I would like to see that. Only problem is you would see Republicans start to do something, that is, team up with Democrats to eliminate the Nationalist party. The MSM would then side Dem/GOP
The President also understood that our system implicitly promotes a two-party system the same way that some specific economic circumstances will always result, absent outside influence, in a monopoly. It made more sense to hijack one of the parties than to try and create a new one with the enormous amount of groundwork that needs to exist for most independent, "average voter" types to consider a new party initiative as anything but a spoiler (especially with a hostile, propaganda-aired-nightly media working against you 24/7).
Of course, if they push us to or near civil war then of course all bets are off and an entirely new party built from the ground up against Communism, Marxism, Leninism (Trotskyism, Maoism, I could go on; these bastards all really did each have their own ideas on how to disenfranchise and murder everyone that might conceivably oppose them), and leftism in general. It'll work in that case because everyone who sabotaged the prior parties will be in a prison.
To be fair though all of their same things still happened throughout all of recorded human history, even during times when sex was punishable by death unless under specific circumstances like marriage.. and even that was still under specific circumstances because you couldn't just run down and get married just to have sex....
I think the internet and social media have a major part to play in why they have all exploded in numbers... the years their numbers started to explode correlate exactly with the rise of the internet....
Seriously, the internet is responsible for the death of the lying ass media. And we all know you can't believe the internet, either. Have to research for yourself, and now we can.
Did you just link sexual promiscuity with fucking banking?
There's nothing wrong with sleeping around. That was the morality before condoms and hygiene standards and healthcare, but today it can be done safely.
I think the correct format is that they “Can” but don’t necessarily will. To make it an absolute would be false. My proof, me. I sleep around and have 0 kids, 0 destroyed nuclear families and guess what, it’s mostly Trumpettes that I’m with.
I don’t consider myself a whore or a prude. I consider myself a smart car shopper who test drives. The sad part, I don’t know what kind of car I want to own for the rest of my life so for the time being, I’ll lease until I find the right one. If you think whoring is the problem of the western world, put down the Bible and pick up the news or better yet, a history book. Lack of accountability, lack of education, and lack of a solid family system are mostly responsible imo. Sure whoring can contribute to those but to paint it as the single reason is a little shortsighted.
There are kids who are better raised in a broken home than a nuclear family. To generalize that broken home, while statistically produce more problems, are not the law.
If something is morally wrong, it’s always been wrong and will always be wrong. Technological advances don’t change whether something is moral or not.
Abortion is morally wrong. People used to say that abortion prior to 30 weeks was fine because the baby couldn’t survive, now technology is better and babies can survive earlier than 30 weeks. Did technology now make it immoral to abort babies at 26 weeks because technology has enabled them to live that long or has it always been wrong to abort children despite their age?
Abortion being immoral is predicated on life starting at conception, and not on whether the baby can live outside of the womb or not. If you're prolife you know this.
If something is morally wrong, it’s always been wrong and will always be wrong
So I assume that marrying a 13 years old or having slaves is not morally wrong, as these things were common at the time of Jesus and he didn't say anything against them?
Jesus didn't say anything against casual sex either. Prove me wrong.
Thou shall not commit adultery is literally one of the Ten Commandments. Jesus pushed it further by clarifying that a man who even looks at a woman who is not his wife with lust has committed adultery in his heart. So yes, Jesus was very much against sleeping around
You ignored my point, created your own, then argued against your created point. That’s a straw man. I’m not going to entertain your argument.
So silence is complicit in your view? You’re sounding like a BLMer now. Morality is an eternal truth, if something is morally wrong then it is morally wrong now and vice versa.
No they didn't. I'm not a prude or anything but you are saying sleeping around is fine because it can be done safely. You claim the opposite was true before and formed a type of morality. Not true. Have you never heard of Judaism or Christianity? Condoms or not, you still don't sleep around if you truly follow Christ. Again, I'm no prude but there very much can be a problem with "sleeping around". Have you ever put your dick in crazy? Have you ever had a condom break? Have you ever ruined a marriage? Have you ever been accused of rape? All of those things are a possibility.
Condoms or not, you still don't sleep around if you truly follow Christ.
Can you please indicate to me where in the 4 canonical gospels Jesus says that I should not sleep around?
Have you ever put your dick in crazy?
Yes
Have you ever had a condom break?
No, they don't break easily.
Have you ever ruined a marriage?
No, never cheated and never made someone else cheat (that I know of). You can have some ethic even if you sleep around. The vast majority of people into casual sex on dating apps would not help someone cheat.
Have you ever been accused of rape?
No, thank God. I don't have sex with drunk women to ensure consent and minimize this risk.
Unfortunately any man can be accused of it, regardless if you actually slept with the accuser or not.
Can you please indicate to me where in the 4 canonical gospels Jesus says that I should not sleep around?
Jesus says this in Matthew 15:19
“For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders.”
He lumps fornication together with murder, thievery, and lying. Notice he separates fornication & adultery. Google defines fornication as sex between unmarried people.
Even if Jesus didn’t condemn a specific sin, there are verses elsewhere in the Bible that do. The entire bible is the word of God. I don’t recall a verse where Jesus specifically warned you to abstain from banging your dog, does that mean it’s ok?
If you read Paul's letters to the Corinthians, it's fairly clear that part of the intent with marriage is to share a holy construct that then makes sex no longer a sin (1 Corinthians 7):
Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 2 But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. 3 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5 Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
Because of the temptation that leads to committing the sin of fornication or adultery, it is better to be married such that these desires are moot because your body is no longer your own but belongs to your spouse.
It seems like you're genuinely trying to be helpful, and I thank you for this.
Let me reassure you, I'm very happy with my life. I don't depend on the opinion of others. I draw my strength from my life achievements and from my sense of peace with my own identity and body.
Causal sex is just something I do because I enjoy. What do you enjoy doing?
For me, there's nothing I'd rather do than going on a successful date and have sex with a new woman.
This passion for sex is also what drove me to improve myself. Get a better job, have more money, improve my social skills, do sport, learn how to dress, etc.
A man needs a purpose. Getting pussy has been the primary motivator of the majority of men who ever lived. It's what drives us to improve ourselves.
That's why the left wants to destroy that, demonizing masculinity and trying to turn young men into faggots or freaks.
It's not hard to not have sex. Seriously. Have some self control. You don't need to fuck.
Tell that to most women and be prepared for a bitchfit the likes of which you have never seen. It's fine for them to tell men, "keep it in your pants", but the moment you tell one of them that same thing you magically hate women and are the scum of the earth for daring to tell her to exercise self control.
I grew up hearing about what pigs men were and how we were going to hell for watching B-rated T&A movies on Friday night. Now days women never hesitate to objectify men right then in front of everyone. They watch Hallmark channel because they like watching women be degraded and abused and victimized. Call bullshit on that and they either just giggle or tell you to grow the fuck up and be an adult.
I think most of them watch it because they want to think every woman will get her happy-ever-after and her previous actions will have no consequences.
The girls in those movies get in a fight over stupid things, leave the boyfriend, get fancy job in city for years, then at the last minute, ta-da! She ends up in a cute small town and either meets the former boyfriend or someone new, always very handsome and nice, and settles down with Mr. Perfect. Wasting years working, having nasty attitudes, divorces, child out of wedlock - no worries, you will still have your happy ending with a tall handsome man.
The funny thing is, they always end up basically as stay at home moms in a sweet small town, so why not start out that way from the beginning, instead of wasting time in the big city or having someone else's kid?
When a lot of women can't cook, can't clean, can't hold a conversation, don't have any actual hobbies, are obsessed with social media, don't have an actual personality, and have given in to the easy way out of embracing their nature, that's all they CAN offer. That's the problem. Many women are vapid shells that offer nothing because they are enabled and encouraged to be that way by not only the state and their fellow women through feminism but also by all the men around them.
It's not just the brainwashing and feminist nonsense that's gotten us here, it's men giving in and giving women anything and everything they want, i.e. "simping", which empowers women to offer nothing and demand everything as is their innate nature. Every religion out there is exceedingly critical of putting women before everything else while not holding them responsible for their actions, and yet society has become the exact opposite. If men in all aspects, from the common man on the street to the judges that let women off with a slap on the wrist while throwing the book at a man for the same crime, started holding women accountable for their actions and forced them to take responsibility things would begin to correct.
It's also why leftists are so harshly pushing for the feminizing of men, because weak men are pushovers, and why women overwhelmingly are leftist in thought, as it tells them everything they want to hear, gives them things without earning them, and very rarely ever tells them no or holds them responsible for anything. The leftists figured out exactly how to bring down a society because if they can't have it they'll make sure it burns down.
Unfortunately, the idea that we all have insatiable sex drives and that sex should be consequence-free is a major cornerstone of feminism. So this is what we’ve been left with.
Because casual, semi-casual, or sex with multiple partners diminishes the importance of sharing your body with another in a construct where you're with that person more or less indefinitely.
I witnessed this myself.
Long term relationship with the same woman; she was my first, I was her first. Due to circumstances beyond control, we went our separate ways (new BF in the relationship I didn't know about did the coup de grâce on her behalf... not kidding). I don't know how many others she's been with since, or whether she's had sex with one or more of them, but I guarantee she's not happy.
For my part, I went back to church. I made mistakes. I asked for forgiveness. I realize now that what we'd done when we were together corrupted her because she didn't have the spirit guiding her away from such sin. Consequently: I'm happier because I'm out of a relationship that had been her gaslighting me for years over things to an extent that I thought everything was my fault.
I doubt she'll ever be happy unless she turns her life over to Christ as I did.
I had an ex who broke up with ME and then continued to make jabs at me on social media all while engaged, then married, then kids eith the new dude. Fucked up.
If you're married, do whatever you want. Because the idea is that you're already committed to that person, and if you have a child, you're already in a circumstance where inviting that child into the world allows it to be born into a nuclear family.
Abstinence for non-married people would be ideal but we know that doesn't happen. Hence u/Aquamine-Amarine 's comment.
These days marriage does not mean you are committed to a single person. All these reddit numales and their "open relationship" that consists of their wife fucking whoever they want while they jerk it at home, alone, to tranny porn, have shit all over the institution. Makes me sick.
Natural Family Planning works (obviously should only be used by people who are married). I've used it successfully. Most people don't seem to realize that a woman is only fertile for a short period of time each month (like a week). There are tons of methods to figure out when that is via paying attention to cervical mucus, temperatures, or even using an actual fertility monitor. Major downside is that women are most aroused during their peak time of fertility.
My husband and I use this method ourselves. Works just fine. And yes, we’re Catholic, but there are versions of it that are entirely secular. You can use a condom during your fertile days and be just fine.
I didn’t know about it until I got married. Our church mandated us to take a class on it. Man, was I pissed that nobody had EVER talked with me about this before. I went to a goddamn catholic high school, and they didn’t teach us about this.
It’s almost like they don’t want women to be responsible for their fertility, and want us to believe that a baby is a death sentence. Better take that body-destroying hormone pill every day!
want us to believe that a baby is a death sentence.
My wife and I tried for years to have one kid. Then her body declared war on herself (she couldn't produce milk, had PPD for about a year and had a lot of health issues after the fact) and of course none of those wonderful Feminist organizations or feminist friends of hers would do shit to help. You know who did help? Our church.
Still worth it as my daughter is a real gift from God. I'm still too hesitant to have another considering how awful the medical toll was on my wife.
There are apps these days that track those sorts of things if you're doing a rhythm method. My health classes in high school actually did teach us about this. My girlfriend has an IUD, but still uses an app to make sure everything is hunky dory. It's still partly a hormonal treatment (which I actually didn't know until talking with her about it), but at a FAR lesser dose than taking a pill. Been together 5 months and never had a problem. I'd be a hypocrite telling people not to screw, but for God's sake, it's not that difficult to be responsible, even if you wanna use alternatives to the pill.
I had horrendous headaches almost daily while on BC. As soon as I went off to have a child with my husband, the headaches went away entirely. I will never go back on it.
A lady I know uses the Ava bracelet, it's an ovulation tracker thing that she wears at night that records temp and heartbeat and things. She likes it, although I understand you need a fairly normal cycle for it to calculate properly.
Well yeah, although there's also the not looking to have more kids at the moment (for whatever reason (e.g., spacing of children)), but sex helps form a stronger bond between the spouses aspect of it.
"But...but you expect me to have standards and not act like a base animal and then demand everyone else pay for the results?! That is oppressive to women and non whites!"
That tells you everything about why our country is where it is.
The rules used to be if you're mature enough to have sex you're mature enough to deal with all the responsibilities, financial and otherwise, that come with it.
I used to pork a lot of babes in my 20s and honestly, of the gfs I had who were on birth control it was quite common for them to forget to take it. Not out of malice, they’re just dumb.
They never forgot to brush their teeth or wear deodorant. So common sense would seem to put the birth control right next to one of those items. Instead it was always on the dresser or some other place they’d have to go look for.
It was a common laughing point my guy friends. None of these girls wanted to get pregnant and were terrified of having a baby while young and starting adult careers. But the one thing they can take each day to solve that problem they were truly too absent minded and stupid to take.
As soon as we get a male birth control the pregnancy rate in this country will bottom out completely. Men aren’t going to simply forget something that big.
I believe male birth control will never functionally exist. Testosterone is important to men's reproduction function, and other functions as well. Men's testosterone levels are incredibly high in comparison to women's estrogen levels (which the pill regulates).
Women have 15-350 pg/Dl of estrogen when menstruating. Men have ~300 ng/Dl of testosterone every single day. 1000 pg per ng. Men have basically 1000x more reproduction hormone in them than women.
We also must consider that men reproduce sperm every single day, while women produce an egg once a month.
Also, I really do not trust if Male Birth Control was made today, as I can see it turning Men into Soyboys at an alarming rate from decreased Testosterone
This is so true in my experience. Mid 20s Pede here - in college and just after, my ex gf would always forget to take her BC while worrying aloud about getting prego. It made 0 sense. Then I found a virgin in the rough and my eyes were opened.
In a case like yours is there no way for the doctor to petition for off label prescriptions based on your specific condition? Because that seems reasonable.
I'm so sorry you're going through that. And I've been injured by doctors so you truly have my sympathy. I would still suggest talking to your doctor and insurance provider about whether this will effect you and what your options are. I'm not a lawyer and I have not read the ruling, and someone who is a lawyer and has read it can correct me if I am wrong. My understanding of the ruling is not that it bars insurance paying for birth control. Rather it allows religious institutions, in this specific case the Little Sisters of the Poor, to opt out on religious grounds. Depending where you work this may not even apply to you. Good luck. Dealing with insurance companies is a frustrating bitch regardless of the issue. But you may not be affected and you may still have options for getting your medication.
As a teen girl in the 1970s it's what I was told, even long before I had sex, by every concerned adult. To the point where it was annoying. As most good advice is to teenagers. Those did used to be the rules. For everyone.
Why would a religious institution offer "Obama Care" in the first place. Don't most major religious institutions have "hella-better" insurance then that already?
The Obamacare law forces all healthcare providers to cover birth control pills at zero cost to the insured. In theory this ruling means religious based healthcare options are say fuck off to the Obamacare requirement.
Unfortunately I don't see spineless Roberts having the judicial clarity to rule Obamacare unconstitutional when he couldn't even rule one subsection of it unconstitutional.
Hopefully I'm wrong, but I won't be holding my breath.
That's just your male privilege blinding you to how women getting shit for free when you have to pay for the same thing is completely fair and equal. /s
The appropriate comparison would be the cost of a (edit) tubal ligation (tubes tied). They both provide the same healthcare treatment (sterility) for men and women. Since it's the same treatment it should be covered to the same extent (% coverage or flat $$ coverage). They are different procedures of course and they will cost different amounts in the end.
I believe Obama Care requires any employer who provides health insurance for its employees to offer free contraception (and possibly even sterilization procedures, not sure) regardless of if you're using state purchased health insurance. I believe they included some exceptions for religious organizations, but it wasn't broad. For example, a hospital would still need to offer them.
Religious employers obviously can take offense to this since use of contraception is considered sinful by some (esp. Catholics). Trump's administration had already broadened those exemptions to religious institutions, this decision upholds those exceptions given by the administration.
Those pills are free under quite a few insurance plans. This is about not wanting to take responsibility for your actions, on in this case inaction, and making sure everything is always the fault of someone else. That's how children act and sadly that's a large portion of our adult population.
ReeEEeeeeeeEEEEee that's why we need communism now! Free everything! I am incapable of making my own decisions and planning a life! I NEED THE GOVERNMENT TO DO IT FOR MEEEEEE!
ReeeEEeeeEEEeee that cuts into my weed budget and weed isn't available via prescription for FREE EITTHER because REEEEEeeeeEEEEeeee fascist government!
Planned Parenthood gives out plenty of free or cheap birth control. because they know it fails - or the woman will forget/use it wrong, and then she's pregnant, and she'll come back for the abortion, which is where they make money.
Listen to Abby Johnson talk about this. She's very blunt. PP knows exactly what they're doing.
So ask the guy you're going to sleep with to use a condom? Yes, I know they sometimes break but there are plenty of options for women to pursue, including things like IUD's and injections that are more reliable than the pills. If you are not willing to take responsibility and be willing to say no if the guy refuses to wear a condom, then I have no sympathy to the arguments.
PP may know what their doing but that is absolving women of any responsibility. They have a plethora of choices and they choose poorly.
To be honest, I'm one of those old-fashioned girls who don't believe in sex outside of marriage. So no, I don't use birth control, nor expect anyone else to. I have made my decisions and I take responsibility for them.
If a woman chooses to be sexually profligate, she should take responsibility for the consequences of her actions.
My work's insurance didn't cover bc so my wife paid like $75/mo for it.
we've since switched to her work's insurance and it's free now - not even a copay
She uses it for hormonal control, not for birth control. We actually want more kids but her hormones are so out of whack we're extremely luckily to have our one healthy child.
I don't think either of us can handle going through yet another miscarriage. Our last attempt involved hearing its heartbeat one day but not the next. She had to take medication to abort the dead fetus. I never want her to have to experience that again.
Maybe it's dependent on where you live, but generic estradiol/ progestin mix literally is one of the medications that are priced $10 for 30 days even if you dont have insurance, at least near me. Things like antibiotics and blood pressure meds are priced similarly. I think condition specific ones are more expensive.
A ton of places (and dare I say as much as I hate then, Planned Parenthood) provide BC pills like candy and contraceptives to everybody. Schools even do it. My insurance provides it for free even.
Because it protects you too. In England, you are still officially born a member of the Anglican church and have to pay a tax not to be baptized into it. And if you decide you want nothing to do with that state church, you have to file as a member of any number of recognized faiths and/or atheist. And even then, your taxes go to pay for that rotting institution to the tune of £14 billion per annum. Oh and best part? The Church automatically gets 20% of the seats in the House of Lords, and that group can pass any law they want without input from the Commons, with the Queen's assent. Some of the laws they passed that way have literally nothing to do with the Church. So yeah, THAT is what the First Amendment is about. Not the nonsense morons like Michael Newdow peddle.
Well technically it's not freedom of religion as such. You can't have a religion that fucks animals for example or that does human sacrifice. The 1A should be read more like, the government cannot establish a state religion. The left should love that but they are willfully ignorant of most things so not surprising they don't support that. Yet they do love the 1A when it comes to doing things like removing the 10 commandments for a court building since it implies a state sanctioned religion.
The Supreme Court is letting the Trump Administration allow religious employers to deny birth control? What does the Trump Administration have to do with it? They’re wording it to sound like POTUS is personally involved in the process.
Also, ALSO, if I don't want to take those pills AND don't want to work you need to pay for my welfare "for the child" for 18 years.
Not even going into the whole "lying about being on the pill and sticking a boyfriend with child support for almost 2 decades" nonsense that some pull.
I got an IUD right now. The constant migraines and mood swings suck. Been looking to get it taken out but no doctors are seeing patients right now because of the coronavirus.
I thought IUDs were 'low hormones', so shouldn't cause as much of an issue... I know there's ones without any hormones at all. Perhaps that's an option? (Assuming you can get an appointment)
So there’s two strengths. Kyleena and Mirena. Kyleena is recommended for women who never had kids because it’s smaller. Misoprostol is used to.. cough.. open ya up and the IUD is shoved in. Very very painful for me.
Fun fact is that misoprostol is used to induce abortions.
Look up vasalgel. It's an injection of a polymer resin into a man's vas defrens that makes him unable to father children while it's there. If he decides he wants to have children, it can be reversed with another injection. It's basically a cheap, easy, and less invasive vasectomy.
You can't get it in the United States because big pharma doesn't want to lose all the money they make from birth control pills. I believe the only country on Earth where you can get a vasalgel injection is India.
Why do the Dems go after the employer here? Why not “mandate” that all “Obama Care” include pills on the insurance level?
For example a business can’t “decide” to not offer ....podiatrists or wound care or earwax removal .... as part of the plan. It’s just part of insurance.
Just seems like it’s all a game to make employers look bad. If all insurance covers it, then there is no employer debate. Just seems like a scam to fuck with people.
The birth control war is so stupid. It's not like this is ridiculously expensive, and most people working for an explicitly Catholic org are not gonna want that coverage anyway.
On the one claw, I don't see why the employer should have a say over what healthcare services an employee uses.
On the other claw, I can see why religious groups would not want to pay for abortions, which are "just another form of family planning" according to the leftards.
On the gripping claw, insurance plans used to be affordable before all of these fucking stupid mandates.
Okay guys. Here's the funniest thing about this debate. I don't sleep around but I take birth control as I don't want anymore children. I have one and that is enough for me and I had my kiddo with my husband. The reason this is funny is because I work a high paying seasonal oilfield job and the company does not offer insurance. I'm uninsured. I pay a whopping $9 a month for my birth control at Walmart. Are there that many women who can't afford $9?! It's all politics. There's also health clinics around my small town who give you birth control for free. The fact this even went to the SC is absolutely ridiculous. I bet these same women drop close to $9 a day at Starbucks.
Or make your date pay? If the guy doesn't want to, he's not marriage material. And if he's "pro life" but has casual sex without protection then he's very likely a liar that can't be relied on.
For the record I’m not against birth control. I just accept that a) abortion is not birth control and b) it’s the woman’s responsibility to get her birth control.
I'm fine with birth control because it's a way to prevent massive bloating of the welfare system. I just hate the fact that slightly over half the population is looked at as being children and don't have to take responsibility for their actions if they don't want to like the other half is expected, and forced, to.
Actions should have consequences. The amount of situations, including in our legal system, where actions have so few consequences pisses me off. And it just gets worse every week it seems like.
But why?! Why not JUST call up your insurer and negotiate a personal addition package for like 12 bucks a month that covers birth control? Why not negotiate with your employer? Why work for an organization you ideologically oppose?
Isn't it weird how they constantly screech about it being okay to deplatform people but they DEMAND employers, who are all operating private businesses btw, should cover all their demands even as they condemn the mere existence of the business itself?
Also my upvote put this post to 666 for all the religious pedes.
Using the salary you earn from your job to pay twelve bucks a month is the worst oppression womyn have ever faced guys. We need to dismantle the patriarchy!
If they can fire you for saying burn loot murder is a crock of shit, they sure as fuck should be able to tell you they don't want to pay for your birth control. If you don't like it go get a job somewhere that doesn't care.
If they really want the taxpayers funding birth control for them they should join the military and have all the ladies doing your medical screening try to bully you into getting a shot in your arm that tends to have terrible side effects for your body.
Or grab a handful of free condoms from the clinic and stop acting like protected sex is the worst thing ever.
I will disagree on this. Reliable birth control, and regulation of cycle, is a very important part of women's health care. There are a number of reasons for a woman to take BCPs because they have a normalizing effect on a lot of female conditions, including painful menstruation and polycystic ovarian syndrome.
If you think women want to take BCPs so they can go out and be promiscuous, I've got news for you.
The ones out screwing six, ten, twelve different men every month are not the ones using birth control pills. These women rarely use any protection at all and if they need "birth control," they get an abortion.
The women who want BCPs and use them correctly and responsibly are quite different. They are:
suffering from one of the conditions I mentioned above (among many others)
of college age and have a boyfriend/fiance, but cannot be having children until at least one of them is providing a living income. They don't want to wait years to be having sex when they have already established a good relationship, so she wants the most reliable form of contraception available (and BCPs do not interfere with lovemaking, either)
married and already have children and do not want more, but also do not want to stop making love with their husbands. They are not willing to risk a less reliable form of contraception and have to live with that worry every month, and see no reason not to use the most reliable form.
Again: Promiscuous, slutty women are not the ones who want insurance companies to cover their birth control pills. They either use the morning-after pill or they get abortions.
When you cut off BCPs from insurance coverage, you are punishing responsible women who are using the pills for health care and/or want to have sexual relationships with their committed partners. And that makes no sense at all.
You cannot just walk in and buy birth control pills over the counter.
They require a prescription.
Prescriptions require regular doctor visits and GYN examinations, because there are many different types and dosages of BCPs and a doctor needs to advise each patient on which one she should be taking.
Doctor visits and GYN exams are very expensive - a hell of a lot more than $10.
That's why BCPs should be covered by insurance.
The "Plan B" morning-after pill can be had without a prescription, but that is a one-time miserable, damaging experience. It is not the birth control pill and that is not what I am talking about.
Condoms do not require prescriptions.
Try again, maybe without yelling hysterically time.
The invasive and humiliating exams that are "required" to get a BC prescription have nothing at all to do with determining the best kind to prescribe. The pelvic exam won't show the doctor if the woman is going to have blood pressure problems or other issues with BC. They just require that exam so they can force women to get yearly pap smears (although you don't actually need those every year either). They do need a doctor visit to get a prescription, but it doesn't require the more expensive, invasive kind of exams if you just need birth control.
"B-but I NEED taxpayers to pay for getting my pussy walls blasted with cum!"
What comes after clown world?
Siegfried & Roy
Roy died in May this year.
Then it's an apt statement, of what will come after...
Death is a preferable alternative to communism
BETTER DEAD THAN RED
COMMUNISM IS FAILURE
CAPITALISM IS SUCCESS
We are going there. Prepare accordingly.
Siegfried & Joe Exotic
They didn't need contraception, just sayin'.
So what you're saying is that half of us will be mauled by tigers? Seems reasonable.
Clown World 2: Election Boogaloo
KEK
This
Spez: if we lose
Hell. Fire and brimstone raining down from the sky because baby killing
Clownreich
If this all means that we get someone more hardline than even Trump in 2024 I might actually see it as worthwhile...
I would like to see that. Only problem is you would see Republicans start to do something, that is, team up with Democrats to eliminate the Nationalist party. The MSM would then side Dem/GOP
Because they won't bite the hand that feeds them.
Elon Musk is an African immigrant, he cannot run for president.
We don’t have a half trillion dollar trade deficit with Israel.
We just send them money directly or laundered thru the deep state.
3 billion a year to keep their defenses up is what we purchase for an ally with nukes.
The President also understood that our system implicitly promotes a two-party system the same way that some specific economic circumstances will always result, absent outside influence, in a monopoly. It made more sense to hijack one of the parties than to try and create a new one with the enormous amount of groundwork that needs to exist for most independent, "average voter" types to consider a new party initiative as anything but a spoiler (especially with a hostile, propaganda-aired-nightly media working against you 24/7).
Of course, if they push us to or near civil war then of course all bets are off and an entirely new party built from the ground up against Communism, Marxism, Leninism (Trotskyism, Maoism, I could go on; these bastards all really did each have their own ideas on how to disenfranchise and murder everyone that might conceivably oppose them), and leftism in general. It'll work in that case because everyone who sabotaged the prior parties will be in a prison.
To be fair though all of their same things still happened throughout all of recorded human history, even during times when sex was punishable by death unless under specific circumstances like marriage.. and even that was still under specific circumstances because you couldn't just run down and get married just to have sex....
I think the internet and social media have a major part to play in why they have all exploded in numbers... the years their numbers started to explode correlate exactly with the rise of the internet....
Seriously, the internet is responsible for the death of the lying ass media. And we all know you can't believe the internet, either. Have to research for yourself, and now we can.
Wait. What tribe? Can you please elaborate?
Ok, Adolph.
Did you just link sexual promiscuity with fucking banking?
There's nothing wrong with sleeping around. That was the morality before condoms and hygiene standards and healthcare, but today it can be done safely.
I think the correct format is that they “Can” but don’t necessarily will. To make it an absolute would be false. My proof, me. I sleep around and have 0 kids, 0 destroyed nuclear families and guess what, it’s mostly Trumpettes that I’m with.
Don't forget the multiple wives, grooming gangs and rapes that are a fundamental part of Islam.
I don’t consider myself a whore or a prude. I consider myself a smart car shopper who test drives. The sad part, I don’t know what kind of car I want to own for the rest of my life so for the time being, I’ll lease until I find the right one. If you think whoring is the problem of the western world, put down the Bible and pick up the news or better yet, a history book. Lack of accountability, lack of education, and lack of a solid family system are mostly responsible imo. Sure whoring can contribute to those but to paint it as the single reason is a little shortsighted.
That's like saying that eating leads to obesity.
One can sleep around using a fucking condom while he's single.
All the negative consequences that you mention are very much avoidable.
There are kids who are better raised in a broken home than a nuclear family. To generalize that broken home, while statistically produce more problems, are not the law.
I use a condom.
Women don't get pregnant randomly.
If something is morally wrong, it’s always been wrong and will always be wrong. Technological advances don’t change whether something is moral or not.
Abortion is morally wrong. People used to say that abortion prior to 30 weeks was fine because the baby couldn’t survive, now technology is better and babies can survive earlier than 30 weeks. Did technology now make it immoral to abort babies at 26 weeks because technology has enabled them to live that long or has it always been wrong to abort children despite their age?
False equivalence.
Abortion being immoral is predicated on life starting at conception, and not on whether the baby can live outside of the womb or not. If you're prolife you know this.
So I assume that marrying a 13 years old or having slaves is not morally wrong, as these things were common at the time of Jesus and he didn't say anything against them?
Jesus didn't say anything against casual sex either. Prove me wrong.
Thou shall not commit adultery is literally one of the Ten Commandments. Jesus pushed it further by clarifying that a man who even looks at a woman who is not his wife with lust has committed adultery in his heart. So yes, Jesus was very much against sleeping around
Adultery means sleeping with another man's wife.
Jesus clearly refers to not breaking the sanctity of marriage, but he's not talking about two unmarried people sleeping together.
You ignored my point, created your own, then argued against your created point. That’s a straw man. I’m not going to entertain your argument.
So silence is complicit in your view? You’re sounding like a BLMer now. Morality is an eternal truth, if something is morally wrong then it is morally wrong now and vice versa.
An immoral act can become moral if its consequences change and they remove the reason it was immoral in the first place.
I guess you can't accept this if your morality comes from faith in norms that you're given. I question the norms.
No they didn't. I'm not a prude or anything but you are saying sleeping around is fine because it can be done safely. You claim the opposite was true before and formed a type of morality. Not true. Have you never heard of Judaism or Christianity? Condoms or not, you still don't sleep around if you truly follow Christ. Again, I'm no prude but there very much can be a problem with "sleeping around". Have you ever put your dick in crazy? Have you ever had a condom break? Have you ever ruined a marriage? Have you ever been accused of rape? All of those things are a possibility.
Yes
Can you please indicate to me where in the 4 canonical gospels Jesus says that I should not sleep around?
Yes
No, they don't break easily.
No, never cheated and never made someone else cheat (that I know of). You can have some ethic even if you sleep around. The vast majority of people into casual sex on dating apps would not help someone cheat.
No, thank God. I don't have sex with drunk women to ensure consent and minimize this risk. Unfortunately any man can be accused of it, regardless if you actually slept with the accuser or not.
Jesus says this in Matthew 15:19 “For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders.”
He lumps fornication together with murder, thievery, and lying. Notice he separates fornication & adultery. Google defines fornication as sex between unmarried people.
Even if Jesus didn’t condemn a specific sin, there are verses elsewhere in the Bible that do. The entire bible is the word of God. I don’t recall a verse where Jesus specifically warned you to abstain from banging your dog, does that mean it’s ok?
So you've been lucky is what you are saying. None of this proves it's a great idea to go sleeping around. Banging bitches as you call it.
Matthew 15:19 It is out of the heart that evil thoughts come, as well as murder, adultery, sexual immorality, stealing, false testimony, and slander.
You can replace sexual immorality with banging hella bitches.
So you’re telling me, everyone that waited to have sex until they were married, are still married?
No, because that's not the point.
If you read Paul's letters to the Corinthians, it's fairly clear that part of the intent with marriage is to share a holy construct that then makes sex no longer a sin (1 Corinthians 7):
Because of the temptation that leads to committing the sin of fornication or adultery, it is better to be married such that these desires are moot because your body is no longer your own but belongs to your spouse.
Don't be a coomer
Do you even know what that means?
It's not just about masturbation. Casual sex/hooking up is included.
Not according to urban dictionary it ain't.
It seems like you're genuinely trying to be helpful, and I thank you for this.
Let me reassure you, I'm very happy with my life. I don't depend on the opinion of others. I draw my strength from my life achievements and from my sense of peace with my own identity and body.
Causal sex is just something I do because I enjoy. What do you enjoy doing? For me, there's nothing I'd rather do than going on a successful date and have sex with a new woman.
This passion for sex is also what drove me to improve myself. Get a better job, have more money, improve my social skills, do sport, learn how to dress, etc. A man needs a purpose. Getting pussy has been the primary motivator of the majority of men who ever lived. It's what drives us to improve ourselves. That's why the left wants to destroy that, demonizing masculinity and trying to turn young men into faggots or freaks.
Tell that to most women and be prepared for a bitchfit the likes of which you have never seen. It's fine for them to tell men, "keep it in your pants", but the moment you tell one of them that same thing you magically hate women and are the scum of the earth for daring to tell her to exercise self control.
Gotta agree.
It’s like, are you a fucking animal or are you a person? A slave to your instincts or do you have control? It can’t be both ways.
I'd love to see a meltdown like that. Give demanding, controlling bitches a taste of their own medicine.
I grew up hearing about what pigs men were and how we were going to hell for watching B-rated T&A movies on Friday night. Now days women never hesitate to objectify men right then in front of everyone. They watch Hallmark channel because they like watching women be degraded and abused and victimized. Call bullshit on that and they either just giggle or tell you to grow the fuck up and be an adult.
The giggling is how you know you've hit reality.
I think most of them watch it because they want to think every woman will get her happy-ever-after and her previous actions will have no consequences. The girls in those movies get in a fight over stupid things, leave the boyfriend, get fancy job in city for years, then at the last minute, ta-da! She ends up in a cute small town and either meets the former boyfriend or someone new, always very handsome and nice, and settles down with Mr. Perfect. Wasting years working, having nasty attitudes, divorces, child out of wedlock - no worries, you will still have your happy ending with a tall handsome man. The funny thing is, they always end up basically as stay at home moms in a sweet small town, so why not start out that way from the beginning, instead of wasting time in the big city or having someone else's kid?
Its because sex is the only thing a lot of women think they have to offer, its part of the brainwashing.
When a lot of women can't cook, can't clean, can't hold a conversation, don't have any actual hobbies, are obsessed with social media, don't have an actual personality, and have given in to the easy way out of embracing their nature, that's all they CAN offer. That's the problem. Many women are vapid shells that offer nothing because they are enabled and encouraged to be that way by not only the state and their fellow women through feminism but also by all the men around them.
It's not just the brainwashing and feminist nonsense that's gotten us here, it's men giving in and giving women anything and everything they want, i.e. "simping", which empowers women to offer nothing and demand everything as is their innate nature. Every religion out there is exceedingly critical of putting women before everything else while not holding them responsible for their actions, and yet society has become the exact opposite. If men in all aspects, from the common man on the street to the judges that let women off with a slap on the wrist while throwing the book at a man for the same crime, started holding women accountable for their actions and forced them to take responsibility things would begin to correct.
It's also why leftists are so harshly pushing for the feminizing of men, because weak men are pushovers, and why women overwhelmingly are leftist in thought, as it tells them everything they want to hear, gives them things without earning them, and very rarely ever tells them no or holds them responsible for anything. The leftists figured out exactly how to bring down a society because if they can't have it they'll make sure it burns down.
Unfortunately, the idea that we all have insatiable sex drives and that sex should be consequence-free is a major cornerstone of feminism. So this is what we’ve been left with.
And yes, that’s second wave feminism, folks.
Because casual, semi-casual, or sex with multiple partners diminishes the importance of sharing your body with another in a construct where you're with that person more or less indefinitely.
I witnessed this myself.
Long term relationship with the same woman; she was my first, I was her first. Due to circumstances beyond control, we went our separate ways (new BF in the relationship I didn't know about did the coup de grâce on her behalf... not kidding). I don't know how many others she's been with since, or whether she's had sex with one or more of them, but I guarantee she's not happy.
For my part, I went back to church. I made mistakes. I asked for forgiveness. I realize now that what we'd done when we were together corrupted her because she didn't have the spirit guiding her away from such sin. Consequently: I'm happier because I'm out of a relationship that had been her gaslighting me for years over things to an extent that I thought everything was my fault.
I doubt she'll ever be happy unless she turns her life over to Christ as I did.
I don't think it's remotely outside the bounds of rational thought to say that promiscuity is a choice. You want to do it? Pay for your decisions.
(But honestly, don't do it.)
I agree, they not only want to win. They want to humiliate us.
Imagine if Trump used taxpayers money to purchase and distribute AR-15s. I'd love that just to fuck with the libtards.
I had an ex who broke up with ME and then continued to make jabs at me on social media all while engaged, then married, then kids eith the new dude. Fucked up.
If taxpayers have to pay for your snatch to get pounded, we all should get a turn.
Dude I've seen enough feminists to say that you can have my turn.
Only after the cats return in disappointment that the fish market wasn't reopened.
They should just get married an then blast away.... It's the old fashioned fun way of doing it, but then again it requires taking some responsibility
the cheapest contraceptive is to just not have sex
I wish more people would practice abstinence, but you know they won't. So I'm all in favor of contraceptives... but pay for it yourself.
This guy fucks
Thanks, whistleblower!
