I understand the “pro-life” arguments against abortion. But l am sincerely puzzled, why/what are the repub arguments against contraception? (assuming that one is not a catholic) Does anyone understand what the issue is with contraception?
Just read about this here:
(contraception part is in 2nd half of article)
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/dec/11/republican-senator-jd-vance-ukraine-cede-land-russia-war-invasion
I understand the “pro-life” arguments against abortion. But l am sincerely puzzled, why/what are the repub arguments against contraception? (assuming that one is not a catholic) Does anyone understand what the issue is with contraception?
Just read about this here:
(contraception part is in 2nd half of article)
https://www.theguardian.com/…-russia-war-invasion
The only reason to have sex is to procreate. If this is the only reason for intercourse by their creator, then contraception is not needed.
I understand the “pro-life” arguments against abortion. But l am sincerely puzzled, why/what are the repub arguments against contraception? (assuming that one is not a catholic) Does anyone understand what the issue is with contraception?
Just read about this here:
(contraception part is in 2nd half of article)
https://www.theguardian.com/…-russia-war-invasion
There has always been a large group of people that don’t want birth control devices (for women) paid for by health insurance. Back in the 80’s I was active duty and TriCare paid for birth control pills for my wife. That was an anomaly at the time. I don’t believe it has changed much
Probably more accurate to say religious people against contraception.
The only reason to have sex is to procreate. If this is the only reason for intercourse by their creator, then contraception is not needed.
Yes, l understand that religious idea. But, since the US is (supposedly) not yet a theocracy, what legal or societal reasons do politicians or others give for using laws and regulations to reduce access to contraception?
Probably more accurate to say religious people against contraception.
Are there any democratic politicians (religious ones, non religious ones, any) that are against contraception?
Probably more accurate to say religious people against contraception.
Are there any democratic politicians (religious ones, non religious ones, any) that are against contraception?
I’ve never heard of any, but they also don’t have the balls to make any changes so they don’t offend the religious zealots.
I understand the “pro-life” arguments against abortion. But l am sincerely puzzled, why/what are the repub arguments against contraception? (assuming that one is not a catholic) Does anyone understand what the issue is with contraception?
Just read about this here:
(contraception part is in 2nd half of article)
https://www.theguardian.com/…-russia-war-invasion
The only reason to have sex is to procreate. If this is the only reason for intercourse by their creator, then contraception is not needed.
Isn’t there an exception for threesomes in Florida if two of the members are influential in the GOP?
Probably more accurate to say religious people against contraception.
Are there any democratic politicians (religious ones, non religious ones, any) that are against contraception?
Probably hard to find, just making the point that the source of the belief is probably religious not political per se.
Probably more accurate to say religious people against contraception.
Are there any democratic politicians (religious ones, non religious ones, any) that are against contraception?
Probably hard to find, just making the point that the source of the belief is probably religious not political per se.
But if the politicians that want to change US laws this way are all repub and none are democratic, it sure seems political.
When people tell or show you who they are, believe them. These people want a theocracy for you and FYIGM let me do anything for themselves.
They’ve a religious zealot as house speaker. It’s exactly what they want. Orange Jesus is the second coming, didn’t you know?
Misnomer of this thread? Conservative instead of Republican . I grew up Catholic, fine with contraception. The church authorities against cause they want consequences for sex, but also for you to make new future church members. Even Jews push to procreate members like rabbits
It’s always been the conservative view that teaching **anything **but abstinence sex ed is bad. Can’t be saying contraception is OK if sex is bad.
Sure, comprehensive sex ed is great at reducing teenage pregnancies and reducing abortions, but gotta control.
Misnomer of this thread? Conservative instead of Republican.
Ok, but are there any democratic politicians (religious ones, non religious ones, any) that are also against contraception?
It’s always been the conservative view that teaching **anything **but abstinence sex ed is bad. Can’t be saying contraception is OK if sex is bad.
Sure, l understand the religious idea. But, since the US is (supposedly) not yet a theocracy, what legal or societal reasons do politicians or others give for using laws and regulations to reduce access to contraception?
It’s a ‘‘keep them barefoot and pregnant issue’’!
It’s a ‘‘keep them barefoot and pregnant issue’’!
Yes, I follow.
But how is that translated into legal or societal language to sway conservative (but non religious) voters to support this platform? Assuming separation of church and state, of course.
The only reason to have sex is to procreate. If this is the only reason for intercourse by their creator, then contraception is not needed.
Yes, l understand that religious idea. But, since the US is (supposedly) not yet a theocracy, what legal or societal reasons do politicians or others give for using laws and regulations to reduce access to contraception?
It’s interesting that hundreds of years ago large groups came to America to escape religious persecution.
It seems we have a growing group who do not recall that the First Amendment allows for freedom of religion. And now “we” want to be a country of Christian based religion.
It’s a ‘‘keep them barefoot and pregnant issue’’!
Yes, I follow.
But how is that translated into legal or societal language to sway conservative (but non religious) voters to support this platform? Assuming separation of church and state, of course.
When it comes to religion, the Dems don’t push back, it’s pretty much as simple as that. No, most Americans, the vast majority, do not want a theocracy. However, religion doesn’t poll well and the Dems stay away from the issue outside of abortion. They chickened out during the ACA and they will continue to not have spines until it becomes the driving issue. Dems main objective is to legalize, infrequent, safe abortions, and they can only do one thing at a time, so the contraception issue gets kicked down the road.
The only reason to have sex is to procreate. If this is the only reason for intercourse by their creator, then contraception is not needed.
Yes, l understand that religious idea. But, since the US is (supposedly) not yet a theocracy, what legal or societal reasons do politicians or others give for using laws and regulations to reduce access to contraception?
It’s interesting that hundreds of years ago large groups came to America to escape religious persecution.
It seems we have a growing group who do not recall that the First Amendment allows for freedom of religion. And now “we” want to be a country of Christian based religion.