Free Birth Control Is The Emerging Standard For Women
Recent data from the IMS Institute document a sharp change during 2013. The share of privately insured women who got their birth control pills without a copayment jumped to 56 percent, from 14 percent in 2012. The law’s requirement that most health plans cover birth control as prevention, at no additional cost to women, took full effect in 2013…
Recent data from the IMS Institute document a sharp change during 2013. The share of privately insured women who got their birth control pills without a copayment jumped to 56 percent, from 14 percent in 2012. The law’s requirement that most health plans cover birth control as prevention, at no additional cost to women, took full effect in 2013.
The benefit to women should be obvious, but this article lays it out for those who don’t get it:
Click here for reuse options!Many medical groups see a strong rationale for free birth control. Contraception can help make a woman’s next pregnancy healthier by spacing births far enough apart, generally 18 months to two years. Closely spaced births carry a risk of such problems as prematurity, low birth weight, even autism. And even modest copays for medical care can discourage its use.
“It’s one of the most concrete ways that women have seen that the Affordable Care Act is helping them,” said Amy Allina, deputy director of the National Women’s Health Network, an advocacy that supports the law’s requirement.
Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: William
retired military , former cop, lifelong gym rat and doting grandfather alive and living in Maine
198 responses to Free Birth Control Is The Emerging Standard For Women
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
rydermike July 5th, 2014 at 20:02
How about trying to be HONEST? They only allowed a company to opt out of the 4 of TWENTY options , the very one’s that are the most disgusting ways and are not about preventing a birth but killing off fertilized life!
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 21:45
Disgusting? What is wrong with you? What about women who needs BCP for endometriosis, polycystic ovarian disease or or other gynecological disorders? Instead of trying to be honest, why don’t you try to be educated?
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:22
Yet the FDA has not approved the use of the BCP for any of these disorders means nothing to you?
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 23:15
I know they were prescribed for me throughout my 30s to cope with my endometriosis. What does it mean to you?
Carla Akins July 5th, 2014 at 23:43
That information is incorrect, You need to research your claim
bahlers July 6th, 2014 at 00:04
The BCP was commonly prescribed in the 60s for medical disorders, but with further research it has been well proven that the use of BCPs for those disorders previously mentioned is no more beneficial than the inherent risks offered. It is you who needs to research your claim.
Shades July 6th, 2014 at 00:56
I see you don’t bother to provide a link. Here’s mine. http://www.asrm.org/FACTSHEET_Noncontraceptive_Benefits_of_Birth_Control_Pills/
http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2011/11/16/8824376-1-in-3-teens-go-on-pill-for-non-contraceptive-reasons
http://humupd.oxfordjournals.org/content/11/5/513.full
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/421497_5
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 08:52
I’ll make sure and mention that to my niece, the OB/GYN. Managing pregnancies, absolutely has an effect on overall health – specifically heart disease, diabetes and autoimmune diseaes that cause organ failure.
Shades July 6th, 2014 at 07:38
The FDA already approved the BCPs. If the doctors choose to prescribe them for these disorders and they work (they do, I’m proof of that), end of story. BTW, aren’t we lucky to have Bahlers here to mansplain the female reproductive system to us? (That, sir, is satire.)
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:23
Why don’t you try to be honest and educated?
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 23:21
I was an ER nurse for 30 years until my recent retirement. In addition, I personally was prescribed BCPs to regulate menstrual cycles in my teen years (and I was a virgin at the time), took them for contraception during my 20s. After my husband had a vasectomy, I was prescribed them to control my endometriosis pain in my 30s up until I had a hysterectomy, all prescribed by my OB/GYN. How’s that for honest and educated?
uzza July 5th, 2014 at 21:59
Yes, let’s be honest. Tell us, is this diseased leaking pustule of an opinion the result of not reading the article or of being too dumb to understand it’s not about Hobby Lobby? ..and,
Do the ravaged remnants of your mind tell you it’s ok to break the law five times out of twenty, or is four the limit? …and,
Does your understanding of biology come from reading the bathroom wall at Fox News or are you an M.D. from some snake fondling one-book University that taught you eggs are fertilized before ovulation?
Also, tell us if you’ve ever had an original thought and what year that was?
rydermike July 5th, 2014 at 22:45
Where does breaking the law even come into this? The court properly EXCUSED the firm from having to be the one paying for the nasty baby killing crap!
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 23:27
Don’t you have a wooly mammoth to club somewhere?
rydermike July 5th, 2014 at 23:44
Not at all ! You missing from the liberals are morons club meeting tonite?
Shades July 6th, 2014 at 00:53
LOL, says the moron who thinks BCPs kill babies. At least Bahlers presents a coherent argument. You’re just throwing your feces.
uzza July 5th, 2014 at 23:27
Please forgive my naivete. You have corrected my folly by explaining that the courts excused HL from breaking the law just as they did with Pol Pot murdering one Cambodian out of four and I can rest easy about these things.
If I may impose further upon your largesse, since I lack the benefit of your advanced medical degree in hallucinology and so am forced to rely merely on the consensus of the world’s medical establishment, perhaps you could be so kind as to explain what they cannot, the miraculous mechanism by which an ovary’s failure to release an egg makes God kill a nasty baby.
