Told you so.
posted by SheaNC at 2:10 AM
Friday, March 17, 2006
Video Start Your Day
News Snipet Blog
Stuff That's Going On
American Scene
Michael Bérubé
Center for Citizen Media: Blog
CJR Daily
David Corn
Donkey Rising
Gadflyer Flytrap
In Media Res
Media Nation
New Donkey
Orcinus
The Plank
Political Animal
Real Clear Politics
Romanesko
Street Prophets
Andrew Sullivan
Talking Points Memo
Talking Politics
TPMCafe
Tapped
Matthew Yglesias
Previous Posts
- Bush's Leviathan
- Updated: A study in contrast: Clinton ran a more e...
- Angry Catholics
- If You're Virtually Fed-Up
- South Dakota getting the ball rolling on Roe v Wade
- The fall guy
- Freedom is on the march, right off the cliff's edge
- An End To Tyranny?
- Another PR Hassle
- Black History Month
Blogroll
10 Comments:
Free chicken in every pot, free condom on every cock.
Hi Shea,
Does this mean that the GOP is against birth control or against paying for it?
-Jack
"If you hand out contraception to single women, we're saying promiscuity is OK as a state, and I am not in support of that," Phillips, R-Kansas City, said in an interview.
Draw your own conclusions.
Hmm...he said he was against condoning promiscuity--not against birth control...
-Jack
No need for family planning in public health clinics when kids can get it in the public schools. What's the problem?
To Jack's point, Phillips is jumping to the conclusion that making birth control available condones promiscuity. That's usually not the case. The message should be: abstinence is the only 100% effective way to avoid STDs and unwanted pregnancy. Barring that, be safe.
Absolutely correct, Smorg. But my point is that its hard to say the GOP is against birth control...
"Fired up" jumped to his own conclusions--
-Jack
Link 1:
Regarding birth control, the national policy under Bush is that only abstinence and the rhythm method are acceptable... Bush has reinstituted the rule that bans dissemination of information about artificial birth control by any organizations that receive financial support from the government... Even the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health have had to delete references to condoms from their Web sites.
Link 3:
Earlier this year, Daniel LeMahieu, the Republican state representative from Oostburg, created a stir when he proclaimed, "I am outraged that our public institutions are giving young college women the tools for having promiscuous sexual relations." The fruit of his outrage was AB343, his bill to ban the advertising, prescribing or dispensing birth control pills on UW campuses. It passed the Assembly 49-41. Fifty-three of the sixty Republicans supported it. Not one Democrat voted for it... If promiscuity is the real issue here, why are Republicans working equally hard to deny married people contraceptives as well? Are Republicans opposed to married people being promiscuous with their own spouses? I don't know. But in March, they introduced AB207, which would allow a pharmacist to deny birth control pills to any woman, including married women. Every Republican, save one, voted for the bill. It easily passed.
Link 3:
In early November of 2004 I wrote about George W. Bush’s first post-reelection appointment – his selection of anti-abortion activist Dr. W. David Hagerto head the FDA’s Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee. This was the same Dr. Hager who wrote that women suffering from PMS need only to turn to the bible for help. In his private practice he refused to prescribe birth control medication to unmarried women. (Hager has been in the news more recently, since his Evangelical Christian conservative wife of over thirty years divorced him, for among other reasons, Hager’s compulsion to anally rape her and his strange need to leave money by her bed after doing so.)
I'm sure there's more out there for those who bother to look for it. The point is, the GOP has been overrun by fundamentalists, zealots, and full-blown wackos who dictate republican policy because they wield a lot of clout; they are vocal, mobilized, and generate a lot of cash. The GOP courts 'em and rewards them by encouraging them to turn their weird psychosexual psychoses into public policy.
Sorry, the above should read link 1, link 2, and link 3, not link 1, link 3, and another link 3. Damn typos.
Not a problem, Shea.
I personally am against public funding of birth control just as I am against funding viagra for old people. (Not comparing the two, just saying that both are equally distasteful to me personally). This said, I used birth control all of my life of one sort or the other.
I did read through the links you provided and the info is a little suspect in terms of credible sources--not in any way saying that they are untrue. The articles do point out some issues that I do find troubling:
I believe you are right that there are some in the government who have adopted the old theocratic position of the Catholic Church and the protestant Presbyterian, Lutheran, Methodist and Congregationalist church/stators of past centuries. I am a staunch advocate of separation of church and state -- a concept founded in this nation by Baptist, Roger Williams. We may be looking at a resurgence of the marriage between church and state again--and you and I both know that is what started the Dark Ages and saw the execution and persecution of many a dissenting Christian or practicing pagan. Do you think that we will see this in our lifetime?
-Jack
Post a Comment
<< Home