I take it you're referring to non-married people? My wife is on birth control (and yes, we pay for it).
He undoubtedly is.
If you're married, do whatever you want. Because the idea is that you're already committed to that person, and if you have a child, you're already in a circumstance where inviting that child into the world allows it to be born into a nuclear family.
Abstinence for non-married people would be ideal but we know that doesn't happen. Hence u/Aquamine-Amarine 's comment.
These days marriage does not mean you are committed to a single person. All these reddit numales and their "open relationship" that consists of their wife fucking whoever they want while they jerk it at home, alone, to tranny porn, have shit all over the institution. Makes me sick.
+1, sad truth.
That said, it doesn't mean that the rest of us can't uphold the institution of marriage and do what we can to defend it.
Natural Family Planning works (obviously should only be used by people who are married). I've used it successfully. Most people don't seem to realize that a woman is only fertile for a short period of time each month (like a week). There are tons of methods to figure out when that is via paying attention to cervical mucus, temperatures, or even using an actual fertility monitor. Major downside is that women are most aroused during their peak time of fertility.
My husband and I use this method ourselves. Works just fine. And yes, we’re Catholic, but there are versions of it that are entirely secular. You can use a condom during your fertile days and be just fine.
I didn’t know about it until I got married. Our church mandated us to take a class on it. Man, was I pissed that nobody had EVER talked with me about this before. I went to a goddamn catholic high school, and they didn’t teach us about this.
It’s almost like they don’t want women to be responsible for their fertility, and want us to believe that a baby is a death sentence. Better take that body-destroying hormone pill every day!
My wife and I tried for years to have one kid. Then her body declared war on herself (she couldn't produce milk, had PPD for about a year and had a lot of health issues after the fact) and of course none of those wonderful Feminist organizations or feminist friends of hers would do shit to help. You know who did help? Our church.
Still worth it as my daughter is a real gift from God. I'm still too hesitant to have another considering how awful the medical toll was on my wife.
Congratulations on your little one! Babies that come after a long time of struggling to conceive are a special gift all on their own!
There are apps these days that track those sorts of things if you're doing a rhythm method. My health classes in high school actually did teach us about this. My girlfriend has an IUD, but still uses an app to make sure everything is hunky dory. It's still partly a hormonal treatment (which I actually didn't know until talking with her about it), but at a FAR lesser dose than taking a pill. Been together 5 months and never had a problem. I'd be a hypocrite telling people not to screw, but for God's sake, it's not that difficult to be responsible, even if you wanna use alternatives to the pill.
It's amazing how once my wife stopped taking BC pills all of her medical issues went away.
I had horrendous headaches almost daily while on BC. As soon as I went off to have a child with my husband, the headaches went away entirely. I will never go back on it.
I always had a feeling it deteriorates health and kills sex drive. I'm all for libs taking it. Less of them at the polls
Or you could look at her Adam's apple, that guarantees that she's not fertile.
Ah, I love 2020.
A lady I know uses the Ava bracelet, it's an ovulation tracker thing that she wears at night that records temp and heartbeat and things. She likes it, although I understand you need a fairly normal cycle for it to calculate properly.
Well yeah, although there's also the not looking to have more kids at the moment (for whatever reason (e.g., spacing of children)), but sex helps form a stronger bond between the spouses aspect of it.
Basically the truth. If you're not a hoe you also won't be a single mother and two parent households both man and women will make America great again
"But...but you expect me to have standards and not act like a base animal and then demand everyone else pay for the results?! That is oppressive to women and non whites!"
That tells you everything about why our country is where it is.
okay that's amazing
The rules used to be if you're mature enough to have sex you're mature enough to deal with all the responsibilities, financial and otherwise, that come with it.
Still my rules essentially. Cant stick your dick in crazy.
I used to pork a lot of babes in my 20s and honestly, of the gfs I had who were on birth control it was quite common for them to forget to take it. Not out of malice, they’re just dumb.
They never forgot to brush their teeth or wear deodorant. So common sense would seem to put the birth control right next to one of those items. Instead it was always on the dresser or some other place they’d have to go look for.
It was a common laughing point my guy friends. None of these girls wanted to get pregnant and were terrified of having a baby while young and starting adult careers. But the one thing they can take each day to solve that problem they were truly too absent minded and stupid to take.
As soon as we get a male birth control the pregnancy rate in this country will bottom out completely. Men aren’t going to simply forget something that big.
I believe male birth control will never functionally exist. Testosterone is important to men's reproduction function, and other functions as well. Men's testosterone levels are incredibly high in comparison to women's estrogen levels (which the pill regulates).
Women have 15-350 pg/Dl of estrogen when menstruating. Men have ~300 ng/Dl of testosterone every single day. 1000 pg per ng. Men have basically 1000x more reproduction hormone in them than women.
We also must consider that men reproduce sperm every single day, while women produce an egg once a month.
Also, I really do not trust if Male Birth Control was made today, as I can see it turning Men into Soyboys at an alarming rate from decreased Testosterone
This is so true in my experience. Mid 20s Pede here - in college and just after, my ex gf would always forget to take her BC while worrying aloud about getting prego. It made 0 sense. Then I found a virgin in the rough and my eyes were opened.
In a case like yours is there no way for the doctor to petition for off label prescriptions based on your specific condition? Because that seems reasonable.
I'm so sorry you're going through that. And I've been injured by doctors so you truly have my sympathy. I would still suggest talking to your doctor and insurance provider about whether this will effect you and what your options are. I'm not a lawyer and I have not read the ruling, and someone who is a lawyer and has read it can correct me if I am wrong. My understanding of the ruling is not that it bars insurance paying for birth control. Rather it allows religious institutions, in this specific case the Little Sisters of the Poor, to opt out on religious grounds. Depending where you work this may not even apply to you. Good luck. Dealing with insurance companies is a frustrating bitch regardless of the issue. But you may not be affected and you may still have options for getting your medication.
That is only for men, and they don’t even get a say in whether or not they want to be the father.
As a teen girl in the 1970s it's what I was told, even long before I had sex, by every concerned adult. To the point where it was annoying. As most good advice is to teenagers. Those did used to be the rules. For everyone.
truth
lol
what slippery wording.
Why would a religious institution offer "Obama Care" in the first place. Don't most major religious institutions have "hella-better" insurance then that already?
Other religious communities form co-ops to cover their communities healthcare costs. See MediShare or Faith-Based Healthcare for examples.
The Obamacare law forces all healthcare providers to cover birth control pills at zero cost to the insured. In theory this ruling means religious based healthcare options are say fuck off to the Obamacare requirement.
This may be a good sign as to how they're going to rule on the overall legality of Obamacare here soon....
It's certainly a good omen as opposed to how we would have felt if they had a majority dissent today....
Unfortunately I don't see spineless Roberts having the judicial clarity to rule Obamacare unconstitutional when he couldn't even rule one subsection of it unconstitutional.
Hopefully I'm wrong, but I won't be holding my breath.
And yet I had to pay several hundred dollars to start shooting blanks. Why was that not free? Sounds like female privilege to me.
That's just your male privilege blinding you to how women getting shit for free when you have to pay for the same thing is completely fair and equal. /s
The appropriate comparison would be the cost of a (edit) tubal ligation (tubes tied). They both provide the same healthcare treatment (sterility) for men and women. Since it's the same treatment it should be covered to the same extent (% coverage or flat $$ coverage). They are different procedures of course and they will cost different amounts in the end.
Hysterectomy's aren't for birth control.
Your right I meant Tubal Ligation. I'll change it.
I believe Obama Care requires any employer who provides health insurance for its employees to offer free contraception (and possibly even sterilization procedures, not sure) regardless of if you're using state purchased health insurance. I believe they included some exceptions for religious organizations, but it wasn't broad. For example, a hospital would still need to offer them.