Carla Akins July 5th, 2014 at 23:40
First of all, the employer does nor pay for contraception, insurance does.
rydermike July 5th, 2014 at 23:43
And whom is subsidizing the cost of that insurance? THE EMPLOYER YOU DUMBASS !
Carla Akins July 5th, 2014 at 23:45
No, it’s included i the insurance costs, like all covered services
rydermike July 6th, 2014 at 00:17
Actually NOT , insurance costs are factored by whats included and it turns out the savings by just excluding the baby killing drugs will be almost a half million for Hobby Lobby while not subsidizing killing kids, pretty damn good deal!
uzza July 6th, 2014 at 00:33
ACTUALLY, it’s the employees that pay for it. By investing their time and labor they create value, which the company then compensates them for with benefits–including health insurance– and wages. The problem is employees are being compensated unfairly.
ACTUALLY too, there are no baby killing drugs involved.
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 08:58
The drugs in question do not kill babies. I have posted that link a couple of hundred times. You have the science wrong. Regardless, employer-provided insurance gives the employer a HUGE tax break. In addition the only pay a portion of the premium, the employee pats the rest – not to mention, when you apply for the job one of the benefits the employer entices you with is health insurance. It is presented as part of your compensation package, so they don’t have to pay you a higher wage. It’s not a gift.
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 00:36
Actually in employer-provided insurance there are no subsidies, only in the individual mandate. Dumbass.
rydermike July 6th, 2014 at 01:20
HELLO , THE EMPLOYER is the one subsidizing ! Employees merely make a small contribution to the total cost TO THE EMPLOYER in an employer provided program.
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 09:07
You need to learn the definition of words. The employer and employee share the cash cost of the premium, However the benefit of offered employee healthcare is considered part of the employees unpaid compensation – part of their pay. And just in case you didn’t know, the Federal government gives Hobby Lobby or the employer a HUGE tax break for offering this benefit.
rydermike July 6th, 2014 at 14:30
HUGE tax break? It’s a business expense , so YES it is something to write off ! As far as compensation it is up to THE EMPLOYER to decide what they feel is a fair compensation to offer and they want no part of adding in end of life crap. If you haven’t noticed they already pay a VERY fair wage compared to the others in retail.
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 16:28
Again, medically, scientifically proven not to end a life – not even prevent the implementation. Hobby Lobby had the option not to provide healthcare and just pay the tax. It would have been cheaper for them, but they chose to force their beliefs on others.
rydermike July 6th, 2014 at 18:19
How stupid can you be ? What part of them including SIXTEEN forms of birth control in the insurance are you not comprehending?
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 20:27
Nice name calling, Not every woman can take evert type of BC, it’s not like switching shoes. This is medicine designed to work best for the individual, whether they are diabetic, have heart issues, polycystic ovary syndrome, high blood pressure – do I need to go on? Each person requires the drug right for them. The decision is made between doctor and patient, the employer has no business in determining which form is best for this individual.The entire reason there are more than 16 types is because they’re needed, medically.
Once more – this is not about sex. It’s about women’s health care, of which pregnancy is a part of. Failure to manage pregnancies or use the wrong BC can literally kill a woman. It can create heart disease, cancer liver and kidney failure and high blood pressure and strokes. It’s not a matter if choosing what color condom to use.
rydermike July 6th, 2014 at 21:33
The 4 excluded are about killing a fertilized life , NOT preventing life from being fertilized. They are about killing not preventing!
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 23:56
The employer pays near 75% of the employee’s medical costs. So how are they not paying for the contraception?
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 00:39
Source please. How much he employer pays toward health insurance is determined by the actual employer. Regardless, insurance is unpaid compensation the employee has earned. Try again.
bahlers July 6th, 2014 at 00:12
Unless I missed something, Hobby Lobby’s action is now deemed completely LEGAL, the SCOTUS is the branch of gov’t that interprets the laws, and what they say stands. So who is it that is not reading the article, or are you just too stupid to understand how our political system works?
uzza July 6th, 2014 at 00:24
well, you’ve missed an awful lot, but you’re right about HL wanting to disobey the law, just like Pol Pot wanted to murder 2 million citizens, but the COURTS interpreted the law and deemed it completely LEGAL, so let’s not worry our little heads about women being discriminated against, or dead Cambodians. Right?
After all, when you can bribe a judge to let you opt out of laws everything is hunky dory. Hey it worked for Blackwater.
R.J. Carter July 5th, 2014 at 22:55
Further, it says there’s a way for women to still get them free … On their own thru Obamacare.
bahlers July 6th, 2014 at 00:11
Good point, you now have the option to opt out of your employer’s plan and get one on the exchange.
Shades July 6th, 2014 at 07:32
But you don’t get the subsidy if your employer offers insurance for less than 10% of your income.
rydermike July 5th, 2014 at 20:02
How about trying to be HONEST? They only allowed a company to opt out of the 4 of TWENTY options , the very one’s that are the most disgusting ways and are not about preventing a birth but killing off fertilized life!
