "voluntary association" takes the form of the free market or of communal co-operatives."

 

[The Hammer]

I see this as a good thing. There are too many of us, we don't live in harmony or equilibrium with our environments, technology replacing capitalism and manufacturing amd fewer of us will mean everything that's not us is going to live and breath easier.

I'm glad somebody said it.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Some think that abortion will be a key to the upcoming election. It won't be. Abortion is way down the list of the top issue for voters. Voters are far more concerned about bread and butter issues.

Gallup poll on top voter issues

But Democrats and Leftists (sorry for the redundancy) know they can't succeed talking about bread and butter issues. So they prefer to change the subject. Leftists are self delusional.

Exactly. There are more important things going on than reproductive issues.

 

[The Hammer]

Exactly. There are more important things going on than reproductive issues.

Sure but it is still a priority issue for many. People can care about more than one thing ya know.