National Journal: Loss in HHS contraception mandate case would “restrict access” for women

posted at 12:41 pm on March 13, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

Behold, the layers of editors and fact checkers. With oral arguments scheduled at the Supreme Court in less than two weeks in the Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood cases, National Journal’s Sophie Novack and Clara Ritger offer up a primer titled “Everything You Wanted To Know About The Contraception Mandate (But Were Afraid To Ask),” as a way to educate readers on the stakes of the case. Most of this recounting of the legal fight is fairly straightforward — until readers get to the description of what happens if the plaintiffs prevail:

Implications: A win for Hobby Lobby and Conestoga would limit women’s access to contraception, essentially allowing any business owner to refuse to provide birth-control coverage on the grounds of religious freedom.

That, in a polite word, is absolute nonsense. Nothing in this case “limits access to contraception.” The issue at hand is whether businesses owned by people who have religious objections to contraception should be forced to provide it for free to their employees, not bar them from purchasing it on their own. Employees (contra NJ, it’s not limited to women) who draw salaries have full latitude to use their income to buy their own contraception and sterilization services.

The problem for the government in this case is that the RFRA — passed under Bill Clinton, by the way — requires the government to prove that there is a compelling government interest in forcing business owners to go against their religious beliefs. In the hypothetical of the small-town pharmacist who refuses to dispense such supplies to a population unable to access it any other way, that might qualify as both compelling and a state interest. Unfortunately for the government, that’s simply not the case here; there is no compelling state interest in forcing employers and schools to provide contraception and sterilization for free, when contraception and sterilization services are widely and easily obtained in the US. The government has other options for this interest, including the current Title X program that distributes contraception to low-income Americans, which has been in place since the early 1970s to little objection.

I’ve linked this many times, but the government’s own CDC study shows that women have had no issues accessing contraception now or over the last 30 years.  That long-range study found 99% of all sexually-active women wishing to avoid pregnancy had accessed contraception, which is about as universal as it gets. This decision will not have any impact on the status quo, or narrow those choices in any way.

Now, some may want employers to expand compensation to give them free stuff, and some employers may see value in offering this to their employees. There isn’t anything preventing them from doing so now.  For those who say that women can’t figure out how to budget to buy contraception and need employers and schools to give it to them for free, I’d suggest taking the advice of the man behind the contraception mandate. Just replace “health care” with “contraception” — which Obama argues are synonymous anyway — and breathe deep the hypocrisy:

The President responded that “if you looked at their cable bill, their telephone, their cell phone bill… it may turn out that, it’s just they haven’t prioritized health care.” He added that if a family member gets sick, the father “will wish he had paid that $300 a month.”

There’s your fact check.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Yet HA continues to link NJ stories…

cozmo on March 13, 2014 at 12:48 PM

The truth no longer matters to the National Socialist Left.

DinaRehn on March 13, 2014 at 12:48 PM

So let me get this straight.

If my employer refuses to put gas in my car at his expense, he’s basically telling me he wants me to stay home.

If my employer refuses to pay for my groceries (over and above my hourly wages), he wants me to starve.

If my employer refuses to pay for my ammunition to go to the range once a week, he’s a gun-grabbing communist.

Have I got it so far, trolls?

CurtZHP on March 13, 2014 at 12:49 PM

Yet HA continues to link NJ stories…

cozmo on March 13, 2014 at 12:48 PM

Most of their work is better than this, even when I disagree with their POV.

Ed Morrissey on March 13, 2014 at 12:50 PM

Ed, you know why NJ said that has nothing to do with facts or bs. It’s about making sure that the Rs never touch the War on Wimmns.

Its pure establishment pre-surrendering.

nobar on March 13, 2014 at 12:50 PM

contraception and sterilization

And abortion. Don’t forget that. They want to force a Hobby Lobby to pay for abortions.

cptacek on March 13, 2014 at 12:50 PM

Liars……..

crosshugger on March 13, 2014 at 12:52 PM

If my employer refuses to pay for my ammunition to go to the range once a week, he’s a gun-grabbing communist.

CurtZHP on March 13, 2014 at 12:49 PM

That part I’m going to agree with. heh.

Fenris on March 13, 2014 at 12:53 PM

Ed Morrissey on March 13, 2014 at 12:50 PM

I don’t know man. They seem to have gotten worse. At about the same time they stopped requiring a sign up to read their stuff.

cozmo on March 13, 2014 at 12:53 PM

Implications: A win for Hobby Lobby and Conestoga would limit women’s access to contraception …

So, what – are there armed guards stationed at pharmacies, “limiting” women’s access to birth control? I don’t think I’ve ever seen that.

Pork-Chop on March 13, 2014 at 12:54 PM

I bet Scalia is working as we post to come up with funny, snarkey comebacks and questions to hammer any attorney who tries to make this argument during the hearing.

tommyboy on March 13, 2014 at 12:54 PM

That long-range study found 99% of all sexually-active women wishing to avoid pregnancy had accessed contraception, which is about as universal as it gets.

But we have to jettison the first amendment to accomdate that 1% who have never heard of those things called pharmacies.

tommyboy on March 13, 2014 at 12:57 PM

To the Left, access == paid for by somebody else.

MJBrutus on March 13, 2014 at 12:59 PM

Yeah, this is just more of the same bullsqueeze. ‘Access’ will remain unchanged.

Midas on March 13, 2014 at 1:00 PM

Free stuff!!!… I’m still wait’n for my unicorn that poops Skittles. If I had a free Obama cell foam I’d be on the foam bitch’n.

roflmmfao

donabernathy on March 13, 2014 at 1:01 PM

A turkey is president, a thuggish turkey, though.

Schadenfreude on March 13, 2014 at 1:02 PM

Implications: A win for Hobby Lobby and Conestoga would limit women’s access to contraception, essentially allowing any business owner to refuse to provide birth-control coverage on the grounds of religious freedom.

I am so sick of the dishonesty from vile harpies and shrews who seem to think that the entire world should be forced to pay for their godamned contraception. Birth control is not a right recognized by the Constitution.

Whatever the hell happened to the idea that government should stay out of the bedroom. Now, government is being invited in and asked to be part of the party!

Happy Nomad on March 13, 2014 at 1:02 PM

The issue at hand is whether businesses owned by people who have religious objections to contraception should be forced to provide it for free to their employees, not bar them from purchasing it on their own.

You know, I’m sort of tired of you Rethuglicans restricting my access to those little chocolate donuts. I love those.

*looks around*

Also, toner for my printer and . . . I could use a camera. I need to make a video tutorial and I have some ideas for YouTube.

You Conservative and Libertarian types seem to think only rich people should have access to their full creative potential. And those little chocolate donuts. I love those, seriously — send those first.

Axe on March 13, 2014 at 1:05 PM

OT – Too bad her book is not coming out in Sept-Oct, 2014.

Attkisson is working on a book, tentatively scheduled for November, called “Stonewalled: One Reporter’s Fight for Truth in Obama’s Washington.”

“I hope to explore the unseen influences on and manipulation of the images and information the public receives in the media, whether it’s online on Wikipedia, or on social media such as Facebook and Twitter, or on television,” she told me.

Schadenfreude on March 13, 2014 at 1:07 PM

I wish the facepalm photo was the Duke one. I’ll try to visualize it.

22044 on March 13, 2014 at 1:07 PM

Whatever the hell happened to the idea that government should stay out of the bedroom. Now, government is being invited in and asked to be part of the party!

Happy Nomad on March 13, 2014 at 1:02 PM

Well, not join the party, but pay for it. And stand in the corner and watch/record it all.

Midas on March 13, 2014 at 1:08 PM

Bbbbbbbuuuut…. if the Federal Gubment loses the case against Hobby Lobby, Obama will have no choice but to send in Federal Park Rangers to put up barricades in front of all contraception retailers. I heardsed it on the MSNBC!!!!

Glenn Jericho on March 13, 2014 at 1:08 PM

Axe on March 13, 2014 at 1:05 PM

Are you Bishop’s bro?

Schadenfreude on March 13, 2014 at 1:08 PM

I wish the facepalm photo was the Duke one. I’ll try to visualize it.

22044 on March 13, 2014 at 1:07 PM

Don’t even. Miss Bug-Eyes is mine!

CurtZHP on March 13, 2014 at 1:09 PM

Free stuff!!!… I’m still wait’n for my unicorn that poops Skittles. If I had a free Obama cell foam I’d be on the foam bytch’n.

roflmmfao

donabernathy on March 13, 2014 at 1:09 PM

Ed always cites to the exact same thing and never cares to look at other studies that might challenge his view.

