Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: And I take as genuine some people's belief that life begins at conception.

I don't, because almost all of them treat a miscarriage quite differently than they treat the birth of a child. When these people start holding funerals and writing obituaries for their 5-weeks-gestation miscarried "babies" (and they most certainly will soon!), same as they would for the tragedy of a 4-year-old who dies of leukemia, then I'll believe that they really think life begins at the moment of conception. In the meantime, it's abundantly clear that their chief unstated motive is to exert control over women's bodies and choices.

I had a burial for my 8 week gestation miscarriage, and mourned that child terribly. I honestly and truly believe that life begins at conception.

I haven't the slightest interest in controlling your choices that don't impact others....and ending the life of a child impacts that child. I am personally actually very pro-birth control...I think it prevents abortions, and is just a wonderful advance in people having control over their own reproductive lives, and I've used birth control myself. But I know that there are people who are opposed to it, and don't think they should be forced to pay for birth control when it violates their beliefs.

Shoiuld someone's religious belief trump the need for others to get help for a possible medical condition? If your religion tells you should have as many kids as your are blessed with, great, and if birth control was used ONLY to prevent pregnancy then I understand, but don't agree. However, I take the pill for a condition. If I had to pay full price for it, it would be a strain and I may have to skip a couple of months. That will impact my health and worsen my symptoms and condition.

So is it ok for me or other's to suffer because it goes agaisnt someone's religious beliefs?

Actually, I think it is reasonable for an employer to tell their employees, here's what we will cover and not cover birth control. Then it's up to you if you want to work there. But the Catholic organizations who are front and center on this issue actually will cover birth control pills for other health conditions like you mention. I have an aunt who is a nun and is severely anemic and she takes birth control pills paid for by the Catholic church for that issue. No one is suggesting that the conditions you are discussing won't be covered.

12:18 - that actually is a Catholic belief (anybody who had to attend pre-marriage counseling through the church might recall discussion about how having sex at all without the intent of procreating was "spilling your seed" from a male perspective, and against God's will). Funny that we don't hear about that side of it AT ALL.

This is not about religion, it never has been. However, I am happy for those with whom I don't believe politically to hitch their carts to this horse, as I believe they are alienating women and younger voters, which will surely keep the Santorum's of hte world in the firmly "unelectable" box.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's about total control over women and their reproductive rights. It's nasty and disgusting.

Here's a twisted idea.
I think if you can't get an erection and have sex, that means God doesn't want you to procreate and have sex. I would like to ban production of Viagra and similar medication, because it's my belief God is against the use of this "artificial" means to getting an erection.

Off the wall crazy, yes. So are these nutjobs.

Who is talking about banning birth control? Almost no one. Even crazy Santorum is talking about whether those who object should have to pay for it.

Sorry, but that is where we are heading with some of these fanatics.....
I would never in a million years would have thought, that in 2012 we would be dealing with the issues we are dealing with now when it comes to woman and reproductive health.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: And I take as genuine some people's belief that life begins at conception.

I don't, because almost all of them treat a miscarriage quite differently than they treat the birth of a child. When these people start holding funerals and writing obituaries for their 5-weeks-gestation miscarried "babies" (and they most certainly will soon!), same as they would for the tragedy of a 4-year-old who dies of leukemia, then I'll believe that they really think life begins at the moment of conception. In the meantime, it's abundantly clear that their chief unstated motive is to exert control over women's bodies and choices.

I had a burial for my 8 week gestation miscarriage, and mourned that child terribly. I honestly and truly believe that life begins at conception.

I haven't the slightest interest in controlling your choices that don't impact others....and ending the life of a child impacts that child. I am personally actually very pro-birth control...I think it prevents abortions, and is just a wonderful advance in people having control over their own reproductive lives, and I've used birth control myself. But I know that there are people who are opposed to it, and don't think they should be forced to pay for birth control when it violates their beliefs.

Shoiuld someone's religious belief trump the need for others to get help for a possible medical condition? If your religion tells you should have as many kids as your are blessed with, great, and if birth control was used ONLY to prevent pregnancy then I understand, but don't agree. However, I take the pill for a condition. If I had to pay full price for it, it would be a strain and I may have to skip a couple of months. That will impact my health and worsen my symptoms and condition.

So is it ok for me or other's to suffer because it goes agaisnt someone's religious beliefs?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: And I take as genuine some people's belief that life begins at conception.

I don't, because almost all of them treat a miscarriage quite differently than they treat the birth of a child. When these people start holding funerals and writing obituaries for their 5-weeks-gestation miscarried "babies" (and they most certainly will soon!), same as they would for the tragedy of a 4-year-old who dies of leukemia, then I'll believe that they really think life begins at the moment of conception. In the meantime, it's abundantly clear that their chief unstated motive is to exert control over women's bodies and choices.