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 21:45
Disgusting? What is wrong with you? What about women who needs BCP for endometriosis, polycystic ovarian disease or or other gynecological disorders? Instead of trying to be honest, why don’t you try to be educated?
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:22
Yet the FDA has not approved the use of the BCP for any of these disorders means nothing to you?
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 23:15
I know they were prescribed for me throughout my 30s to cope with my endometriosis. They were prescribed for me in my early teens (age 13) to help regulate my menstrual cycle. What does it mean to you?
Carla Akins July 5th, 2014 at 23:43
That information is incorrect, You need to research your claim
bahlers July 6th, 2014 at 00:04
The BCP was commonly prescribed in the 60s for medical disorders, but with further research it has been well proven that the use of BCPs for those disorders previously mentioned is no more beneficial than the inherent risks offered. It is you who needs to research your claim.
Shades July 6th, 2014 at 00:56
I see you don’t bother to provide a link. Here’s mine. http://www.asrm.org/FACTSHEET_Noncontraceptive_Benefits_of_Birth_Control_Pills/
http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2011/11/16/8824376-1-in-3-teens-go-on-pill-for-non-contraceptive-reasons
http://humupd.oxfordjournals.org/content/11/5/513.full
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/421497_5
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 08:52
I’ll make sure and mention that to my niece, the OB/GYN. Managing pregnancies, absolutely has an effect on overall health – specifically heart disease, diabetes and autoimmune diseaes that cause organ failure.
Shades July 6th, 2014 at 07:38
The FDA already approved the BCPs. If the doctors choose to prescribe them for these disorders and they work (they do, I’m proof of that), end of story. BTW, aren’t we lucky to have Bahlers here to mansplain the female reproductive system to us? (That, sir, is satire.)
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:23
Why don’t you try to be honest and educated?
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 23:21
I was an ER nurse for 30 years until my recent retirement. In addition, I personally was prescribed BCPs to regulate menstrual cycles in my teen years (and I was a virgin at the time), took them for contraception during my 20s. After my husband had a vasectomy, I was prescribed them to control my endometriosis pain in my 30s up until I had a hysterectomy, all prescribed by my OB/GYN. How’s that for honest and educated?
uzza July 5th, 2014 at 21:59
Yes, let’s be honest. Tell us, is this diseased leaking pustule of an opinion the result of not reading the article or of being too dumb to understand it’s not about Hobby Lobby? ..and,
Do the ravaged remnants of your mind tell you it’s ok to break the law five times out of twenty or is four the limit? …and,
Does your understanding of biology come from reading the bathroom wall at Fox News or are you an M.D. from some snake fondling one-book University that taught you eggs are fertilized before ovulation?
Also, tell us if you’ve ever had an original thought and what year that was?
rydermike July 5th, 2014 at 22:45
Where does breaking the law even come into this? The court properly EXCUSED the firm from having to be the one paying for the nasty baby killing crap!
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 23:27
Don’t you have a wooly mammoth to club somewhere?
rydermike July 5th, 2014 at 23:44
Not at all ! You missing from the liberals are morons club meeting tonite?
Shades July 6th, 2014 at 00:53
LOL, says the moron who thinks BCPs kill babies. At least Bahlers presents a coherent argument. You’re just throwing your feces.
uzza July 5th, 2014 at 23:27
Please forgive my naivete. You have corrected my folly by explaining that the courts excused HL from breaking the law just as they did with Pol Pot murdering one Cambodian out of four and I can rest easy about these things.
If I may impose further upon your largesse, since I lack the benefit of your advanced medical degree in Hallucinology and so am forced to rely merely on the consensus of the world’s medical establishment, perhaps you could be so kind as to explain what they cannot, the miraculous mechanism by which an ovary’s failure to release an egg makes God kill a nasty baby.
Carla Akins July 5th, 2014 at 23:40
First of all, the employer does nor pay for contraception, insurance does.
rydermike July 5th, 2014 at 23:43
And whom is subsidizing the cost of that insurance? THE EMPLOYER YOU DUMBASS !
Carla Akins July 5th, 2014 at 23:45
No, it’s included i the insurance costs, like all covered services
rydermike July 6th, 2014 at 00:17
Actually NOT , insurance costs are factored by whats included and it turns out the savings by just excluding the baby killing drugs will be almost a half million for Hobby Lobby while not subsidizing killing kids, pretty damn good deal!
uzza July 6th, 2014 at 00:33
ACTUALLY, it’s the employees that pay for it. By investing their time and labor they create value, which the company then compensates them for with benefits–including health insurance– and wages. The problem is employees are being compensated unfairly.
ACTUALLY too, there are no baby killing drugs involved.
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 08:58
The drugs in question do not kill babies. I have posted that link a couple of hundred times. You have the science wrong. Regardless, employer-provided insurance gives the employer a HUGE tax break. In addition the only pay a portion of the premium, the employee pats the rest – not to mention, when you apply for the job one of the benefits the employer entices you with is health insurance. It is presented as part of your compensation package, so they don’t have to pay you a higher wage. It’s not a gift.
