3 ms·

Why is it so hard for you to believe that Republicans are against contraception? In the House, it was voted for by 100% of Democrats, and voted against by 96%

Why is it so hard for you to believe that Republicans are against contraception? In the House, it was voted for by 100% of Democrats, and voted against by 96% of Republicans. The text, in full, if you want to read it is here: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/hr8373/text https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/hr8373/text It's not very long. I've read it. It is the answer to what you want to know, straight from the horses mouth. There is no uncertainty or middle-man telling you how to interpret things. Just read it, and then consider that 96% of Republicans did not wish for that bill to go to congress. You can then try to surmise what plausible reasoning they might have had to object. Just be somewhat critical, otherwise you'll just reaffirm what you already wanted to believe. Don't know what else I can suggest on this matter.

freedomben 3y ago
> Why is it so hard for you to believe that Republicans are against contraception? Because I try very, very hard not to believe things without evidence, and I haven't seen any evidence yet. From my sibling comment on this law, this bill would have guaranteed the right to an abortion because the way they define contraceptive includes abortion. This then seems like evidence that Conservatives love the idea of restricting abortion (which they absolutely do). It is a fallacy of composition to say they favor restricting contraceptives. If you do that, you may as well broaden the category more and say they love restricting health care, or that they love to restrict free market transactions, though such is clearly not warranted because generally speaking conservatives hate the idea of restricting free market transactions (unless they're jailing people simply for ingesting plants (an allusion to the war on drugs, which they definitely seem to love, but I digress)).
- otterley 3y ago
  > From my sibling comment on this law, this bill would have guaranteed the right to an abortion because the way they define contraceptive includes abortion Nonsense. The two terms are clearly defined in the bill and neither of them are defined as any acts, drugs, or devices that would take place or be utilized after conception (i.e., pregnancy). (1) Contraception The term contraception means an action taken to prevent pregnancy, including the use of contraceptives or fertility-awareness based methods, and sterilization procedures. (2) Contraceptive The term "contraceptive" means any drug, device, or biological product intended for use in the prevention of pregnancy, whether specifically intended to prevent pregnancy or for other health needs, that is legally marketed under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, such as oral contraceptives, long-acting reversible contraceptives, emergency contraceptives, internal and external condoms, injectables, vaginal barrier methods, transdermal patches, and vaginal rings, or other contraceptives.
  - okamiueru 3y ago
    The expression "you can only lead a horse to water" doesn't really cut it. The horse is neck deep. We've been spoon feeding it. Tried IV hydration. Not even a bucket of water with apples made a difference. A sealion doesn't have to be self aware of the fact. I'm out.
- okamiueru 3y ago
  Just be careful as to not collapse into a black hole.
otterley 3y ago
I never read the text before, but ignoring the findings and other boilerplate, the only substantive language in there is section 4(a): > A person has a statutory right under this Act to obtain contraceptives and to engage in contraception, and a health care provider has a corresponding right to provide contraceptives, contraception, and information related to contraception. The outcome of the vote is pretty clear and convincing evidence of how the Republican Party feels about this issue.
- freedomben 3y ago
  I looked at the way the law defines "contraceptive", and the definition to me sure seems like it includes a right to access and provide an abortion: > (1)Contraception > The term contraception means an action taken to prevent pregnancy, including the use of contraceptives or fertility-awareness based methods, and sterilization procedures. Abortion is an action taken to prevent pregnancy, so to me this law includes a right to an abortion. Again, if you think abortion is equivalent to birth control pills or condoms, then sure the conclusion that republicans just love the idea of restricting "contraception" seems clear. But if you see any difference or nuance between the two, which I think is pretty reasonable, then there's a pretty good explanation of why they voted against it: They think abortion is murder. They are against murder. You can disagree with them that it's murder, but it's quite disingenuous to suggest that they just love restricting contraception unless you also clarify that by "contraception" you mean "abortion."
  - otterley 3y ago
    > Abortion is an action taken to prevent pregnancy Nonsense. The literal meaning of the word "contraception" is "to prevent conception." Abortion, by definition, takes place after conception (i.e., pregnancy), and that's the whole reason anti-abortionists have concerns about it. Don't conflate the two concepts to suit your own ends. The real reason that conservatives want to restrict access to contraception are far more sinister than this, but I won't get into that in a public forum.

