War on Women

[Simon Peter]

Female protesters : “Not the church, not the state, women must control their fate” — then demand free birth control and abortions.

Hundreds of protesters marched on Saturday in New York City against what they say are setbacks to equal rights and reproductive rights for women.

Saturday’s march against the “war on women” was one of dozens around the country.

Protesters marched from Washington Square down Broadway to Foley Square.

They chanted “Not the church, not the state, women must control their fate.”

Brenda Reiss says she was taking part in the protest because of efforts in several states to restrict access to abortion and contraception. She says women “will not be shoved back in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant.”

Protesters included actress Martha Plimpton, star of television program “Raising Hope.”

Plimpton tweeted that it was “a beautiful day for yelling at the government.”

Police reported no arrests.
http://newyork.cbslocal.com

[PonderThis]

Nice how you twist women protesting restricted access to abortion and contraception (restricted via state laws put into place by people like you) into demanding free abortions and contraception on demand. It really bugs you for women to have control over their own bodies and contraception, doesn't it?

[tornado]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-..._blog.html?
It’s Democrats who are putting focus on birth control
By Melinda Henneberger

The beauty of the current birth-control conversation for Democrats is that they not only have public opinion on their side but have cannily managed to make contraception a front-burner election-year campaign issue -- by complaining that Republicans are making it front-burner election-year campaign issue.

The answer, in other words, to the many who are wondering why the Republicans would want to ride such a losing pony is: They don’t.... read more at the link.

[chuck white]

Free Breast implants while we're at it.

[Scrapper]

[PonderThis]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-..._blog.html?
It’s Democrats who are putting focus on birth control

Are you meaning to say Simon Peter is a Democrat???

[Clone]

[Tiamat]

Female protesters : “Not the church, not the state, women must control their fate” — then demand free birth control and abortions.

Hundreds of protesters marched on Saturday in New York City against what they say are setbacks to equal rights and reproductive rights for women.

Saturday’s march against the “war on women” was one of dozens around the country.

Protesters marched from Washington Square down Broadway to Foley Square.

They chanted “Not the church, not the state, women must control their fate.”

Brenda Reiss says she was taking part in the protest because of efforts in several states to restrict access to abortion and contraception. She says women “will not be shoved back in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant.”

Protesters included actress Martha Plimpton, star of television program “Raising Hope.”

Plimpton tweeted that it was “a beautiful day for yelling at the government.”

Police reported no arrests.
http://newyork.cbslocal.com

I read your post and your link which doesn't take me to the article and fail to see where women demand free birth control and abortions? But as for birth control, if women pay for their insurance, why shouldn't their birth control be part of what they pay for? Pregnancy, the potential of, is a huge factor in the everyday health of women. It's an everyday part of life. Why shouldn't they have birth control covered?

[orygunluvr]

The real war on women.

http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-co...ades-women

Obama cozies to Muslim Brotherhood - the same MB that oppresses, degrades women

Dems claim GOP waging "War on Women"...

A delegation of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood was recently welcomed to the Obama White House, and shortly thereafter, $1.5 billion of American taxpayers money was granted to the nation whose new government will be dominated by the same Muslim Brotherhood.

Since the above transpired in Washington, DC, National Review is reporting that the Hillary Clinton-run Obama State Department has ordered the suspension of routine border inspection procedures in regards to Muslim Brotherhood operatives.


"The State Department broke with normal procedures last week when it ordered the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) not to conduct a secondary inspection on members of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party (FJP).

This happened despite the fact that one member of the delegation had been implicated – though not charged – in a U.S. child pornography investigation..."


The website On Coptic Nationalism cites the Muslim Brotherhood's political arm, the Freedom and Justice Party, has stated in their Election Program that they intend to:


"Ensure that all women get their rights.

As long as these don’t clash with Islamic Sharia."


As previously covered by Examiner.com, Khairat al-Shater, the presidential candidate of the growingly politically powerful and influential Egyptian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood has unequivocally stated that as President of the Egyptian Republic:


"... introducing sharia law would be his 'first and final' objective."


As published by the University of California at Los Angeles, according to sharia law the following are acceptable punishments for women:


* Honor killing.
* Rape/gang rape.
* Buried alive.
* Lashing.
* Stabbing.
* Beating to death.
* Shooting.
* Beheading.
* Slitting the throat.
* Disfigurement.
* Hanging.
* Strangulation.
* Dismemberment.

[PonderThis]

Fanatical religious nuts all of you. Your Bible calls for some pretty ridiculous stuff as well, and I'm sure some of their university scholars would be glad to point them out for you, too.

Myself as well, if you're interested. Only 430 verified Bible direct contradictions to explain away, I haven't seen any of you Bible bangers even attempt it yet.

[orygunluvr]

Yep, I can see comparing biblical text of another century to the public execution of women today for as little as walking in front of her man as relevant. Nice to see you support our funding these groups that believe in the public execution of women. Seems our current administration feels the same way, money well spent.

[PonderThis]

Doesn't your Bible say something about stoning adulterers to death? You don't want to go against the word of God himself, do you???

[orygunluvr]

Doesn't your Bible say something about stoning adulterers to death? You don't want to go against the word of God himself, do you???

Yep, I can see comparing text from centuries ago to a current time activity as relevant. Got it, kill women and we have no more babies. Leftists dream.

[PonderThis]

It's in your book, now. I suppose now you're saying it's no longer the word of God too, or you can just pick and choose the parts you like, and ignore the rest. Typical Christian attitude btw, you'll fit right in.

[Scrapper]

Now now, Ponder... you know they pick and choose what scripture fits their agenda at the time.

