Women oppose contraception mandate on legal, medical grounds [CNA]

[JimG]

Contraception is widely available everywhere. There are numerous insurance policies which cover it. There is no shortage of contraception.

There is no need for it to be mandated as no-copay coverage for every health insurance policy in the United States.

Does the HHS mandate coverage of viagra for men with no copay? Obviously not. Does the HHS mandate coverage of every possible prescription? Obviously not.

So why does it mandate coverage without copay of oral contraceptives, morning after pills, and sterilization? What makes that the number 1 priority of HHS?

The health insurance industry has existed for decades without Federal mandates as to what coverage must be provided. Insurance companies provide the coverage its customers want. Not every policy is the same. Nor should they be.

Catholic institutions, Catholic employers, Catholic insurance companies, have been free to practice their religion in desiging policies which are not morally objectionable to them.

Now the government is telling them: No, you have to go against your conscience. You have to provide the coverage WE want, not the coverage you want, not the coverage you have been providing without problem for decades.

It’s an exercise in raw government coercion, and it forces Catholic institutions to reject their Catholicism or go out of business.

 

[62Joy]

Kelfa- Frankly, I am not sure all the Church has been there for mistreated children. Especially for the ones abused by our own priests. The cover up says otherwise. And I still believe that birth control is a lot better option for people who don’t want a child than abortion.

As I said EVERY CHILD SHOULD BE WANTED…that is why I wish we would spend all the time and money we use trying to change a law that will never change, and use it to improve adoption laws and for a great Public Relations campaign. PR made cigarettes unacceptable and people look down on people who smoke ---- why can’t we make abortion just as unacceptable in the public eye as cigarettes? . If we could make adoptions easier and cheaper and focus on making adoption the avenue of popular choice for an unwanted pregnancy - it would help tremendously in stopping abortion. …A great, well thought out and exercised PR campaign could make abortion the choice of fools and the selfish and adoption the only preferable choice of courage for women “who care”. .GUILT DOES NOT WORK! Forcing sonograms on women, marches and passing out fetus pictures DOES NOT WORK. I feel we hurt ourselves by the way we approach the abortion issue. And the birth control issue will backfire on the Church as well since most people support birth control.

 

[JimG]

The Catholic Church has done very good work with respect to adoptions, but it is increasingly being forced out of the adoption business by laws which force Catholic adoption agencies to place children with homosexual couples. Catholic agencies cannot do that without rejecting their religion. Once again, it’s the government forcing the Church out of doing the charitable work that it does best.

 

[Dan_McVay]

My conscience is violated every time I have to past taxes that reimburse the sexist Catholic Church for services. I don’t to have to pay for services that by sexist organizations.

Do you support my right not to have taxes go in any way to the sexist Catholic Church?

(No offense meant, and I am not anti-Catholic, just anti-sexist. If the Catholic Church ends its sexist practices, I would support my taxes going to it for services.)

 

[JimG]

Sexist organizations? What—like the Boy Scouts? The Girl Scouts? The Women’s Bowling Congress? The LPGA? NOW? The American Association of Women Radiologists? The La Leche League?

 

[_Abyssinia]

Given the gravity of killing a baby in the womb, don’t you think it is is a small intrusion for the woman to be given the choice of viewing an ultrasound?

There is evidence women considering an abortion would like to see an ultrasound:

“In one of the few studies of the issue — there have been none in the United States — two abortion in British Columbia found that 73 percent of patients wanted to see an image if offered the chance. Eighty-four percent of the 254 women who viewed sonograms said it did not make the experience more difficult, and none reversed her decision.”

---

There is a big difference between a woman wanting an ultra sound and being forced by the state to have one. I have no problem if the woman is asked and says yes, especially since she is required to pay for it regardless. I think it is a terrible ineffective way to limit abortions- because there are so many better thinks we can be doing. All this will do is force the woman to another state or, if she does not have the money, to a later term abortion. As far as I am concerned the earlier an abortion is preformed on a woman who is determined to have one—the better. Plus the Medical Association said a sonogram early on shows nothing. If the state is requesting it…the state should pay for it. Personally, this is one law I would like to see the ACLU get involved in. Because there is no question it is not Constitutional.

Most if not always before an abortion an ultrasound is done anyway to find out the gestational age of the baby. Do you really think an abortion goes ahead before an ultrasound is done?

