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.
Thanks for your thoughts. I still go back to the fact that unless you can find a secular reason for a contraception ban, right now the "drive" for it is religiously based. If it were to succeed in any state, that would be imposing a religious belief on all women who want to use contraception. If a state decides to ban contraception for a secular reason (and there may be a secular reason for that--I just can't come up with one), then that would not violate the 1st Amendment.
That all said, I do not believe this is something that is happening. Like I said, it's a message board, I'm bored, and I decided to jump into the hypothetical.
Apart from one would-be state representative with Roman Catholicism oozing from her pores, I haven't seen anyone in favor of banning contraceptives that are not also abortifacients.
Hoping to revisit a wrongly reasoned decision that happened to involve contraceptives, along with other wrongly reasoned decisions, isn't the same as opposing contraceptives.
Apart from one would-be state representative with Roman Catholicism oozing from her pores, I haven't seen anyone in favor of banning contraceptives that are not also abortifacients.
Hoping to revisit a wrongly reasoned decision that happened to involve contraceptives, along with other wrongly reasoned decisions, isn't the same as opposing contraceptives.
I agree. I'm just answering the question on this thread. A hypothetical. We can still do that, right?
It appears that this is coming from the misunderstanding of those not educated on the SC, and what decisions they can make vs what the states can make. No one ever said anything about making contraceptives illegal. Thomas mentioned other cases that were possibly decided by the SC, but actually may have fell under the states' rights to make the rules/laws.
The only possible issue with contraceptives that I have seen, well ever, was with the morning after pill, and some pharmacists not wanting to fill that. I know previously there was some talk about the IUD as far as "rupturing". Other than that, I just don't see any issue when it goes to the states to decide, and I believe it may in the future.
I wonder how many answering this are actually aware of the different types of contraceptives. Seriously, are we talking ALL contraceptives? Condoms, diaphrams, spermacidal gels, birth control pills, patches, injections..........
Silly notion that contraceptives would be banned. SC probably overstepped is all, and the decisions regarding such should return to the states. Geesh! Look what power MSM has when it comes to spreading propaganda!
Women I talk to... secretly... realize the folly of their ways with regard to unlimited sexual activity. They also realize they probably won't be able to convince young women of the need to curtail it.
Why should men buy the cow when the milk is free? And we start to see more and more women alone... birth rate... in the trash.
Why shouldn't men in relationships cheat when most women they meet are offering... and they do and either break up their marriage or the woman just has to deal with it.
The government reducing access would actually be a favor to women so the irresponsible might have to curtail their activities.
So your theory is men are just there to take advantage of these childlike stupid women? Really?
Contraceptives should be legal, but not supplied at the taxpayer's expense. If you can't control your sexual desires, and can't afford the consequences, then you need to be sterilized after the first tax funded kid or abortion.
The right to pursue happiness is not the right to have others pay for it.
Precisely. When I looked at the results, I was surprised at first … 14% favored making contraception illegal? I wouldn’t have predicted more than 1% at most. But then it dawned on me that the poll is almost certainly skewed by pro-choice ideologues wanting to create the illusion that there was a measurable threat to birth control.
I believe that your typical conservatives who want legitimate restrictions on abortion would never favor restricting contraception because there is a direct conflict of purpose, which is typically a dysfunctional trait left wingers possess, like wanting to take guns away because police are there to protect us, and then promoting the defunding and elimination of the police.
I find the very notion of restricting contraception to be offensive to basic common sense, which again is more reflective of the minds of left wing fanatics. Methinks this is a leftist straw man argument.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 8 days ago)
35,631 posts, read 17,968,125 times
Reputation: 50655
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
Precisely. When I looked at the results, I was surprised at first … 14% favored making contraception illegal? I wouldn’t have predicted more than 1% at most. But then it dawned on me that the poll is almost certainly skewed by pro-choice ideologues wanting to create the illusion that there was a measurable threat to birth control.
I believe that your typical conservatives who want legitimate restrictions on abortion would never favor restricting contraception because there is a direct conflict of purpose, which is typically a dysfunctional trait left wingers possess, like wanting to take guns away because police are there to protect us, and then promoting the defunding and elimination of the police.
I find the very notion of restricting contraception to be offensive to basic common sense, which again is more reflective of the minds of left wing fanatics. Methinks this is a leftist straw man argument.
Like this clown? I swear to God, you can't take your eyes off these whacko right wing governors, or before you know it you'll have lost the right to birth control.
Oral contraceptives were initially developed in the 1950s. Norethidrone was approved in the late 1950s for menstrual cramps and the first combination pill was also initially approved that. As a result of Norethidrone trials, they had an understanding that fertility was effected. Physicians did start prescribing it for contraception before the official approval. The providers just said these women has menstrual cramps. Currently, oral contraceptives are approved for menstrual issues, endometriosis.and acne. It would be ashame if they have to used those old techniques again.
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.
