To be or not to be: Contraception the Political issue

[JIMMY12345]

"Despite prominent Republicans’ claims to the contrary, “Republicans have a long history of attacking contraception,” says Dana Singiser, cofounder of the nonprofit Contraceptive Access Initiative. And since the Dobbs decision, “it is getting harder and harder for Republicans to actually hide their long-standing opposition to contraception.”

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in his concurring opinion on Dobbs that the court “should reconsider” its long-standing rulings, including the 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut decision, which granted married couples the right to use contraceptives without government oversight. (The Eisenstadt v. Baird decision seven years later granted unmarried couples the same right.)" Extract from the Independant newspaper
***********************************************
You can be Republican.You can be Democrat.You can be other.(I have good friends in ALL parties.)Please do not bring Politics in your responses,unless your making a factual point.
The question is as a voter : Do you or do you not support Contraception?
Reasons will be good.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I don't support or not support contraception. I support the individual's/couple's right to choose whether or not they wish to use it.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't support or not support contraception. I support the individual's/couple's right to choose whether or not they wish to use it.

I go farther, ie, contraception is good for the environment.
(Too many people on the planet already.)

Clarence Thomas isn't a fan of non-enumerated civil rights.
One of them is the right to inter-racial marriage.
I wonder how he & Ginny would feel if that were over-turned,
& laws were passed making his marriage illegal.

Why do so many conservatives ignore the 9th Amendment, eh.

 

[MikeF]

"Despite prominent Republicans’ claims to the contrary, “Republicans have a long history of attacking contraception,” says Dana Singiser, cofounder of the nonprofit Contraceptive Access Initiative. And since the Dobbs decision, “it is getting harder and harder for Republicans to actually hide their long-standing opposition to contraception.”

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in his concurring opinion on Dobbs that the court “should reconsider” its long-standing rulings, including the 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut decision, which granted married couples the right to use contraceptives without government oversight. (The Eisenstadt v. Baird decision seven years later granted unmarried couples the same right.)" Extract from the Independant newspaper
***********************************************
You can be Republican.You can be Democrat.You can be other.(I have good friends in ALL parties.)Please do not bring Politics in your responses,unless your making a factual point.
The question is as a voter : Do you or do you not support Contraception?
Reasons will be good.

I, as a voter, would vote to prohibit restrictions being placed on all safe and effective contraception options. Why? Because they would be a safe and effective way to prevent conception.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

To the Supreme Court, the question is does the Constitution protect it? That's all. What states do and what voters want are all different issues.

 

[PureX]

Contraception has nothing to do with me as a voter. If some idiot politician forces it to a vote I will vote to rid us of that politician.

 

[Quintessence]

What reason could I possibly have for not supporting a woman's right to not be relegated to breeding stock for males? Especially in a historical era of human overpopulation?

 

[metis]

I don't support or not support contraception. I support the individual's/couple's right to choose whether or not they wish to use it.

Ditto.

 

[exchemist]

"Despite prominent Republicans’ claims to the contrary, “Republicans have a long history of attacking contraception,” says Dana Singiser, cofounder of the nonprofit Contraceptive Access Initiative. And since the Dobbs decision, “it is getting harder and harder for Republicans to actually hide their long-standing opposition to contraception.”

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in his concurring opinion on Dobbs that the court “should reconsider” its long-standing rulings, including the 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut decision, which granted married couples the right to use contraceptives without government oversight. (The Eisenstadt v. Baird decision seven years later granted unmarried couples the same right.)" Extract from the Independant newspaper
***********************************************
You can be Republican.You can be Democrat.You can be other.(I have good friends in ALL parties.)Please do not bring Politics in your responses,unless your making a factual point.
The question is as a voter : Do you or do you not support Contraception?
Reasons will be good.

The availability of contraception has played a major role in the emancipation of women in the latter half of the c.20th, both their sexual emancipation and more generally by allowing them to choose when if at all to have children, and how many.

It is probably not too much of a stretch to say contraception is what is chiefly responsible for the forecast plateauing of the human population, which will be so important to controlling the effect of humanity on the planet.

I do not believe anyone in modern politics would seriously attempt to reverse it.

 

[crossfire]

Some states are passing laws against "stealthing." (Removing a condom without consent is a form of sexual assault.) Here's the latest from my state:

Proposed state law would make removing a condom without consent illegal - The Daily Chronicle

Testifying before lawmakers, Mina Hashemi recounted how three years ago she was shocked to see that the condom she had explicitly asked for during sex had been removed. “I felt …

www.chronline.com

 

[☆Dreamwind☆]

Being against contraception is being a sexist ghoul who needs to be FORCED to keep s their hyper religious, bass-ackwards noses outta other peoples medical business. It also helps with other gynological issues.