An Article Against Free Birth Control

[debrand]

There are already articles against the recommendation made by the Institute of Medicine that insurance companies provide free birth control pills.

Here are some of the reasons the article gives for being against the Institute of Medicine's recommendations.

Because it removes choice from both the consumer and the insurance companies, it actually furthers the shedding of innocent blood in the nation by requiring funding be given to abortion in the guise of birth control and making abortions free in some cases. As Jess Clark wrote a couple weeks ago, there are types of birth control that do not allow for potential abortion but most of what the Obama Administration plan is covering does cause abortion. This means that, in effect, abortion has been expanded in this nation—with the wave of a wand, sin has been conjured up at a greater level because now insurance companies will be mandated to provide this coverage.

I think that the author is claiming that birth control pills cause abortion, but I'm not certain.

There is a bit of good news here in that there is an amendment included allowing religious institutions to opt out. This is something, but it’s not enough. How many pro-life people actually work for religious institutions? Most Americans these days have to pay something toward their medical insurance premiums, and virtually all of us have to pay copays if we see a doctor. A religious opt out still opts in the majority of pro-life citizens. It’s not enough.

This argument frustrates me because I don't see the outrage over insurance premiums being used to pay for other procedures or medicine. What if someone believes that weight loss should only occur through eating less and exercise. Should they be able to dictate to others that their monthly payment won't be used for surgery to help loose weight?

http://bound4life.com/blog/2011/08/01/a ... tion-pills

[bananacat]

Lol, how does offering free birth control remove the choice from the consumer? That doesn't make it mandatory, only more accessible. These people really have no idea what some words mean, and they just use them as patriotic-sound buzzwords. Also, when did they start caring about choice anyway?

[browngrl]

Oh for goodness sake! No one is advocating that rogue doctors go around prescribing birth control pills to poor unsuspecting innocents. As I understand it this proposal simply makes the birth control pill free to those who want it.. Once again we have fundamentalists trying to take away choice and then lying and saying that they are actually increasing choice. Please.

[Austin]

Lol, how does offering free birth control remove the choice from the consumer? That doesn't make it mandatory, only more accessible. These people really have no idea what some words mean, and they just use them as patriotic-sound buzzwords. Also, when did they start caring about choice anyway?

Exactly. How has this become some scenarios where we're going to force-feed women oral contraceptives or shove IUDs into women or force them into sterilization surgery? I've seen all kinds of comments about "now we're just like China". Really? Must not know very much about China then. :roll:

The hysterics. The pearl clutching. For most people, nothing will really change except the capability to procure contraception that they already are using or are intending to use - with no cost barriers. If couples have moral opposition to contraception, then they'll just continue to. . . not use contraception. O.M.G.

[CanadianHippie]

It could be that since they are willing to force a woman to carry the child to term, they are sure the other side is willing to force the woman onto contraceptives/to have an abortion.

[Koala]

Exactly. How has this become some scenarios where we're going to force-feed women oral contraceptives or shove IUDs into women or force them into sterilization surgery? I've seen all kinds of comments about "now we're just like China". Really? Must not know very much about China then. :roll:

The hysterics. The pearl clutching. For most people, nothing will really change except the capability to procure contraception that they already are using or are intending to use - with no cost barriers. If couples have moral opposition to contraception, then they'll just continue to. . . not use contraception. O.M.G.

There should be a "like" button here

[Childless]

These people are not stupid. They know that no one is going to force anyone to take the birth control pill. What they're really mad about is the fact that they can no longer control other women's fertility. That's what they really want, control. They want to force us all to be barefoot and pregnant. If they had their way, they'd take away every right that women have and basically reduce us to slave status. That's their ultimate goal.

[debrand]

I think that the argument is that if the monthly payment for insurance is used for a purpose that the client disagrees with than that client is being forced to support someone else's use of birth control. Please be aware, I don't agree with this reasoning but I believe that is what the author is trying to say.

My bet is that opponents will use this particular argument to try to deny free birth control to women.

[Deleted03]

I'll repeat it again, if you don't have money to pay for an abortion or for contraceptives, you won't have enough money to raise a kid. how hard is that to understand?

[shesinsane]

I think that the author is claiming that birth control pills cause abortion, but I'm not certain.

In some anti-abortion circles, there is firm believe that the Pill can cause abortions. It's not about suppressing ovulation, but if an egg gets released and fertilized but doesn't implant in the uterus because of the Pill, that's an abortion. According to one site I was reading, when a woman on the Pill gets a very heavy period, that's actually a miscarriage (which is really an abortion because that unimplanted egg would result in a healthy baby if the harlot hadn't been taking the Pill).

So if you believe that life begins at conception and you believe that birth control pills can make a uterus too hostile for the fertized egg, then the Pill causes abortion. And if you believe that the birth control pill causes abortion and you're anti-abortion, the outrage at free (or government subsidized) birth control pills is understandable. Not based in science or fact, but understandable.

[doggie]

I'll repeat it again, if you don't have money to pay for an abortion or for contraceptives, you won't have enough money to raise a kid. how hard is that to understand?

never stopped the quiverful Sad but true.