This study, for example, found:

•Nearly one out of four women report having put off
a gynecological or birth control visit to save money in
the past year. Such forgone care was more common
among those who are financially worse off than
among others (30% vs. 19%, p=.06). Women who
lost their health insurance during the past year are
more likely to report delaying a visit than are those
who did not.

• Eight percent of women report that they sometimes
did not use birth control in order to save money.* This
cost-cutting behavior is more common among those
who are financially worse off than among others (12%
vs. 4%).

• Among women using the pill, 18% report inconsistent
use as a means of saving money. Pill users said they
skipped pills (4%), delayed getting a prescription filled
(12%), went off the pill for at least a month (11%)
and obtained fewer pill packs at one time (8%). Such
inconsistent use is more common among women
who are struggling financially than among others (25%
vs. 6%)

Perhaps Ed should expand his horizons a bit before claiming to be a definitive fact checker.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:10 PM

Ok, who pooped on the stock market today?

Midas on March 13, 2014 at 1:10 PM

Are you Bishop’s bro?

Schadenfreude on March 13, 2014 at 1:08 PM

lol — Bishop came from the sky. :)

. . . wish I hadn’t thought of those donuts. Now I’m starving.

HAPPY, NEOSOCONS?

Axe on March 13, 2014 at 1:11 PM

Notice how liberal concerns are completely inverse to those of the public at large.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/167843/climate-change-not-top-worry.aspx

pat on March 13, 2014 at 1:11 PM

Just cancel the cable and the expensive smartphone.

JoeHanson on March 13, 2014 at 1:12 PM

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:10 PM

You know that Guttmacher is a pro-abortion group, right? I’ll stick with the CDC.

Ed Morrissey on March 13, 2014 at 1:12 PM

Perhaps Ed should expand his horizons a bit before claiming to be a definitive fact checker.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:10 PM

*Nothing* you just wrote or cited in the study – *nothing* – has anything remotely to do with “access”.

Muppet indeed.

Midas on March 13, 2014 at 1:12 PM

That, in a polite word, is absolute nonsense…

No doubt a man with your education could come up with something more colorful, Ed…

:)

Seven Percent Solution on March 13, 2014 at 1:12 PM

not giving is taking
freedom is slavery, etc.

NoVAHockey on March 13, 2014 at 1:13 PM

You Conservative and Libertarian types seem to think only rich people should have access to their full creative potential. And those little chocolate donuts. I love those, seriously — send those first.

Axe on March 13, 2014 at 1:05 PM

Have you tried a direct appeal to Pelosi?

de rigueur on March 13, 2014 at 1:13 PM

Whatever the hell happened to the idea that government should stay out of the bedroom. Now, government is being invited in and asked to be part of the party!

Happy Nomad on March 13, 2014 at 1:02 PM

Well, not join the party, but pay for it. And stand in the corner and watch/record it all.

Midas on March 13, 2014 at 1:08 PM

Well now you’ve gone and made it sound creepy! ;0

Happy Nomad on March 13, 2014 at 1:16 PM

You know that Guttmacher is a pro-abortion group, right? I’ll stick with the CDC.

Ed Morrissey on March 13, 2014 at 1:12 PM

I believe that’s what we call an ad hominem attack.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:16 PM

. . wish I hadn’t thought of those donuts. Now I’m starving.

HAPPY, NEOSOCONS?

Axe on March 13, 2014 at 1:11 PM

I don’t know about them but this SOTRUECON is.

RickB on March 13, 2014 at 1:16 PM

I believe that’s what we call an ad hominem attack.
themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:16 PM

You believe wrong. Pointing out an obvious bias is not an ad hominem attack.

tommyboy on March 13, 2014 at 1:19 PM

I believe that’s what we call an ad hominem attack.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:16 PM

You would be wrong. I’m not calling them a name; Guttmacher explicitly supports and promotes abortion rights. They are an interest group, whereas the CDC is a government agency that deals in all sorts of medical issues and trends.

Maybe you should check your own references first.

Ed Morrissey on March 13, 2014 at 1:20 PM

I believe that’s what we call an ad hominem attack.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:16 PM

… says the hypocrite who just attacked Ed’s character (impugning his motives/perspectives w/r to ‘fact checking’) rather than address the fact/reality of what he posted.