[PonderThis]

I can't help it if Islamics really live their faith, while OL only gives his lip service.

[cletus1]

Back to the war on women.

I found these views pretty center of the road. Access to contraception started this controversy. This was never a left right issue until just recently. Lets hope some conservative women that use BC weigh in.

Anyway, here are some excerpts from some articles I read. Wow, calmer more intelligent discussions are possible; just looky here:

“I am completely shocked that contraception is being made to seem as if it’s a controversial issue,” said the Rev. Debra W. Haffner, president of the Religious Institute, a Connecticut-based group that examines the intersection of theology and human sexuality. “The fact is, 99 percent of heterosexual, sexually active adults use contraception. More than nine in 10 American adults support the availability of contraception.”

Haffner noted that support for this issue used to be bipartisan. As a member of the House of Representatives during the 1970s, future president George H.W. Bush championed family planning initiatives, and President Ronald W. Reagan signed them into law during the 1980s.

Why the change now?

“I think what is going on now has virtually nothing to do with contraception,” Haffner, a Unitarian Universalist minister, told Church & State. “It has to do with both the Catholic bishops and the extreme evangelical right looking for new wedge issues to continue to try to impose their beliefs about sexuality on the general public.

http://www.au.org/church-state/may-2012-...traception

[Simon Peter]

Back to the war on women.

I found these views pretty center of the road. Access to contraception started this controversy. This was never a left right issue until just recently. Lets hope some conservative women that use BC weigh in.

Anyway, here are some excerpts from some articles I read. Wow, calmer more intelligent discussions are possible; just looky here:

“I am completely shocked that contraception is being made to seem as if it’s a controversial issue,” said the Rev. Debra W. Haffner, president of the Religious Institute, a Connecticut-based group that examines the intersection of theology and human sexuality. “The fact is, 99 percent of heterosexual, sexually active adults use contraception. More than nine in 10 American adults support the availability of contraception.”

Haffner noted that support for this issue used to be bipartisan. As a member of the House of Representatives during the 1970s, future president George H.W. Bush championed family planning initiatives, and President Ronald W. Reagan signed them into law during the 1980s.

Why the change now?

“I think what is going on now has virtually nothing to do with contraception,” Haffner, a Unitarian Universalist minister, told Church & State. “It has to do with both the Catholic bishops and the extreme evangelical right looking for new wedge issues to continue to try to impose their beliefs about sexuality on the general public.

http://www.au.org/church-state/may-2012-...traception

Access to BC and abortion is fine. The below photo is from the protest referred to in the OP and it is why I commented how I did.

[cletus1]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-..._blog.html?
It’s Democrats who are putting focus on birth control
By Melinda Henneberger

The beauty of the current birth-control conversation for Democrats is that they not only have public opinion on their side but have cannily managed to make contraception a front-burner election-year campaign issue -- by complaining that Republicans are making it front-burner election-year campaign issue.

The answer, in other words, to the many who are wondering why the Republicans would want to ride such a losing pony is: They don’t.... read more at the link.

I don't agree. It was the far right religious nuts that decided to carry water for the ultra-conservative Catholic Bishops that put this issue in the news.

Here is some more from another article that I found compelling:

Catholic Bishops, Religious Right Allies Step Up Their Campaign To Deny Americans’ Access To Birth Control

May 2012

By Rob Boston

A rally in downtown Scranton, Pa., March 23 was billed as a gathering to defend “religious freedom” – but sometimes things are not what they seem to be. In this case, the event was actually an attack on access to birth control, and it was backed by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).

Among those attending were 55 boys dressed in blue blazers from St. Gregory’s Academy in Elmhurst, a males-only boarding school. Joseph Dalimati, a senior at the school, told the Wilkes-Barre Citizens’ Voice that he believes reliance on birth control fosters sexually transmitted diseases.

“Women don’t have a right to what they are calling health care,” Dalimati said. “Birth control is not health care. Society is not obligated to provide it.”

The Scranton street protest was just one of several dozen similar events held in cities all over America. Planned by an anti-abortion group called the Pro-Life Action League, the events were endorsed by the bishops and represent the latest escalation of the church hierarchy’s ongoing war with the administration of President Barack Obama over Americans’ access to birth control...... snip



"Garrett said the Catholic hierarchy talks about religious freedom, but what they are really seeking is a mechanism that will enable them to impose their views about contraceptives on large numbers of Americans who do not share that belief.

“Religious freedom doesn’t give a church the right to impose its dogma on the unwilling,” Garrett said. “The Obama administration has crafted a rule that protects the interests of purely religious groups while preserving every American’s right to make his or her own decisions about private medical matters. It’s a sensible course that most Americans support, and so does AU.”

..."Lynn opposed the idea that health care should be tailored to the demands of large and powerful religious groups or that employers should have a right to bend employees’ health care to the employer’s religious beliefs.

“Thus, if your boss becomes a fundamentalist Christian and decides that childhood vaccines demonstrate a lack of faith in God, he can deny vaccination coverage to all of his workers,” wrote Lynn. “This is not ‘religious freedom.’ It is control of others.”

Added Lynn, “The government has no obligation to assist an employer impose his religious beliefs on others. A factory owner has the right to believe what he wants about God and run his own life according to those beliefs. He has no right to interject his theology into the personal relationship between you and your doctor.”

The complete article: http://www.au.org/church-state/may-2012-...ontroversy

[broadzilla]

The original post is about women demanding FREE on demand abortions and birth control. Kind of like pay per view TV?

Seriously, if women end up getting free surgical procedures and free medication...then you would have to do that for everyone for everything. Socialized medicine here we come! Finally, a way to actually get it done...hoo-rah!