Pepper sprayed for public safety. - Page 64

Tyrone Slothrop · 02-10-2012, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

no. this reeks more of Stalinism.

As I recall, Stalin didn't force anyone to the gulags -- all he had to do was issue regulations revising the tax code and his victims trooped off to Siberia themselves, eager to save their tax deductions. Such is the insidious power of big government.

Hank Chinaski · 02-10-2012, 02:22 PM

http://www.msmagazine.com/news/uswirestory.asp?ID=13456 How can someone who wants to get rid of Griswold so states can ban contraception win a state? Forget going after Roe, lets get the belly of the beast, kill that privacy right at its root. Are there really enough people that crazy to make this a position that isn't poison to a campaign?

Fugee · 02-10-2012, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

You could get contraception before ("you" in the sense that you have lady parts), but there was a co-pay. The change is to eliminate the co-pay. Creeping socialism, right?

Are you sure? I thought it was that the organizations opposed to birth control don't want to offer birth control at all as part of their plans.

Tyrone Slothrop · 02-10-2012, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

http://www.msmagazine.com/news/uswirestory.asp?ID=13456 How can someone who wants to get rid of Griswold so states can ban contraception win a state? Forget going after Roe, lets get the belly of the beast, kill that privacy right at its root. Are there really enough people that crazy to make this a position that isn't poison to a campaign?

Obama: Don't throw me into the briar patch.

Tyrone Slothrop · 02-10-2012, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fugee

Are you sure? I thought it was that the organizations opposed to birth control don't want to offer birth control at all as part of their plans.

The Catholic bishops and a bunch of other people don't want want women to have sex, and they don't want women to have contraceptives.

Ostensibly, the current issue is about the "religious freedom" to deny the choice to get contraceptives to employees who don't share your views. (Conservatives demand that we tolerate their intolerance!)

Adder · 02-10-2012, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

http://www.msmagazine.com/news/uswirestory.asp?ID=13456 How can someone who wants to get rid of Griswold so states can ban contraception win a state? Forget going after Roe, lets get the belly of the beast, kill that privacy right at its root. Are there really enough people that crazy to make this a position that isn't poison to a campaign?

What kind of campaign? In a republican primary, apparently not.

In a general election? Well, let's just say that I REALLY hope we get to find out.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy · 02-10-2012, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

The Catholic bishops and a bunch of other people don't want want women to have sex, and they don't want women to have contraceptives.

Ostensibly, the current issue is about the "religious freedom" to deny the choice to get contraceptives to employees who don't share your views. (Conservatives demand that we tolerate their intolerance!)

I know it was a long time ago, but what the issue of birth control was raised at our pre-Cana, the priest mentioned rhythm method, told us there were doubts about its effecitveness, and then suggested we talk with our doctors.

This is one where the Bishops have to say something, because the 5% of their flock who are anti-birth control are very vocal and Rome still lives in a fantasy world, but ought to be smart enough to put the conversation to bed quickly before alienating the overwhelming majority of their congregation.

On the other hand, I'll bet some of the righty fundies really believe in abstinence only birth control.

Fugee · 02-10-2012, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

http://www.msmagazine.com/news/uswirestory.asp?ID=13456 How can someone who wants to get rid of Griswold so states can ban contraception win a state? Forget going after Roe, lets get the belly of the beast, kill that privacy right at its root. Are there really enough people that crazy to make this a position that isn't poison to a campaign?

I don't remember any coverage of this position when he was in Minnesota so there are probably a lot of religious conservatives here who think he's only against abortion, not against birth control.

And then there are his supporters like my brother who thinks birth control pills are abortifacients (sp?) because an egg might get through and get fertilized but the pill will stop it from implanting thus causing an abortion. Did I mention he's a one-issue voter?

Fugee · 02-10-2012, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

On the other hand, I'll bet some of the righty fundies really believe in abstinence only birth control.

My brother and his wife successfully used the basel temperature method** until he went in for the snip so probably think that's acceptable too. I'm reasonably certain they don't have an issue with condoms or spermicidal methods.

**Why do I know this much about my family's sex life? I think my head is going to explode.

Hank Chinaski · 02-10-2012, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fugee

My brother and his wife successfully used the basel temperature method** until he went in for the snip so probably think that's acceptable too. I also suspect they don't have an issue with condoms or spermicidal methods.

**Why do I know this much about my family's sex life? I think my head is going to explode.

if he got cut he can't have a problem with a condom.

Fugee · 02-10-2012, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

if he got cut he can't have a problem with a condom.

You're right. He doesn't have a problem with contraception, just anything that could possibly cause an abortion.

Sidd Finch · 02-10-2012, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

http://www.msmagazine.com/news/uswirestory.asp?ID=13456 How can someone who wants to get rid of Griswold so states can ban contraception win a state? Forget going after Roe, lets get the belly of the beast, kill that privacy right at its root. Are there really enough people that crazy to make this a position that isn't poison to a campaign?

Appears he's taking the "double-down" approach referenced in Ty's blog re-post.

Or maybe Santorum feels that less contraception = less vaginal sex = more spreading around of his namesake.

Adder · 02-10-2012, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Appears he's taking the "double-down" approach referenced in Ty's blog re-post.

Or maybe Santorum feels that less contraception = less vaginal sex = more spreading around of his namesake.

There is a guy who sings and plays the guitar in the skyway near the office every day. As I was passing by today, he was singing, "santorum, santorum, Romeny got splashed in the face with santorum."

Tyrone Slothrop · 02-10-2012, 04:23 PM

Here is what Atticus might say on all this.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy · 02-10-2012, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fugee

You're right. He doesn't have a problem with contraception, just anything that could possibly cause an abortion.

I think he's a diff't variety than the hardest core God-said-no-spilling-your-seed type. Still, now it's not just you, but all of us who have TMI regarding your family's sex life. Maybe I should wax poetic on past adventures with the rhythym method?

All I know is, the more this gets discussed, the more likely I am to turn Hindu.