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 00:36
Actually in employer-provided insurance there are no subsidies, only in the individual mandate. Dumbass.
rydermike July 6th, 2014 at 01:20
HELLO , THE EMPLOYER is the one subsidizing ! Employees merely make a small contribution to the total cost TO THE EMPLOYER in an employer provided program.
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 09:07
You need to learn the definition of words. The employer and employee share the cash cost of the premium, However the benefit of offered employee healthcare is considered part of the employees unpaid compensation – part of their pay. And just in case you didn’t know, the Federal government gives Hobby Lobby or the employer a HUGE tax break for offering this benefit.
rydermike July 6th, 2014 at 14:30
HUGE tax break? It’s a business expense , so YES it is something to write off ! As far as compensation it is up to THE EMPLOYER to decide what they feel is a fair compensation to offer and they want no part of adding in end of life crap. If you haven’t noticed they already pay a VERY fair wage compared to the others in retail.
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 16:28
Again, medically, scientifically proven not to end a life – not even prevent the implementation. Hobby Lobby had the option not to provide healthcare and just pay the tax. It would have been cheaper for them, but they chose to force their beliefs on others.
rydermike July 6th, 2014 at 18:19
How stupid can you be ? What part of them including SIXTEEN forms of birth control in the insurance are you not comprehending?
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 20:27
Nice name calling, Not every woman can take evert type of BC, it’s not like switching shoes. This is medicine designed to work best for the individual, whether they are diabetic, have heart issues, polycystic ovary syndrome, high blood pressure – do I need to go on? Each person requires the drug right for them. The decision is made between doctor and patient, the employer has no business in determining which form is best for this individual.The entire reason there are more than 16 types is because they’re needed, medically.
Once more – this is not about sex. It’s about women’s health care, of which pregnancy is a part of. Failure to manage pregnancies or use the wrong BC can literally kill a woman. It can create heart disease, cancer liver and kidney failure and high blood pressure and strokes. It’s not a matter if choosing what color condom to use.
rydermike July 6th, 2014 at 21:33
The 4 excluded are about killing a fertilized life , NOT preventing life from being fertilized. They are about killing not preventing!
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 23:56
The employer pays near 75% of the employee’s medical costs. So how are they not paying for the contraception?
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 00:39
Source please. How much he employer pays toward health insurance is determined by the actual employer. Regardless, insurance is unpaid compensation the employee has earned. Try again.
bahlers July 6th, 2014 at 00:12
Unless I missed something, Hobby Lobby’s action is now deemed completely LEGAL, the SCOTUS is the branch of gov’t that interprets the laws, and what they say stands. So who is it that is not reading the article, or are you just too stupid to understand how our political system works?
uzza July 6th, 2014 at 00:24
well, you’ve missed an awful lot, but you’re right about HL wanting to disobey the law, just like Pol Pot wanted to murder 2 million citizens, but the COURTS interpreted the law and deemed it completely LEGAL, so let’s not worry our little heads about women being discriminated against, or dead Cambodians. Right?
After all, when you can bribe a judge to let you opt out of laws everything is hunky dory. Hey it worked for Blackwater.
R.J. Carter July 5th, 2014 at 22:55
Further, it says there’s a way for women to still get them free … On their own thru Obamacare.
bahlers July 6th, 2014 at 00:11
Good point, you now have the option to opt out of your employer’s plan and get one on the exchange.
Shades July 6th, 2014 at 07:32
But you don’t get the subsidy if your employer offers insurance for less than 10% of your income.
Republicans_are_Evil July 5th, 2014 at 20:30
Free birth control is every young man’s fondest fantasy. Naturally, right wingers are opposed to it.
Republicans_are_Evil July 5th, 2014 at 20:30
Free birth control is every young man’s fondest fantasy. Naturally, right wingers are opposed to it.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 20:52
When are male condoms going to be covered by health insurance? Men’s rights!
Republicans_are_Evil July 5th, 2014 at 20:52
I totally agree. If they are going to make the pill free for woman, condoms need to be free for guys.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 20:53
I think we all know that this will never happen.
Republicans_are_Evil July 5th, 2014 at 20:54
Oh, I don’t know about that. Things are changing fast in this country. At this point, anything is possible.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 20:59
The feminists will never allow it, at least from my understanding of them through my interactions with them.
Trumbull Desi July 5th, 2014 at 21:24
(rolls eyes)
Republicans_are_Evil July 5th, 2014 at 21:28
So you think feminists would be the ones to complain about giving men free birth control too? How very enlightened of you.
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 21:42
I seriously doubt you have any interactions with feminists, or any other intelligent women for that matter.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 21:44
I was unaware that you know who I am or the people that I have been in contact with. I interacted with too many feminists to count while I was in college these past four years, professors and students alike.
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 21:47
It was obvious by your statement that feminists won’t allow free condoms.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 21:53
Too many feminists that I have had the “pleasure” of speaking to have stated that they do not want equality, they want control. So by using their own logic there is no reason why they would be for anything that promotes something that can be seen as an issue that serves men.
