Sex should be left to the professionals.

Last edited Mon Apr 9, 2012, 04:35 PM - Edit history (1)

I won't take any idiotic claim they make and ignore it, no matter how insane. There are too many idiots in America willing to follow them.

Also ... skip the ED stuff ... and go after Vasectomies ... once a man has one of those, he's more likely to cheat on his wife.

I have no statistics to back that up ... but who cares ... let's just say it ... if a man can cheat on his wife and be sure his mistress can't get pregnant, no man can pass that up.

Push that version and watch the GOP men's club explode.

but (1) I got a vasectomy without first checking to see if it was covered by my insurance - I don`t know why, but I just assumed it was. The clinic, of course, didn`t check (or if they did, they didn`t bother to say anything). Turns out it wasn`t covered. (2) I was separated from my wife at the time, but still seeing her. She later got pregnant. Man, was I glad I`d had the vasectomy.

when you think they cannot get any stupider.

and they've been digging ever since. The stupid pit seems to be endless.

Thanks for the thread, TheMastersNemesis.

I want to send it to a brother-in-law.

I think the argument here mostly hinges on who pays for contraception, along with exemptions for religious organizations. I think it's incorrect to argue that 'sex is for procreation only' is a mainstream conservative argument. It's there in the movement of course, but I don't get the impression it has the support of most in the rank and file.

Women that can't get pregnant represent significant savings for insurance providers. No pre-natal, no obstetrics, no screaming kids that need coverage for 26 years.

Conservatives live with the constant fear that someone, somewhere, is enjoying their life more than they are. That must be stamped out!

--imm

People across the political spectrum use contraception and have recreational sex. Any DUer who has dated or married a conservative could tell you that.

The real issue here isn't really even about contraception. It's about the rote conservative aversion to 'big government,' meaning they don't want Democrats telling them how to spend their money. That's far from new and not really about sex or contraception. It's just one aspect of their larger aversion to things like the Affordable Health Care Act.

The exemption for religious organizations argument is another old one too. That's the other, cultural side of the 'big government' argument - they don't want Democrats telling private organizations that they have to adhere to 'liberal' values. It's not so different than the argument about gays and the boy scouts (although it is a little different since plenty of conservatives are actually hostile to the idea homosexuality, whereas very few are hostile to concept of contraception).

BTW, I see your point about less kids meaning less money, but that argument could never fly alongside their opposition to abortion.

of someone somewhere is getting something that they don't.........gasp........deserve (not in their minds, anyway).

That's why those aging boomers in the hot tubs need them -- to start a family.

--imm

What a joke.

know because we are not supposed to enjoy sex

leave my body alone. The crazies and their crazy minions.

I don't doubt it's being said...... but I'd like to be able to reference it when I post to other forums.

thanks!

http://mypregnancycenter.org/programs.html

and

http://deaconforlife.blogspot.com/2011/10/birth-control-pill-is-drug.html

and


http://www.semperficatholic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13751&sid=9652a7ddc818f73c3538a919eba73d2c

THE BIRTH CONTROL PILL IS A "GATEWAY" DRUG
Pope Paul VI's Prophetic Warning

(snip)

"Undoubtedly, the Pill is a "gateway" drug, introducing its users to promiscuity, premarital pregnancy, abortion, and divorce. Is it any wonder that the divorce rate rose sharply in the 1960s with the wide popularity of the birth control pill, leveling off at the current disgraceful rate of about 50 percent once the contraceptives market became saturated? The link between contraception and abortion was stated unequivocally by the U.S. Supreme Court (in my opinion an arrogant, over-reaching legislative body) in the landmark 1992 Casey case. In this case, the high court upheld the constitutional right to abortion that Roe v. Wade had established. The court opined that a society with a right to contraception is obligated to have free access to abortion in case contraception fails.

Regarding the medical risks of the Pill, we can be relatively certain it comes with some risk of an early chemical abortion. What is not widely taught or explained about birth control pills is that they operate in three ways. First, they inhibit ovulation. Second, they change the cervical mucus so sperm cannot navigate through the cervix as well as usual. Third, they alter the lining of the uterus, the endometrium, so that it becomes inhospitable to the embryo, the newly developing human being.

If ovulation occurs, as can happen when using birth control pills, fertilization may take place in the fallopian tube. The newly formed human, called a zygote, develops quickly into an embryo, then passes down the tube heading for its first home in the uterus. The thinned uterine lining makes attachment very difficult, however, and an early, chemical abortion takes place.

I don't believe this happens a large percentage of the time. But with the millions upon millions of contracepted cycles occurring each year in the U.S., the number of such abortions could be large.

Possibly in response to this concern, some years ago the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists unilaterally redefined the start of pregnancy as successful implantation in the uterus. This, of course, was a thinly veiled, rhetorical sleight-of-hand that allowed them to claim that any agent acting prior to implantation was contraceptive and not abortifacient.

Shame on them and shame on all of us who have perpetuated the false dichotomy between contraception and abortion. They are truly fruit of the same evil tree. The sooner we and our Protestant brethren realize this, the sooner we will advance in the preservation and protection of life. "

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There was also an article on huffington post last Thursday but I can't find it. It's mostly catholics, and southern republicans who are trying to re-classifly specifically the pill, but in general contraceptives.

Procreation is something the Catholic church encourages. And Viagra and other erectile dysfunction drugs can be of help.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/02/14/church-bishops-are-true-blue-in-their-support-of-viagra-its-about-procreation-not-sex/

preachers and other religious figures don't believe that the world is becoming over populated. Star Trek series once tackled that in one of their shows. If was not earth but another planet where there were no diseases and long of life to the planet habitants. They were over populated to the point where there was no space and everybody were on the planet like sardines.

their wives and girlfriends are using birth control?

We are talking an extremely radical departure from the status quo not folks trying to tread water.

Do you have the link to the article so that I can blast the Comment section apart?

Thanks!

The same people who got active with boycotting Rush, need to boycott every business that bought and paid for these clowns seeking to drag us back the Dark Ages.

Perhaps they should try to convince people it's wrong to have sex even using the Rhythm Method. That's used to prevent pregnancy too so it must be used for recreational sex.

Author Nancy Cohen has a new book out: Delirium : How the Sexual Counterrevolution is Polarizing America. I just heard about this book myself: I think it's going to be another 'must-read.'

From Ms. Cohen's website: