ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Single Women Birth Control

Why do Conservatives assume all women, who want their insurance to pay for birth control are single? I used it when I was married. My children who are married use it. Statistics say that 99% of all women use it. Not all women who use birth control are single. Why the assumption?

Moderator - I have not kept up with the issues, however my guess is that Liberals have highlighted the single person not the married family.

Join Our Free Chat and Take The Parenting Bible Quiz
 ---Trish on 3/9/12
     Helpful Blog Vote (5)

Reply to this BlogPost a New Blog



Too bad I can't post links here, but I read a story about a MARRIED couple who used every contraceptive known to man, even NPF, and STILL conceived 7 children while using them.

The woman who wrote the story said, "You can call me Failure Rate."

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 3/17/12


\\My husband didn't want any more kids, and threatened to divorce me if I did not get an abortion.\\

Many women have said they got abortions because they felt pressured by the baby's father or others to have one.

Even allowing for some post-facto rationalizations--so much for choice!

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 3/16/12


Trish, I'm glad you did the right thing and had the baby despite your husbands immaturity and threats. Even in that situation, it still would have been wrong to have the abortion. Your husband obviously wasn't mature enough to handle the marriage and the children that are a natural result of marriage. You obviously were mature enough and did the right thing. The thing that hurts people today is they are taught that with protection, intercourse won't lead to a baby, which is a lie. Then when they get pregnant they don't kow what to do. People should teach that intercourse can always lead to a baby, since that's actually what it was designed for, and that if you can't handle a baby then you should remain abstinent and unmarried.
---Jed on 3/15/12


Trish, I didn't answer you to come down on you. I'm glad you had the child. I know you decided to have him because even though your husband threathen you, in your heart you knew it was wrong to have an abortion. That is the moral decision I am concern about when it comes to abortion. When women decide to have abortions, they are only thinking of themselves. As if having the abortion will clear their sinful souls. They don't think of the unborn. Only themselves. And who speaks for them? Murder is what it is. Can you think of anything worse then cracking the skull and sucking the brains out of an unborn with a vacumm cleaner? That is worse then animals. That matters to me more then getting help for something I need.
---Mark_V. on 3/15/12


Francis, absolutely not. Intercourse is a very important part of a health marriage. Married couples on birth control should realize that even protected intercourse may lead to a baby and be prepared to take care of one in the event that it does happen. If you're not mature enough to accept that fact, then you're not mature enough for marriage or intercourse, and should ramain unmarried and abstinent until you grow up a little. ---Jed on 3/14/12

AGREED
---francis on 3/15/12




Jed: I was married, with two kids, when I found out I was pregnant again. My husband didn't want any more kids, and threatened to divorce me if I did not get an abortion. I didn't and he stayed with me till that baby was 18.
---Trish on 3/15/12


Are you also avocating ABSTAINANCE for the few married people who MAY have abortions?
---francis on 3/14/12

Francis, absolutely not. Intercourse is a very important part of a health marriage. Married couples on birth control should realize that even protected intercourse may lead to a baby and be prepared to take care of one in the event that it does happen. If you're not mature enough to accept that fact, then you're not mature enough for marriage or intercourse, and should ramain unmarried and abstinent until you grow up a little. After all, God's plan for a marriage is not just for two adults having fun, it for raising a family with children. If that's not your goal, then marriage and intercourse probably isn't for you.
---Jed on 3/14/12


Cluny:

Should a Mormon employer who provides health insurance be free to refuse to pay for cold remedies containing caffeine and alcohol?

Should a Second Day Adventist employer be free to refuse to pay for vaccines because they are made with animal products?

Should a Scientologist employer be free to refuse to pay for psychoactive prescription drugs because they don't believe in psychotherapy?

Should a Christian Scientist employer be free to refuse to pay for all medications at all?
---StrongAxe on 3/14/12


Trish, we were advocating for abstinence instead of ABORTION, not birth control. But you know that cause I already clarified that. Almost all abortions are by single, un-wed mothers, not by married families. ---Jed on 3/14/12

Are you also avocating ABSTAINANCE for the few married people who MAY have abortions?
---francis on 3/14/12


Trish, we were advocating for abstinence instead of ABORTION, not birth control. But you know that cause I already clarified that. Almost all abortions are by single, un-wed mothers, not by married families. Secondly, "reasonbly priced" birth control coverage was never discussed. The bill by Obama that you keep advocating is for FREE contraception paid by your employer, not "reasonbly priced" birth control. That is not even one of the options being offered by the liberals because birth control is already very affordable, even without insurance coverage at all. Anyone can afford contraception, that's not really what this is about. This is all about forcing people to obey Obama over their religios beliefs.
---Jed on 3/14/12




Cluny: There is a clause that says, if the employer has moral objections, the insurance company the employer uses should provide it. The decision to use birth control should be between the woman, God, and her doctor. The employer's moral objections should not be a factor.
---Trish on 3/14/12


MarkV: On the blog: What is a Liberal? Quite a few people said that instead of being provided with reasonably priced, covered by insurance, birth control, the women should abstain. Those people assume the women wanting birth control coverage are single and promiscuous. My question is why the assumption.

As for free stuff for the poor, the kids born into poverty are helpless. They go to the poorest schools. Parents may, or may not provide healthy meals, so they need their meals provided by the schools. It's not the fault of the children.

Same for the disabled, and the veterans who come home unable to work because of their injuries. It's not their fault, yet the Conservatives cut funding for them left and right.
---Trish on 3/14/12


\\Jed: I am not advocating for free birth control. I am advocating for birth control coverage by employers' insurance companies. Stay focused\\

Even if the employer--such as a religious ministry--has moral objections to contraception?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 3/14/12


StrongAxe, yes most of these same people that morally object to providing contraception (I am not one of them BTW) are most outspoken about being forced to provide abortions for others. I'm glad you can agree that having to financially support abortions against your beliefs is wrong. That is a battle, among many others, that most of us are currently fighting. But getting out of business doesn't stop you from funding abortions. Anyone that has a job and pays income taxes is being forced to fund abortions too. And just because we are being forced to do alot of wrong things by this administration, doesn't mean we should just lay down and die and let them continue force their way on us for whatever they want.
---Jed on 3/14/12


Trish, I believe this to be a smoke screen as to the reason why you vote against conservatives. Your justifing why you vote democrat. Liberals wants their rights even when they go against the rights of the Christian. Who by the way is voting for the life of the unborn. Only they speak for him. Lets be honest, instead of all the talk about birth control, free condoms, free abortions, free help so that people don't have to work. Free lunches, free housing, everything free, while the others work hard and pay taxes, pay their own bills, buy their own food. While others sit at home getting very heavy eating off of someone else, they are only thinking of themselves and not the others. Sure, we should help the needy. Was that the reason for your blog?
---Mark_V. on 3/14/12


Jed:

So if it's so inexpensive, why are so many employers/insurers having such a big hissy fit about it? Is it because it offends their conscience to have to pay for such things?

Well, guess what? They pay taxes, and their tax money goes to pay for much worse things, like abortions, military (who kill people in other countries), etc. Do they have problems with that? If not, they shouldn't have problem with one kind of forced payment if they don't have a poblem with the other kind of forced payment. And if they DO have problems with taxation, they should get out of commerce altogether to avoid having to pay it.
---StrongAxe on 3/13/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Lasik Surgery


Trish, you are twisting the facts again. Most insurance policies DO currently cover birth control. In fact, many of them cover birth control without covering viagra, but no insurance policy (that I've ever heard of) covers viagra without also covering birth control, as you claim. Alot more insurance companies cover birth control than viagra. Basically, the only policies that don't cover birth control are the ones for religious institutions, and they don't cover viagra either. No one is forcing employers to cover viagra against their beliefs. Even though viagra actually does treat a disorder and is very expensive and contraception is pretty cheap.
---Jed on 3/13/12


StrongAxe, you are right when you say birth control is inexpensive. That's the point. No one has ever gotten pregnant because they didn't have access to contraception. It's there at every pharmacy, department store, grocery store, and gas station bathroom for anyone to buy, at pretty low prices too. A 12 pack of condoms costs about $4 at Walmart and you can get a 90 day supply of birthcontrol for under $20. So if you can afford anything, you can afford contraception. If you really have to have intercourse that badly you can give up a few can's of soda every week. Unplanned pregnancies accur for two reasons: 1 the contraception didn't work, or 2 they were too lazy and irresponsible to get the birth control on their own.
---Jed on 3/13/12


Jed:

If one wants to object about "having to pay" for contraceptives on the basis that the financial burden is unfair, it should be pointed out that the cost of birth control is MUCH MUCH less than the cost of pregnancy care, which is much more necessary if birth control is not available.

It falls under the old proverb "a stitch in time saves nine" (months, in this case).
---StrongAxe on 3/13/12


Jed: I am not advocating for free birth control. I am advocating for birth control coverage by employers' insurance companies. Stay focused.

If what you say is true, that intercourse is a choice, why should these employers, or their insurance companies, cover Viagra and not birth control?
---Trish on 3/13/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Bullion


Jed:

They are drugs, and as such, controlled by the FDA, and as such, they are medications.
---StrongAxe on 3/13/12


Trish, these same insurance companies DO NOT provide viagra free of charge. That is a lie. If you do not think that intercourse is a choice then I'm not even going to waste my time arguing with someone so absurd.

StrongAxe, This bill is not only about health insurance plans covering birth control. It would provide all forms of contraceptives completely free of charge, at no added cost to the employee, only the employer. They don't even do that for medications that are vital to people's health. I know there are exceptions, but generally, contraceptives are not a medication, they simply allows us to have intercourse without pregnancy. How it ever got labled as a health need is beyond me.
---Jed on 3/12/12


Jed:

Trish has a good point. If intercourse is a choice, so, as a result, is pregnancy. Do you think insurance companies should be able to decline ob/gyn care too? How about lung cancer treatment, since smoking is a choice? Or diabetes care, since overeating is a choice? Just where do we draw the line?
---StrongAxe on 3/12/12


Jed: If intercourse is a choice, why do these same employers' insurance policies provide Viagra?
---Trish on 3/12/12


Send a Free Romantic Ecard


Jed:

It's not a matter of "drugs free of charge", but "insurance covering them". Most drug plans require a deductable or co-payment, but people who need drugs can get them at affordable rates, rather than steep prices drug companies charge.

Isn't this bill about health care plans including birth control? I have never heard of any kind of comprehensive health plans excluding insulin. Employers that don't provide health insurance wouldn't be required to provide birth control, would they?

Have you ever tried to purchase health insurance independently? Individual insurance usually costs many times more than being part of a group plan. Could you afford $1000 a month in premiums? Most can't.
---StrongAxe on 3/12/12


Cluny my point was if 99% of American women have used birth control at some time in their lives,then since there are Catholic American women it would include them too. No research tests are 100% correct,besides that like any research testing its designed to prove what the designer wants it to prove. One can skew any test they create to make it come out the way they wish. Even if honest they make it prove their point. God Bless
---Darlene_1 on 3/12/12


StrongAxe, firstly, I don't know of anyone who is aposed to those particular drugs you mentioned. That seems a little absurd. Secondly, Those drugs are not provided free of charge. Doesn't it seem a little wrong that a diabetic has to pay for their own medication while birthcontrol is provided for free, even though intercourse is a choice and diabetes is not? Thirdly, it's not your employers responsibility to provide you with anything other than a paycheck. Anything else is an added bonus, not a right. So if your employer has a religious objection to paying for something. Then go buy your own insurance at full price. They don't have to provide any insurance at all and you are aware of the company insurance policies before you sign up.
---Jed on 3/12/12


Jed:

If one believes that an employer or insurer can legitimately refuse to pay for certain legitimate drugs (like birth control pills) because those violate their consciences, how about other drugs?

For example, headache and cold remedies that contain caffeine to counteract the drowsiness, or cough syrups that contain alcohol. I can well imagine that Mormon companies might object to paying for those. Do you think they should be justified in doing so?

Or if they are vegan, do they have a right to refuse to pay for drugs that contain animal byproducts, or upon which animal testing was used?

Where does one draw the line at what they can and cannot refuse based on conscience?
---StrongAxe on 3/12/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Menopause


Trish, those comments suggesting abstinence were not about birth control, they were about abortion. Some liberals suggested that abortion was okay if the parents weren't ready to take care of a baby. And the conservatives rightly answered that a person who is not ready to take care of a baby should abstain, since birth control does not guarantee pregnancy-free relations. No one suggested that a married couple should remain abstinent if they're not planning a baby. But even married couples on birth control should realize that it's not a guarantee they won't get pregnant and should be ready to take care of a baby in case it does happen. If you're not then you're not mature enough to be married.
---Jed on 3/12/12


\\Darlene, that same survey found that 98% of all Catholic women used birth control at some point in their lives.
---Trish on 3/10/12\\

Wrong, Trish.

The Alan Guttmacher study that's so misquoted of late says that 98% of UNMARRIED Catholic women age 15-49, who are sexually active (married or not), are pregnant or immediately post-partum, and do NOT want to have children use birth control.

Rather limited demographic, right?

Gee! 98% of women who don't want to have children use birth control. That's like saying 98% of smokers use tobacco.

And the Guttmacher Institute is the research wing of Planned Barrenhood.

