I have had it with the anti-health, anti-women Republican attitude

No, this is not about you-know-who. It's about contraceptive bans and abstinence education.

Did you know that one of the Wisconsin legislative wingnuts is trying to prohibit any University-run health clinic from prescribing oral contraceptives?

http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local/index.php?ntid=32856&nt_adsect=edit

(Usual reasons -- mini-abortions, morality, promiscuity, outrage.)

It's almost as though this wingnut is telling us that he's a better parent figure than our own parents. It's insulting. I've had it.

I wrote a much longer rant on my own site (http://www.wisconsinite.net/dairyconspiracyarchives/000610.html) , but there's a lot of talk about sex and I don't want this thread deleted. (So, head there if you want, but let's keep this discussion separate.)

For a party that preaches personal responsibility and the sanctity of the family unit and small government, they're really sticking their noses where they don't belong.
:grr:

I think I shall give the UW clinic a call and find out if they make Viagra available.

Granted, most people using the UW Health System are not in Viagra's target demographic, but...yeah, this could be a big honking helping of hypocracy here.

Thanks...

So, now they are trying to bring Bush's Abstinence Only until MARRIAGE on college campuses too? What next? A 30 year old woman won't be able to get a BC prescription from a doctor until she shows a MARRIAGE LICENSE?

What is next - overturn Griswald? Sorry, no birth control for you too even if you ARE married. It is you DUTY to procreate for the state if you are married.

Somebody better start PAYING attention or you will not recognize this country in 4 years. We will have more in common with the Taliban than the good ole USA.

That's been their goal for over 30 years.

providing oral contraceptives, period.

Theroretically -- if a 30-year-old married mother of two needs to take hormonal contraception in order to get relief from otherwise disabling cramps or endometriosis -- so she can go to class and take care of her kids -- she'll have to go elsewhere.

The legislation hasn't been written yet, so I don't know if it will include exclusions like that.

She's suppose to be at home taking care of the house and the kids. Making sure that dinner is warm and on the table so when the husband comes home he can relax. Classes lead to thinking and thinking just gets them domestic slaves into trouble.

In otherwords, keep the poor masses pregnant and ignorent, so long as HIS daughters don't have to worry about getting knocked up and HIS sons don't have to worry about dropping out of school to support their child.

:nuke:

Let us not forget that the legal cases that preceded Roe all had to do with making contraception available. One case dealt with allowing unmarried women to get a prescription filled for The Pill; another related to whether a married woman should have to get her husband's permission to go on The Pill.

they sound interesting.

A bit of text on the topic from this site:

When the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the birth control pill in 1960, 30 states prohibited the sale of contraceptives to married and unmarried persons. In 1965 the Supreme Court overturned all state laws that denied married people access to contraceptives.<16> In 1972, it extended the right to contraception to unmarried persons.<17>

The cases:

Griswold vs. Connecticut, which is about giving married people access to contraception: http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/reproduction/griswold.htm

Eisenstadt v. Baird, which deals with dispensing birth control to unmarried women: http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/630/

These are the precursors to Roe, and what the Reich Wing would like to see overturned in their efforts to make The Handmaid's Tale a reality.

:scared:

Most college students are adults and should be allowed to make their own decisions about family planning without the intervention of this jerk. Moreover, many college students are married. Why shouldn't they be able to purchase birth control?

They want a ignorant-drunk-abusive father state.

I'm sure the gov'ment knows what's best for me :silly:

They want to force women to have babies and don't want people to enjoy sex. Simple as that.

And this is in Wisconsin, for God's sake, not a state that I would normally identify with reactionary extremism.

I really thought people like this died out years ago, along with pro-slavery and alcohol prohibitionists.

of wingnuts up here.

We have very few moderate Republicans. Those we do have, or those who are perceived as moderate, lose their jobs -- last year, Sen. Majority Leader Mary Panzer (West Bend), who was no flaming liberal, lost her seat because a state rep, Glenn Grothman, took her on for not being conservative enough. He won.

Madison's solidly progressive; Milwaukee's old-school Democratic; we vote marginally blue as a state, but we've got nutjobs scattered throughout.

I am fuming over the control these thugs seek to have over women.

Is how many of our own people still don't believe that this was their intention all along. When it was there for anyone (and everyone) with fundamental reading skills to see.