Book accuses White House of faking Iraq-9/11 link

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

. . . And mandatory Norplant? Good Lord. How about free, easily accessible condoms?

Not a strong enough deterrent

Seriously, I think the Fed. Govt. should makle all birth control available for those who request it. It is a dollars and sense argument to me as the cost of providing it is far less than the cost of providing for some unmarried welfare mother with 8 unwanted, unplanned kids.

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Not a strong enough deterrent

Seriously, I think the Fed. Govt. should makle all birth control available for those who request it. It is a dollars and sense argument to me as the cost of providing it is far less than the cost of providing for some unmarried welfare mother with 8 unwanted, unplanned kids.

Agreed. Birth control is free in other countries, right? My aunt is having her 5th kid because the catholic hospital she had her last kid in wouldn't tie her tubes. Apparently she couldn't otherwise make an appointment or take care of it? I think it was probably a cost/insurance issue. It's people that aren't thinking or don't have the money for birth control that have too many kids they can't afford. Although she's a good mom and can support all of her children, it is just a struggle. To me it's silly because if you can't afford birth control you certainly can't afford a kid. Then again you can't exactly get it through WIC.

[strandinthewind]

Of course, the far right, the Bush Admin., and, I believe, McCain's solution is just not to have sex period and regardless of you marital status. Sex is for procreation only. Well, that and a cheap thrill with a Congressional intern, in a public restroom, or with your "massage therapist" while smoking meth - of there also was BULLDOG

[SuzeQuze]

That's right, sex is SCARY and BAD.

By the time kids are teens they make up their own minds based on what they've been taught, you can't force abstinence on them. Anyway preaching to the choir I know. But statistically pregnancies and STDs increase with abstinence curriculum and decrease with sex ed including instruction for using birth control. Just another case of the right not using their heads but some ideology they see as The Truth which all us minions should just quietly follow along with.

[ajmccarrell]

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

That's right, sex is SCARY and BAD.

By the time kids are teens they make up their own minds based on what they've been taught, you can't force abstinence on them. Anyway preaching to the choir I know. But statistically pregnancies and STDs increase with abstinence curriculum and decrease with sex ed including instruction for using birth control. Just another case of the right not using their heads but some ideology they see as The Truth which all us minions should just quietly follow along with.

No one that is a mainstream Republican politician has said anything like that. MAYBE Pat Buchanan or some other guy way out there. Most support birth control and would like to make it madatory for people on welfare, much like myself. That is a good characterization of the Catholic church's position, but not of Republicans at large. The only thing McCain has said like that was that health insurance plans often cover Viagra bu not birth control. This is another smear that has been repeated so much that people think it's the truth. Here in Washington State, as with a lot of states, you can get free birth control, although I'd have to say it doesn't do that much good in poorer neighborhoods. We have Planned Parenthood's everywhere, with no protesters, and still we have an out of wedlock and teenage pregnancy crisis. Making solutions available doesn't always mean that people will take advantage of them. It's one thing to be down on your luck and be poor, but for people who stay that way, it's because of poor decisions. Early pregnancy certainly tops that list of bad behaviors. Even though contraception is widely available, people are still stupid enough not to use it here.

[ajmccarrell]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Of course, the far right, the Bush Admin., and, I believe, McCain's solution is just not to have sex period and regardless of you marital status. Sex is for procreation only. Well, that and a cheap thrill with a Congressional intern, in a public restroom, or with your "massage therapist" while smoking meth - of there also was BULLDOG

Hi Strand,

I think if you looked it up you might agree that your characterization here is over the top. This is not a representation of Republicans at large. It is what many churches believe, certainly. But contrary to the image portrayed by the media, most republicans are fairly moderate and maybe 35% hold the view you just summarized. Most do support birth control, no one supports sex for procreation only (except all married women, LOL), and even McCain said in a townhall meeting last week that he'd like to have families choose if they have birth control on their insurance policy or not. This is unfortunately a lie that people use to smear republicans, and sadly too many people believe it.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Then again, I am for the govt. putting Norplant in all women at 13. I will stay effective until they are 18. Talk about a fool proof solution to the public cost of teen pregnancy

The typo makes this a humorous statement.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by ajmccarrell

No one that is a mainstream Republican politician has said anything like that. MAYBE Pat Buchanan or some other guy way out there. Most support birth control and would like to make it madatory for people on welfare, much like myself. That is a good characterization of the Catholic church's position, but not of Republicans at large. The only thing McCain has said like that was that health insurance plans often cover Viagra bu not birth control. This is another smear that has been repeated so much that people think it's the truth.

McCain has never advocated anything but sex within the mariage via abstinence only. But, why take my word for it -- here it is from the horse's mouth:

John McCain Campaign to Brody File: Eliminating "Abstinence Only" Programs is Wrong

May 24, 2007

A spokesman for GOP presidential candidate John McCain tells The Brody File that he, “strongly opposes efforts by the Democratic-controlled Congress to eliminate abstinence-only sex education classes for school-aged children.”