Religious employers obviously can take offense to this since use of contraception is considered sinful by some (esp. Catholics). Trump's administration had already broadened those exemptions to religious institutions, this decision upholds those exceptions given by the administration.
The thing that irritates me is that we even need to talk about religious rights only to defend our freedoms.
If I'm a random atheist dude and I don't want to provide birth control or accept homos, my freedom should not be violated.
Instead we need to organise ourselves into an identity group (Christians) to resist unjust laws
Dropping some real knowledge, some useful information.
Up vote for you.
It’s bad wording.
The ACA mandated that ALL employers provide health insurance that covered certain things, including abortion.
Very moist word choice!
ReEeEeEee pay for my sexual decisions bigot
Abort my fetus because I couldn't afford $20 pills REeeEeEeeeeEEEE
Ceasing being a whore is too much to ask, of course
Those pills are free under quite a few insurance plans. This is about not wanting to take responsibility for your actions, on in this case inaction, and making sure everything is always the fault of someone else. That's how children act and sadly that's a large portion of our adult population.
ReeeEEeeeeEe I don't have insurance because I choose to be a bartenderrrrr!
But she's got a degree! A worthless degree that she'll never use and is in so much debt she'll never pay it off, but she's got that degree!
ReeEEeeeeeeEEEEee that's why we need communism now! Free everything! I am incapable of making my own decisions and planning a life! I NEED THE GOVERNMENT TO DO IT FOR MEEEEEE!
How you could come to any other conclusion is beyond me.
Whiners and mentally ill running the show by bullying and name-calling.
When I was a kid, you smashed the bully in the face and broke his fucking nose and he fucked off. Works every time.
ReeeEEeeeEEEeee that cuts into my weed budget and weed isn't available via prescription for FREE EITTHER because REEEEEeeeeEEEEeeee fascist government!
Planned Parenthood gives out plenty of free or cheap birth control. because they know it fails - or the woman will forget/use it wrong, and then she's pregnant, and she'll come back for the abortion, which is where they make money.
Listen to Abby Johnson talk about this. She's very blunt. PP knows exactly what they're doing.
So ask the guy you're going to sleep with to use a condom? Yes, I know they sometimes break but there are plenty of options for women to pursue, including things like IUD's and injections that are more reliable than the pills. If you are not willing to take responsibility and be willing to say no if the guy refuses to wear a condom, then I have no sympathy to the arguments.
PP may know what their doing but that is absolving women of any responsibility. They have a plethora of choices and they choose poorly.
To be honest, I'm one of those old-fashioned girls who don't believe in sex outside of marriage. So no, I don't use birth control, nor expect anyone else to. I have made my decisions and I take responsibility for them.
If a woman chooses to be sexually profligate, she should take responsibility for the consequences of her actions.
Again? Hasn't this constantly been brought up in various forms?
Yeah, that's what blows my mind about this. Wasn't this decided years ago with the Hobby Lobby case?
There should be repercussions for a judge that gives a ruling that is then reversed.
It's official that he made a mistake.
And on top of it, nothing about this abuse of power is a liberal ideal. Today's "liberals" are authoritarians.
LGB meh everything else especially T is mentally deranged retards who think they are above peoples privacy
The standard "pill" is $10 for a month supply at my local Walmart. If you can not afford that, maybe...I dont know, stop fucking everybody?
Can't hold women or nonwhites accountable for anything .
My work's insurance didn't cover bc so my wife paid like $75/mo for it.
we've since switched to her work's insurance and it's free now - not even a copay
She uses it for hormonal control, not for birth control. We actually want more kids but her hormones are so out of whack we're extremely luckily to have our one healthy child.
I don't think either of us can handle going through yet another miscarriage. Our last attempt involved hearing its heartbeat one day but not the next. She had to take medication to abort the dead fetus. I never want her to have to experience that again.
This is if there is insurance. $10 is just a co-pay.
Maybe it's dependent on where you live, but generic estradiol/ progestin mix literally is one of the medications that are priced $10 for 30 days even if you dont have insurance, at least near me. Things like antibiotics and blood pressure meds are priced similarly. I think condition specific ones are more expensive.
A ton of places (and dare I say as much as I hate then, Planned Parenthood) provide BC pills like candy and contraceptives to everybody. Schools even do it. My insurance provides it for free even.
Insurance provides "free".
There is no free lunch. Somebody needs to pay for it.
I meant out of my pocket it is compared to other prescription medicine's
This is not a proper reference.
It is important and relevant for the topic. Nuns do not provide insurance to abortion pills, as such it will need to be paid from out of pocket.
....okay?
7-2
suck it
Ginsberg and Sotomayor.
RBG and Sotomayor
Because it protects you too. In England, you are still officially born a member of the Anglican church and have to pay a tax not to be baptized into it. And if you decide you want nothing to do with that state church, you have to file as a member of any number of recognized faiths and/or atheist. And even then, your taxes go to pay for that rotting institution to the tune of £14 billion per annum. Oh and best part? The Church automatically gets 20% of the seats in the House of Lords, and that group can pass any law they want without input from the Commons, with the Queen's assent. Some of the laws they passed that way have literally nothing to do with the Church. So yeah, THAT is what the First Amendment is about. Not the nonsense morons like Michael Newdow peddle.
Well technically it's not freedom of religion as such. You can't have a religion that fucks animals for example or that does human sacrifice. The 1A should be read more like, the government cannot establish a state religion. The left should love that but they are willfully ignorant of most things so not surprising they don't support that. Yet they do love the 1A when it comes to doing things like removing the 10 commandments for a court building since it implies a state sanctioned religion.
The Supreme Court is letting the Trump Administration allow religious employers to deny birth control? What does the Trump Administration have to do with it? They’re wording it to sound like POTUS is personally involved in the process.
Happened to me. My wife is premenopausal, and doctor prescribed pills to ease the hormone transition.
My insurance (I work for a church) denied them. Do you know what I did? I said, "I understand. I'll pay for them myself."
Like a normal person would.
You missed a step.
Not even going into the whole "lying about being on the pill and sticking a boyfriend with child support for almost 2 decades" nonsense that some pull.
Promiscuity. Is. A. Choice.
Anyone have the specific wording of the ruling?
Birth control is probably the single biggest economy killer, I used to fix everything before I had kids. I just buy new instead now.
We must be in different universes, haha. I'm replacing screen doors, super-glue-ing handles on coffee mugs, sanding down tables.. It never ends..
Given than I’m from another country, I don’t exactly know how Obamacare is such a stubborn problem to fix.
So I’ll just ask simply: is this ruling from the SCOTUS going to upset the crazies on the left?
They're telling women that they can't have everything that they demand. What do you think?
Also - Birth control is basically poison, but its touted as a miracle cure and nobody ever talks about the side effects.
It's prescribed to treat pimples and stuff - it's like fixing a leaky pipe with duct tape. You can't tell its leaking, but its causing issues.
It's so sad how many 14 year olds are put on this and then SOL with undiagnosed issues, or side effects 10 years later.
I got an IUD right now. The constant migraines and mood swings suck. Been looking to get it taken out but no doctors are seeing patients right now because of the coronavirus.
Got a pair of needle nose pliers and a mouth guard if you're interested.
Deal! But when I A Christmas Story Santa boot your face in, no liability!
I thought IUDs were 'low hormones', so shouldn't cause as much of an issue... I know there's ones without any hormones at all. Perhaps that's an option? (Assuming you can get an appointment)
So there’s two strengths. Kyleena and Mirena. Kyleena is recommended for women who never had kids because it’s smaller. Misoprostol is used to.. cough.. open ya up and the IUD is shoved in. Very very painful for me.
Fun fact is that misoprostol is used to induce abortions.