freedomben 3y ago

> Why is it so hard for you to believe that Republicans are against contraception? Because I try very, very hard not to believe things without evidence, and I haven't seen any evidence yet. From my sibling comment on this law, this bill would have guaranteed the right to an abortion because the way they define contraceptive includes abortion. This then seems like evidence that Conservatives love the idea of restricting abortion (which they absolutely do). It is a fallacy of composition to say they favor restricting contraceptives. If you do that, you may as well broaden the category more and say they love restricting health care, or that they love to restrict free market transactions, though such is clearly not warranted because generally speaking conservatives hate the idea of restricting free market transactions (unless they're jailing people simply for ingesting plants (an allusion to the war on drugs, which they definitely seem to love, but I digress)).

otterley 3y ago
> From my sibling comment on this law, this bill would have guaranteed the right to an abortion because the way they define contraceptive includes abortion Nonsense. The two terms are clearly defined in the bill and neither of them are defined as any acts, drugs, or devices that would take place or be utilized after conception (i.e., pregnancy). (1) Contraception The term contraception means an action taken to prevent pregnancy, including the use of contraceptives or fertility-awareness based methods, and sterilization procedures. (2) Contraceptive The term "contraceptive" means any drug, device, or biological product intended for use in the prevention of pregnancy, whether specifically intended to prevent pregnancy or for other health needs, that is legally marketed under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, such as oral contraceptives, long-acting reversible contraceptives, emergency contraceptives, internal and external condoms, injectables, vaginal barrier methods, transdermal patches, and vaginal rings, or other contraceptives.
- okamiueru 3y ago
  The expression "you can only lead a horse to water" doesn't really cut it. The horse is neck deep. We've been spoon feeding it. Tried IV hydration. Not even a bucket of water with apples made a difference. A sealion doesn't have to be self aware of the fact. I'm out.
okamiueru 3y ago
Just be careful as to not collapse into a black hole.

otterley 3y ago

I never read the text before, but ignoring the findings and other boilerplate, the only substantive language in there is section 4(a): > A person has a statutory right under this Act to obtain contraceptives and to engage in contraception, and a health care provider has a corresponding right to provide contraceptives, contraception, and information related to contraception. The outcome of the vote is pretty clear and convincing evidence of how the Republican Party feels about this issue.

freedomben 3y ago
I looked at the way the law defines "contraceptive", and the definition to me sure seems like it includes a right to access and provide an abortion: > (1)Contraception > The term contraception means an action taken to prevent pregnancy, including the use of contraceptives or fertility-awareness based methods, and sterilization procedures. Abortion is an action taken to prevent pregnancy, so to me this law includes a right to an abortion. Again, if you think abortion is equivalent to birth control pills or condoms, then sure the conclusion that republicans just love the idea of restricting "contraception" seems clear. But if you see any difference or nuance between the two, which I think is pretty reasonable, then there's a pretty good explanation of why they voted against it: They think abortion is murder. They are against murder. You can disagree with them that it's murder, but it's quite disingenuous to suggest that they just love restricting contraception unless you also clarify that by "contraception" you mean "abortion."
- otterley 3y ago
  > Abortion is an action taken to prevent pregnancy Nonsense. The literal meaning of the word "contraception" is "to prevent conception." Abortion, by definition, takes place after conception (i.e., pregnancy), and that's the whole reason anti-abortionists have concerns about it. Don't conflate the two concepts to suit your own ends. The real reason that conservatives want to restrict access to contraception are far more sinister than this, but I won't get into that in a public forum.