Midas on March 13, 2014 at 1:22 PM

I believe that’s what we call an ad hominem attack.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:16 PM

Ad hominem is not necessarily a logical fallacy. If you’re skeptical of the honesty of the person (in this case organization) then taking what they say at face value is not reasonable. Studies and polls are frequently misrepresented and conducted sloppily, especially when done by someone with an axe to grind.

Fenris on March 13, 2014 at 1:22 PM

I believe that’s what we call an ad hominem attack.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:16 PM

I believe you should look up the definition of ad hominem. No one called Guttmacher names or attacked it or you on a personal level. Pointing out obvious sources of potential bias is not the same thing.

ClownsToTheLeftOfMe on March 13, 2014 at 1:23 PM

And with that, I’m out of troll snacks, so will be throwing them no further goodies today.

Midas on March 13, 2014 at 1:23 PM

Have you tried a direct appeal to Pelosi?

de rigueur on March 13, 2014 at 1:13 PM

“We see it as an entrepreneurial bill, a bill that says to someone, if you want to be creative and be a musician or whatever, you can leave your work, focus on your talent, your skill, your passion, your aspirations because you will have health care. You won’t have to be job locked.”

http://dailycaller.com/2010/05/15/pelosi-to-artists-quit-your-jobs-u-s-taxpayers-have-your-health-care/

As usual, as a committed progressive, I’m appalled that the so-called “enlightened” progressives I elect don’t go far enough. Sure, free health care, which almost frees me to capitalize on explore my potential –

But where the hell are my donuts?

. . . also condoms. I’m tired of my right to have protected sex being abridged by Rethugli-prudes.

Axe on March 13, 2014 at 1:24 PM

You would be wrong. I’m not calling them a name; Guttmacher explicitly supports and promotes abortion rights. They are an interest group, whereas the CDC is a government agency that deals in all sorts of medical issues and trends.

Maybe you should check your own references first.

Ed Morrissey on March 13, 2014 at 1:20 PM

I would classify it as an ad hominem attack, but a perfectly legitimate one.

Fenris on March 13, 2014 at 1:25 PM

You would be wrong. I’m not calling them a name; Guttmacher explicitly supports and promotes abortion rights. They are an interest group, whereas the CDC is a government agency that deals in all sorts of medical issues and trends.

Maybe you should check your own references first.

Ed Morrissey on March 13, 2014 at 1:20 PM

First, ad hominem attacks aren’t just “name calling.”

Second, I don’t see a connection between being pro-abortion and being biased in a study of whether women can afford birth control. Perhaps you think that birth control is a form of abortion?

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:26 PM

Yikes.
 
Can we have an open registration soon?

rogerb on March 13, 2014 at 1:30 PM

Employees (contra NJ, it’s not limited to women) who draw salaries have full latitude to use their income to buy their own contraception and sterilization services.

Well, of course it is. Just as employees have full latitude to “keep their doctors” if they use their income to pay for them.

It will be telling how the court rules on this one, considering how the “law” is eroding each and every day.

jersey taxpayer on March 13, 2014 at 1:30 PM

I think the president’s got it right. If you want your own birth control, cancel your cable and/or cellular bill.

And you guys say he’s not fiscially bright…

RI_Red on March 13, 2014 at 1:31 PM

OMG! That pic looks like me when I was that age. Totally white-headed. For years.

(Totally off-subject,)

avagreen on March 13, 2014 at 1:31 PM

I can’t stand this anymore. I am a woman. No one ever paid for my contraception needs but me. All this focus on “lady parts” is not only boring but completely irrelevant.

If you can’t afford to get contraception, and your male friend won’t wear a “raincoat” don’t engage. Period. It’s called delayed gratification people. It’s also called being responsible.

Going to the gynecologist is important, yes. But the focus here isn’t on seeing the ObGyn for anything but birth control. Enough is enough.

This Democrat insistence that women can’t take care of themselves is the most insulting, demeaning and infantalizing strategy. The shame of it is that too many of my gender are too stupid and/or blind to see it for the manipulative BS it is. I swear, there are days when I question the wisdom of the 19th Amendment, but then I think to myself of how I and those women smart enough to think as I do would not be able to vote . . ..

/rant off

ClownsToTheLeftOfMe on March 13, 2014 at 1:33 PM

***

Perhaps Ed should expand his horizons a bit before claiming to be a definitive fact checker.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:10 PM

You know that Guttmacher is a pro-abortion group, right? I’ll stick with the CDC.

