Santorum is a lunatic, Part 10,568

[Link]

Birth control is used by 98% of Catholic women. This opposition to basic healthcare based on far-right old-fashioned ideas that the vast majority of the country disagrees with is disgusting. I hope Obama doesn't back down on this.

Be careful: The pendulum can swing the other way down the road. Do you really want that kind of power in the hands of somebody like Santorum some day?

What?  The power to force us to do what 98% of us are doing already?  Sure.  Why not?

[Senator Sbane]

Birth control is used by 98% of Catholic women. This opposition to basic healthcare based on far-right old-fashioned ideas that the vast majority of the country disagrees with is disgusting. I hope Obama doesn't back down on this.

The state is not in a position to dictate to churches what they must do. I agree that opposition to contraception is absurd, but people have their beliefs and they ought to be respected. Not just that, it's a slippery slope saying the state can start telling churches what to do. Be careful: The pendulum can swing the other way down the road. Do you really want that kind of power in the hands of somebody like Santorum some day?

It is called separation of church and state, not state over church.

Contraception need not be covered for church workers AFAIK. Only for Hospital employees. It's a great thing that the Catholic church is involved in running Hospitals, but it ain't a church.

[Politico]

Birth control is used by 98% of Catholic women. This opposition to basic healthcare based on far-right old-fashioned ideas that the vast majority of the country disagrees with is disgusting. I hope Obama doesn't back down on this.

Be careful: The pendulum can swing the other way down the road. Do you really want that kind of power in the hands of somebody like Santorum some day?

What?  The power to force us to do what 98% of us are doing already?  Sure.  Why not?

Really? You do realize what Santorum wants of 2-10% of the population, or whatever the percentage is, right?

[Hashemite]

Rick Santorum should go back to Spain, 1939.

[Politico]

Birth control is used by 98% of Catholic women. This opposition to basic healthcare based on far-right old-fashioned ideas that the vast majority of the country disagrees with is disgusting. I hope Obama doesn't back down on this.

The state is not in a position to dictate to churches what they must do. I agree that opposition to contraception is absurd, but people have their beliefs and they ought to be respected. Not just that, it's a slippery slope saying the state can start telling churches what to do. Be careful: The pendulum can swing the other way down the road. Do you really want that kind of power in the hands of somebody like Santorum some day?

It is called separation of church and state, not state over church.

Contraception need not be covered for church workers AFAIK. Only for Hospital employees. It's a great thing that the Catholic church is involved in running Hospitals, but it ain't a church.

Say what you will about the Catholic church, but they do a hell of a better job running hospitals than the government. And if they don't want to provide contraceptives or abortions, so be it. The government is not in a position to force Catholic hospitals to provide services that are not compatible with their religious beliefs. Consumers are free to get those services elsewhere.

[Senator Sbane]

Birth control is used by 98% of Catholic women. This opposition to basic healthcare based on far-right old-fashioned ideas that the vast majority of the country disagrees with is disgusting. I hope Obama doesn't back down on this.

The state is not in a position to dictate to churches what they must do. I agree that opposition to contraception is absurd, but people have their beliefs and they ought to be respected. Not just that, it's a slippery slope saying the state can start telling churches what to do. Be careful: The pendulum can swing the other way down the road. Do you really want that kind of power in the hands of somebody like Santorum some day?

It is called separation of church and state, not state over church.

Contraception need not be covered for church workers AFAIK. Only for Hospital employees. It's a great thing that the Catholic church is involved in running Hospitals, but it ain't a church.

Say what you will about the Catholic church, but they do a hell of a better job running hospitals than the government.

LOL ok. Did I even try to do a comparison? Do you know my position on the government providing care, you ignorant fool? A Hospital is a Hospital though.

That being said all providers who have ever worked for the VA love it.