[Austin]

These people are not stupid. They know that no one is going to force anyone to take the birth control pill. What they're really mad about is the fact that they can no longer control other women's fertility. That's what they really want, control. They want to force us all to be barefoot and pregnant. If they had their way, they'd take away every right that women have and basically reduce us to slave status. That's their ultimate goal.

Bingo. We cannot lose sight of this. This really has nothing to do with wombs made "hostile" by BC pills or IUDs or morning after pills causing "abortion". This about power and control. Some people are very upset that they have been losing power and control now for some years and they are absolutely determined to get it back. When the populace does something stupid like vote these asshats into office, it gives them a chance to force their anti-woman agenda on everyone (I'm looking at you, Gov. Ka-suck).

For those of us who care about this, we cannot afford to get complacent (or continue to stay that way). These people are organized and they've got $$$. My BFF and I had dinner last night and she is like-minded, but a little shaken up because of an interview she had seen with a Tea Party guy, a moderate/independent, and a democrat/liberal. She said that while she abhorred the message of the Tea Party guy, he was way more organized in his thoughts and had his ducks in a row and looked like a superstar next to these other guys.

I have joined Emily's List and I am on PP's email list so I know of events that are taking place. I give financially when I can. I vote every single time. If every woman who cares about her autonomy would stand up, we could roll over these idiots. Just because we have a liberty, even guaranteed by the Constitution, does not mean we cannot lose it. We're losing it.

[darkplumaged]

Silly people--of course the fundies are advocates of choice! There are two choices: have as many babies as God wants you to have, or never ever ever have teh eeeevil sex... which isn't a legitimate choice if you're married, because you can't deny your headship the pleasures of the marriage bed, or something. So I guess you have just one choice. But it's the only godly one, so that's OK.

[Buzzard]

Colbert took a stab at it too. Hysterical!

http://gawker.com/5827580/stephen-colbe ... th-control

[shesinsane]

Colbert took a stab at it too. Hysterical!

Thank you for sharing that. He about summed up why some people are outraged in the opening:

A woman’s health decisions are a private matter between her priest and her husband.

Replace priest with God and you've got the reason so many fundies oppose birth control.

[LynnKaboom]

I first heard this story about a month ago, and the way it was described was that it was basically a modern form of eugenics- the mentally ill and the poor would be given these free birth control pills by the government and "strongly encouraged" (read: more or less required) to take them. Being mentally ill myself my knee-jerk reaction was "fuck no, what is this, Nazis 2.0?"

I've done some more research since then, but I really can't get a coherent picture of what this whole free birth control thing is really about. I'm seeing plenty of fundie opposition to it, as well as some amount of opposition from the non-neurotypical community, who are reading it the way I first did. The people in support of it have all been people like Melissa McEwan (who I'm about as willing to trust as I am the creepy dude in the windowless van who says he has candy). Can someone link me to an article that lays out what this recommendation is about, preferably from a legit news source or Institute of Medicine?

Note: I'm not saying I believe the fundies here, I just want to know what the actual reasoning behind this is, preferably from the institute itself. I can't seem to find it online (my Google-fu needs work apparently) and just want to see this proposal from a non-biased point of view.

[Childless]

Basically it's just requiring insurance agencies to cover birth control without a co-pay. If you don't wish to use birth control, then don't take advantage of the new requirement. Simple as that.

[Childless]

By the way, it's also covering breast pumps and mental health sessions, so its not a eugenics experiment by any means.

[kaetrin]

Silly people--of course the fundies are advocates of choice! There are two choices: have as many babies as God wants you to have, or never ever ever have teh eeeevil sex... which isn't a legitimate choice if you're married, because you can't deny your headship the pleasures of the marriage bed, or something. So I guess you have just one choice. But it's the only godly one, so that's OK.

Of course you have a choice! You can choose whether to have a joyful attitude or not! It's so liberating to fake happiness all the time!

[LynnKaboom]

Ah, OK. That makes more sense, and if it's covering mental health sessions as well, that's good news for me!

I personally have no moral objection to birth control (since I use it myself to keep my endometriosis under control), but I do have a moral objection to eugenics. It seems as though that's not the case then.

[Austin]

ICan someone link me to an article that lays out what this recommendation is about, preferably from a legit news source or Institute of Medicine?

Will CNN do? (I don't know what you consider a legit news source to be. Some people think WingNut Daily is legit news, so one never knows :) ).

Anyhoo:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/08/01/fr ... =allsearch

Besides contraceptive use, the list includes screenings for conditions such as gestational diabetes and the human papillomavirus (HPV), as well as breastfeeding support and counseling on sexually transmitted diseases. The full list is available on the Department of Health and Human Services website.

ETA: Here is the link for the announcment on the Department of Health and Human Services' website:

http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/ ... 0801b.html

[galaxygirl]

Colbert took a stab at it too. Hysterical!

http://gawker.com/5827580/stephen-colbe ... th-control

That's hilarious. I completely lost it at the T-Rex part.

[LynnKaboom]

Yeah, CNN's fine. By legit news source I pretty much meant anything that's not a personal blog (or WND.) :P

Thanks for the links, I definitely have a better understanding of what this is about now.