Often when a woman gets an ultrasound or X ray done they review it with their doctor, why should it be any different in the case of abortion - and the woman is only given the choice to view the ultrasound, it is not compulsory.

 

[Kelfa28]

Kelfa- Frankly, I am not sure all the Church has been there for mistreated children. Especially for the ones abused by our own priests. The cover up says otherwise. And I still believe that birth control is a lot better option for people who don’t want a child than abortion.

I could say the exact same thing about the Public School System in the states. In fact, I believe that system is far worse and far more dangerous if you want to start bringing up scandal. Far, FAR more kids are abused sexually and physically by teachers and other students in High Schools then any other place.

The Public School System is sexist, dangerous, and has a blatant agenda. Yet, not only do we have zero problem with our taxes being sent there but we send our kids there in droves. Kids are far more damaged by going to a public school then anywhere else, besides the home environment yet we all stare at the Catholic Church when it comes to scandal.

Sorry, but the better option is giving children a sense of morals and teaching them to wait for marriage and teaching them this information in the correct context. Schools can’t teach abstinence without teaching morals as well.

 

[62Joy]

Most if not always before an abortion an ultrasound is done anyway to find out the gestational age of the baby. Do you really think an abortion goes ahead before an ultrasound is done?

Often when a woman gets an ultrasound or X ray done they review it with their doctor, why should it be any different in the case of abortion - and the woman is only given the choice to view the ultrasound, it is not compulsory.

---

I don’t believe an ultrasound is done by a doctor in the first few weeks of pregnancy because, like the AMA has stated, it won’t show anything. . Early in a pregancy we are talking about a D & C procedure. Which by the way----over 90% of abortions are done in this early stage. My fear is that forcing women to have an ultra sound that no insurance will pay for and the woman is required to pay for…we are going to have a lot more later term abortions. Plus the bigger issue is that I don’t understand how the Church can complain about government intrusion while supporting government intrusion on someone else. The whole thing blows my mind.

 

[SamH]

I could say the exact same thing about the Public School System in the states. In fact, I believe that system is far worse and far more dangerous if you want to start bringing up scandal. Far, FAR more kids are abused sexually and physically by teachers and other students in High Schools then any other place.

The Public School System is sexist, dangerous, and has a blatant agenda. Yet, not only do we have zero problem with our taxes being sent there but we send our kids there in droves. Kids are far more damaged by going to a public school then anywhere else, besides the home environment yet we all stare at the Catholic Church when it comes to scandal.

Sorry, but the better option is giving children a sense of morals and teaching them to wait for marriage and teaching them this information in the correct context. Schools can’t teach abstinence without teaching morals as well.

Agreed.

Every year the public school systems of the US abuse more children than were ever abused by the Catholic Church in the last century. And that’s a documented fact.

https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/misconductreview/report.pdf

lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2010/apr/10040101

 

[62Joy]

Kelfa28- So you, like many on the right, are willing to destroy the whole public school system because you don’t like the way it works? Unfortunately, it works the way it works because of years of prejudice that we are now reaping the results of. I think it is disgusting that the far right is trying to destroy the public schools like they are in many states and force their idea of education on others. If you don’t like a school either send your kid to a private school or home school them. I agree that teaching a child about waiting to marriage is the best idea. But there is real arrogance in thinking that just because you teach them they are still not going to experiment and possibly end up pregnant or impregnating someone. That, my friend, was going on in the 30’s, 40’s, 50’s and 60’s when sex before marriage was a taboo. Also, there has always been a double standard in this country. Somehow it was different when boys had sex before marriage. “After all, boys will be boys!”

 

[62Joy]

Keelie said: Every year the public school systems of the US abuse more children than were ever abused by the Catholic Church in the last century. And that’s a documented fact.​

I find these kind of studies funny because it is like they are trying to excuse one kind of abuse by looking for something worst. What does it matter which numbers are bigger - both are wrong and both have to be addressed. If you want to argue numbers - I would say that the abuse of children at home far exceeds any of those numbers. So are we going to tear down the Catholic Church and replace it because there was abuse? Are we going to go around and if we find some parent screaming at their child or abusing them in some other way…take them out of the house? That is exactly what these nutty Tea Party governors are doing in many states to the public schools. All my children are involved in Public Education in one form or another…all of them are caring people who stay up nights working on school projects and trying to deal with parents that simply do not care. Blanket statements are usually not true. In the case of public education it is definitely not true.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Most if not always before an abortion an ultrasound is done anyway to find out the gestational age of the baby. Do you really think an abortion goes ahead before an ultrasound is done?

Often when a woman gets an ultrasound or X ray done they review it with their doctor, why should it be any different in the case of abortion - and the woman is only given the choice to view the ultrasound, it is not compulsory.

---

I don’t believe an ultrasound is done by a doctor in the first few weeks of pregnancy because, like the AMA has stated, it won’t show anything. . Early in a pregancy we are talking about a D & C procedure. Which by the way----over 90% of abortions are done in this early stage. My fear is that forcing women to have an ultra sound that no insurance will pay for and the woman is required to pay for…we are going to have a lot more later term abortions. Plus the bigger issue is that I don’t understand how the Church can complain about government intrusion while supporting government intrusion on someone else. The whole thing blows my mind.

But how does an abortionist know the pregnancy is only a few weeks? They have to almost always do an ultrasound to check. I have never heard that women will have to pay for an ultrasound - can you provide a source for this? This is not government intrusion, ultrasounds are done anyway.

Do you think it is an intrusion when somebody has to have an ultrasound or X ray for anything other than an abortion?

 

[maryjk]

I don’t believe an ultrasound is done by a doctor in the first few weeks of pregnancy because, like the AMA has stated, it won’t show anything. . Early in a pregancy we are talking about a D & C procedure. Which by the way----over 90% of abortions are done in this early stage. My fear is that forcing women to have an ultra sound that no insurance will pay for and the woman is required to pay for…we are going to have a lot more later term abortions. Plus the bigger issue is that I don’t understand how the Church can complain about government intrusion while supporting government intrusion on someone else. The whole thing blows my mind.

Ever had a D&C?

Know what they do first?
An ultrasound.

Know why? So they know the size and shape of the uterus.

Know what happens if they don’t do an ultrasound? They don’t know the size and shape and the chance of puncturing the uterus increases.

No one is forcing anyone to have an ultrasound. The ultrasounds are happening already.

 

[Kelfa28]

Kelfa28- So you, like many on the right, are willing to destroy the whole public school system because you don’t like the way it works? Unfortunately, it works the way it works because of years of prejudice that we are now reaping the results of. I think it is disgusting that the far right is trying to destroy the public schools like they are in many states and force their idea of education on others. If you don’t like a school either send your kid to a private school or home school them. I agree that teaching a child about waiting to marriage is the best idea. But there is real arrogance in thinking that just because you teach them they are still not going to experiment and possibly end up pregnant or impregnating someone. That, my friend, was going on in the 30’s, 40’s, 50’s and 60’s when sex before marriage was a taboo. Also, there has always been a double standard in this country. Somehow it was different when boys had sex before marriage. “After all, boys will be boys!”

Completely change the entire system? Absolutely! My taxes are paying for it! BTW, my children, God Willing will never set foot inside a public school as long as I have a say in it. In fact, I’m far more bitter about the fact that despite my plans to send my children to private school, I will still have to pay for the public schools. Public Schools that have long sense needed a complete and total over hall.

Here is the deal, at the time you are speaking, if a girl was pregnant outside of Marriage, 9 times out of 10, the boy would step up and marry the girl. Now, 9 times out of 10 the boy does not step up, leaves the relationship and takes no responsibility for his actions, leaving the girl to fend for herself. What’s worse?

Yes, you’re right “Boys will be Boys” until a girl gets pregnant. Then everything changes. Now, “boys will be boys” with no strings attached and no responsibility. They still continue to be “boys” with every single relationship they enter and every single child out of wedlock they have. How many of these “boys” have children with more then one mother?

Yet, it’s the Church’s fault for not changing their ideals and teachings with the times.

