I'm not saying using condoms is bad at all. Obviously it's a good idea to use them. I just think arguing against the use of the pill because condoms are available is silly.

I might point out that condoms are only about 78% effective, as concerned with birth control. Me personally, I'd like to have more that one base covered in that situation.

A New Battle Over Contraception
Published: November 5, 2011

The Obama administration made the right call in August when it issued new standards requiring all insurers to cover contraceptives without a deductible or a co-payment, starting next year. The White House now needs to resist pressure from House Republicans, the Roman Catholic Church and other groups out to eliminate or significantly weaken the contraceptives mandate.

The new rules already exempt churches and other religious institutions from having to provide contraceptive coverage for their employees. That is similar to provisions in state laws upheld by the highest courts in New York and California.

Nevertheless, church leaders are calling for an expansive exemption for all employees of Catholic hospitals, charitable organizations, elementary and secondary schools, and colleges and universities. That would, in effect, deny coverage for contraceptives for millions of women who may not be Catholic and may disagree with the church’s stance on birth control.

Some opponents of contraceptives are pushing to allow all employers to opt out of providing contraceptives coverage if it offends their conscience.

The issue was joined last week at a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing called by Representative Joe Pitts, Republican of Pennsylvania, who opposes the mandate. At the hearing, Jon O’Brien, the president of Catholics for Choice, testified that 98 percent of sexually active Catholic women in the United States have used a form of contraception banned by the Vatican.

He criticized the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops for doing the very thing that it wrongly accuses the administration of doing: trying to impede “the religious freedom of millions of Americans” by “taking reproductive health care options away from everybody.”

The administration’s policy on birth control coverage follows the recommendation of the National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine, which studied the medical facts, including high rates of unintended pregnancy and abortion largely caused by lack of access to birth control. President Obama should stand by the policy.

The article from the OP:



Gotta love how the religious are pushing their views on others.

Birth control is cheaper than payimg for births and health care of children.....you would think nsurance companies would want to cover birth control

define 'alot'

from planned parenthood

"Birth control pills cost about $15–$50 a month. They may be purchased with a prescription at a drugstore or clinic.

Visit a Planned Parenthood "



from fifty cents to 1.50 a day, less than what most of us (women and men) spend on junk food everyday

,, not 'alot' in my eyes for something that is supposed to be so vital..

Most of them probably would, which is why there is no need to 'force' them to..

Well, under most insurances, women can get birth control for $10 a month, which is very reasonable. Without insurance, they can be $30-$50 a month, which is way above reasonable.

Except if you work for companies that are religious. Then they can force you to pay more money for something that should be covered by insurance.

than you could opt out of company insurance and opt in to insurance that covers it

or you could skip the starbucks and stay 'protected' instead,,

You do realize that paying for insurance on your own can be quite expensive, right?

You're assuming everyone is spending money on starbucks instead of something more important?

There is kind of the assumption that everyone who dates is having sex and that is not true. WHEN I have been in relationships, WHERE I have been having sex, boyfriends have been MORE than happy to pay for birth control. I think it depends on the caliber of WHO you are dating.

I do not birth control is that overpriced. I think that a lot of people kind of assume it's something everyone needs 24//7 with everyone because it's kind of a haphazard thing that people have sex. But in reality, I would not really have a relationship with a man who couldn't afford birth control on his own because to me that is not really a man.

There is kind of the assumption that everyone who dates is having sex and that is not true. WHEN I have been in relationships, WHERE I have been having sex, boyfriends have been MORE than happy to pay for birth control. I think it depends on the caliber of WHO you are dating.

I do not birth control is that overpriced. I think that a lot of people kind of assume it's something everyone needs 24//7 with everyone because it's kind of a haphazard thing that people have sex. But in reality, I would not really have a relationship with a man who couldn't afford birth control on his own because to me that is not really a man.

Birth control isn't important enough for you to pay for as well?

I'd never rely solely on the guy to provide the birth control. If I think I'm going to have sex, I will make sure to have condoms with me.

I know whether or not I intend to have sex.