Ed Morrissey on March 13, 2014 at 1:12 PM

C’mon, muppet. Even the left finds it troubling to cite Guttmacher.

BuckeyeSam on March 13, 2014 at 1:33 PM

Second, I don’t see a connection between being pro-abortion and being biased in a study of whether women can afford birth control. Perhaps you think that birth control is a form of abortion?

Check this link, and read it in its entirety: http://pfli.org/faq_oc.html

RI_Red on March 13, 2014 at 1:34 PM

But where the hell are my donuts?

. . . also condoms. I’m tired of my right to have protected sex being abridged by Rethugli-prudes.

Axe on March 13, 2014 at 1:24 PM

Wait! Now it’s a War on Men™, too? You’ve just opened an entire Second Front. Single-handedly.

de rigueur on March 13, 2014 at 1:35 PM

Second, I don’t see a connection between being pro-abortion and being biased in a study of whether women can afford birth control. Perhaps you think that birth control is a form of abortion?

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:26 PM

Perhaps you think abortion is a form of birth control.

Fenris on March 13, 2014 at 1:35 PM

This study, for example, found:

•Nearly one out of four women report having put off
a gynecological or birth control visit to save money in
the past year
. Such forgone care was more common
among those who are financially worse off than
among others (30% vs. 19%, p=.06). Women who
lost their health insurance during the past year due to 404care are more likely to report delaying a visit than are those who did not.

• Eight percent of women report that they sometimes
did not use birth control in order to save money.* This
cost-cutting behavior is more common among those
who are financially worse off than among others (12%
vs. 4%).

• Among women using the pill, 18% report inconsistent
use as a means of saving money. Pill users said they
skipped pills (4%), delayed getting a prescription filled
(12%), went off the pill for at least a month (11%)
and obtained fewer pill packs at one time (8%). Such
inconsistent use is more common among women
who are struggling financially than among others (25%
vs. 6%)

Perhaps Ed should expand his horizons a bit before claiming to be a definitive fact checker.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:10 PM

Personal choices, every one–except where the women lost their insurance due to mandates in 404care.

Newtie and the Beauty on March 13, 2014 at 1:36 PM

Don’t even. Miss Bug-Eyes is mine!

CurtZHP on March 13, 2014 at 1:09 PM

Heh. Aren’t you married, Curt? :)

22044 on March 13, 2014 at 1:38 PM

You know that Guttmacher is a pro-abortion group, right? I’ll stick with the CDC.

Ed Morrissey on March 13, 2014 at 1:12 PM

I believe that’s what we call an ad hominem attack.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:16 PM

Nice try at trying to cry “foul” in the language wars.

Are you the one behind the push to ban bossy? I suppose you’re the one who is now bleeping the infrequent use of f*g in syndicated reruns of shows produced before PC really took over the country.

BuckeyeSam on March 13, 2014 at 1:38 PM

I believe that’s what we call an ad hominem attack.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:16 PM

Go back to studying the term.

Schadenfreude on March 13, 2014 at 1:40 PM

Heh. Aren’t you married, Curt? :)

22044 on March 13, 2014 at 1:38 PM

Uh…….(rubs grease on ring finger…)

Just ’cause I’m on a diet doesn’t mean I can’t look at the menu.

CurtZHP on March 13, 2014 at 1:40 PM

Hey Muppet,
I’ve put off going to an event because the gas money wasn’t in the budget.
I’ve put off getting a tooth capped because the money wasn’t in the budget.
I’ve put off getting cable, going to the movies, buying alcohol, going out to dinner, throwing a party, because the money wasn’t in the budget.
I’ve put off having sex because a baby wasn’t in the budget.

And I didn’t demand that someone else foot the bill for things I wanted but could not afford. I took responsibility for myself like an adult and altered my behaviour accordingly.

See how it works?

Rivers on March 13, 2014 at 1:41 PM

I think the president’s got it right. If you want your own birth control, cancel your cable and/or cellular bill.

And you guys say he’s not fiscially bright…

RI_Red on March 13, 2014 at 1:31 PM

No cable, cell phones, internet, or telephone……. I’d say birth control is a must given the long quiet evenings.

Happy Nomad on March 13, 2014 at 1:42 PM

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:10 PM

These are women. Why do the act like rabbits?

