General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI get it now.
MON FEB 13, 2012 AT 05:55 AM PST
I get it now.
bykoosahFollow
.......................
I get it now.
Like many women (Hell, like 98% of women!) I am getting a bit tetchy watching other people decide what I can do to my own body, particularly when those people don't even share the same body parts that I do. Each time I see some fat, old, white guy bloviate on these topics, I want to throw up or throw something, usually both. I start channeling Jules from Pulp Fiction and I want to rain down "furious anger" on their mother-fracking asses.
I'm usually a gentle soul. I taught Kindergarten for 13 years. Children and dogs love me!
So why the anger? Because I get it now. My rights to my own body exist outside the law...not at the pleasure of the law.
And that's why even though I am grateful to President Obama for the legislation to secure access to affordable and free contraception coverage for all employed women--even those employed by religious institutions--I am still angry. I am even proud of President Obama because, once again, he managed to accomplish the goal in sight and foil our adversaries and make them look like asshats at the same time. But I am still angry! This legislation is a concession that I and other women are being allowed access to birth control at all. It concedes our rights to the whims of the majority, something the Constitution was supposed to protect.
the rest:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/02/13/1063821/-I-get-it-now-?via=siderecent
MineralMan
(146,286 posts)The majority should not dictate basic human rights to anyone.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)the fight will constantly be on.
Ship of Fools
(1,453 posts)I can never come up with a good retort to the asshats in
my life, but "My rights to my own body exist outside the law" just made my day.
Thanks again!
Pirate Smile
(27,617 posts)normally would be on our side who flipped on a dime to circle wagons around the Catholic Bishops. EJ Dionne, Mark Shields, Chris Matthews, etc. That was the part that truly set my hair on fire.
Bandit
(21,475 posts)paying for that same birth control...The issue is over who pays for it..not whether you can have it or not...Since I am for 100% Government supplied Health Services I can understand why it is important for the Government to rule on this in this manner...
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)Sure, the current outrage is about who is going to pay for it but there's a faction of the GOP (3 of which are running for President) who would like to see female contraception outlawed entirely. That very much goes to my "right" to birth control.
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)It seems to me that some health care expenses are rather frivolous. Cosmetic surgery for instance. Should taxpayers really fork over their money for somebody's nose job? or liposuction?
What about chiropractors? Some people swear by their periodic adjustments, but myself, I think it is quackery. I don't pay for it myself and don't want to help others pay for it. But then again, my friend who got busted up in a car accident needs some kind of treatment for his chronic back pain.
Then too, I seem to have met a number of old guys who said they are having rotator cuff surgery so they can keep playing golf.
I have no problem with people playing golf, necessarily, or even getting surgery so they can indulge in their obsessive hobby. I have my own obsessive hobbies, but I don't expect the taxpayers to pay for things to help me indulge in those hobbies.
I am not sure exactly where the lines should be, but I am guessing that single payer nations put some sort of restrictions on what is covered.
midnight
(26,624 posts)never touch women's right to health care ever...
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
Terra Alta
(5,158 posts)Morally speaking, it's the right thing to do. I don't believe a loving God would want women popping out baby after baby on an already overpopulated planet.
Denying women access to affordable contraception is treating women like second-class citizens, which isn't very moral either. I don't hear anyone trying to deny men access to Viagra, what's the difference?
Skittles
(153,147 posts)who will tell you "Viagra is for a medical condition" - as if every guy taking viagra has a "medical condition"......they also seem unaware that The Pill has many uses other than contraception
saras
(6,670 posts)Skittles
(153,147 posts)STOP IT YOU'RE KILLING ME
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)is the same thing as prohibition.
People who don't give me free stuff are trying to tell me what I can do with my body, dammit. Give me my free stuff, you control freaks!!!
No, I don't think Viagra should be covered by an insurance policy either. It's absurd if it is, but probably just another way for insurance companies and pharmaceuticals to make more money.
TBF
(32,047 posts)Unwanted children are more likely to be a strain on our safety net in the form of needing food stamps, free medical care, free child care etc... Free contraceptive to any woman (and I would add girl) who is able biologically to conceive should be our norm. It will save you on taxes down the road. Does that make more sense for you?
If men were able to conceive there would be birth control dispensers on every corner. This is a control issue, plain and simple.
Redstate Bluegirl
(213 posts)ec!