I am not aware of any movement to ban or limit access to birth control in any way as it's been for the last thirty years (at least). It's just not happening.

The issue of abortion is another matter and should not be lumped into the same category, nor should the morning after pill be looped in with condoms and the pill as "emergency contraception".

This all boils down to a fabricated propaganda war created by the Left to take the debate away from Obamacare, the economy and four dollar gas.

That being said, if mommies and daddies out there would teach there little crumb crunchers that there is something to be said for not banging any Tom Dick or Jane that shows the slightest interest in them alot of this this shit would not be necessary.

Not the ethics, only the how-to's.

Going to name her Estella too?

Uh... Rosie, that wasn't a "women's health forum". It was to a committee to determine if Obama's healthcare law mandate violates religious freedoms.

R v. W is bad law, not because of the abortion issue but because it infringes on a State's right to decide that issue. Even if Congress passed actual legislation to coincide with the ruling at least the proper legal process would be followed.

That being said... which politician is trying to overturn R v. W?

I don't think citizenry does, otherwise all those foreigners on vacation should make sure there resulting offspring would be citizens...

...but life? I would love to know when you think it begins.

Not much to say here, Santorum is not my choice of candidate.

Where is this even being promoted? Hell, with paternity testing readily available and strong child-support laws across the nation I would say the guy has as much skin in the game as she does... especially since he has no choice whether or not his unwanted child is born or aborted.

*shrug* Flawed argument. It's like calling for the teaching of Biblical creationism in schools and saying "If you don't like it, just ignore it".

I have some significant issues with that outside of criminalizing the killing of a baby in the womb when the mother desires to keep the child.

I do not think it's a good idea, nor will it gain any ground in the abortion debate without seriously impacting the safety of women in high-risk pregnancies.

Actually, as anti-abortion as I am... I am also pro-choice. I do not think the government should be involved in a very tragic and personal decision between a woman and her doctor. The government should not promote it or fund organizations that do, but neither should it be outlawed.

They were not talking about whether or not to legalize (or even pay for) birth control. They were not ever discussing religion. The hearing was on whether the president has the authority to make the mandate one way or the other at all.

Remember, if Obama can simply order that birth control coverage is mandatory... Santorum can use the same power if elected to remove all access to the drugs.

Further, I have to ask... why can't I get my condoms payed for! Don't I have the same rights women do !?!

If they have an insurance plan that covers it, they don't have to pay. If they don't they either go to Planned Parenthood or pay for the prescription themselves. Out of pocket they run $15 to $50 a month depending on brand and dose. Not that staggering. And if you can't afford the pill I doubt you can afford the 8% chance that it will fail so perhaps sex should be off the menu. (Source? Why Planned Parenthood!)

I don't think it's wrong at all. The man made a choice to engage in sex... not all women have the same benefit. If he sires a child with a woman who wants to keep it he should be required to provide for that child.

Funny thing... abortion is actually a young man's best friend. I know quite a few girls that were pressured into it by a boyfriend who didn't want it, including the one we cared for. Had we not given her an option this child would not be alive.

Had my four and am responsibly (and permanently) out of the gene pool.

I love this idea. More freedom of choice is always a good thing.

Which is why, despite my personal objection, I will not make that decision for another either directly or through the proxy of government.

Eh, there are laws that cover this, and if the 18 y/o senior has all the rights and responsibilities of an adult then he should follow the laws of his state or face the consequence. A 21 year old goes to jail if he buys the 18 y/o booze but the 18 y/o doesn't go to jail for statutory rape of a 15 y/o?

Of course the sexual laws around minors are pretty screwed up... think about it, at 37 I could sleep with a 16 y/o... but if I take pics of her I go to jail for child porn.

Where I find it a messier situation is when two kids under the age of consent are involved... but they are actually both breaking the law. Why is it wrong to tell them that?

Yup, my wife's grandparents did this for one of her aunts. It's what my wife and I would do if my daughters got themselves in that situation too.

Obviously much bigger issues here than access to abortion and contraception.

Amen to that. (yes we Pagans can say Amen... just the Hebrew version of 'so mote it be' anyway )