tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24739165.post7092837151971156543..comments2023-10-31T08:45:32.158-07:00Comments on The Northern Muckraker: Here comes the slippery slopeDouglas Hesterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08294368746311073234noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24739165.post-24337449169809619432011-08-02T06:25:05.919-07:002011-08-02T06:25:05.919-07:00Greg, if federally funded birth control prevents a...Greg, if federally funded birth control prevents abortions and unwanted births, please explain to me why there are still over 1 million abortions annually, and the rate of unwed births has skyrocketed since LBJ started pushing birth control in welfare programs. <br /><br />Reality is that it's not birth control that prevents out of wedlock births, but rather self control.<br /><br />Regarding Dear Leader's act, I was under the impression that Article 1 gave legislative power to Congress. Unless that's been changed while I wasn't looking, I think it's time to remove him from office.Bike Bubbahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08193546045614393425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24739165.post-69521415784657510842011-08-01T22:37:21.576-07:002011-08-01T22:37:21.576-07:00You and I are going to VEHEMENTLY disagree on this...You and I are going to VEHEMENTLY disagree on this topic. Access to basic healthcare services is something I believe in to the core. <br /><br />How many abortions and unwanted babies have been born because of a lack of access to birth control? How many women are locked into cycles of poverty because they do not have real control over their reproduction? Think of how much money could be saved on welfare and other social service programs by simply covering basic birth control. An ounce of prevention...<br /><br />Providing basic health care is not as difficult or as expensive as Fox News would have you believe. And you know what, I'd much rather have my tax dollars going to pay for programs that save lives than to cover continued corporate bailouts and tax exemptions. Without state sponsored healthcare, I would either be on my deathbed or in bankruptcy. How is our current system ethical, moral, right, or fair? I have yet to hear anyone from the right come up with a viable alternative.<br /><br />I think some of your logic is flawed. No one is telling these companies to "give away" birth control products. These companies make HUGE profits off their customers through premiums, deductibles, etc. The law is saying that insurance companies can't refuse to provide access to a medication. As you know, there are other applications for birth control, other than as contraception. Oh yeah, and they're not that expensive. I can't speak for the rest of the country, but here in WA I can get a month supply for less that $20.<br /><br />As for the other facets of women's health care: promoting breast feeding, pap smears, etc. It's more cost effective for the insurance companies to cover that, than to continue to have women not getting care, and ultimately costing MORE in healthcare costs than a simple preventative screening.<br /><br />But let's address some of the real underlying issues: namely sexism and control over women. Would anybody really argue about this point if we were talking about covering Viagra or heart meds or diabetes care?<br /><br />This is SUCH a complex issue, that I believe it's unfair to simply categorize it as a waste of $$ and taking away our liberties. We're talking about human beings and saving lives on a real level. <br /><br />Some things are about more than dollars and cents.Grace Rnoreply@blogger.com