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 21:59
You’re a bald-faced liar. I’m a feminist, have been for five decades. We want equality period. I know many, many men who are strong, confident and 100% supportive of that goal. The more you post, the more you expose yourself as a frightened little man, so crawl out from under that bed and grow up. This is the real world.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:03
This may be your viewpoint, and I did not try to say otherwise, this is the new viewpoint held by many younger feminists (aged 20-25). I graduated from a very liberal liberal arts school in Oregon this year and every feminist that I talked to that was my own age held that viewpoint. This is the updated “real” world as you put it.
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 22:29
In my day, if we wanted a thick, overbearing Neanderthal to leave us alone, we told him we were washing our hair.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:31
Ha, that’s pretty funny. And if the “neo-feminists” had the wherewithal to present their political argument the way you do, I would be much more inclined to side with them on many more issues.
uzza July 5th, 2014 at 23:37
You mean like this?
Republicans_are_Evil July 5th, 2014 at 22:30
Because the subject of free contraception for men comes up so frequently when you talk to feminists. You are such a bad liar.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:34
Not ever in any of the conversations that I had, not to say they don’t exist. I just don’t see it happening in this political climate. There is so much hate spewed towards men (especially caucasian) that I don’t see any movement being started that will benefit them. Do you recall any of the “check your privilege” movements that have been going around? Using their frame of mind, men will just need to buy their own.
LightningJoe July 8th, 2014 at 11:43
“Using their frame of mind, men will just need to buy their own.”
So fricking cut to the chase and BUY IT!
You don’t need a woman to have sex, all you need is a competent appliance.
http://www.sextoy.com/?gclid=CK6uoLmGtr8CFYpefgodmrMA7w
Of course NONE of them can be used for procreation, so you might be out of luck…
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 23:38
When one guy has this many problems with feminists, maybe it isn’t the feminists who are the problem.
LightningJoe July 8th, 2014 at 11:37
“every feminist that I talked to that was my own age held that viewpoint.”
Color me not believing you.
You’ve extrapolated that from what they DID say. Part of your Male Privilege told you that women in control of their own lives would cut into your prerogatives, so your “brain” immediately translated that into “women controlling men.”
I don’t think you can hear what they ARE saying, is why you must translate it in your head.
R.J. Carter July 5th, 2014 at 22:53
So you DO support free condoms, then?
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 23:14
Yes.
LightningJoe July 8th, 2014 at 11:34
I propose that men want control OVER women, so when women say they want control over their OWN lives, men take it personally; because controlling women’s lives has always been part of “being a man.”
LightningJoe July 8th, 2014 at 11:31
“have stated that they do not want equality, they want control.”
Just a niggle here… I’m perfectly willing to accept that Feminists might have told you they want control OVER THEIR OWN LIVES AND ISSUES, but I’m far less willing to believe that they told you they want control over you – at least not in ways not linked to how you treat them.
If you think that is what they said, I surmise that YOU read it into their words. Men are so invested in having the ONLY final say in everything, that they are liable to take a woman wanting to determine the limits and allowances of her OWN life, as also limiting the menz’ lives.
… and given what men expect from women, what they expect them to give up for men, that’s not too hard to imagine…
Carla Akins July 5th, 2014 at 23:23
Condoms are used for preventing pregnancy due to recreational sex. Birth control id used to msnsgrnwomen’d health.
uzza July 5th, 2014 at 23:32
“Birth control id used to msnsgrnwomen’d health.”
Admit it, you’re drunk, aren’t you?
Happy Fourth of July.
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 00:32
Yeo
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 14:44
yay, a anew word
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 23:33
They also prevent the spread of disease. I’m in favor of a reasonable amount of condoms being made available.
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 00:34
Agreed.Condoms are distributed by dozens of organizations.They are hardly difficult to come by
LightningJoe July 8th, 2014 at 11:25
“Condoms are distributed by dozens of organizations.”
…for free…
LightningJoe July 8th, 2014 at 11:25
“Condoms are distributed by dozens of organizations.”
…for free…
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 21:46
Instead of whining like a spoiled kid, why don’t you get off your behind and lobby for it?
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 21:52
Since you are obviously too close minded to see satire when you see it, I will spell it out for you. I was mocking the viewpoint held by you and others like you in that you want everything handed to you for free. I don’t believe in women’s “right” to contraception, nor a man’s “right” to condoms for that matter. If you want to engage in sexual intercourse, that is your choice, and have at it. But, there is no reason why you can’t pay any associated costs with your recreational activity. By your logic, I play golf because I enjoy it and it offers many positive health outcomes, so should my health insurance cover any greens fees that are associated with the rounds that I play? It is completely preposterous.
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 22:02
You consider contraception recreational? You compare it to golf and call me close-minded? Wow, just wow.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:07
No, I consider sex solely for pleasure to be recreational. When you want to have contraception paid for, it is so you can have the pleasure of sex without the risk of pregnancy (if I am missing something on that then let me know). This is a cost that must be paid to engage in the recreational activity (that is what sex for pleasure is right?). When I play golf, it is in large part due to how much fun it is, and to do so I must pay the fee to do so.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:08
So where is the difference between the two?
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 22:28
Honey, if your parents haven’t explained that to you yet, I’m not going to do it.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:29
Obviously, I meant besides the most glaring difference, lol.
Carla Akins July 5th, 2014 at 23:20
As a woman contraceptives ate not designed for recreational sex only/ As a matter of fact preventing pregnancy is mostly a heajth issue.
bahlers July 6th, 2014 at 00:08
Exactly, sex becomes a recreational activity (primarily) when pregnancy is trying to be prevented after (or during) the act.
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 08:54
Are you married or in a long-term relationship? Sex is very much a part of life, not just for the mini-skirt wearing, cleavage displaying drunk sluts.
Shades July 6th, 2014 at 11:04
Well, if what he says is true, that all “feminists” tell him their goal is domination not equality, I’m guessing that’s the contemporary version of the “I have to visit my sick aunt” excuse my generation used to blow off a creep. The more likely possibility is he’s a performance troll who doesn’t believe a word of what he posts but enjoys riling up the regulars. I admit I enjoy the rare occasions we get a contrarian visitor who is capable of proper sentence structure.
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 11:42
Funny, not in a haha way – if he thinks feminists are out for domination and control instead of equality – me thinks he has some issues.
LightningJoe July 8th, 2014 at 11:21
But see Carla, some people just think sex is dirty.
They don’t EVER want to do it, or see or deal with others who they know do it. Church tells them such things. Sure, their BODIES want to do it, but their brains fight that impulse constantly. Indeed, for some, I think that is what Church is FOR, is to marshal the needed fortitude to continue resisting the urge.
But it is also far cry, to assume that parents with twelve children, have only had sex twelve times in their lives. I’d bet a hundred to one, that they used the mom’s pregnancy AS birth control for sex, every time; because after all, sex is free, if she’s already pregnant!
So IF sex is only to be for procreation, why isn’t it prohibited once procreation is already in progress?
Carla Akins July 8th, 2014 at 11:47
Of course, how silly of me. I forgot sex was dirty (at least if you do it right)
LightningJoe July 8th, 2014 at 11:12
“No, I consider sex solely for pleasure to be recreational.”
Ah, but there is a wrinkle here that does not jive with a comparison to golf.
That is, IF sex is to be “solely for pleasure,” then some sort of contraception is a must, is required. If golf were to turn life-or-death at some point, based only on the presence or absence of some small-but-essential piece of equipment, THEN the comparison would hold true.
But the withholding of that small-but-essential piece of equipment would also be of interest. Indeed, given today’s culture, some might withhold it just to increase golf casualties, so that the evil golfers would one day learn the error of their ways, when enough of them had died playing the game.
Some of us might even want that piece of equipment included in the greens fees, so that no one would have to do without it, unless they WANTED to play for the high stakes.
Regardless, it definitely would increase the amount of thought one devoted to the game. Is that your purpose? Are you a golfer?
R.J. Carter July 5th, 2014 at 22:52
Well, both are generally played with a club, a bag, and balls…
And the headline did say “free.”
Carla Akins July 5th, 2014 at 23:16
This is why I love you.
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 23:17
Well played.
uzza July 5th, 2014 at 23:31
Don’t have sex with Bahler, whatever you do. He thinks sex is the same as hitting your balls with a club!
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 23:51
Funny, but in no way representative of what I said.
bahlers July 6th, 2014 at 00:07
I think that making that comparison would make me rather open minded, don’t you?
Shades July 6th, 2014 at 00:51
No, but it explains why intelligent women aren’t interested in you.
uzza July 5th, 2014 at 22:16
See this is why right wingers can never do satire. The idea is to take something that exists and exaggerate it for effect. It doesn’t work with something completely imaginary like the world conservatives live in.
Jonathan Swift wouldn’t be famous if he had written about lizard people eating the Kenyan atheist muslims spawned by chemtrails,
or bahler’s idea of feminism.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:19
It’s not my idea, I am simply relaying the information that I learned from encounters with shall I say neo-feminists.
bahlers July 6th, 2014 at 00:07
You see, this is why liberals can never do satire correctly, they believe that exaggeration is the only form of satire.
Shades July 6th, 2014 at 07:30
No dear. We know exactly what satire is. You may be ironic but you’re not clever. Point Uzza.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 20:52
When are male condoms going to be covered by health insurance? Men’s rights!
Republicans_are_Evil July 5th, 2014 at 20:52
I totally agree. If they are going to make the pill free for woman, condoms need to be free for guys.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 20:53
I think we all know that this will never happen.
Republicans_are_Evil July 5th, 2014 at 20:54
Oh, I don’t know about that. Things are changing fast in this country. At this point, anything is possible.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 20:59
The feminists will never allow it, at least from my understanding of them through my interactions with them.
Trumbull Desi July 5th, 2014 at 21:24
(rolls eyes)
Republicans_are_Evil July 5th, 2014 at 21:28
So you think feminists would be the ones to complain about giving men free birth control too? How very enlightened of you.
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 21:42
I seriously doubt you have any interactions with feminists, or any other intelligent women for that matter.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 21:44
I was unaware that you know who I am or the people that I have been in contact with. I interacted with too many feminists to count while I was in college these past four years, professors and students alike.
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 21:47
It was obvious by your statement that feminists won’t allow free condoms.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 21:53
Too many feminists that I have had the “pleasure” of speaking to have stated that they do not want equality, they want control. So by using their own logic there is no reason why they would be for anything that promotes something that can be seen as an issue that serves men.