At the end of June, Congressional Democrats will let time run out on $50 million dollars used to fund abstinence-only programs in public schools. The Brody File was aware of this development on Capitol Hill and asked for Senator McCain’s reaction to it. Here’s his full response as furnished by his campaign:

Senator McCain strongly opposes efforts by the Democratic-controlled Congress to eliminate abstinence-only sex education classes for school-aged children. Senator McCain believes the correct policy for educating young children on this subject is to promote abstinence as the only safe and responsible alternative. To do otherwise is to send a mixed signal to children that, on the one hand they should not be sexually active, but on the other here is the way to go about it. As any parent knows, ambiguity and equivocation leads to problems when it comes to teaching children right from wrong. Senator McCain believes that there are many negative forces in today’s society that promote irresponsible and dangerous behavior to our children. The public education system should not join this chorus of moral equivocation and ambiguity.”

It’s a pretty strong statement by Senator McCain. Clearly, he thinks abstinence is the way to go. My original question asked the following:

“Does he believe federal funds for “Abstinence only” programs should be the “only” alternative in public schools or does he believe federal funds should be used for other more comprehensive programs that teach about condoms?

He doesn’t specifically address the comprehensive programs other than you get the sense that he’s not a big fan of them. The statement above seems to leave some wiggle room when it comes to allowing federal dollars to be used for comprehensive sex education (condoms, etc). I asked for a clarification in a follow-up about this and here’s what I got:

"Senator McCain believes the best approach is to teach abstinence to children as it is the only truly safe and responsible policy. He is unequivocally opposed to Democrat-led efforts to eliminate federal funding for abstinence-only education in public schools."

Is abstinence funding going to be a “key issue” in 2008? No, of course not. But with religious conservatives searching for the “right” candidate, issues like this can help voters develop a clearer picture.

http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/164102.aspx?option=print

So, the presumed leader of the R party is towing the line He has to take this position because the R party is for abstinence only and he is not about to piss them off or estrange them anymore than he already has.

Originally Posted by ajmccarrell

Here in Washington State, as with a lot of states, you can get free birth control, although I'd have to say it doesn't do that much good in poorer neighborhoods. We have Planned Parenthood's everywhere, with no protesters, and still we have an out of wedlock and teenage pregnancy crisis. Making solutions available doesn't always mean that people will take advantage of them. It's one thing to be down on your luck and be poor, but for people who stay that way, it's because of poor decisions. Early pregnancy certainly tops that list of bad behaviors. Even though contraception is widely available, people are still stupid enough not to use it here.

Exactly what methods of birth control are free and freely available in your area? I submit it might condoms at a sex club, gay bar, or AIDS testing facility, which are the standard places everywhere else, which I can assure you the R party fights tooth and nail - abstinence only is their policy and there is no significant deviation.

Also, I think that if people were educated about sex and birth control was cheap or free and freely available, certainly that would cut down on unplanned pregnacies. Put it this way, how could it possibly hurt anything other than the R's position that sex outside of marriage is wrong, though everyone does it Again, a political position and law based solely on a religious idea, which is against the First Amendment.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by ajmccarrell

Hi Strand,

I think if you looked it up you might agree that your characterization here is over the top. This is not a representation of Republicans at large. It is what many churches believe, certainly. But contrary to the image portrayed by the media, most republicans are fairly moderate and maybe 35% hold the view you just summarized. Most do support birth control, no one supports sex for procreation only (except all married women, LOL), and even McCain said in a townhall meeting last week that he'd like to have families choose if they have birth control on their insurance policy or not. This is unfortunately a lie that people use to smear republicans, and sadly too many people believe it.

Well, here is what the RNC says on its site:

Conservative values are at the heart of the Republican Party, and the hard work of conservatives was integral to the historic Republican successes in 2000, 2002, and 2004. President Bush has sought to create a culture of life in this county and has worked for opportunities to strengthen the family. The Republican National Committee's Conservative Team Leader outreach regularly engages with conservative activists from across the country, working together to further a national agenda promoting free markets, limited government, and stronger families and communities.

http://faithandvalues.gop.com/GroupPage.aspx?

and they openly advocate it in the laws they pursue:

• President Bush has nominated and appointed conservative judges who will follow the letter of the law and will not legislate from the bench.
• President Bush believes that marriage is the union between one man and one woman. He supports a Federal Marriage Amendment.
• Building a Culture of Life: President Bush is the most pro-life president in history.
• President Bush has signed into law the Born Alive Infants Act, Partial Birth Abortion Ban and Laci & Connor Peterson’s Law.
• President Bush has been a strong protector of religious freedom as he signed a reaffirmation of "In God We Trust" as the national motto.
• President Bush has also defended the phrase "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance.
• President Bush has created a national Faith Based Initiative that is serving people in communities all across America.

Id. There are many other things in the site and if you look at the legislation the R openly promotes. So, it is a fact, not a smear, though I readily agree than some R's are not for this BS and see it for what it is

Also, it is more of the R party's religious BS. I think religion is a wonderful thing, but I would never force it down someoe's throat by making them say "One Nation Under God" or making them adjust their sexual life to my religions' belief, esp. when no one I know did or does that. Yet, the R party makes it seem like this goal is obtainable and the D's are somehow godless freaks who want to harm an America that in reality does not exist. How can you possibly suport that?

Also, why are you so loathe to admit the R party is a party run by religious zealots who want to make Christianity "the" religion of the US. Certainly, the evidence is overwhemingly supportive of that point. Yet, you refute it, which is rather unexplainable.