Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
She went to a doctor but she was healthy and saw no reason to have the baby at the hospital. They saved a ton of money. As I posted pregnancy is not a disease. Our ancestors had their babies at home most of the time. My grandmother had all of her 7 children at home, they didn't have a hospital within miles of where they lived. Only people today think they have a horrible life if they don't have BC and can screw around. Sex for entertainment and not procreation. Then they are at a loss when they have an oops. They can't understand how they got pregnant.
And a lot of babies and mothers who died in the "good old days" wouldn't have died with the doctors and hospitals we have today.
I see nothing wrong with your friends having their babies at home.....that is their CHOICE.....and I am all for women having CHOICE.....as you well know.
People are not going to stop having recreational sex. Nothing good will come of people no longer using birth control and having a whole gaggle of children like they did in the old days either.
One of the quickest ways to find yourself living in poverty is to have more children than you can afford.
And FYI.....growing up in poverty is not good for children.
All insurance needs to be overhauled. Obamacare is not what we need though. It's too invasive and I thought you were concerned with invasion.
Abortions are more invasive as an ultrasound. If a women does not want any instrument put up her than an abortion will be too hard for her to go through anyway.
I agree that our healthcare system needs an overhaul.....there is a lot of waste, inefficiency and fraud, IMO.
Obamacare doesn't go far enough, I would like to see universal healthcare.
Just because one invasive procedure in necessary.....that does not mean unneeded procedures should be done "just because"....and against the woman's will. There is also the matter of who pays for it.....if the government mandates it.....the government should pay for it.
Your second point, that is like saying if a woman has no problem with her husband's penis invading her, she shouldn't have a problem with a rapists penis invading her either.
Also, having an abortion is much less invasive than repeated prenatal exams, childbirth and recovery.....not even close.
Most abortions are not to save the mother's life. Most are for oops. BC is not 100% and people live in a fantasy if they think it is. It has a failure rate.
I do wish modern women would toughen up but not become like a man tough like they want to do.
One out of 4 pregnancies ends in abortion now. That should be shocking to most. The most shocking is some do not care just as long as they can do what they want to do.
The fact is, Janelle, banning abortion and restricting birth control is not going to stop abortions.
Education, low cost/free/easy to obtain birth control and newer, more effective methods of birth control will stop more abortions than anything else we can do. THAT is what you should be fighting for.
And again---NO ONE HAS A PROBLEM WITH BC BEING USED FOR MEDICAL REASONS. So yes it can.
You should care becaue it raises your insurance costs. All of the issues you posted is lifestyle that is not optional, you get those problems just for living and breathing. Well Mrs. Obama wants livestyle taken in to account so it may be regulated. We just may see people who have diabetes blamed for getting it themselves for being overweight and they will be under some kind of regs afterall. NO DESSERT FOR YOU.
WOW.....I can't beleive that you are upset that Michelle Obama is fighting to have healthy meals fed to your children in school instead of junk food.
That she is fighting to have your children taught what is a good diet vs eating a bad diet that will eventually compromise their health.
That she is fighting to see that children learn that getting up off the couch and playing a game of ball instead is good for them.
WHAT AN EVIL WOMAN!
BTW.....Michele Obama had nothing to do with people being blamed for illnesses that can be attributed to lifesyle.
That would be the people behind the anti-smoking campaigns.....and those people are Republican and Democrat.....big pharma and insurance companies. Pushing for smoker's to pay more for their health insurance, etc......because, after all, they are making themselves sick. With that reasoning, are you surprised that "the powers that be" realized they could also use that reasoning to force the overweight to pay more for their insurance too? After all, aren't they also making themselves sick?
Looks like the far right is geting desperate knowing that their own Party is driving women voters away from the Party, I wonder how many wives of Repubs will not be voting for Repubs in November. Nope you righties cannot control how your wife votes, thinking women scare the heck out of you dinosaurs don't they.
As a for instance, the wife of the former Republican governor of Florida, Crist, switched her party registration from Republican to Democrat. What if a lot of other Republican women have been doing that?
Then why does he want politicians between a woman and her doctor and that is what will happen with Obamacare. You doctor will need to get a politicians agreement to treat you. If they say no then you are toast. Many older doctors are planning to retire and there won't be that many younger doctors to care for all of us. There will be a huge doctor shortage.
Where do you GET this stuff?? More Rush Limbaugh "facts"? NONE of it is as you imply.
Older doctors have always been planning to retire, lets pick 500 doctors out of 6 million and use them as a sample set to prove our point.
For most people, they will see NO change in how their Health Insurance operates.
A few years ago I had to get some testing done, I had to get approval from my insurer.
A couple years ago I had surgeries, again, I needed Insurance company approval.
In the spring I needed emergency care, no approval needed in this case, didn't need to call my congressman first.
Prior approval for major care has always been the case.
You really need to stop listening to Rush, or only listen to him as comedy, just like The Onion News reports.
The fact is, Janelle, banning abortion and restricting birth control is not going to stop abortions.
Education, low cost/free/easy to obtain birth control and newer, more effective methods of birth control will stop more abortions than anything else we can do. THAT is what you should be fighting for.
Not to mention that abortion is a personal Constitutional right as decided by the Supreme Court -- but of course, some only follow the constitution when it favors their arguments.
Nice try. Why don't you admit you are for Rape like the GOP and want women to have their rapist baby?
Grin and Bear it Women cause abortion stops a beating heart and all the jazz.
This is the same crowd that hates single moms and people who accept public assistance. So who should pay for the prenatal care...birth...well child visits and support the child until it reaches maturity? Of course in fantasy land adoption is always the answer. Unless of course its not a white baby then I guess it's the foster care system for minority babies and the babies born with disabilities. Of course then these same people complain about tax dollars being spent on programs to support those who have the nerve to be born outside of wedlock.
They can do and are allowed to do whatever they want to do, no one is stopping them. The tax payers wonder why they need to pay for her BC to stop pregnancies.
And again since some are not able to comprehend this----
NO ONE HAS ANY PROBLEM WITH BC TAKEN FOR MEDICAL REASONS.
Evidently you don't comprehend things very well.
If you have insurance that covers prescription medicine, and your doctor prescribes you medicine, your insurance should cover that medicine. When your employer tells your insurance company that he wants to refuse coverage for certain medications that are used for birth control but also used to treat medical conditions, then the insurance company will deny those medications, REGARDLESS of whether the medication is being used as birth control or if the medicine is being used for other medical needs.
And by the way, sometimes birth control is medication. There are some women whose lives can be endangered by a pregnancy. For instance, women with severe diabetes, or women who are in cancer treatment, or women with reproductive abnormalities, take birth control because otherwise they could DIE. Shouldn't there insurance cover medication that is being prescribed to prevent their DEATH?
Or are you going to say, no one has a problem with women getting birth control in those situations. Because if that's what you're going to say, you should go back to what the Catholic Church has been campaigning on all summer. They don't want their insurance paying for birth control NO MATTER WHAT. NO MATTER if the woman is using it to treat health conditions. NO MATTER if the woman is preventing a life-threatening pregnancy. NO MATTER WHAT.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