I had a burial for my 8 week gestation miscarriage, and mourned that child terribly. I honestly and truly believe that life begins at conception.

I haven't the slightest interest in controlling your choices that don't impact others....and ending the life of a child impacts that child. I am personally actually very pro-birth control...I think it prevents abortions, and is just a wonderful advance in people having control over their own reproductive lives, and I've used birth control myself. But I know that there are people who are opposed to it, and don't think they should be forced to pay for birth control when it violates their beliefs.

Anonymous wrote:It's about total control over women and their reproductive rights. It's nasty and disgusting.

Here's a twisted idea.
I think if you can't get an erection and have sex, that means God doesn't want you to procreate and have sex. I would like to ban production of Viagra and similar medication, because it's my belief God is against the use of this "artificial" means to getting an erection.

Off the wall crazy, yes. So are these nutjobs.

Who is talking about banning birth control? Almost no one. Even crazy Santorum is talking about whether those who object should have to pay for it.

It's about total control over women and their reproductive rights. It's nasty and disgusting.

Here's a twisted idea.
I think if you can't get an erection and have sex, that means God doesn't want you to procreate and have sex. I would like to ban production of Viagra and similar medication, because it's my belief God is against the use of this "artificial" means to getting an erection.

Off the wall crazy, yes. So are these nutjobs.

Anonymous wrote:I love birth control and use it all the time.

However, I do not think that religious employers should be forced to pay for it, through insurance or not.

And I take as genuine some people's belief that life begins at conception. That makes some forms of birth control a difficult call for them. It doesn't have to be about hatred toward women or the desire to control them.

Birth control is not only used for prevention of pregnancy but to treat other medical conditions a woman may suffer. Examples are: anemia related to menstrual bleeding, hormonal imbalance, polycystic ovarian syndrome, adenomyosis, dysmenorrhea and mild to moderate acne. I think it's nothing short of discriminatory when you don't cover hormonal birth control that can treat these conditions, but you cover Viagra and the like.

IMO, the belief that a zygote or fetus should have equal rights is inherently about controlling and oppressing women. While it may be a "sincere" belief, it's a ridiculous one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: And I take as genuine some people's belief that life begins at conception.

I don't, because almost all of them treat a miscarriage quite differently than they treat the birth of a child. When these people start holding funerals and writing obituaries for their 5-weeks-gestation miscarried "babies" (and they most certainly will soon!), same as they would for the tragedy of a 4-year-old who dies of leukemia, then I'll believe that they really think life begins at the moment of conception. In the meantime, it's abundantly clear that their chief unstated motive is to exert control over women's bodies and choices.

You need to broaden your friend base so that you know some people who hold these views. They treat early miscarriage very seriously. And they don't think that those who disagree with them are evil. It would seem you don't extend the same courtesy.

What's more, you can think life begins at conception and still mourn a 4 year old you knew more than a first trimester miscarriage. There is nothing inconsistent about that.

My own view is that something starts at conception but that the rights of the woman trump until pregnancy is much further along.

Anonymous wrote: And I take as genuine some people's belief that life begins at conception.

I don't, because almost all of them treat a miscarriage quite differently than they treat the birth of a child. When these people start holding funerals and writing obituaries for their 5-weeks-gestation miscarried "babies" (and they most certainly will soon!), same as they would for the tragedy of a 4-year-old who dies of leukemia, then I'll believe that they really think life begins at the moment of conception. In the meantime, it's abundantly clear that their chief unstated motive is to exert control over women's bodies and choices.

I love birth control and use it all the time.

However, I do not think that religious employers should be forced to pay for it, through insurance or not.

And I take as genuine some people's belief that life begins at conception. That makes some forms of birth control a difficult call for them. It doesn't have to be about hatred toward women or the desire to control them.

OP here - Sorry title should be *these*

Anyway, I never "took" Feminism 101. Care to share basic principals?

OP, You might consider that this is Feminism 101.

We could just chalk this up to them being conservative idiots, but I am trying to understand where the desire to move us back 70 years (at least) is coming from. I would love to hear some intelligent debate on what you think this is really about.

I'll go - I believe that the Bob McDonnells and Rick Santorums of the world are so incensed that a lowly, 'ol woman, gets to make the most important decision in the world: when/how and if to have children with or with out being in a traditional relationship with a man. The bible teaches them (us?) that women are less than nothing, so in their minds, how can we and why should we be given this "power." I am curious what others think.