A political response from an unapologetic atheist

A political response from an unapologetic atheist

By rights, politics should never need to be involved with discussion about religion. However, since the GOP has proclaimed themselves to be “God’s Own Party”, it is only right that we place them firmly in our crosshairs
//
//

About these ads

11 Responses to A political response from an unapologetic atheist

  1. malinelf says:

    It’s interesting that this is actually a debate in the US, it feels like another century. Where I live (Sweden) the question of birth control and abortion is a non-question for I believe all political parties (maybe except for one of the smaller ones) – it’s a non-debatable thing that women should have the right to decide over their own bodies.
    On the other hand the discussion about women’s bodies and their right to it goes on in other forums and take other expressions – see an example of this on my blog apieceofsweden.wordpress.com

  2. radnews says:

    Thank you for this! I live in a fairly conservative, Catholic town, and conversations about politics and/or birth control around here are just maddening. People seem to have no ability to link these ideas to their logical outcomes.

  3. radnews says:

    Reblogged this on Skipping Stones and commented:
    Wonderful.

  4. Thank you for showing this. I believe the lack of control women have over their own bodies now is appalling, and you have wonderfully given a synopsis of the reason the GOP will never have my vote.

  5. Gary Denton says:

    Companies and insurance companies that do not cover contraception end up raising their rates because pregnancy and kids are a heck of a lot more expensive, Michelle. You don’t like contraception, fine don’t use it and hope your magical sky friend prevents unwanted children but don’t deny others their rights that saves everyone money.

  6. raijer says:

    “I think birth control should be available and affordable, but I don’t think anyone should be FORCED to cover the costs of something they are opposed to or not using themselves.”

    Really? Now wouldn’t that just be grand? According to this wonderful little fantasy, I shouldn’t be FORCED to fund imperialistic wars of aggression, illegal wiretapping, the pathetic “War on Drugs,” sociopathic police brutality, assassinations of U.S. citizens without due process, and/or internationally illegal prisons such as Guantanamo Bay? As John Stewart put it so perfectly “You have to pay taxes for something you don’t like? Welcome to the cdlub!”

  7. I think birth control should be available and affordable, but I don’t think anyone should be FORCED to cover the costs of something they are opposed to or not using themselves. Why aren’t people attacking the health insurance companies for not covering contraceptives, or Obama for not subsidizing it in his Obama care plan?

    This is a grossly over exaggerated representation of conservative view point that not many people would agree on, including Republicans. The idea that conservatives are anti-woman falls right into Obama’s ploy to polarize people in this country. Women’s health care and contraceptives are not being taken away from anyone, its all about who will pay for it, not about the choice to use them.

    • “I don’t think anyone should be FORCED to cover the cost of something they are opposed to or not using themselves.”

      If you’re concerned about the monetary cost of funding contraceptives, then I should tell you that you’d be able to retain a lot more of your tax payment by just saying “I don’t want my tax dollars to go to all of these middle-east wars”. You and me, we’re both paying for those. I don’t agree with them, and I have no clue if you do. But, wouldn’t I be just as entitled as you by saying that I don’t want to fund the deaths of our soldiers, of my home-town friends? I’m morally opposed to them, but I’ve still got to pay. I have little idea as to what drives some people to despise the idea of contraceptives/abortion/female health in general, but I can tell you that it’s nothing compared to what the families and friends of soldiers have to go through every day, mourning the loss of their loved ones.

    • Matthew Brown says:

      Fantastic! I don’t have to cover the cost of things that I don’t want my money used for??? Great…can you ask the IRS when my refund for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will be coming?

      And, just as an FYI since apparently no one seems to get this, Obama’s plan is not about forcing the american taxpayer to pay for people’s birth control – it is literally about ensuring that private health care plans cover it…even those pesky religious employers (which the President gave them a way out of the provision anyway)…the whole argument is a moot point – and, I wouldn’t blame liberals or the media for this sh*tstorm – Ricky Santorum is brining this one right down on the heads of the right himself…as are republicans in legislatures all across the country.

    • tautolog says:

      ” I don’t think anyone should be FORCED to cover the costs of something they are opposed to or not using themselves. ”

      –Really? So if I don’t drive I shouldn’t have to pay taxes to cover roads? If I don’t have kids then I don’t have to pay property taxes to support schools? If I am opposed to wars, I don’t have to pay to support them? How about tax supported religious education like those abstinence only programs, and all those other “faith-based” initiatives? We are a society and we support things that we don’t use personally for the good of the whole all the time.

      ” Why aren’t people attacking the health insurance companies for not covering contraceptives, or Obama for not subsidizing it in his Obama care plan?”

      — This whole pseudo-controversy was about closing a loophole that allowed certain insurance companies to not cover it. All public insurance plans that already exist like medicaid/medicare already cover contraception. This whole thing was a criticism of the health insurance companies.

      “This is a grossly over exaggerated representation of conservative view point that not many people would agree on, including Republicans. ”

      — Except that factually 3 of the 4 are in no way an exaggerations. Conservatives have gone on the record as opposing 1) contraceptive coverage, 2) abortion, 3) welfare for children. Perhaps 4) is slightly exaggerated.

      “The idea that conservatives are anti-woman falls right into Obama’s ploy to polarize people in this country.”

      — It is amazing that you think Obama is the one polarizing people. But you are right, conservatives aren’t anti-women per se. They are anti women’s rights. Conservatives have nothing against women as long as they are in their place, not having sex, not wanting equal pay, not demanding equal treatment.

      “Women’s health care and contraceptives are not being taken away from anyone,”

      — Except for those who work at religious institutions and can’t afford them otherwise.

      “its all about who will pay for it, not about the choice to use them.”

      — You do realize that a mainstream Republican candidate has gone on the record that he opposes contraception for everyone? That would be Santorum. This clearly contradicts your point.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: