Name the Republicans who have ever banned birth contrtol

[NYcarbineer]

Dimwit........contraception prevents the fertilization of the egg. Any form that affects a fertilized egg is not contraception, but abortion. An IUD scraping the uteran wall to keep the egg from implanting is no different than a doctor scraping the uteran wall to remove it. You are intelligent enough to know the difference aren't you? There are plenty of reputable medical websites that will explain the difference between contraception and abortion. Google is your friend.

So your position is that the personhood amendment would ban the IUD on the grounds that it is in fact an abortion device, and not a contraception device??

An IUD is not a contraceptive device as it does not PREVENT pregnancy. You need to do some Googling and understand the definitions of the terms you are arguing.

FROM YOUR OWN DICTIONARY LINK YOU ASSHOLE

intrauterine device (IUD) a plastic or metallic device inserted in the uterus to prevent pregnancy.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Name the Republicans who have ever banned birth contrtol

Hell....it's tough-enough (within their ranks of elites), trying to find one that (even) understands what-the-fuck is.....

.....actually GOING-ON!!!!

I guess Snooki Palin hadn't (yet) read-about-it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

kwc57 deserves the respect of all such trolls as he.

 

[kwc57]

So your position is that the personhood amendment would ban the IUD on the grounds that it is in fact an abortion device, and not a contraception device??

An IUD is not a contraceptive device as it does not PREVENT pregnancy. You need to do some Googling and understand the definitions of the terms you are arguing.

FROM YOUR OWN DICTIONARY LINK YOU ASSHOLE

intrauterine device (IUD) a plastic or metallic device inserted in the uterus to prevent pregnancy.

You glossed over this part, "Intrauterine devices—Intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUDs) are inserted into the uterus, where they stay from one to 10 years. An IUD prevents the fertilized egg from implanting in the lining of the uterus, and may have other effects as well."

Tell me, was the egg fertilized or prevented from being fertilized?

 

[kwc57]

kwc57 deserves the respect of all such trolls as he.

JakeFakey, do everyone here a couple of favors. First, look up the definition of troll. Learn it. Second, since you saw your shadow, stick your head back up your ass for another six weeks.

 

[JakeStarkey]

kcw57 is fail.

 

[rightwinger]

I could never understand the GOP position on this.

I perfectly understand they have a moral objection to abortion and oppose it on those grounds

But if their primary objection is to abortion, why do they also object to those programs that help to prevent abortions? Contraception, Planned Parenthood, Sex Education, low cost childcare, welfare ....all help reduce the need for abortions

Yet all are opposed by the GOP

 

[NYcarbineer]

An IUD is not a contraceptive device as it does not PREVENT pregnancy. You need to do some Googling and understand the definitions of the terms you are arguing.

FROM YOUR OWN DICTIONARY LINK YOU ASSHOLE

intrauterine device (IUD) a plastic or metallic device inserted in the uterus to prevent pregnancy.

You glossed over this part, "Intrauterine devices—Intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUDs) are inserted into the uterus, where they stay from one to 10 years. An IUD prevents the fertilized egg from implanting in the lining of the uterus, and may have other effects as well."

Tell me, was the egg fertilized or prevented from being fertilized?

You said the IUD does not prevent pregnancy. Your own link says the IUD does prevent pregnancy.

You both can't be right.

 

[kwc57]

FROM YOUR OWN DICTIONARY LINK YOU ASSHOLE

intrauterine device (IUD) a plastic or metallic device inserted in the uterus to prevent pregnancy.

You glossed over this part, "Intrauterine devices—Intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUDs) are inserted into the uterus, where they stay from one to 10 years. An IUD prevents the fertilized egg from implanting in the lining of the uterus, and may have other effects as well."

Tell me, was the egg fertilized or prevented from being fertilized?

You said the IUD does not prevent pregnancy. Your own link says the IUD does prevent pregnancy.

You both can't be right.

Abortion "PREVENTS" pregnancy......after the fact...just like a bullet to the head does or an IUD. It all depends on how you define prevents doesn't it. For you, there is no distinction between taking a pill that stops ovulation or a rubber that prevents sperm from travelling and a doctor using a blade to scrape a uterus clean.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You glossed over this part, "Intrauterine devices—Intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUDs) are inserted into the uterus, where they stay from one to 10 years. An IUD prevents the fertilized egg from implanting in the lining of the uterus, and may have other effects as well."

Tell me, was the egg fertilized or prevented from being fertilized?

You said the IUD does not prevent pregnancy. Your own link says the IUD does prevent pregnancy.

You both can't be right.

SNIP

kcw57 is not any authority to define anything. he is fail.

 

[kwc57]

You said the IUD does not prevent pregnancy. Your own link says the IUD does prevent pregnancy.

You both can't be right.

SNIP

kcw57 is not any authority to define anything. he is fail.

Jake, you arrived late to the party.....and you weren't even invited. Do what you do best ......go blow.

 

[BluePhantom]

I already addressed this in another thread but very well.

