GOP candidate wants to outlaw birth control

Skye1300 said:

Or she can learn her body and her fertile times and know when not to have sex or when to do a different kind of sex during that window.

Click to expand...

Or we can inform religious people that they have no business inserting themselves into our sex lives.

I would just like to reiterate my standing offer:

Anyone who wants to live in a theocracy is welcome to move to one. I will very gladly pay for your plane ticket out of my country.

Skye1300 said:

Or she can learn her body and her fertile times and know when not to have sex or when to do a different kind of sex during that window.

Click to expand...

A woman who does not want to get pregnant should not rely on this method.

Belk said:

inserting themselves

Click to expand...

Unusual verb choice.

Nithavela said:

The USA needs soldiers and wageslaves.

Click to expand...

Especially since we've cut back so drastically on desperate immigrants.

NxNW said:

If we are not a theocracy, which person decides what is righteous?

Click to expand...

The one who appeals to peoples fears most directly.

Tom 1 said:

The anti-contraception thing came out of the general belief that the serfs were property of the local bigwig, and hence had no right to put limits on the size of the workforce. Nothing to do with biblical teachings, although a particularly egregious malinterpretation of an OT passage is used to justify it.

Click to expand...

Church Fathers were writing against the use of contraception before what we now refer to as serfdom was even a thing. But yeah, I guess you could just make stuff up too. That's cool.

durangodawood said:

The one who appeals to peoples fears most directly.

Click to expand...

Hold on, buddy, I wasn't interested in the actual truth here.

Redac said:

Church Fathers were writing against the use of contraception before what we now refer to as serfdom was even a thing. But yeah, I guess you could just make stuff up too. That's cool.

Click to expand...

That’s not right, the Romans practised serfdom in latter days of the empire, from 2nd CE or thereabouts. Augustine was the first serious anti-contraception fanatic, but it seems rather obvious from his own pronouncements, and life, that his own views on sex were driven by some sense of guilt or self-loathing over his rampantly promiscuous early life (resulting in at least one child he abandoned). According to Augustine, a married couple should only have sex to procreate, meaning, according to him, a married couple that uses contraception is not really married, and hence living in sin. Obvious nonsense. By the time the Catholic Church got round to making an official prohibition, nothing much had changed in terms of attitudes towards serfs/peasants - those living in what we might technically call serfdom but also any depending on a feudal lord (or other similarly dependent relationship) for protection and so subject to conscription or other impositions - had not changed, but the political power of the church had grown considerably. The concern was not the welfare of the many, but the privilege of the few. Just how much death and suffering is implicated in that decision would be hard to calculate, but it was a monumental evil.

comana said:

A woman who does not want to get pregnant should not rely on this method.

Click to expand...

Also, women don't CHOOSE to get pregnant, that's not how that process works anymore than one chooses to get infected via bacteria or viruses, because both happen without our conscious recognition of said process. Even birth control is not 100%, do we just punish married couples who want to have relations for the unitive purpose of sex instead of reproductive?

Nithavela said:

Theyll come around when they can impose their pet sexual moral on the general population.

Click to expand...

If they're going to become political lobbying organizations they need to be taxed as such.

muichimotsu said:

Also, women don't CHOOSE to get pregnant, that's not how that process works anymore than one chooses to get infected via bacteria or viruses, because both happen without our conscious recognition of said process. Even birth control is not 100%, do we just punish married couples who want to have relations for the unitive purpose of sex instead of reproductive?

Click to expand...

Contrarian points: Many women do choose to get pregnant and measles/chicken pox parties are a thing among anti-vaxxers.

But I do agree with your overall point.

DaisyDay said:

Contrarian points: Many women do choose to get pregnant and measles/chicken pox parties are a thing among anti-vaxxers.

But I do agree with your overall point.

Click to expand...

I think we're confusing choice in the sense of purposeful action to achieve a goal with the choice of enacting the physiological process of the fertilization and attachment to the uterine wall. Women don't choose that anymore than men can choose their sperm to just not worm

And the same applies to the other example, because that's intentional goals, but it doesn't always work, though those two diseases are highly communicable by nature, so that's more fringe insanity at that point, thinking there's no problems that could complicate a simple infection due to a child's immune system differing in some way

quietpraiyze said:

I heard this. I don't think it was even a week after the "leak" and it wasn't the Candidate you're mentioning.

I don't think it's just me but I've known for years that some Pro-Lifers were not only against abortion but birth control as well. The birth control issue was just more low key or in some instances put on the back burner but it was always there. I'm not surprised though. I do wonder if they're considering viagra, cialis, and other ED's to be a part of that hmmmm...

Click to expand...

TLK Valentine said:

Oh, no, no, no... those are for men, and more importantly, they're to encourage men to have sex... for procreation, of course.

If a prescription wasn't required, they'd be handing them out in the churches...

Click to expand...

IMO, if people were really concerned about righteousness, premarital sex, virtue, personal responsibility etc, ED medications would be restricted to married men. In fact, I think the prescription should require require the wife's permission. The organizations who were wanting to opt out of the Obamacare provisions of providing contraceptives, which at one time had reduced abortion rates to lows not seen since 1973, were more than happy to allow men to have Viagra.