[InsaneTrollLogic]

Freedom of religion is absolutely essential. He is on the mark there. However, he is turning off some voters by arguably being a bit hyperbolic about Obama and Co. "taking faith and crushing it." Some conservatives agree with that rhetoric. It is not a winning message, a message that will help topple Obama, but nobody accuses those conservatives of caring about actually winning an election that is going to require some nuance to win. What matters to them is being so right-wing that you cannot beat Obama. And you are not going to outdo Obama when it comes to Big Government. Just because you're proposing Big Government social conservatism, that does not mean the results are going to be any better than Obama's version of Big Government, anyway. Pork is pork whether it smells good and is tempting, or is expired and rotten. I'll take Romney's lean beef over Obama's pork or Santorum's pork any day of the week.

You'll take his beef like a big boy....

[realisticidealist]

Birth control is used by 98% of Catholic women.

Maybe if you include NFP, but otherwise there is no way that stat is true. At most 60% or 70% of sexually active Catholic women, but certainly not 98%.

I really don't see how anyone who is against abortion can be against birth control. I really can't comprehend it. Abortion is the taking of a possible life (or a life in the eyes of many). Putting it even close to the same level as contraception is ridiculous. The best way to prevent abortions is greater use of contraception, no doubt about it.

Some types of contraception perhaps, but certainly not all. I have far less problem with condoms or even the pill than the morning after pill. Granted, if that were the compromise I'd have to make to get rid of abortion, I certainly would.

As far as the Guttmacher study, it refers to 98% of highly sexually experienced Catholic women have ever used birth control, which is different than saying that 98% of all (or even all sexually active) Catholic women actively use birth control. I will not believe the latter.

[Politico]

Freedom of religion is absolutely essential. He is on the mark there. However, he is turning off some voters by arguably being a bit hyperbolic about Obama and Co. "taking faith and crushing it." Some conservatives agree with that rhetoric. It is not a winning message, a message that will help topple Obama, but nobody accuses those conservatives of caring about actually winning an election that is going to require some nuance to win. What matters to them is being so right-wing that you cannot beat Obama. And you are not going to outdo Obama when it comes to Big Government. Just because you're proposing Big Government social conservatism, that does not mean the results are going to be any better than Obama's version of Big Government, anyway. Pork is pork whether it smells good and is tempting, or is expired and rotten. I'll take Romney's lean beef over Obama's pork or Santorum's pork any day of the week.

You'll take his beef like a big boy....

Hey, all I want is a bone thrown my way every now and then. I don't expect filet mignon. I'm just a dawg who wants a ride in the pimped out dawg crate on top of the Mittmobile. Who let the dawgs out? Romney, that's who, who.

[InsaneTrollLogic]

Freedom of religion is absolutely essential. He is on the mark there. However, he is turning off some voters by arguably being a bit hyperbolic about Obama and Co. "taking faith and crushing it." Some conservatives agree with that rhetoric. It is not a winning message, a message that will help topple Obama, but nobody accuses those conservatives of caring about actually winning an election that is going to require some nuance to win. What matters to them is being so right-wing that you cannot beat Obama. And you are not going to outdo Obama when it comes to Big Government. Just because you're proposing Big Government social conservatism, that does not mean the results are going to be any better than Obama's version of Big Government, anyway. Pork is pork whether it smells good and is tempting, or is expired and rotten. I'll take Romney's lean beef over Obama's pork or Santorum's pork any day of the week.

You'll take his beef like a big boy....

Hey, all I want is a bone thrown my way every now and then. I don't expect filet mignon. I'm just a dawg who wants a ride in the pimped out dawg crate on top of the Mittmobile. Who let the dawgs out? Romney, that's who, who.

All I am saying is that comparing the beef and pork of other men is....

Is there something you need to tell us?

[Politico]

Birth control is used by 98% of Catholic women. This opposition to basic healthcare based on far-right old-fashioned ideas that the vast majority of the country disagrees with is disgusting. I hope Obama doesn't back down on this.

The state is not in a position to dictate to churches what they must do. I agree that opposition to contraception is absurd, but people have their beliefs and they ought to be respected. Not just that, it's a slippery slope saying the state can start telling churches what to do. Be careful: The pendulum can swing the other way down the road. Do you really want that kind of power in the hands of somebody like Santorum some day?

It is called separation of church and state, not state over church.

Contraception need not be covered for church workers AFAIK. Only for Hospital employees. It's a great thing that the Catholic church is involved in running Hospitals, but it ain't a church.

Say what you will about the Catholic church, but they do a hell of a better job running hospitals than the government.

LOL ok. Did I even try to do a comparison? Do you know my position on the government providing care, you ignorant fool? A Hospital is a Hospital though.

That being said all providers who have ever worked for the VA love it.

Vets deserve better than the service usually provided at VAs. The health care offered to vets is part of the benefits package offered in return for their services provided to America. Not that VAs are bad, but in general they could be better. They certainly will never get better if we open government hospitals to all comers "free" of charge AKA the liberal dream.

[oakvale]

I'll believe that anything other than a negligible amount of Catholics virtually anywhere use "natural family planning" when I see any evidence. I absolutely don't believe that for a second.

[Politico]

Freedom of religion is absolutely essential. He is on the mark there. However, he is turning off some voters by arguably being a bit hyperbolic about Obama and Co. "taking faith and crushing it." Some conservatives agree with that rhetoric. It is not a winning message, a message that will help topple Obama, but nobody accuses those conservatives of caring about actually winning an election that is going to require some nuance to win. What matters to them is being so right-wing that you cannot beat Obama. And you are not going to outdo Obama when it comes to Big Government. Just because you're proposing Big Government social conservatism, that does not mean the results are going to be any better than Obama's version of Big Government, anyway. Pork is pork whether it smells good and is tempting, or is expired and rotten. I'll take Romney's lean beef over Obama's pork or Santorum's pork any day of the week.

You'll take his beef like a big boy....

Hey, all I want is a bone thrown my way every now and then. I don't expect filet mignon. I'm just a dawg who wants a ride in the pimped out dawg crate on top of the Mittmobile. Who let the dawgs out? Romney, that's who, who.

All I am saying is that comparing the beef and pork of other men is....

Is there something you need to tell us?

Stand with Santorum!

[Secretary Polnut]

Assuming the Catholic-owned institution is employing people without concern for their faith, they have the same obligation as any other employer.

If anything this shows how ridiculous it is that your employer has ANYTHING to do with private health matters.

[IDS Speaker Ben Kenobi]

As far as the Guttmacher study, it refers to 98% of highly sexually experienced Catholic women have ever used birth control, which is different than saying that 98% of all (or even all sexually active) Catholic women actively use birth control. I will not believe the latter.

Nor does it mean that the women were even Catholic at the time when they used birth control. If you ever used birth control at any point of your life  you count.

Terrible statistic btw. I would like to see the numbers for practicing Catholic women as a whole presently using contraception. I would highly suspect that they are a minority.

[Secretary Polnut]

As far as the Guttmacher study, it refers to 98% of highly sexually experienced Catholic women have ever used birth control, which is different than saying that 98% of all (or even all sexually active) Catholic women actively use birth control. I will not believe the latter.

Nor does it mean that the women were even Catholic at the time when they used birth control. If you ever used birth control at any point of your life  you count.

Terrible statistic btw. I would like to see the numbers for practicing Catholic women as a whole presently using contraception. I would highly suspect that they are a minority.

I would HIGHLY doubt that's the case. There's a big difference between 'practicing' and 'practicing and observant'... BIG difference.

[IDS Speaker Ben Kenobi]

Assuming the Catholic-owned institution is employing people without concern for their faith, they have the same obligation as any other employer.

If anything this shows how ridiculous it is that your employer has ANYTHING to do with private health matters.

Most Catholic institutions do take faith into consideration and try to hire faithful Catholics. This requirement would also apply to nuns who work for various Catholic charities. Terrible optics for Obama not doing the standard opt out clause - where those wishing for a conscience exemption can simply choose not to participate.

I'm not sure why the government should require people to purchase elective coverage. No one has any medical need for contraception.

[Senator Sbane]

Birth control is used by 98% of Catholic women.

Maybe if you include NFP, but otherwise there is no way that stat is true. At most 60% or 70% of sexually active Catholic women, but certainly not 98%.

I really don't see how anyone who is against abortion can be against birth control. I really can't comprehend it. Abortion is the taking of a possible life (or a life in the eyes of many). Putting it even close to the same level as contraception is ridiculous. The best way to prevent abortions is greater use of contraception, no doubt about it.

Some types of contraception perhaps, but certainly not all. I have far less problem with condoms or even the pill than the morning after pill. Granted, if that were the compromise I'd have to make to get rid of abortion, I certainly would.

As far as the Guttmacher study, it refers to 98% of highly sexually experienced Catholic women have ever used birth control, which is different than saying that 98% of all (or even all sexually active) Catholic women actively use birth control. I will not believe the latter.

Yes, I would assume the 98% would only be for sexually active women. I don't know why sexually inactive women would be on BCP's, unless they have a disease which requires therapy with BCP's, in which case it wouldn't exactly be birth control.

Morning after pills are not abortions. They do not kill a fertilized embryo. They mostly prevent ovulation from occurring in the first place. But there is evidence it can prevent implantation which would be your gripe with it? It's not it's main mechanism of action though. Anyways here is what Clinical Pharmacology tells us.

The primary contraceptive effect of progestins involves the suppression of the midcycle surge of LH. The exact mechanism of action, however, is unknown. At the cellular level, progestins diffuse freely into target cells and bind to the progesterone receptor. Target cells include the female reproductive tract, the mammary gland, the hypothalamus, and the pituitary. Once bound to the receptor, progestins slow the frequency of release of gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) from the hypothalamus and blunt the pre-ovulatory LH surge, thereby preventing follicular maturation and ovulation. Overall, progestin-only contraceptives prevent ovulation in 70—80% of cycles, however, the clinical effectiveness ranges 96—98%. This suggests that additional mechanisms may be involved. Other actions of progestins include alterations in the endometrium that can impair implantation and an increase in cervical mucus viscosity which inhibits sperm migration into the uterus. Following removal of Norplant® capsules, fertility rates rapidly return to normal.

http://clinicalpharmacology.com/?epm=2_1

[Senator Sbane]

Birth control is used by 98% of Catholic women. This opposition to basic healthcare based on far-right old-fashioned ideas that the vast majority of the country disagrees with is disgusting. I hope Obama doesn't back down on this.

The state is not in a position to dictate to churches what they must do. I agree that opposition to contraception is absurd, but people have their beliefs and they ought to be respected. Not just that, it's a slippery slope saying the state can start telling churches what to do. Be careful: The pendulum can swing the other way down the road. Do you really want that kind of power in the hands of somebody like Santorum some day?

It is called separation of church and state, not state over church.

Contraception need not be covered for church workers AFAIK. Only for Hospital employees. It's a great thing that the Catholic church is involved in running Hospitals, but it ain't a church.

Say what you will about the Catholic church, but they do a hell of a better job running hospitals than the government.

LOL ok. Did I even try to do a comparison? Do you know my position on the government providing care, you ignorant fool? A Hospital is a Hospital though.

That being said all providers who have ever worked for the VA love it.

Vets deserve better than the service usually provided at VAs. The health care offered to vets is part of the benefits package offered in return for their services provided to America. Not that VAs are bad, but in general they could be better. They certainly will never get better if we open government hospitals to all comers "free" of charge AKA the liberal dream.

LOL you should talk to some vets sometimes. But yeah, that level of care cannot be sustained for all Americans. Not without massive tax increases which would cripple the economy.

[Secretary Polnut]

Assuming the Catholic-owned institution is employing people without concern for their faith, they have the same obligation as any other employer.

If anything this shows how ridiculous it is that your employer has ANYTHING to do with private health matters.

Most Catholic institutions do take faith into consideration and try to hire faithful Catholics. This requirement would also apply to nuns who work for various Catholic charities. Terrible optics for Obama not doing the standard opt out clause - where those wishing for a conscience exemption can simply choose not to participate.

I'm not sure why the government should require people to purchase elective coverage. No one has any medical need for contraception.

Um... really? Do you know how many OTHER conditions are treated by the pill?

In fact, I'll help you out...
* Acne
* Severe period pain
* Polycystic ovarian syndrome
* Ovarian cysts
...and plenty more...

Plus women who use oral contraceptives have a much lower rate of ovarian and endometrial cancer...

[Link]

Birth control is used by 98% of Catholic women. This opposition to basic healthcare based on far-right old-fashioned ideas that the vast majority of the country disagrees with is disgusting. I hope Obama doesn't back down on this.

Be careful: The pendulum can swing the other way down the road. Do you really want that kind of power in the hands of somebody like Santorum some day?

What?  The power to force us to do what 98% of us are doing already?  Sure.  Why not?

Really? You do realize what Santorum wants of 2-10% of the population, or whatever the percentage is, right?

2%≠10%  It's 1/5 of 10%.  Nice try.

No actually I don't know what Santorum wants of 10% of the population.

98% of Catholics volunarily use contraception.  Please name for me some other issues regarding sexual reproduction where 98% of the population not only have an opinion but have at some time in the past followed through and acted on that opinion.

And this isn't forcing someone to take contraception.  This is forcing certain institutions to cover it on their insurance.  If no one at the company wants to take it then there is effectively no change for the company.  No change seems  pretty benign.  What could be better than that?

[Link]

No one has any medical need for contraception.

The ignorance of this statement is astonishing.

[IDS Speaker Ben Kenobi]

Morning after pills are not abortions.

Yes they are. They prevent implantation, not contraception. You take them after contraception in order to procure an early term abortion.

They do not kill a fertilized embryo.

By the time you take them - the egg has already been fertilized. They take effect after, not before conception.

They mostly prevent ovulation from occurring in the first place.

If that were the case you would take them before having sex. We don't call it the 'morning before' pill, do we?

But there is evidence it can prevent implantation which would be your gripe with it?

That's the whole purpose of the pill.

It's not it's main mechanism of action though.

When you define personhood - as Santorum does, as beginning with contraception - then yes, it procures an early term abortion.

[Lief]

Look, if Republicans want to run on a platform straight out of the 1950s against contraception, and lose women voters by an even greater percentage than they did in 2008, I encourage them to. It would be hilarious.

[Politico]

Birth control is used by 98% of Catholic women. This opposition to basic healthcare based on far-right old-fashioned ideas that the vast majority of the country disagrees with is disgusting. I hope Obama doesn't back down on this.

Be careful: The pendulum can swing the other way down the road. Do you really want that kind of power in the hands of somebody like Santorum some day?

What?  The power to force us to do what 98% of us are doing already?  Sure.  Why not?

Really? You do realize what Santorum wants of 2-10% of the population, or whatever the percentage is, right?

2%≠10%  It's 1/5 of 10%.  Nice try.

I was being nice by inflating the estimate to 10%. Personally, I suspect it is closer to 2% than 10%.

No actually I don't know what Santorum wants of 10% of the population.

You might want to look into why Santorum means what it means.

98% of Catholics volunarily use contraception.  Please name for me some other issues regarding sexual reproduction where 98% of the population not only have an opinion but have at some time in the past followed through and acted on that opinion.

And this isn't forcing someone to take contraception.  This is forcing certain institutions to cover it on their insurance.  If no one at the company wants to take it then there is effectively no change for the company.  No change seems  pretty benign.  What could be better than that?

Stop being such a Big Government stooge. This is a bad precedent regardless of what percentage of Catholics do or do not use contraception.

We the people own the state, not the other way around. Any actions that imply otherwise are to be soundly rejected and opposed.