Look up vasalgel. It's an injection of a polymer resin into a man's vas defrens that makes him unable to father children while it's there. If he decides he wants to have children, it can be reversed with another injection. It's basically a cheap, easy, and less invasive vasectomy.
You can't get it in the United States because big pharma doesn't want to lose all the money they make from birth control pills. I believe the only country on Earth where you can get a vasalgel injection is India.
No thanks. They'll chop my balls off and sell it in some dank ass street market as some "cure" for something.
Because the country with fucking billions of people is the one from where we should get family planning advice
"birth control" for a legitimate medical treatment? Sure.
Birth control so you can indiscriminately get nutted in by dudes? Pay for your own shit
I think the Court also ruled that religious institutions can hire people based on sharing their religious values/beliefs.
Why do the Dems go after the employer here? Why not “mandate” that all “Obama Care” include pills on the insurance level?
For example a business can’t “decide” to not offer ....podiatrists or wound care or earwax removal .... as part of the plan. It’s just part of insurance.
Just seems like it’s all a game to make employers look bad. If all insurance covers it, then there is no employer debate. Just seems like a scam to fuck with people.
Evil Democrats. They've sued a charity ran by nuns, not once but TWICE over this bullshit.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/little-sisters-of-the-poor-battles-states-in-court-over-birth-control-mandate
Or work someplace that shares your values.
I deserve the freedom to use birth control.
And others deserve the same freedom to not cover something they don't believe in.
No one is owed anything in this world.
The birth control war is so stupid. It's not like this is ridiculously expensive, and most people working for an explicitly Catholic org are not gonna want that coverage anyway.
Meh.
On the one claw, I don't see why the employer should have a say over what healthcare services an employee uses.
On the other claw, I can see why religious groups would not want to pay for abortions, which are "just another form of family planning" according to the leftards.
On the gripping claw, insurance plans used to be affordable before all of these fucking stupid mandates.
We'll only pay for the red pills 😉
Okay guys. Here's the funniest thing about this debate. I don't sleep around but I take birth control as I don't want anymore children. I have one and that is enough for me and I had my kiddo with my husband. The reason this is funny is because I work a high paying seasonal oilfield job and the company does not offer insurance. I'm uninsured. I pay a whopping $9 a month for my birth control at Walmart. Are there that many women who can't afford $9?! It's all politics. There's also health clinics around my small town who give you birth control for free. The fact this even went to the SC is absolutely ridiculous. I bet these same women drop close to $9 a day at Starbucks.
Men pay for condoms, why can’t women pay for pills?
Or make your date pay? If the guy doesn't want to, he's not marriage material. And if he's "pro life" but has casual sex without protection then he's very likely a liar that can't be relied on.
Don’t get why so many abortions (especially black babies that make up almost 40%) of birth control is supposedly so available.
Laziness. Why should they have to take a pill every single day just to not have a baby when they can go and murder that baby once every few months.
There’s so many other long lasting ones too!
For the record I’m not against birth control. I just accept that a) abortion is not birth control and b) it’s the woman’s responsibility to get her birth control.
I'm fine with birth control because it's a way to prevent massive bloating of the welfare system. I just hate the fact that slightly over half the population is looked at as being children and don't have to take responsibility for their actions if they don't want to like the other half is expected, and forced, to.
Actions should have consequences. The amount of situations, including in our legal system, where actions have so few consequences pisses me off. And it just gets worse every week it seems like.
But why?! Why not JUST call up your insurer and negotiate a personal addition package for like 12 bucks a month that covers birth control? Why not negotiate with your employer? Why work for an organization you ideologically oppose?
Isn't it weird how they constantly screech about it being okay to deplatform people but they DEMAND employers, who are all operating private businesses btw, should cover all their demands even as they condemn the mere existence of the business itself?
Also my upvote put this post to 666 for all the religious pedes.
Why not got to Walmart and spend $9 a month and leave your employer/insurance out of it?
I'm OK with birth control pills. I'd rather use pills than abortions.
The harassment of The Little Sisters of the Poor went on far too long. Great victory for religious freedom.
Note the weasel language “Trump administration” can do this, not “United States”
curious if they ruled that future admins can’t revoke the exemption.
Condoms are so Fucking cheap, and generic bc pills are like $8 a month... I don't understand why this is even a question.
Using the salary you earn from your job to pay twelve bucks a month is the worst oppression womyn have ever faced guys. We need to dismantle the patriarchy!
The left will use this an excuse to get more abortions and funded by taxes, as if abortion should be considered a form of casual birth control.
*damn
Wait does my employer have to give me free condoms?
FzekbiEH9 DmA BMC0S Hpt3F5h NGvofK wGOMwt guHL0AOk4Gdx hO badG NJNx ISL tzaTrs zPJ 7dcn Tg92R 5eNn LfZ 8pDC
If they can fire you for saying burn loot murder is a crock of shit, they sure as fuck should be able to tell you they don't want to pay for your birth control. If you don't like it go get a job somewhere that doesn't care.
Would be a shame if a meteor hit when SCOTUS was meeting and Clarence Thomas and Alito were home sick.
If they really want the taxpayers funding birth control for them they should join the military and have all the ladies doing your medical screening try to bully you into getting a shot in your arm that tends to have terrible side effects for your body.
Or grab a handful of free condoms from the clinic and stop acting like protected sex is the worst thing ever.
Whatever floats their boat.
I will disagree on this. Reliable birth control, and regulation of cycle, is a very important part of women's health care. There are a number of reasons for a woman to take BCPs because they have a normalizing effect on a lot of female conditions, including painful menstruation and polycystic ovarian syndrome.
If you think women want to take BCPs so they can go out and be promiscuous, I've got news for you.
The ones out screwing six, ten, twelve different men every month are not the ones using birth control pills. These women rarely use any protection at all and if they need "birth control," they get an abortion.
The women who want BCPs and use them correctly and responsibly are quite different. They are:
suffering from one of the conditions I mentioned above (among many others)
of college age and have a boyfriend/fiance, but cannot be having children until at least one of them is providing a living income. They don't want to wait years to be having sex when they have already established a good relationship, so she wants the most reliable form of contraception available (and BCPs do not interfere with lovemaking, either)
married and already have children and do not want more, but also do not want to stop making love with their husbands. They are not willing to risk a less reliable form of contraception and have to live with that worry every month, and see no reason not to use the most reliable form.
Again: Promiscuous, slutty women are not the ones who want insurance companies to cover their birth control pills. They either use the morning-after pill or they get abortions.
When you cut off BCPs from insurance coverage, you are punishing responsible women who are using the pills for health care and/or want to have sexual relationships with their committed partners. And that makes no sense at all.
BIRTH CONTROL PILLS ARE $10 A MONTH!
IF YOU CAN’T AFFORD $10 A MONTH, STOP HAVING SEX!
MEN BUY CONDOMS FOR BIRTH CONTROL, SHOULD THEY BE COMPENSATED LIVING IN YOUR UTOPIA?
You cannot just walk in and buy birth control pills over the counter.
They require a prescription.
Prescriptions require regular doctor visits and GYN examinations, because there are many different types and dosages of BCPs and a doctor needs to advise each patient on which one she should be taking.
Doctor visits and GYN exams are very expensive - a hell of a lot more than $10.
That's why BCPs should be covered by insurance.
The "Plan B" morning-after pill can be had without a prescription, but that is a one-time miserable, damaging experience. It is not the birth control pill and that is not what I am talking about.
Condoms do not require prescriptions.
Try again, maybe without yelling hysterically time.
The invasive and humiliating exams that are "required" to get a BC prescription have nothing at all to do with determining the best kind to prescribe. The pelvic exam won't show the doctor if the woman is going to have blood pressure problems or other issues with BC. They just require that exam so they can force women to get yearly pap smears (although you don't actually need those every year either). They do need a doctor visit to get a prescription, but it doesn't require the more expensive, invasive kind of exams if you just need birth control.