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 21:59
You’re a bald-faced liar. I’m a feminist, have been for five decades. We want equality period. I know many, many men who are strong, confident and 100% supportive of that goal. The more you post, the more you expose yourself as a frightened little man, so crawl out from under that bed and grow up. This is the real world.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:03
This may be your viewpoint, and I did not try to say otherwise, this is the new viewpoint held by many younger feminists (aged 20-25). I graduated from a very liberal liberal arts school in Oregon this year and every feminist that I talked to that was my own age held that viewpoint. This is the updated “real” world as you put it.
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 22:29
In my day, if we wanted a thick, overbearing Neanderthal to leave us alone, we told him we were washing our hair.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:31
Ha, that’s pretty funny. And if the “neo-feminists” had the wherewithal to present their political argument the way you do, I would be much more inclined to side with them on many more issues.
uzza July 5th, 2014 at 23:37
You mean like this?
Republicans_are_Evil July 5th, 2014 at 22:30
Because the subject of free contraception for men comes up so frequently when you talk to feminists. You are such a bad liar.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:34
Not ever in any of the conversations that I had, not to say they don’t exist. I just don’t see it happening in this political climate. There is so much hate spewed towards men (especially caucasian) that I don’t see any movement being started that will benefit them. Do you recall any of the “check your privilege” movements that have been going around? Using their frame of mind, men will just need to buy their own.
LightningJoe July 8th, 2014 at 11:43
“Using their frame of mind, men will just need to buy their own.”
So fricking cut to the chase and BUY IT!
You don’t need a woman to have sex, all you need is a competent appliance.
http://www.sextoy.com/?gclid=CK6uoLmGtr8CFYpefgodmrMA7w
Of course NONE of them can be used for procreation, so you might be out of luck…
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 23:38
When one guy has this many problems with feminists, maybe it isn’t the feminists who are the problem.
LightningJoe July 8th, 2014 at 11:37
“every feminist that I talked to that was my own age held that viewpoint.”
Color me not believing you.
You’ve extrapolated that from what they DID say. Part of your Male Privilege told you that women in control of their own lives would cut into your prerogatives, so your “brain” immediately translated that into “women controlling men.”
I don’t think you can hear what they ARE saying, is why you must translate it in your head.
R.J. Carter July 5th, 2014 at 22:53
So you DO support free condoms, then?
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 23:14
Yes.
LightningJoe July 8th, 2014 at 11:34
I propose that men want control OVER women, so when women say they want control over their OWN lives, men take it personally; because controlling women’s lives has always been part of “being a man.”
LightningJoe July 8th, 2014 at 11:31
“have stated that they do not want equality, they want control.”
Just a niggle here… I’m perfectly willing to accept that Feminists might have told you they want control OVER THEIR OWN LIVES AND ISSUES, but I’m far less willing to believe that they told you they want control over you – at least not in ways not linked to how you treat them.
If you think that is what they said, I surmise that YOU read it into their words. Men are so invested in having the ONLY final say in everything, that they are liable to take a woman wanting to determine the limits and allowances of her OWN life, as also limiting the menz’ lives.
… and given what men expect from women, what they expect them to give up for men, that’s not too hard to imagine…
Carla Akins July 5th, 2014 at 23:23
Condoms are used for preventing pregnancy due to recreational sex. Birth control id used to msnsgrnwomen’d health.
uzza July 5th, 2014 at 23:32
“Birth control id used to msnsgrnwomen’d health.”
Admit it, you’re drunk, aren’t you?
Happy Fourth of July.
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 00:32
Yeo
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 14:44
yay, a anew word
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 23:33
They also prevent the spread of disease. I’m in favor of a reasonable amount of condoms being made available.
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 00:34
Agreed.Condoms are distributed by dozens of organizations.They are hardly difficult to come by
LightningJoe July 8th, 2014 at 11:25
“Condoms are distributed by dozens of organizations.”
…for free…
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 21:46
Instead of whining like a spoiled kid, why don’t you get off your behind and lobby for it?
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 21:52
Since you are obviously too close minded to see satire when you see it, I will spell it out for you. I was mocking the viewpoint held by you and others like you in that you want everything handed to you for free. I don’t believe in women’s “right” to contraception, nor a man’s “right” to condoms for that matter. If you want to engage in sexual intercourse, that is your choice, and have at it. But, there is no reason why you can’t pay any associated costs with your recreational activity. By your logic, I play golf because I enjoy it and it offers many positive health outcomes, so should my health insurance cover any greens fees that are associated with the rounds that I play? It is completely preposterous.
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 22:02
You consider contraception recreational? You compare it to golf and call me close-minded? Wow, just wow.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:07
No, I consider sex solely for pleasure to be recreational. When you want to have contraception paid for, it is so you can have the pleasure of sex without the risk of pregnancy (if I am missing something on that then let me know). This is a cost that must be paid to engage in the recreational activity (that is what sex for pleasure is right?). When I play golf, it is in large part due to how much fun it is, and to do so I must pay the fee to do so.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:08
So where is the difference between the two?
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 22:28
Honey, if your parents haven’t explained that to you yet, I’m not going to do it.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:29
Obviously, I meant besides the most glaring difference, lol.
Carla Akins July 5th, 2014 at 23:20
As a woman contraceptives are not designed for recreational sex only/ As a matter of fact preventing pregnancy is mostly a health issue.
bahlers July 6th, 2014 at 00:08
Exactly, sex becomes a recreational activity (primarily) when pregnancy is trying to be prevented after (or during) the act.
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 08:54
Are you married or in a long-term relationship? Sex is very much a part of life, not just for the mini-skirt wearing, cleavage displaying drunk sluts.
Shades July 6th, 2014 at 11:04
Well, if what he says is true, that all “feminists” tell him their goal is domination not equality, I’m guessing that’s the contemporary version of the “I have to visit my sick aunt” excuse my generation used to blow off a creep. The more likely possibility is he’s a performance troll who doesn’t believe a word of what he posts but enjoys riling up the regulars. I admit I enjoy the rare occasions we get a contrarian visitor who is capable of proper sentence structure.
Carla Akins July 6th, 2014 at 11:42
Funny, not in a haha way – if he thinks feminists are out for domination and control instead of equality – me thinks he has some issues.
LightningJoe July 8th, 2014 at 11:21
But see Carla, some people just think sex is dirty.
They don’t EVER want to do it, or see or deal with others who they know do it. Church tells them such things. Sure, their BODIES want to do it, but their brains fight that impulse constantly. Indeed, for some, I think that is what Church is FOR, is to marshal the needed fortitude to continue resisting the urge.
But it is also far cry, to assume that parents with twelve children, have only had sex twelve times in their lives. I’d bet a hundred to one, that they used the mom’s pregnancy AS birth control for sex, every time; because after all, sex is free, if she’s already pregnant!
So IF sex is only to be for procreation, why isn’t it prohibited once procreation is already in progress?
Carla Akins July 8th, 2014 at 11:47
Of course, how silly of me. I forgot sex was dirty (at least if you do it right)
LightningJoe July 8th, 2014 at 11:12
“No, I consider sex solely for pleasure to be recreational.”
Ah, but there is a wrinkle here that does not jive with a comparison to golf.
That is, IF sex is to be “solely for pleasure,” then some sort of contraception is a must, is required. If golf were to turn life-or-death at some point, based only on the presence or absence of some small-but-essential piece of equipment, THEN the comparison would hold true.
But the withholding of that small-but-essential piece of equipment would also be of interest. Indeed, given today’s culture, some might withhold it just to increase golf casualties, so that the evil golfers would one day learn the error of their ways, when enough of them had died playing the game.
Some of us might even want that piece of equipment included in the greens fees, so that no one would have to do without it, unless they WANTED to play for the high stakes.
Regardless, it definitely would increase the amount of thought one devoted to the game. Is that your purpose? Are you a golfer?
R.J. Carter July 5th, 2014 at 22:52
Well, both are generally played with a club, a bag, and balls…
And the headline did say “free.”
Carla Akins July 5th, 2014 at 23:16
This is why I love you.
Shades July 5th, 2014 at 23:17
Well played.
uzza July 5th, 2014 at 23:31
Don’t have sex with Bahler, whatever you do. He thinks sex is the same as hitting balls with a club!
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 23:51
Funny, but in no way representative of what I said.
bahlers July 6th, 2014 at 00:07
I think that making that comparison would make me rather open minded, don’t you?
Shades July 6th, 2014 at 00:51
No, but it explains why intelligent women aren’t interested in you.
uzza July 5th, 2014 at 22:16
See this is why right wingers can never do satire. The idea is to take something that exists and exaggerate it for effect. It doesn’t work with something completely imaginary like the world conservatives live in.
Jonathan Swift wouldn’t be famous if he had written about lizard people eating the Kenyan atheist muslims spawned by chemtrails.
Or bahler’s idea of feminism.
bahlers July 5th, 2014 at 22:19
It’s not my idea, I am simply relaying the information that I learned from encounters with shall I say neo-feminists.
bahlers July 6th, 2014 at 00:07
You see, this is why liberals can never do satire correctly, they believe that exaggeration is the only form of satire.
Shades July 6th, 2014 at 07:30
No dear. We know exactly what satire is. You may be ironic but you’re not clever. Point Uzza.
FVS July 6th, 2014 at 23:09
I don’t suppose any of you morons ever heard of the expression “There’s no such thing as a free lunch”? Just who do you think produces anything for “free” except maybe at the point of a gun? But then that’s how you would like it done isn’t it?
Activist Justices Favor Religion Over Scientific Progress | The Fifth Column July 7th, 2014 at 08:03
[…] Free Birth Control Is The Emerging Standard For Women (Jul 5, 2014) […]
FVS July 7th, 2014 at 09:32
Why don’t you crybabies quit your whining and get a job and pay for your own birth control? It’s not like it’s terrible expensive. What $8 or $10 a month? But I guess that would cut into your wine and cheese budget. Would mean what 1-1/2 less Margaritas on one Saturday night a month, oh poor babies.