Study: Free birth control leads to fewer abortions; Romney wants to cut access.

[Noomi]

One has to wonder why the Governor wants to cut off the primary source for low cost contraception to financially challenged women.

Well, you know, it's that pesky thing called personal responsibility, something I doubt you would understand.

Using contraception is irresponsible?

I'm beginning to suspect the right actually likes unwanted pregnancy and abortion for some bizarre reason.

Using condoms and the pill is irresponsible because they prevent the sperm from reaching the egg which is killing a bay-bee!

 

[Clementine]

You know what I get from the study, 35-40% of women are so completely irresponsible even when offered free birth control they won't use it and wind up getting an abortion. After all planned parenthood has offered free birth control to the poor for decades and single parent births are still on the rise.

Your assertion that anyone in the political arena favors restricting acces is a total lie. But why let that stand in the way of a good story.

But, liberals believe that refusing to pay = denying access.

Wonder how much the study cost to find out that people will take advantage of things that are free. Whodathunkit. And what is the excuse for those who don't? It's not enough to offer it, we have to take them by the hand and lead them to it or we'll be responsible for dealing with the consequences.

Is it any wonder each generation gets more irresponsible when they don't have to ever pay for their mistakes. Screw up. Send the bill to tax payers. Repeat. Never learn lesson.

 

[candycorn]

And keeping your pants on lead to fewer.

Simple math.

Simple biology rather. How's that working? Not too good. We've been down this road before which lead to Title funding being created in the first place.

So candy you cant stop having sex? really? you have no control whatsoever?

It seems many do not. Which is their problem; right? Wrong; we all end up paying in terms of services, entitlements, etc... True we would be paying now but any calculation shows that we pay far more later on. If you want proof of this, simply read the posts of the right wing posters on this board.

 

[candycorn]

Does the radical left concede that decades of condom on a cucumber sex ed is a failure and the only option left to teenage girls is surgical contraceptive implants at taxpayer expense? What a Country.

Does the radical right concede that the trillions spent on defense have been a waste since we haven't fought the Soviets or China?

What I think the report is saying is that contraception is a good thing. Access to contraception is a better thing. And fault-free contraception is a great thing. Nothing is better than abstinence in my view but thats hardly a widely held viewpoint in practice.

You might want to rethink your defense spending analogy, we haven't had to fight those folks because we have stayed strong and they know they would lose head to head. Would you pick on a guy you know could kick your ass, only a moron would.

The point is that measuring what didn't transpire against what you spent is a nebulous argument at best.

Maybe we could have spent a quarter of what we did spend and get the same result, no? You can't say for sure that we couldn't any more than I could say for certain that we could.

 

[Greenbeard]

Well, you know, it's that pesky thing called personal responsibility, something I doubt you would understand.

Using contraception is irresponsible?

I'm beginning to suspect the right actually likes unwanted pregnancy and abortion for some bizarre reason.

Using condoms and the pill is irresponsible because they prevent the sperm from reaching the egg which is killing a bay-bee!

There oughta be laws against contraception!

 

[candycorn]

One has to wonder why the Governor wants to cut off the primary source for low cost contraception to financially challenged women.

Well, you know, it's that pesky thing called personal responsibility, something I doubt you would understand.

And it's not free, by the way. Someone is paying for it, like me.

Which is why I didn't say "free". You're also paying for schools that aren't doing a good job of preparing our children, entitlements to feed impoverished people, and prison cells to house criminals. I would like to pay less; paying a little up front prevents you paying a lot later on.

And also, the irony is that the elimination (not cut--elimination) in Title X funding is supposedly being done to prevent funding from going to "abortion groups like Planned Parenthood." Riddle me this; what do you think happens when you have more unwanted pregnancies that contraception would have prevented?

 

[Stephanie]

the Associated Press calling for population control by the hands of the Government

but hey, nothing commie about that

that is why Obama is for abortions and Free Contraceptives

 

[gallantwarrior]

This from The Associated Press.

-----------

WASHINGTON (AP) — Free birth control led to dramatically lower rates of abortions and teen births, a large study concludes. The findings were eagerly anticipated and come as a bitterly contested Obama administration policy is poised to offer similar coverage.
The project tracked more than 9,000 women in St. Louis, many of them poor or uninsured. They were given their choice of a range of contraceptive methods at no cost — from birth control pills to goof-proof options like the IUD or a matchstick-sized implant.

When price wasn't an issue, women flocked to the most effective contraceptives — the implanted options, which typically cost hundreds of dollars up-front to insert. These women experienced far fewer unintended pregnancies as a result, reported Dr. Jeffrey Peipert of Washington University in St. Louis in a study published Thursday.

The effect on teen pregnancy was striking: There were 6.3 births per 1,000 teenagers in the study. Compare that to a national rate of 34 births per 1,000 teens in 2010.
There also were substantially lower rates of abortion, when compared with women in the metro area and nationally: 4.4 to 7.5 abortions per 1,000 women in the study, compared with 13.4 to 17 abortions per 1,000 women overall in the St. Louis region, Peipert calculated. That's lower than the national rate, too, which is almost 20 abortions per 1,000 women.

One has to wonder why the Governor wants to cut off the primary source for low cost contraception to financially challenged women. From his website:

Eliminate Title X Family Planning Funding — Savings: $300 Million. Title X subsidizes family planning programs that benefit abortion groups like Planned Parenthood.

Associated Press | The Register-Guard | Eugene, Oregon

For $300M (or less than 1/3 the cost of a new destroyer the Navy is building), we could prevent a great many abortions, unwanted pregnancies, and help ensure women's health choices. The $300M spent now will be a lot less than building more schools, expanding entitlements, and building more prisons later on when the unwanted pregnancies are carried to term.

Also it should be noted that Title X money is not only provided to Planned Parenthood (no Title money is used for abortions by the way) but to public health departments across the nation; in red states as well as blue states. It is used to pay for everything from iron tablets to condoms to contraceptive foams and creams.

Forum copyright policy, to be found HERE, prohibits posting of pieces in their entirety and requires that you provide a link.

~Oddball

Self control and abstaining from behaving like some rutting animal also decreases the number of abortions...and it costs a whole lot less. For those who prefer emulating our distant simian relatives, rubbers are also less expensive, readily available, and effective not only to prevent pregnancy but also the transmission of sundry nasty diseases.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Maybe Sandra should charge for her services.

She'd get about $2.00 a trick.

You think she'd get that much? I'm thinking she probably pays the johns, hence the expensive "birth control" costs.

 

[Katzndogz]

Democrats want everything to be free. Free sunscreen prevents sunburn. We pass laws preventing people from going around nude (except in San Francisco) yet we don't provide free clothing. No one pays. It's free.

 

[gallantwarrior]

That money comes from somewhere.

Don't wanna get pregnant.....keep your pants on.

Tired of paying for Sandra....

Fluke off.

Yes it does. In the case of Ms. Fluke, it would come from her premiums. In the case of the study, the money spent today is nominal compared to the money spent on new classrooms, prisons, and entitlements in 10-20 years.

Here's a novel concept, particularly for those concerned with what will be needed 10-20 years down the road. We'll start with the premise that if a woman is old enough to choose to have sex, she's old enough to take responsibility for the outcome. We can eliminate tons of entitlements immediately because I, and millions like me, will not be dunned to support those who make poor choices. Instead of murdering the innocents in the womb, why don't we expand the types of crimes carrying a mandatory death sentence. Get the ones who had their chance and who have demonstrated their unwillingness and inability to behave responsibly. Oh, for those who will argue that abortion should always be an option for victims of incest and rape, those two crimes are at the top of the new, improved list of death penalty crimes. Let's try deterring these animals from committing the crimes in the first place. We also make prison an unpleasant experience. Only the barest minimum required to keep one alive, no perks. An inexpensive way to make prison a less desirable alternative.
As for schools, those should be brought back to the reality of teaching children how to think, reason, read, cipher, and make good choices, period. Save the fancy-schmancy, namby-pamby, feel-good bullshit for the university, where people pay for what they want to study.

 

[California Girl]

Nowhere on this planet does 'free' birth control exist. So, where did this 'study' take place?

 

[WillowTree]

This from The Associated Press.

-----------

WASHINGTON (AP) — Free birth control led to dramatically lower rates of abortions and teen births, a large study concludes. The findings were eagerly anticipated and come as a bitterly contested Obama administration policy is poised to offer similar coverage.
The project tracked more than 9,000 women in St. Louis, many of them poor or uninsured. They were given their choice of a range of contraceptive methods at no cost — from birth control pills to goof-proof options like the IUD or a matchstick-sized implant.

When price wasn't an issue, women flocked to the most effective contraceptives — the implanted options, which typically cost hundreds of dollars up-front to insert. These women experienced far fewer unintended pregnancies as a result, reported Dr. Jeffrey Peipert of Washington University in St. Louis in a study published Thursday.

The effect on teen pregnancy was striking: There were 6.3 births per 1,000 teenagers in the study. Compare that to a national rate of 34 births per 1,000 teens in 2010.
There also were substantially lower rates of abortion, when compared with women in the metro area and nationally: 4.4 to 7.5 abortions per 1,000 women in the study, compared with 13.4 to 17 abortions per 1,000 women overall in the St. Louis region, Peipert calculated. That's lower than the national rate, too, which is almost 20 abortions per 1,000 women.

One has to wonder why the Governor wants to cut off the primary source for low cost contraception to financially challenged women. From his website:

Eliminate Title X Family Planning Funding — Savings: $300 Million. Title X subsidizes family planning programs that benefit abortion groups like Planned Parenthood.

Associated Press | The Register-Guard | Eugene, Oregon

For $300M (or less than 1/3 the cost of a new destroyer the Navy is building), we could prevent a great many abortions, unwanted pregnancies, and help ensure women's health choices. The $300M spent now will be a lot less than building more schools, expanding entitlements, and building more prisons later on when the unwanted pregnancies are carried to term.

Also it should be noted that Title X money is not only provided to Planned Parenthood (no Title money is used for abortions by the way) but to public health departments across the nation; in red states as well as blue states. It is used to pay for everything from iron tablets to condoms to contraceptive foams and creams.

Forum copyright policy, to be found HERE, prohibits posting of pieces in their entirety and requires that you provide a link.

~Oddball

How does birth control become free? No costs to manufacture, distribute or retail it? It just plops "freely" onto a woman's tongue? You libtards are morons.

 

[gallantwarrior]

One has to wonder why the Governor wants to cut off the primary source for low cost contraception to financially challenged women.

Well, you know, it's that pesky thing called personal responsibility, something I doubt you would understand.

Using contraception is irresponsible?

I'm beginning to suspect the right actually likes unwanted pregnancy and abortion for some bizarre reason.

No, but threatening not to be responsible if someone else doesn't pay for it is petty, childish, and irresponsible.

 

[gallantwarrior]

This from The Associated Press.

-----------

WASHINGTON (AP) — Free birth control led to dramatically lower rates of abortions and teen births, a large study concludes. The findings were eagerly anticipated and come as a bitterly contested Obama administration policy is poised to offer similar coverage.
The project tracked more than 9,000 women in St. Louis, many of them poor or uninsured. They were given their choice of a range of contraceptive methods at no cost — from birth control pills to goof-proof options like the IUD or a matchstick-sized implant.

When price wasn't an issue, women flocked to the most effective contraceptives — the implanted options, which typically cost hundreds of dollars up-front to insert. These women experienced far fewer unintended pregnancies as a result, reported Dr. Jeffrey Peipert of Washington University in St. Louis in a study published Thursday.

The effect on teen pregnancy was striking: There were 6.3 births per 1,000 teenagers in the study. Compare that to a national rate of 34 births per 1,000 teens in 2010.
There also were substantially lower rates of abortion, when compared with women in the metro area and nationally: 4.4 to 7.5 abortions per 1,000 women in the study, compared with 13.4 to 17 abortions per 1,000 women overall in the St. Louis region, Peipert calculated. That's lower than the national rate, too, which is almost 20 abortions per 1,000 women.

One has to wonder why the Governor wants to cut off the primary source for low cost contraception to financially challenged women. From his website:

Eliminate Title X Family Planning Funding — Savings: $300 Million. Title X subsidizes family planning programs that benefit abortion groups like Planned Parenthood.

Associated Press | The Register-Guard | Eugene, Oregon

For $300M (or less than 1/3 the cost of a new destroyer the Navy is building), we could prevent a great many abortions, unwanted pregnancies, and help ensure women's health choices. The $300M spent now will be a lot less than building more schools, expanding entitlements, and building more prisons later on when the unwanted pregnancies are carried to term.

Also it should be noted that Title X money is not only provided to Planned Parenthood (no Title money is used for abortions by the way) but to public health departments across the nation; in red states as well as blue states. It is used to pay for everything from iron tablets to condoms to contraceptive foams and creams.

Forum copyright policy, to be found HERE, prohibits posting of pieces in their entirety and requires that you provide a link.

~Oddball

How many Cases of Cervical Cancer or other related Problems associated with Birth Control does it lead to?

Look I don't have a problem with Providing access to Birth Control, But I do have a problem with a School that tells me they can't legally give my kid a fucking aspirin when he has a head ache, but they can give my Kids Birth Control, or even give my Daughter the Morning after pill, and they don't even have to tell me about it.

Shit, schools won't even let you send an aspirin with your kid for his headache.

 

[gallantwarrior]

That money comes from somewhere.

Don't wanna get pregnant.....keep your pants on.

Tired of paying for Sandra....

Fluke off.

So...a woman who is still young, but she and her husband have had enough children should just never have sex because they might get pregnant?

Are conservatives retarded, or are they living in a dream world?

Where has anyone said they should never have sex? We have been saying that they should be responsible for their own birth control, though. Are liberals retarded, or are they living in a dream world where everyone else should pay for their choices while they remain blameless?

 

[gallantwarrior]

Simple biology rather. How's that working? Not too good. We've been down this road before which lead to Title funding being created in the first place.

So candy you cant stop having sex? really? you have no control whatsoever?

It seems many do not. Which is their problem; right? Wrong; we all end up paying in terms of services, entitlements, etc... True we would be paying now but any calculation shows that we pay far more later on. If you want proof of this, simply read the posts of the right wing posters on this board.

Again, quit paying people off for making bad choices. If they know they'll have to do for themselves, more would reconsider doing stupid shit. We shouldn't be paying for stupid decisions made by stoopid people...now, or later.

 

[AmyNation]

Free birth control, as in no upfront cost to the individual, is a good idea. However it should be a state issue, not a federal one.

 

[gallantwarrior]

One has to wonder why the Governor wants to cut off the primary source for low cost contraception to financially challenged women.

Well, you know, it's that pesky thing called personal responsibility, something I doubt you would understand.

And it's not free, by the way. Someone is paying for it, like me.

Which is why I didn't say "free". You're also paying for schools that aren't doing a good job of preparing our children, entitlements to feed impoverished people, and prison cells to house criminals. I would like to pay less; paying a little up front prevents you paying a lot later on.

And also, the irony is that the elimination (not cut--elimination) in Title X funding is supposedly being done to prevent funding from going to "abortion groups like Planned Parenthood." Riddle me this; what do you think happens when you have more unwanted pregnancies that contraception would have prevented?

Strangely enough, your so-called low-cost contraception has been available for many years now, and provision has increased geometrically since the 60s. Now, just how effective has that been if we still face increased numbers of abortions, criminals, and other unwanted consequences?

 

[gallantwarrior]

Nowhere on this planet does 'free' birth control exist. So, where did this 'study' take place?

Free birth control does exist, it's called abstinence. Costs nothing to keep your panties on. Oh, I forget, that's a forbidden concept in the liberal lexicon.