Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Empire_of_Liberty
I think it’s a great issue the way it is, now, for conservatives to “demagogue”, since it highlights the idiocy of making medicine political.

The recent election kind of shows that it is not currently a good issue for us. This sort of thing helped Obama win and win big with women. As long as it is a prescription covered by insurance, Obama can continue using the pill as a freebie to buy votes. The idea is if it goes 'over the counter' that it is no longer a prescription drug and insurance is out of the loop. Therefore no more freebies for Obama to give away.

Over the counter means pretty much all medical (and parental) control is given up. B.C. is as safe as cough-drops? For 12-year-olds? I don’t believe it, and frankly, I think its effect on our society has been devastating.

Sounds like you are just personally opposed to contraception - or at least the pill. I get your point about low birth rates of traditional Americans changing the face of the country, unfortunately there is no going back where things like the pill are concerned. Might as well make it 'over the counter' since every woman that wants it gets it anyway. OTC means Obama can't use it to buy votes.

16 posted on 12/20/2012 8:37:55 AM PST by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: Longbow1969

I believe you are correct that Jindal’s “triangulation” is to remove the issue from the table, in order to take it away from Democrats.

I stll say, it is wrong. Republicans will never get the vote of “womyn” for which this is an issue. They wil lose the vote of many Conservatives who dislike sexualizing their children at an ever-increasing rate. It also admits the “government belongs in healthcare” argument, by injecting even more government.

How do you do this, anyway? I don’t believe that BC is by perscription, now, because of any laws, is it? It is for medical reasons, isn’t it? How do you “legislate” this? That sounds like something Democrats would do.

Beyond all of this, there is still a moral issue, that I believe is faulty to ignore. BC is not a “medicine”. It is not curing or treating an illness. Almost its only reason for existance is to enable recreational sex. I don’t know why Consevatives drop this issue. I don’t want to pay for Sandra Fluke’s recreational sex fund any more than I want to pay for her kegger-fund that’s needed to get a guy to want to lay her in the first place.


22 posted on 12/20/2012 9:01:38 AM PST by Empire_of_Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson