What's the "grave moral wrong" of birth control?

If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.
DCB
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3869
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: What's the "grave moral wrong" of birth control?

Postby DCB » Wed Mar 07, 2012 12:58 pm

Kenneth Burns wrote:If I'm reading this right: The church says husband and wife should give themselves to each other totally. If they use contraception, they're not doing that. Ergo, it's immoral.

Santorum said something like that. But its not clear if anyone else really believes that nonsense.

The right wing just loves this idea that 'scary Obama wants to attack your religious freedom'. But it seems that nobody other would-be-preacher-in-chief Santorum is willing to describe what that means. The anti-Obama douchenozzles on this forum evade and bluster, but can't really defend it. Because its just bullshit.

If you've been wondering, how is it that self-described small government types can get so worked up over private matters like contraception, I think this clears things up:
Corey Robin wrote:Conservatism, then, is not a commitment to limited government and liberty—or a wariness of change, a belief in evolutionary reform, or a politics of virtue. These may be the byproducts of conservatism, one or more of its historically specific and ever-changing modes of expression. But they are not its animating purpose. Neither is conservatism a makeshift fusion of capitalists, Christians, and warriors, for that fusion is impelled by a more elemental force—the opposition to the liberation of men and women from the fetters of their superiors, particularly in the private sphere.

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2012/03/ ... state.html

wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3247
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm
Contact:

Re: What's the "grave moral wrong" of birth control?

Postby wack wack » Wed Mar 07, 2012 1:24 pm

Larry Kaufmann wrote:BTW, there's more than enough absurdity to go around on this issue - Obama for putting the whole thing in motion, and adopting the individual mandate (which he excoriated Hillary Clinton for supporting) as the centerpiece of his health care "reform" plan; the Democratic Congress, for passing such a grotesque, poorly-conceived piece of legislation; Sebelius and Obama again, for cynically ginning up the phony "contraception" issue; Santorum, for foolishly jumping on the bandwagon and thoroughly confusing the issue (and yes, I have no doubt in his heart of hearts Rick Santorum does want to impose his morality via legislation); Fluke, for her childish and misleading Congressional testimony; and Limbaugh, for his similarly childish smear. The whole thing has been a circus...


I mean this with all the kind politeness I can muster: this is just about the most exactly backwards thing I've ever read.

snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 14035
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: What's the "grave moral wrong" of birth control?

Postby snoqueen » Wed Mar 07, 2012 4:53 pm

Every single sentence of it. Not one of 'em issues from what we normally describe as reality.

However, I am beginning to appreciate the level of sock puppet coordination we've seen the last few days.

doppel
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 669
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 9:30 pm
Location: varies
Contact:

Re: What's the "grave moral wrong" of birth control?

Postby doppel » Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:22 pm

If I am one of the sock puppets Sno refers to, so be it. I still don't know if "Obamacare" provides reprodutive healhcare for men. I know it is 1200 pages long, but there must be one foron well-versed enough to answer this question. From the lack of answers, I'm guessing it doesn't.

Brazil provides it for men--from the AP:

"Brazil's government says it handed out nearly a half-billion free condoms last year — a record for the nation's campaign to reduce AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases.

Brazil's Health Ministry says it distributed 493 million condoms last year. That's 2 1/2 condoms for every person in Latin America's largest nation. They cost the government about $19 million."

I beleive that insurance companies need not necessarily pay for contraception. It should be treated like plastic surgery or dental work. It's your decision to engage in intercourse, not the companies. Insurance should pay for a doctor's visit to get any prescription needed for your own health protection, as defined by you.

But if our government has writen the law differently, and a women's reprodutive healthcare is to be paid for by the government, why not men's?

snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 14035
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: What's the "grave moral wrong" of birth control?

Postby snoqueen » Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:18 pm

If insurance shouldn't pay for contraception because it's a person's choice to have sex, why should they pay for diabetes care because it's a person's choice to eat poorly and not exercise? Or cancer care and heart disease care because it's a person's choice to smoke? Your argument is entirely aimed at passing judgment against sexual activity while keeping other hazardous activities on a separate schedule.

Paying for the doctor's visit but not the pills/devices won't cut it. Do we do this with other voluntarily-acquired conditions?

No, you weren't on my short list of sock puppets. You make your own original statements, it seems to me. (I don't have to agree with them.)

Did you see the reports today about a woman legislator who's trying to get Viagra removed from insurance coverage as long as birth control is? On what grounds would this be unjust? I thought it was fairer than anything else we've seen lately on the sexual-health front.

Meade
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm
Contact:

Re: What's the "grave moral wrong" of birth control?

Postby Meade » Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:16 pm

snoqueen wrote:If insurance shouldn't pay for contraception because it's a person's choice to have sex, why should they pay for diabetes care because it's a person's choice to eat poorly and not exercise? Or cancer care and heart disease care because it's a person's choice to smoke? Your argument is entirely aimed at passing judgment against sexual activity while keeping other hazardous activities on a separate schedule.

snoqueen, you are finally starting to get it. None of those things should be covered because they are all the result of individual decisions to engage in behavior harming one's own health.

snoqueen wrote:Paying for the doctor's visit but not the pills/devices won't cut it. Do we do this with other voluntarily-acquired conditions?

Exactly. By providing pills/devices for voluntarily-acquired conditions, we are enabling and encouraging that behavior. For example: Want to drive drunk? Pay for additional special individual private insurance. Don't ask the rest of us to pay to fix you up because you chose to drive drunk right into a tree.

snoqueen wrote:Did you see the reports today about a woman legislator who's trying to get Viagra removed from insurance coverage as long as birth control is? On what grounds would this be unjust? I thought it was fairer than anything else we've seen lately on the sexual-health front.

Absolutely. Viagra is a recreational drug just as the birth control pill is a recreational drug. snoqueen, I'm beginning to like the cut of your libertarian jib.

pjbogart
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7162
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:57 pm

Re: What's the "grave moral wrong" of birth control?

Postby pjbogart » Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:40 pm

snoqueen wrote:If insurance shouldn't pay for contraception because it's a person's choice to have sex, why should they pay for diabetes care because it's a person's choice to eat poorly and not exercise? Or cancer care and heart disease care because it's a person's choice to smoke? Your argument is entirely aimed at passing judgment against sexual activity while keeping other hazardous activities on a separate schedule.


Well, we already prioritize treatment when it comes to self-inflicted wounds, at least in instances where there is an extremely limited number of people you can attempt to cure. My understanding is that organ transplants work on waiting lists and people who need a new liver because they chased their's off are given lower priority than people who might have suffered a more chance failure. And that's probably how it should be.

But prioritizing treatments according to whether we deserve the treatment seems like a slippery slope. Is someone paying cash more deserving? Most people would say that a nine year-old deserves priority over a 90 year-old, but what about a 30 year-old? Should coal miners get priority over people who suffer illnesses from second-hand smoke?

I guess the only solution would be to set up some sort of democratic institution capable of making the decisions by committee vote. I'm sure no one would have a problem with that.

dave esmond
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2569
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 4:15 pm
Contact:

Re: What's the "grave moral wrong" of birth control?

Postby dave esmond » Tue Mar 13, 2012 8:44 am

Meade wrote:Absolutely. Viagra is a recreational drug just as the birth control pill is a recreational drug. snoqueen, I'm beginning to like the cut of your libertarian jib.


Birth control pills are often prescribed for reasons other then keeping someone from getting pregnant.

I'm pretty sure it's come up before in this thread.

kurt_w
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6095
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 3:11 pm
Contact:

Re: What's the "grave moral wrong" of birth control?

Postby kurt_w » Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:01 am

Meade wrote:
snoqueen wrote:If insurance shouldn't pay for contraception because it's a person's choice to have sex, why should they pay for diabetes care because it's a person's choice to eat poorly and not exercise? Or cancer care and heart disease care because it's a person's choice to smoke? Your argument is entirely aimed at passing judgment against sexual activity while keeping other hazardous activities on a separate schedule.

snoqueen, you are finally starting to get it. None of those things should be covered because they are all the result of individual decisions to engage in behavior harming one's own health.


Good grief, Meade, are you joking?

If I were to develop diabetes, you want to have some kind of panel that would scrutinize my behavior and lifestyle, and if that panel decided I'd eaten too much unhealthy food, or been too sedentary, my insurance company could refuse to pay for my medical care?

jman111
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 4305
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 12:43 pm
Location: Dane County
Contact:

Re: What's the "grave moral wrong" of birth control?

Postby jman111 » Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:19 am

We can only hope that this is Meade's attempt to make some sort of point by arguing for the absurd.

Oh wait....there it is.
Meade wrote:...we are enabling and encouraging that behavior.

Diabetics and cancer patients need only pull themselves up by the bootstraps and stop relying on handouts. Now I get it.

Meade
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm
Contact:

Re: What's the "grave moral wrong" of birth control?

Postby Meade » Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:20 am

kurt_w wrote:If I were to develop diabetes, you want to have some kind of panel that would scrutinize my behavior and lifestyle, and if that panel decided I'd eaten too much unhealthy food, or been too sedentary, my insurance company could refuse to pay for my medical care?

Yes. A government panel. Scrutinizing your diet and exercise habits.
Why not?

Meade
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm
Contact:

Re: What's the "grave moral wrong" of birth control?

Postby Meade » Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:24 am

dave esmond wrote:Birth control pills are often prescribed for reasons other then keeping someone from getting pregnant.

No reason to stop those treatments.

peripat
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1259
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 1:59 am

Re: What's the "grave moral wrong" of birth control?

Postby peripat » Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:58 am

Meade is proposing the ultimate nanny state. Think how many new government employees it will take to enforce his mandates.

snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 14035
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: What's the "grave moral wrong" of birth control?

Postby snoqueen » Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:59 am

Meade wrote:
Stebben84 wrote:Meade, should insurance cover vasectomies?

Absolutely, Stebben. But if it does not and you want one but can't afford to pay for it, give me a call - I'll be happy to contribute to your sterilization.


Meade wrote:By providing pills/devices for voluntarily-acquired conditions, we are enabling and encouraging that behavior. For example: Want to drive drunk? Pay for additional special individual private insurance. Don't ask the rest of us to pay to fix you up because you chose to drive drunk right into a tree.


Uh-oh. Better go back and edit something, because those two opinions don't fit together too well. Vasectomy is nothing if not a remedy for not wanting to curtail voluntary behavior. Don't expect the rest of us to pay when you get your intern pregnant, OK?

More evidence Meade just takes the most contrary viewpoint he can dream up on any one day, without ever arriving a cohesive personal philosophy beyond "I like getting attention by being annoying."

I thought Chris Rickert had an original and rather good-hearted take on the contraception issue today:

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/ ... 963f4.html

He observes that contraception helps encourage sex, and sex is a healthful behavior just like eating right and exercising, which are activities some health insurance actually subsidizes these days. I seriously believe this is a stronger argument than any of the religious nonsense pushed by the far right, and I hadn't seen it expressed in print before Rickert's column.

rabble
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 9600
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: What's the "grave moral wrong" of birth control?

Postby rabble » Tue Mar 13, 2012 10:10 am

peripat wrote:Meade is proposing the ultimate nanny state. Think how many new government employees it will take to enforce his mandates.

We've come a long way since Sarah Palin's worries about the Obama Death Panels, ain't we?


Return to “Headlines”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests