2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumU.S. House Republicans Propose Rolling Back Access To Birth Control To Avert Government Shutdown
House Republicans Propose Rolling Back Access To Birth Control To Avert Government Shutdown
In order to avert a government shutdown later this month, Congress and the Obama administration must negotiate a continuing resolution to maintain federal funding and a group of House Republicans is suggesting that deal should also roll back Obamacares effort to expand womens access to affordable contraception.
-snip-
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/03/05/1675731/house-republicans-birth-control-shutdown/
The War on Women continues...
Rider3
(919 posts)That'll have great repercussions.
PDJane
(10,103 posts)These folks are too stupid to be out without a keeper, honestly. Maybe a leash.
shawn703
(2,702 posts)They already tried something like this, and figured out that the cost to the taxpayer would be so much more doing it their way.
noiretextatique
(27,275 posts)SharonAnn
(13,776 posts)Guess it's still true.
noiretextatique
(27,275 posts)but Texas is a the top of the list.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,414 posts)Are we actually even paying for that?
LiberalFighter
(50,948 posts)surrealAmerican
(11,362 posts)Birth control is a small investment that brings big savings in medical costs.
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts).................. are women's uteruseseses, or is that uteri - no matter, they must be dealt with or we'll go bankrupt!
starroute
(12,977 posts)They don't really care about deficits or balancing the budget. They just see it as an excuse to hurt people -- and to make them feel helpless and humiliated.
Bunch of sadists.
Bake
(21,977 posts)I mean, it's not like they're all Catholics or anything. I can understand the opposition to abortion (not that I agree, I'm just saying I can understand their opposition), but CONTRACEPTION???? WTF??? That's totally out of left field.
I thought that battle was over in the 60s; hell, Loretta Lynn even wrote and recorded a song about it ("The Pill" .
Can anyone 'splain this to me?
Bake
lindysalsagal
(20,692 posts)If you want to put women back in their second-class-citizen status of 100 years ago, the quickest way is to keep them at home surrounded by kids with little ability to become educated, trained, experienced or employable.
This is about totally insecure men who are threatened by strong women: If women can control their own family responsibilities, how will men keep them under men's control? These losers want women and children totally dependent on them for their basic survival needs.
Because of child-rearing, women work fewer years in lesser jobs, make less money, have less job security, remain below management/administration, and cannot even retire alone. This keeps men the bread-winners, which gives these losers a way to feel manly.
The Subservient Woman is their goal.
Bake
(21,977 posts)I see your point, and it makes as much sense as anything else I can imagine to try to explain the phenomenon. What I don't get is that the men, in their little scenario, have to pay for all those kids, so there's less money per child. I mean, have they never heard of family planning? Everybody knows that white men got no rhythm ...
Bake