Jul 18, 2008 02:14PM GMT
Question
•
Lifestyle - Health
Do contraceptives really equal abortion? Does anyone sane actually believe this?
Bush Administration Memo Tries To Define Birth Control As AbortionThere are 188 days left in the Bush administration, and it is becoming painfully clear that if George W. cannot end the war, or boost the economy, he'll sure as hell make it his mission to chip away at Roe vs. Wade. As Reuters reports, a leaked Department Of Health and Human Services memo describes a plan to cut off federal funds to states, hospitals and clinics that discriminate against employees who refuse to offer birth control or abortions on religious or moral grounds. As if that weren't bad enough, the proposal redefines all birth control as abortion. According to Reuters, in the memo, the HHS draft "proposes to define abortion as 'any of the various procedures — including the prescription and administration of any drug or the performance of any procedure or any other action — that results in the termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation."
Reuters adds that the Department of Health and Human Services would not verify the contents of the widely-circulated memo, "but noted their responsibility to protect against discrimination of doctors and pharmacists who object to abortion or birth control on religious or moral grounds."
Pro-choice organizations and women all over the country are understandably up in arms over this. Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL, asks the New York Times, "Why on earth is the Bush administration trying to discourage doctors and clinics from providing contraception to women who need it?” Good question! Apparently, they're peeved over recent state laws, like Connecticut's 2007 legislation requiring hospitals to distribute Plan B to rape victims, and according to Reuters, the proposal was "specifically designed to counter" those laws. How convenient for Republicans to be in favor of states rights…for everything except a woman's right to choose!
And speaking of Republicans, NARAL's blog notes that while John McCain has yet to comment on this specific proposal, he has voted against choice 125 times in the Senate. It's obvious that the Bush administration will stand behind the straw man of "religious freedom" when defending this proposal, but if it's so concerned with religious freedom, why does this law only apply to birth control? Some Christian Scientists are against using modern medicine. So, by this logic, it would be discrimination to not hire a Christian Scientist because he or she refused to dole out insulin for diabetes, or declined to give a cancer patient chemo? Exactly. The only discrimination here is against a woman's right to choose.
Loading...-
Answered None of the above
i can't say yes because it says women must be punished for sex.
I could say yes if the premise were different.
HUMANEA VITEA
http://www.vatican.va/holy_fa... -
i doubt you'll get this but we can try.
first of all i don't expect the gov't to impose a religious tenent of the Catholic Church.But if you got the facts right here in the first place you would know that this is not what George Bush said.Or you knew and didn't care.Misrepresented the facts anyway.
I would never expect the gov't to impose a religious tenent of the Catholic Church.In fact the Church does not impose anything itself.It's called FREE WILL and ppl will do what they choose anyway.It does not mean the Church abdicates her obligation to teach truth regardless of what ppl do or don't do.Ppl will do what they will anyway regardless of what the Church teaches. I'm referring to Catholics here. However,there are many Catholics who do and this is what George W.was reffering to:Imposing on Catholic hospitals,doctors and those in health care who should not be forced by government to cpmpromise.I'll post the FACTS about what George Bush REALLY said again if i have to.
In case you didn't notice from the time that artificial contraception was introduced several things happened.
divorce rates went through the roof
our culture began to sink in the swamp of moral depravity
children out of wedlock actually increased not decreased
abortion was legalized
gay 'marriage' got put on the table
Porn is a billion dollar business.Hardly anything is considered obscene anymore.
"all the gods forbid women be viewed as more the walking wombs right?"
I would never degrade motherhood lik...i doubt you'll get this but we can try.
first of all i don't expect the gov't to impose a religious tenent of the Catholic Church.But if you got the facts right here in the first place you would know that this is not what George Bush said.Or you knew and didn't care.Misrepresented the facts anyway.
I would never expect the gov't to impose a religious tenent of the Catholic Church.In fact the Church does not impose anything itself.It's called FREE WILL and ppl will do what they choose anyway.It does not mean the Church abdicates her obligation to teach truth regardless of what ppl do or don't do.Ppl will do what they will anyway regardless of what the Church teaches. I'm referring to Catholics here. However,there are many Catholics who do and this is what George W.was reffering to:Imposing on Catholic hospitals,doctors and those in health care who should not be forced by government to cpmpromise.I'll post the FACTS about what George Bush REALLY said again if i have to.
In case you didn't notice from the time that artificial contraception was introduced several things happened.
divorce rates went through the roof
our culture began to sink in the swamp of moral depravity
children out of wedlock actually increased not decreased
abortion was legalized
gay 'marriage' got put on the table
Porn is a billion dollar business.Hardly anything is considered obscene anymore.
"all the gods forbid women be viewed as more the walking wombs right?"
I would never degrade motherhood like that.You want to that's up to you,but it's not going to be me.
Let's take a look at how it's controlling by first looking at what the Catehcism states re artificial contraception:
The Catechism clearly proclaims, along with Pope Paul VI, that contraception, described as every action which, either in anticipation of the conjugal act, during its accomplishment, or in the development of its consequences, proposes either as end or means to impede procreation, “is intrinsically evil” (no. 2370)
This does not mean every time you turn around you have to become pregnant.What it DOES mean is that you do not intentionally impede procreation in the conjugal act itself.
In the end a woman becomes an object whose purpose is to satisfy others’ appetite for pleasure or for power.You can see it on tv,advertisement,movies,books... internet and above all in porn but it can even extend into relationships particularly marriage.
And that's how it's controlling.
Ask any guy if sex before marriage is ok. See how many say yes and then the reasons they give for why it's ok.
I was on another poll and heard them all;
try the milk before you buy the cow
test drive the car
even a trycicle has training wheels
you have to practice to be good in sports
If you can't see the difference in our culture/society since the introduction of artificial contraception you have to be living in a cave.I can recall when shows on tv were actually wholesome.
i can recall when divorce was the exception(not the rule).
I can recall when very few children were born out of wedlock.
When motherhood was something to be celebrated.Now if you have more than 2 kids they look at you like you're strange.
I can also recall the slogan for legalized abortion;
it was going to be rare,safe and cheap.
You call 4,000 abortions per day RARE?
(4 million to date).
It may be cheap but it's become a pretty lucrative business that targets minorities particularly African Americans.
Safe?We'd have to take a real close look at that one.
For something that was supposed to make children more wanted-artificial contraception-it has had the exact opposite affect.For something that was supposed to "FREE" women it has made them mere objects who are supposed to be ready and willing to gratify someone sexually (inside or outside of marriage).You can see it in advertising,in porn,in our fashions,music.Even young girls dress and look like street hookers and that's 'fashionable.'
No mam.I don't see us as 'walking wombs.'
I see motherhood as a gift to be celebrated and honored.
Your referring to this as 'walking wombs' is exactly my point about what artificial contraception has done to our mentality and attitudes.
God Bless,
"boxerpaws"(less) -
that's what i thought.
So you're talking out of one side of your mouth saying that you oppose Bush on this because artificial contraception is NOT abortion.Anotherwords you support aritifical contraception because it prevents abortion.And out of the other side of your mouth you support
abortion anyway.
Most of the arguments here against Bush is that if ppl had artifical contraception then abortion could be prevented.But the very SAME ppl that say this support abortion anyway.So when you get right down to it abortion is back up birth control.It's all the same thing.
And it's not PRO CHOICE.It's PRO ABORTION. -
First of all this article wasn't totally honest.
It took what George W.actually said and made it into something he did NOT say at all.
But before we get to the truth of what he said an interesting FACT:
Last year's Annals of Family Practice Medicine published a finding how standard estrogen/progesterone oral contraceptives were abortaficient anywhere from 3-30% of the time; even though the intent is to prevent ovulation, they work "too well" to be preventing just that.
Now for what George W. ACTUALLY said;
What was posted here was inaccurate and MISLEADING!
One of the problems with medical providers that use government funding is that there has been discrimination allowed against people who, for religious reasons, refuse to perform abortions or prescribe or fill prescriptions for abortificants or birth control.
Because the government does not allow discrimination based on religious belief, it has proposed to make those providers who accept federal funding to not be able to discriminate against those people.
HHS has a proposal that would cut "federal funds to hospitals and states that attempt to compel medical providers to offer legal abortion and contraception services to women."
They have to protect the right of doctors and pharmacists to not provide these services or products based on their religious beliefs.
God Bless,
"boxerpaws" -
One more time;
"The US Catholic Bishops are now entering the political fracas over a Bush Administration plan to protect the conscience rights of health care professionals that object to abortifacient contraception. "
Anotherwords a health care prof is Catholic.If that prof does not compromise his/her beliefs they lose funding.
All this does is PROTECT those health care prof.
Is this a problem?(And yes some aritificial contraceptives work as abortificents.FACT.)
"The proposed HHS regulations would ban individuals and entities receiving federal funds from discriminating against health care professionals and institutions that have moral or religious objections to abortion and abortifacient birth control.
The proposed HHS regulations would ban individuals and entities receiving federal funds from discriminating against health care professionals and institutions that have moral or religious objections to abortion and abortifacient birth control. The HHS pointed to conscience violations by state laws (such as New York and Connecticut) that force abortifacient emergency contraception on Catholic hospitals or threaten the loss of funding as compelling reasons for a stronger federal regulation."
http://www.tldm.org/News12/Pi... -
let's take a trip back in time.
Back when we didn't have artificial contraception.There was such a time.
There was a 100% foolproof and safe way for married persons to plan their families.Abstinance.
The purpose of artificial contraception was not to plan families.It was so ppl could have free love.
Abortion is back up birth control and artificial contraceptives can be an abortifacient.
But let's just suppose in marriage we give ourselves to each other totally but we say i will go this far with you but ONLY if you don't become pregnant.
I wil go this far but only if you will protect yourself from me.
What we're looking at here is an abortion mentality.
Meaning children are an unwanted by product of the conjugal union.
Abortion and contraception don't make children more wanted-they make them LESS wanted.
Again i recommend reading the prophetic words of Humanae Vitea.Catholic or not,religious or not,tell me what has not taken place?
Answered Does this guy really exist in our same world?
186 Days and counting!