What does THIS tell you?: That they are unbiased?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 3/11/12


NurseRoberts, Conservatives don't think other people's contraception is their business, including paying for it. Conservatives are not trying to stop anyone from being able to get birth control. That's not the issue. The issue is whether employers should be forced to provide something that they don't agree with for free, making them a participant in what they believe is wrong. Any adult can buy their own birth control or contraceptives wherever they want already. Conservatives aren't trying to change that. Look at it this way. I don't agree with smoking so I don't smoke. I'm not trying to ban smoking for everyone just because I don't agree with it, but at the same time, I'm not going to participate in it by buying people cigarettes.
---Jed on 3/11/12


I assumed people would know I meant AMERICAN women.

I was also talking about the Conservatives on these blogs who said that the women who want birth control should abstain. Why should marry people abstain?
---Trish on 3/11/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Penpals


Moderator, maybe you mean certain liberals started the idea that single women would be victims if birth control is not covered by insurance. And then, maybe you mean, certain conservatives did not do their homework, but assumed that only single women are an issue. I would not say that all liberals would be misleading like this, or that all conservatives piggy-back on other people's assumptions (c:

In a culture of oppression, ones will put people in general categories, then dictate what is true of all of them . . . so they can push how they dictate that we must see things . . . their way. They who are oppressive don't care about the individuals they represent, but they use people for their general claims so they can get what they want.
---willie_c: on 3/11/12


NurseRobert since it is American Conservatives and Librals we are talking about it follows that we are talking about American women,who are the only ones affected by what those people do. Blessings
---Darlene_1 on 3/11/12


Actually, the study was about American Catholic women, a little bit different that ALL Catholic women.

Back to the original question.I don't believe that all connservatives assume its just single women. My question is, why do they think its ANY of their business?
---NurseRobert on 3/11/12


Darlene, that same survey found that 98% of all Catholic women used birth control at some point in their lives.
---Trish on 3/10/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Accounting


Trish was right. I found where it does say 99% of American women have used birthcontrol methods at some time in their lives. That doesn't mean all at one time. If that is correct then that would automatically include Catholic women. So what if the Catholic women did,who did they hurt,no one? Of course I will be the first to admit whoever did the survey could have skewed it to suit their purposes. A College teacher told her class don't ever believe everything you read and only half of what you see. Not bad advice.
---Darlene_1 on 3/10/12


and the point of this insipid question is?

99% of all women!!!! really? you are claiming women 55 and beyond are using birth control???

as a conservative myself I would be very interested in your outlandish accusation and the "sources" you are citing for your question ...seeing almost half of all abortions (1 million+) yearly in USA are done by women who do not use birth control

seeing your question LACKS facts, makes wild generalized accusations about conservatives, and has some agenda unknown in your short flighty question
---Rhonda on 3/10/12


\\My question is, why is it assumed that women who want that coverage are all single? \\

Assumed by whom?

I'm not making that assumption.

Why are YOU assuming that all conservatives are making this assumption?

**Statistics say that 99% of all women use it.**

Where did you come up with this statistic?

This sounds as suspicious the "98% of all Catholic women use BC," which is NOT what the misquoted study by the Alan Guttmacheer Institute (consider the source) found.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 3/10/12


Guys: You are not answering the question I asked. I did not ask whether all employers should provide birth control coverage. My question is, why is it assumed that women who want that coverage are all single? Please answer the original question. I don't want to debate about the employers covering it, or insurance paying for it. I want to know why there is the assumption the women who want the coverage are single.
---Trish on 3/9/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Fundraisers


FWIW, Canada, which has what boils down to socialized medicine with a $54 monthly access fee, does NOT cover contraceptives, and nobody there feels discriminated against.

Generic BC pills from Walgreen's runs less than $10 a month. I realize that not every pill works for every woman, and there are reasons, other than contraception, for taking them.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 3/9/12


Mod: I beg to differ with you on that hypothesis. It has been the Conservative lawmakers and mews media that is discussing women who are single wanting birth control.
---Trish on 3/9/12


It is not about the birth control it is about the "All insurances MUST provide birth control (or whatever) in insurance even if you are against birth control (or whatever)." The catholic church which has always been against it, for right or wrong reasons, has to provide it now by law. The conservative stance is if you want it go find an insurance that provides it. If not find one that does not. If don't care then don't care. The conservative stance is for you to choose whether it is a good idea or a bad idea and you must pay the consquences. The liberial message about conservative is that we are soulless heartless war hawks and that is not true.
---Scott1 on 3/9/12


Why should anyone pay so someone else can have sex?
---calhoon on 3/9/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Ecommerce


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.