1873 President Ulysses S. Grant (Republican) signed the Comstock Act of 1873 which prohibited contraception, information about contraception, or information about how to obtain contraception from being sent in the United Sates mail or crossing state lines. The law was pushed by Anthony Comstock (Republican) and passed the 43rd United States Congress with little opposition. Both houses of Congress were dominated by Republicans with a 69.9% share of the Senate and a 63.4% share of the House. Approximately 4,000 people faced criminal charges as a result.

Connecticut Governor Charles B. Andrews (Republican) signed into law a complete ban on all contraceptive drugs and devices including a ban on their use by married couples and in regards to private or personal possession, sale, or ownership in 1879. While I can't find information on the party demographics of the Connecticut General Assembly in 1879, the state was a strongly Republican until the 1960s so it's likely that the Republicans held the majority. The law was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1965 (Griswold v. Connecticut).

Birth control for non-married couples was not established until 1975 Baird v. Eisenstadt; a Supreme Court decision which broadened the scope of the Griswold decision and was in regard to a Massachusetts law banning contraception ("Crimes against chastity" (Chapter 272, sections 19- 21A). Whether the crimes against chastity laws were sponsored by Republicans is unknown, but as with Connecticut, Massachusetts was a strong Republican state until FDR and one could reasonably conclude that the laws were passed before then.



USC Law School

Comstock Act (1873) - eNotes.com

Comstock laws - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

43rd United States Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Birth Control - A Brief History of Birth Control - Our Bodies Ourselves

General Laws of Massachusetts - Chapter 272 Crimes Against Chastity, Morality, Decency and Good Order. - Section 1 Enticing away a person under 16 for marriage - Massachusetts Attorney Resources - Massachusetts Laws

 

[Rozman]

Man these Democrat chicks really like
screwing...why else are they going so freaking nuts
over people messing with their Birth control....

 

[rightwinger]

Man these Democrat chicks really like
screwing...why else are they going so freaking nuts
over people messing with their Birth control....

I don't think any chick wants you messing with their birth control

 

[kwc57]

Man these Democrat chicks really like
screwing...why else are they going so freaking nuts
over people messing with their Birth control....

I'm all for liberals getting as much birth control as they can get their hands on and using it religiously. Have you noticed how quickly they breed more moochers?

 

[JakeStarkey]

SNIP

kcw57 is not any authority to define anything. he is fail.

Jake, you arrived late to the party.....and you weren't even invited. Do what you do best ......go blow.

That is a fail statement, sonny.

 

[geauxtohell]

You glossed over this part, "Intrauterine devices—Intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUDs) are inserted into the uterus, where they stay from one to 10 years. An IUD prevents the fertilized egg from implanting in the lining of the uterus, and may have other effects as well."

Tell me, was the egg fertilized or prevented from being fertilized?

You can go back to my original ACOG bulletin for a source.

It's blatantly dishonest to claim that IUDs are abortifacients. People who claims that they are are basing their stance on the non-expert opinion of clergy and zealots as opposed to physicians and scientists. People have their choice of who they want to listen to on the matter, however, when people try and compel others to follow a "non medical" opinion with their health care, there are going to be a lot of problems.

IUDs and oral contaceptives both work in the same way. They deliver hormones to the body that prevents fertilization. (see ACOG bulletin). For the IUDs that don't contain hormone (and contain copper), they still impair sperm motility.

The difference is mode of delivery. IUDs work through direct contact and absorption in the uterus.

For the very rare instances where the IUD fails to prevent fertilization then the IUD poses a formidable mechanical barrier to implantation.

I suppose people who are fanatical about "life begins at conception" might take issue with that. That is there right. However, a large majority of people do not accept that and it is not proper to try an force them to change their health care choices over the matter. Legally, it's not an abortion in any state (unless these wack jobs succeed in changing the law) - that means ultimately it's a matter of patient choice.

To claim that IUDs primarily functions as abortifacients is wrong. Banning IUDs because they are abortifacients is not an action that has been done with any advice from professional medical groups.

Oh, and, a peer reviewed source (not a bunch of bullshit speculation by laypeople).

IUDs are contraceptives, not abortifacients: a comment on research and belief.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2623730

 

[JakeStarkey]

Post 92 above proves kcw's fail.

Let's move on.

 

[Article 15]

This has noting to do with the GOP wanting to deny or outlaw contraception. The only thing the GOP is doing is pointing out that Obama is making an unconstitutional reach. If you were unaware of this, I could have one of my cabin boys swing by the island and pick you up.

Oh, I'm aware of the issue. I'm aware that the GOP has come down on the side of denying birth control coverage to Americans in an election year.

 

[rdean]

Still no liberals will answer this.

Why? BECAUSE IT COMPLETELY SHUTS DOWN THEIR LYING MEME ABOUT REPUBLICANS AND BIRTH CONTROL.

This is all they have. They can't give us reasons to vote for Obama.

Face it libs. Thanks to me, YOU JUST LOST THE ARGUMENT!

I will hit you with this question every time you try another spamming Bullshit about Republicans and birth control.

Wow, you just saved the Republican Party. You're so smart. Guess you got us there.