 

[scipio337]

Kelfa28- So you, like many on the right, are willing to destroy the whole public school system because you don’t like the way it works? Unfortunately, it works the way it works because of years of prejudice that we are now reaping the results of. I think it is disgusting that the far right is trying to destroy the public schools like they are in many states and force their idea of education on others. If you don’t like a school either send your kid to a private school or home school them. I agree that teaching a child about waiting to marriage is the best idea. But there is real arrogance in thinking that just because you teach them they are still not going to experiment and possibly end up pregnant or impregnating someone. That, my friend, was going on in the 30’s, 40’s, 50’s and 60’s when sex before marriage was a taboo. Also, there has always been a double standard in this country. Somehow it was different when boys had sex before marriage. “After all, boys will be boys!”

The statistic of those born out of wedlock was something like 7-10% up until about 1960.

Today, its over 60%.

cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db18.pdf

Coincidence?

nytimes.com/2009/05/13/health/13mothers.html

Typical of the far left to ignore the elephant in the living room. Our solution? More teachers unions that don’t allow any merit based structures. We can just throw more money at it!

You’ve posted many misleading statements, including those on the Virginia ultrasound law.

 

[62Joy]

As far as the test in Virginia. Here is one article. If the woman is required to have the test anyway than why does the State need a bill demanding one be done? The article also shows that there is no requirement that the State or the insurance company pay for the procedure? There are lots of articles out there giving the facts on this.

nbcwashington.com/blogs/first-read-dmv/Virginia-Senate-Passes-Amended-Abortion-Ultrasound-Bill-140760023.html

 

[_Abyssinia]

As far as the test in Virginia. Here is one article. If the woman is required to have the test anyway than why does the State need a bill demanding one be done? The article also shows that there is no requirement that the State or the insurance company pay for the procedure? There are lots of articles out there giving the facts on this.

nbcwashington.com/blogs/first-read-dmv/Virginia-Senate-Passes-Amended-Abortion-Ultrasound-Bill-140760023.html

Because I do not think Planned Parenthood or other abortion facilities allow woman the opportunity to see the ultrasound but 99% of abortion clinics do an ultrasound already:

In a 2003 study of Planned Parenthood and other independently owned abortion facilities, 99 percent of these clinics admitted that they either “always” or “sometimes” perform an ultrasound in association with a surgical abortion. Further, it was stated that vaginal ultrasounds were “always” performed before the early surgical abortion at 83 percent of these sites, 16 percent “under certain conditions,” and only 1 percent “never” did them.

Additionally, the study revealed that after an abortion was performed, vaginal ultrasounds were also “always” performed at 26 percent of these sites, “under certain conditions” at 66 percent of these sites, and “never” at 8 percent.

Planned Parenthood even admits they do ultrasounds before an abortion: “That’s just the medical standard,” said Adrienne Schreiber, an official at Planned Parenthood’s Washington, D.C., regional office. “To confirm the gestational age of the pregnancy, before any procedure is done, you do an ultrasound.”

Requiring an ultrasound to take place before an abortion is performed makes sense since it ensures that the mother is actually pregnant, determines the age and size of the baby, and aids in determining the location of the unborn child for either the vacuum machine or a needle used to end its life, if in fact a surgical abortion is decided upon. And in many abortion procedures, ultrasounds are used during the surgical abortion to ensure that the abortionist doesn’t physically harm the mother while they dismember the unborn child.

Abortion clinics do ultrasounds, but many don’t tell women what’s on the screen — their living baby.

Pro-choice advocates — rather than asking questions about how to ensure that abortion is “safer” for mothers and whether or not women are fully informed about the development of their child before they make the most irrevocable decision in their lifetime — are resorting to disrespecting actual rape victims and utilizing silly scare tactics.

If a woman has decided to undergo a surgical abortion, this decision requires an abortionist to force instruments into her vagina in order to rid the woman of her child. Unfortunately that’s part of the package you get with abortion. How is this any less invasive than the ultrasound?

lifenews.com/2012/02/24/if-ultrasound-is-rape-arrest-planned-parenthood-staffers/

 

[62Joy]

Additionally, the study revealed that after an abortion was performed, vaginal ultrasounds were also “always” performed at 26 percent of these sites, “under certain conditions” at 66 percent of these sites, and “never” at 8 percent.

Planned Parenthood even admits they do ultrasounds before an abortion: “That’s just the medical standard,” said Adrienne Schreiber, an official at Planned Parenthood’s Washington, D.C., regional office. “To confirm the gestational age of the pregnancy, before any procedure is done, you do an ultrasound.”

Requiring an ultrasound to take place before an abortion is performed makes sense since it ensures that the mother is actually pregnant, determines the age and size of the baby,
and aids in determining the location of the unborn child for either the vacuum machine or a needle used to end its life, if in fact a surgical abortion is decided upon. And in many abortion procedures, ultrasounds are used during the surgical abortion to ensure that the abortionist doesn’t physically harm the mother while they dismember the unborn child.

---

Again, if this is true than why is the State of Virginia mandating them??? No matter how you cut it the State has no right to demand any test be done on anyone for any reason. It sounds like Nazi Germany doing their “tests” for their own reasons. I say it is simply an infringement on individual rights. If the woman wants one fine…if she doesn’t than they should have to respect her wishes. If her doctor says she needs one that is an entirely different thing. Again I hope the ACLU gets involved in this since I would bet that it is not Constitutional if tested.

 

[Dawnia]

Additionally, the study revealed that after an abortion was performed, vaginal ultrasounds were also “always” performed at 26 percent of these sites, “under certain conditions” at 66 percent of these sites, and “never” at 8 percent.

Planned Parenthood even admits they do ultrasounds before an abortion: “That’s just the medical standard,” said Adrienne Schreiber, an official at Planned Parenthood’s Washington, D.C., regional office. “To confirm the gestational age of the pregnancy, before any procedure is done, you do an ultrasound.”

Requiring an ultrasound to take place before an abortion is performed makes sense since it ensures that the mother is actually pregnant, determines the age and size of the baby,
and aids in determining the location of the unborn child for either the vacuum machine or a needle used to end its life, if in fact a surgical abortion is decided upon. And in many abortion procedures, ultrasounds are used during the surgical abortion to ensure that the abortionist doesn’t physically harm the mother while they dismember the unborn child.

---

Again, if this is true than why is the State of Virginia mandating them??? No matter how you cut it the State has no right to demand any test be done on anyone for any reason. It sounds like Nazi Germany doing their “tests” for their own reasons. I say it is simply an infringement on individual rights. If the woman wants one fine…if she doesn’t than they should have to respect her wishes. If her doctor says she needs one that is an entirely different thing. Again I hope the ACLU gets involved in this since I would bet that it is not Constitutional if tested.

I could be wrong, but ultrasound laws have already passed constitutional muster in several states. Texas being the most recent. This law is likely patterned after those laws.

I think it’s a good thing. Informed consent should be part of any procedure.

 

[bellasbane]

Additionally, the study revealed that after an abortion was performed, vaginal ultrasounds were also “always” performed at 26 percent of these sites, “under certain conditions” at 66 percent of these sites, and “never” at 8 percent.

Planned Parenthood even admits they do ultrasounds before an abortion: “That’s just the medical standard,” said Adrienne Schreiber, an official at Planned Parenthood’s Washington, D.C., regional office. “To confirm the gestational age of the pregnancy, before any procedure is done, you do an ultrasound.”

Requiring an ultrasound to take place before an abortion is performed makes sense since it ensures that the mother is actually pregnant, determines the age and size of the baby,
and aids in determining the location of the unborn child for either the vacuum machine or a needle used to end its life, if in fact a surgical abortion is decided upon. And in many abortion procedures, ultrasounds are used during the surgical abortion to ensure that the abortionist doesn’t physically harm the mother while they dismember the unborn child.

---

**Again, if this is true than why is the State of Virginia mandating them??? ** No matter how you cut it the State has no right to demand any test be done on anyone for any reason. It sounds like Nazi Germany doing their “tests” for their own reasons. I say it is simply an infringement on individual rights. If the woman wants one fine…if she doesn’t than they should have to respect her wishes. If her doctor says she needs one that is an entirely different thing. Again I hope the ACLU gets involved in this since I would bet that it is not Constitutional if tested.

Hi 62Joy - Welcome to CAF!

You make a very good point. Some people are too quick to throw a woman’s rights under the bus in their desire to end abortion. It is a if the only strategy they can comprehend is one that requires women to be at their mercy.

Peace!
-Bella

P.S. One bit of advice - if you click the “quote” button on the bottom right, rather than the “post reply” button on the left - it will create a new post with the words from the post you are responding to automatically added at the top. It makes it easier for you to respond to someone’s comments and for us to follow your responses.