Possibility of contraception restrictions?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-11-2016, 12:06 PM
Possibility of contraception restrictions?
Which forms of contraception, if any, do you think the US govt. would have a legitimate chance of restricting?

Remember, a simple majority is needed in both the House and Senate to pass a bill, as well as either:
1. A signature from the president or
2. The president waits for 10 days without signing it, and congress also remains in session during that 10 day period.

If we came from dust, then why is there still dust?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-11-2016, 12:14 PM
RE: Possibility of contraception restrictions?
Restricted birth control?

No.

Pay for your own birth control without taxpayer assistance?

I think that's a yes.

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Lord Dark Helmet's post
13-11-2016, 12:31 PM
RE: Possibility of contraception restrictions?
(13-11-2016 12:06 PM)cactus Wrote:  Which forms of contraception, if any, do you think the US govt. would have a legitimate chance of restricting?

Remember, a simple majority is needed in both the House and Senate to pass a bill, as well as either:
1. A signature from the president or
2. The president waits for 10 days without signing it, and congress also remains in session during that 10 day period.

They would likely ban the "morning-after pill", Levonogestrel et al.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
13-11-2016, 12:37 PM
RE: Possibility of contraception restrictions?
Defunding Planned Parenthood realistically restricts all contraception, I think this is where Pence is going to lead Trump.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
13-11-2016, 12:56 PM
RE: Possibility of contraception restrictions?
Great. Let's make more unwanted babies, prevent abortions and pay people to raise unwanted children in unfavorable circumstances.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dom's post
13-11-2016, 01:02 PM (This post was last modified: 13-11-2016 01:16 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Possibility of contraception restrictions?
(13-11-2016 12:14 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  Restricted birth control?

No.

Pay for your own birth control without taxpayer assistance?

I think that's a yes.

Great, and while you're at it, stop covering prescriptions for ED for you old men, which are MORE often prescribed, AND COVERED in multiple forms, than ANY BC medication.
Oops forgot that, didn't you. Oh wait. You know NOTHING about health care.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lar...l_products
Funny. You NEVER hear these conservative old farts whining about their coverage for Viaga.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Bucky Ball's post
13-11-2016, 01:34 PM
RE: Possibility of contraception restrictions?
I'm just gonna get a robot anyway.

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes yakherder's post
13-11-2016, 02:10 PM
RE: Possibility of contraception restrictions?
(13-11-2016 01:02 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(13-11-2016 12:14 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  Restricted birth control?

No.

Pay for your own birth control without taxpayer assistance?

I think that's a yes.

Great, and while you're at it, stop covering prescriptions for ED for you old men, which are MORE often prescribed, AND COVERED in multiple forms, than ANY BC medication.
Oops forgot that, didn't you. Oh wait. You know NOTHING about health care.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lar...l_products
Funny. You NEVER hear these conservative old farts whining about their coverage for Viaga.

I'm fine with insurance covering MEDICAL CONDITIONS. ED is a medical condition. I'm also fine with birth control pills being paid by insurance or Planned Parenthood for MEDICAL CONDITIONS (hormone control, heavy periods etc). But should taxpayers foot the bill for a woman's birth control not related to a medical condition? I don't think so. What's next, men wanting their insurance to pay for their monthly condom usage? No. Buy your own condoms/birth control.

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Lord Dark Helmet's post
13-11-2016, 02:17 PM (This post was last modified: 13-11-2016 02:24 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Possibility of contraception restrictions?
(13-11-2016 02:10 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(13-11-2016 01:02 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Great, and while you're at it, stop covering prescriptions for ED for you old men, which are MORE often prescribed, AND COVERED in multiple forms, than ANY BC medication.
Oops forgot that, didn't you. Oh wait. You know NOTHING about health care.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lar...l_products
Funny. You NEVER hear these conservative old farts whining about their coverage for Viaga.

I'm fine with insurance covering MEDICAL CONDITIONS. ED is a medical condition. I'm also fine with birth control pills being paid by insurance or Planned Parenthood for MEDICAL CONDITIONS (hormone control, heavy periods etc). But should taxpayers foot the bill for a woman's birth control not related to a medical condition? I don't think so. What's next, men wanting their insurance to pay for their monthly condom usage? No. Buy your own condoms/birth control.

Pregnancy is a medical condition. In many cases estrogen, (BC) is used as a preventive measure. Prevention is CHEAPER than the results of having complex pregnancies, and unwanted children. So... it's not really about saving money for you, it's about control over women and their reproductive cycles. You have no evidence that no BC is a less expensive alternative. If you do, let's see it. If you were REALLY a conservative, you would also be against the government or insurance paying for health care for pregnant females ... also a *choice*.

As I said, you know NOTHING about health care.
And *of course* you're not against Viagra. Laugh out load It's a CHOICE, just like BC is a choice. It's not necessary to maintain health.
You're a fraud.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Bucky Ball's post
13-11-2016, 02:26 PM (This post was last modified: 13-11-2016 02:33 PM by Lord Dark Helmet.)
RE: Possibility of contraception restrictions?
(13-11-2016 02:17 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(13-11-2016 02:10 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  I'm fine with insurance covering MEDICAL CONDITIONS. ED is a medical condition. I'm also fine with birth control pills being paid by insurance or Planned Parenthood for MEDICAL CONDITIONS (hormone control, heavy periods etc). But should taxpayers foot the bill for a woman's birth control not related to a medical condition? I don't think so. What's next, men wanting their insurance to pay for their monthly condom usage? No. Buy your own condoms/birth control.

Pregnancy is a medical condition. In many cases estrogen, (BC) is used as a preventive measure. Prevention is CHEAPER than the results of having complex pregnancies, and unwanted children. So... it's not really about saving money for you, it's about control over women and their reproductive cycles. You have no evidence that no BC is a less expensive alternative. If you do, let's see it.

As I said, you know NOTHING about health care.
And *of course* you're not against Viagra. Laugh out load It's a CHOICE, just like BC is a choice. It's not necessary to maintain health.
You're a fraud.

Nope. You're the fraud. I don't give two shits what a woman does with her body. She can have as much sex with as many dudes as she wants. But she needs to pay for it HERSELF. I don't need to pay for it. I mean damn. This is so one sided and sexist. I wish I could have all the money back I've dropped in condoms. Why does a man have to spend $15 a box of condoms but a woman should get her version of birth control for free? Fuck that.

It's always the extreme with you liberals. If you're against illegal aliens you're a racist. If you're against taxpayer funded birth control you're against women. If you're against the black lives matter movement you're a racist. And you wonder why people are moving away from the democratic party. Insults. That's all you have left

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Lord Dark Helmet's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: