The World Beyond BetterMost > Women Today
Hey Congress! Focus on Jobs, Not on Us!
CellarDweller:
--- Quote from: Marge_Innavera on October 20, 2011, 11:13:09 am ---Let someone propose that men abstain from sex to ensure that unplanned pregnancies don't happen and see how far that would get.
Of course, this is a feminist perspective so some folks might want to take that into account... ::)
--- End quote ---
Marcia, abstaining from sex would never work.
However, I think I have a solution.
Let's take all the abortion clinics, and have the doctors turn them into Vasectomy Clinics. Men could go in and have the reversable surgery, which will prevent pregnancies, and then there would be no need for the abortions.
Front-Ranger:
Milo, what this thread is about is saying that Congress should be focusing on the crisis at hand, which is the economy and jobs, not on prohibiting health insurers from providing coverage for therapeutic abortions to women. If women had jobs, then they would go ahead with more pregnancies since, like Alma, they'd be able to "support 'em". They'd also have the money to get preventive health care and birth control pills. Congress is being reactive, deceptive and delusional.
Chuck, your idea is good, but I thought vasectomies were already widely available. Apparently they aren't very popular with the men who would benefit from them most. It's another aspect of the actions being divorced from the consequences for men. Oh, why didn't the Creator figure out a way to physically burden the man for 19 years or so when he conceives a child? Seems He didn't think it through completely. God must be a He!!
milomorris:
--- Quote from: Scare-Ranger on October 20, 2011, 11:30:42 am ---not on prohibiting health insurers from providing coverage for therapeutic abortions to women.
--- End quote ---
The government is not prohibiting insurers from doing anything. The idea is to withhold federal funding from abortion practitioners. The insurers can fund whomever they please. The practitioners can still get state funding where allowed, and private funding. So to say that poor women will no longer have access to abortion is factually incorrect.
Congress is not interested controlling the sexual behavior of poor women, they just want to make sure that our federal tax dollars aren't involved in the abortion process.
Monika:
--- Quote from: milomorris on October 20, 2011, 09:29:53 am ---This isn't about women's rights from a Congressional perspective. This is about how federal tax revenues---a/k/a your money and mine--is being spent. Its also about the role of government, and abuse of funds.
--- End quote ---
If that was the case, then the congress should understand that bringing unwanted children into this world will also cost tax money - eventually.
Besides, I don´t think that´s what it is about. I think it´s about trying to please certain groups of voters.
milomorris:
--- Quote from: Marge_Innavera on October 20, 2011, 11:13:09 am ---Let someone propose that men abstain from sex to ensure that unplanned pregnancies don't happen and see how far that would get.
--- End quote ---
If the women are abstaining, the men are abstaining too by definition.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version