Bullsh*, Planned Parenthood politicized it a long, long time ago and your side hasn't let up since, all the way to mandates and a mythical war on women.

Men can already buy condoms, with this they could buy the pills, too.

For the same reason a grocery store checker that hates alcohol will run your beer across the scanner?

Bobby Jindal sounds like a smart, sensible politician, the Republican party needs more like him.

Why should women pay for them free otc when the new Obamacare regs say they can get them for free if they are prescribed ? Jindal's jui-jitsu will not fool true believers . Their goal is not women's access to birth control .Their goal is the strong arming of the Catholic Church ,forcing it to bend to their will.

I think the goal is to keep other people noses out of private business between companies, doctors, or consumers. What gives religion the right to say what goes on in people lives and think it's a conspiracy when they get told to screw off?

I think anyone who believes that is either naïve, willfully ignorant or clueless. In fact, based on your posts you're obviously just fine with getting your nose between others and their private business.

See? Exhibit A.

Ok, if this isn't an example of why the contraceptive mandate is an affront I don't know what is, it requires celibate nuns to provide free contraceptive coverage.

Obamacare could drive Little Sisters of the Poor out of the US

Now that's a war on women. But I know, if these nuns would just stop acting like a business instead of a church they wouldn't have this problem.

The services just need to be included in the package, it's obvious they will never be used so what's the big deal?

On the abortion debate - I get frustrated with both sides. Unwanted pregnancy is a horrible situation for a mother to be in. I used to be a pro-choice advocate because of the "exceptions" to the norm - rape, incest (which I consider to BE rape), the life of the mother. I'm Catholic and my church does permit the use of the morning after pill in cases of rape and incest. They do permit the use of tubal ligation in the case of a tubal pregnancy to save the life of the mother - there is no chance of the child surviving and the mother wouldn't survive it either. I differ with the church on this tubal ligation - I think if the tube can be spared, it should be. To me, that choice does more to preserve life and the potential for life.

At the same time, I have changed my mind on elective abortion except in these critical circumstances. Women do have the choice not to get pregnant if they do not want to parent from the beginning. We are not such weak people that we cannot abstain from intercourse if we don't want children. It really discredits men and women alike to perpetuate this argument that women need the choice of abortion as a form of birth control. When a woman has intercourse, she knows it can result in pregnancy. If she engages in it regularly whe knows it is more likely than not to result in pregnancy. Well, in making this decision - stupidly if she doesn't want a child - she, in my view, voluntarily relinquishes a part of her body, agreeing to share it with another person. I'm not sure her rights, at that point, trump the rights of the unborn child. She has all the power, and child needs some protection.

For some reason if a woman is pregnant and wants her child, then is shot and killed and her child also dies, we have no difficulty considering it a double homicide. But if she doesn't want the baby and elects for the child to die, we consider it a medical choice. We need to be careful of this kind of thought process.

From the moment of conception, that child is human and real and alive - that's scientific fact. Some will argue that it's less human, or not yet human enough to be accorded any rights of it's own. I think that's silly. We know better. So then the question becomes, "when is killing a baby justfiable?" I would challenge women considering abortion to ask themselves if their circumstances are so intolerable as to warrant terminating that child's life. She has the option of placing the child for adoption, so once the pregnancy is over, she certainly has the option to resume her normal life.

What is she sparing herself by taking the life of the child? A temporary interuption in her education? Embarrassment in her community? The upset of her family? Disapproval of a man who isn't man enough to help her parent?

To me, there are very few situations in which taking the life of the child is morally justafiable. And on this point, some people will go on and bluster over the audacity of considering a moral position. Well, I believe in morals. And manners. And Ethics. And laws. And personal standards. All of these things are meant to lead us to healthier, happier, more productive lives during which we are not a pain in the neck to the rest of society.

I am not convinced that our government can effectively discern when an abortion is justified and do not want it addressed in the government forum with laws barring the practice. However, I certainly am offended by those who diminish the idea of human life to a "medical decision" or a "personal choice" or the suggestion that a woman who was not raped, who's life is not in jeapordy and who is not pregnant form incest, should suck it up and carry out her pregnancy, placing her child for adoption if she is unable or unwilling to parent herself. Yes, it's hard. When we put ourself in dumb situations, sometimes it's hard to get out of them. That's how life works. When we're spared the consequences of our decisions, or let ourselves off the hook, we don't learn a damned thing.

And that's the powerful message we need to give our sons and daughters!

Seriously? You don't get the absurdity of forcing nuns to buy contraceptives?

The nuns buy nothing but insurance that covers a full range of services. They would be buying the insurance any way. They don't turn down tax exemptions either. It's a simple fix, contract your clerical work out. DUUUHHH!!

Show me. Links please.

You need links to confirm that a human embryo or featus is human, alive and real? What do you think it is - a pot roast until the 7th month? Come on - let's be reasonable.

You know the left, life doesn't begin until you can see it with you'un own eyes, they think a baby is akin to a hen egg or maybe they are still born in cabbage patches.

This whole issue is because the left wants easy abortion, easy contraception and of course the easy lifestyle that goes with it. You would have thought that having won the cold war and seen what the easy lifestyle did to the Soviet Union, they wouldn't want to go down the same path, but they just don't make the connect

I think Tal was referring to a scientific link.

The science would tells us that the embryo is a potential human being. Science also tells us that a fetus is not conscious until a certain number of months into the gestation period. Prior to this number of months the fetus is consider not to be conscious enough to feel pain. In other words, it has no experience. Another way of saying it would be the there is not enough neurological development for experience to occur.

In most societies that practice abortion this magical number of months always turns out to be very loose and is always seems loosely applied depending on the country.

I might, and I say I MIGHT accept that a fetus is not conscious in the first trimester, but I cannot accept that it isn't at the end of the second and at the beginning of the third.

Personally, I have a lot of problems with this scientific approach to determining what is and isn't conscious. Even though science would try and tells us they have an understanding of consciousness I am rather skeptical.

I may have a very good metaphysical argument as to why a fetus is conscious even in the very early stages of development, but he reality is that, laws in this area tend to allow for scientific argument rather than for metaphysical arguments.

I am against abortion for a different reason. That reason being that no one actually know what consciousness is.

Tut

When children are considered a disposable commodity depending on convenience , we really shouldn't be surprised that a disturbed person with a gun likewise thinks children are disposable .

I agree Tom the recent tragedy is as much a mental health issue as it is a gun issue and they is a lot of community attitude caught up in it and in this so called war on women

One post you're whining about keeping your nose out of other people's health care decisions and the next your for forcing celibate nuns to buy birth control. You can't make this stuff up.

Hello again, Steve:

What you can't make up, is the right wing's LAST gasp attempt at trying to hang on to a bankrupt policy... I know YOU don't think there was a war on women. But the MAJORITY of the country's women think there IS. Your policy's have been REPUDIATED by the country, and we're moving in a different direction now. You can change up, or you can die on the vine..

excon

The nuns don't buy contraceptives, they don't make them, pay for them, or provide them. That's just right wing fantasy to make a false point so no one else can buy them or use them. That's my problem with what you have said many times about how you have a right to make others practice what you believe. You don't have that right.

What's a celibate nun have to do with an employees private doctor writig a script for birth control? How would they even know if they weren't sticking their nose into personal business and trying to control the business interests of private companies who have a right to offer services to private citizens.

To be clear though the law applies to insurance companies paying for contraceptives, not a celibate nun using them, paying for them, or passing them out.

I am pro life for ME, and its not my care or concern what anyone else is. Why is it the concern of a celebate nun? Who gives her power and authority over everyone else who is not celibate or Catholic?

Oh stop trying to intimidate me into caving to your bullsh*t, I'm not moved in the least.

I would have thought even you would get that you this nun example is total nonsense. And just so you know, Obama is going to end up caving because the courts have recognized this intrusion on religious freedom and are holding his feet to the fire.

The administration admitted as much that the mandate infringes on religious freedom and the court is going to hold them to more than a promise to fix it.

P.S. It might be a good time for you guys to stop with all the nonsensical war imagery in light of Newtown.