Schadenfreude on March 13, 2014 at 1:42 PM

Perhaps Ed should expand his horizons a bit before claiming to be a definitive fact checker.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:10 PM

Nothing in your little list of questionable facts shows a reason why an employer with a deeply held religious belief against abortion should be forced by the federal government to pay for it.

cptacek on March 13, 2014 at 1:42 PM

Perhaps Ed should expand his horizons a bit before claiming to be a definitive fact checker.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:10 PM

The fact that some low-income women don’t make birth control a spending priority doesn’t mean those women don’t have “access” to birth control.

As Ed pointed out, there are many clinics and organizations that give away free contraception, and generic birth control pills can be purchased in the U.S. for as little as $9 a month.

If a woman chooses to use her income to pay for cigarettes, a manicure, hair highlights, new tattoos, or some other purchase instead of birth control pills, that is her right. But that spending choice does not justify the government in forcing a third party to violate his or her religious beliefs and provide the woman with “free” birth control and/or abortion pills just so that the woman doesn’t have to concern herself with managing her own budget more responsibly.

AZCoyote on March 13, 2014 at 1:42 PM

Uh…….(rubs grease on ring finger…)

Just ’cause I’m on a diet doesn’t mean I can’t look at the menu.

CurtZHP on March 13, 2014 at 1:40 PM

Ahhh, very well.
I had never noticed her before. Until you mentioned her.

22044 on March 13, 2014 at 1:44 PM

Wait! Now it’s a War on Men™, too? You’ve just opened an entire Second Front. Single-handedly.

de rigueur on March 13, 2014 at 1:35 PM

I did. :)

–And I can’t pursue it because self-serving rationalization masquerading as selflessness, protected by perpetual righteous indignation and embroidered with ridiculous linguistic buttons, is exhausting. :)

I think it would be a lot easier stoned. O, hey, yeah, while I’m here:

LEGALIZE IT, up-tight tyrants!

Axe on March 13, 2014 at 1:49 PM

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:10 PM

Guttmacher is a spinoff of Planned Barrenhood.

As to what you quoted, so what! Buy your own shiite!

Akzed on March 13, 2014 at 1:52 PM

rogerb on March 13, 2014 at 1:30 PM

Lolz! Disappointed rogerb?

Bmore on March 13, 2014 at 1:53 PM

Until you mentioned her.

22044 on March 13, 2014 at 1:44 PM

Mentioned who?

CurtZHP on March 13, 2014 at 1:56 PM

themuppet

Man o man I wish y’all would make your minds up. In-out-in-out-in-out-in-out…………

Bmore on March 13, 2014 at 1:57 PM

Ed Morrissey on March 13, 2014 at 12:50 PM

I understand linking to leftist cesspools. It’s useful to be familiar with the BS narratives.

Just make sure you warn us, especially in the headlines. Please. There are some sites I just won’t give a click, and some days I’m just not in the mood for wading through ankle deep horsesh!t.

novaculus on March 13, 2014 at 1:57 PM

I believe that’s what we call an ad hominem attack.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:16 PM

Wow, it seems every open registration the quality of trolls drops a little further.

GWB on March 13, 2014 at 2:00 PM

… would limit women’s access to contraception …

Why do we never hear about “men’s access to contraception”?

Carnac on March 13, 2014 at 2:00 PM

novaculus on March 13, 2014 at 1:57 PM

Hovering the mouse over it doesn’t reveal it in the bar?

Bmore on March 13, 2014 at 2:00 PM

Perhaps Ed should expand his horizons a bit before claiming to be a definitive fact checker.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:10 PM

Look little concern troll. The topic is not preventative contraceptives, but the “morning after pill”, which operates by abortion and is far more costly than any of the preventative pills (which Hobby Lobby does not object to). Perhaps you should expand your horizons by checking into the questions on the survey and why people think $4/month is too expensive.

HINT: It’s not the prescription that’s expensive, but the doctor visit to get the prescription.

dominigan on March 13, 2014 at 2:01 PM

Perhaps Ed should expand his horizons a bit before claiming to be a definitive fact checker.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:10 PM

So did this “study” ask if women stopped having sex or limit it due to responsible choices? Or should we just all assume the Fluking answer?

Odie1941 on March 13, 2014 at 2:04 PM

I did. :)

–And I can’t pursue it because…

I think it would be a lot easier stoned. O, hey, yeah, while I’m here:

LEGALIZE IT, up-tight tyrants!

Axe on March 13, 2014 at 1:49 PM

Well, I would not feel so all alone. But shouldn’t this move over to the veggie thread?

de rigueur on March 13, 2014 at 2:04 PM

dominigan on March 13, 2014 at 2:01 PM

Actually, Ed *is* talking about contraception.

GWB on March 13, 2014 at 2:06 PM

I think the president’s got it right. If you want your own birth control, cancel your cable and/or cellular bill.

And you guys say he’s not fiscially bright…

RI_Red on March 13, 2014 at 1:31 PM

No cable, cell phones, internet, or telephone……. I’d say birth control is a must given the long quiet evenings.

Happy Nomad on March 13, 2014 at 1:42 PM

Well, I do have 5 kids… :)

RI_Red on March 13, 2014 at 2:09 PM

Mentioned who?

CurtZHP on March 13, 2014 at 1:56 PM

Miss “Bug-Eyes”

22044 on March 13, 2014 at 2:11 PM

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:10 PM

We want to be treated the same as MEN! *Except when we want to play the whiny little victim female dog card.*
Yes muppet-I’m a broad.
Abstinence doesn’t cost ANYTHING-it’s also the most effective birth control there is.
I shouldn’t have to pay for others promiscuous behavior.

annoyinglittletwerp on March 13, 2014 at 2:13 PM

RI_Red on March 13, 2014 at 2:09 PM

The husband is the eldest of five.
I’m the older of 2. Reformed Jews tend to not be very prolific. LoL

annoyinglittletwerp on March 13, 2014 at 2:15 PM

Miss “Bug-Eyes”

22044 on March 13, 2014 at 2:11 PM

Never heard of her.

(C’mon, man, you trying to get us in trouble??)

CurtZHP on March 13, 2014 at 2:17 PM

Ed Morrissey needs to STOP calling it “free birth control”. It is “paid for through insurance premiums” – it is not in any way “free”.

If the government mandated that oil changes be covered under auto insurance – in no way would it be “free oil changes” – the price of auto insurance would go up.

Mordaukar on March 13, 2014 at 2:26 PM

We want to be treated the same as MEN! *Except when we want to play the whiny little victim female dog card.*

annoyinglittletwerp on March 13, 2014 at 2:13 PM

Well…. yeah. That’s been the case for at least 400 years!

Pajama boy whining about not having the financial means to hump like a bunny would not have had as sympathetic a reception as a slutty law student and “reproductive rights activist.” There’s always been a double standard here.

Happy Nomad on March 13, 2014 at 2:28 PM

Never heard of her.

(C’mon, man, you trying to get us in trouble??)

CurtZHP on March 13, 2014 at 2:17 PM

Ahhh, very well then.

22044 on March 13, 2014 at 2:38 PM

Most of their work is better than this, even when I disagree with their POV.

Ed Morrissey on March 13, 2014 at 12:50 PM

NJ is not having a good day. This lady is just a flat out LIAR:

https://twitter.com/emmaroller/status/444167102379724800

http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/ted-cruz-criticized-abortion-protesters-for-chanting-hail-satan-this-satanist-is-offended-20140313

reddevil on March 13, 2014 at 3:18 PM

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:10 PM

Abstinence is free. Men can pay for condoms and they hand them out free on most college campuses now. No woman needs insurance to avoid being pregnant if she doesn’t want to be.

Pregnancy is not a disease; therefore birth control is not “preventative health care,” which is what insurance policies are supposed to cover under Obamacare. Kathleen Sebelius made a completely political decision to help subsidize Planned Parenthood and create a winning issue in the 2012 election by declaring birth control to be preventative medicine, thus requiring insurers to cover contraceptives that PP now gives out for free. This will produce a billion-dollar windfall for Planned Parenthood, which is the largest abortion provider in America.

The entire contraceptive mandate thus subsidizes abortion.

rockmom on March 13, 2014 at 3:45 PM

Some companies give some employees company cars.
My company didn’t give me a car “restricting my access” to an automobile.

Oddly I have a car. I bought it myself.
Wait, I think I get the argument.
Women can’t find stores or buy stuff themselves.

That seems overly sexist to claim. I think women are capable of shopping (and will avoid all the painfully easy misogynistic jokes I set up here).

Now here’s a premise:
This entire argument has nothing to do with contraception; and is only useful as an attack on religion.

I will state, they’re NOT attacking employers who don’t provide insurance at all. Those employers don’t provide ANY coverage, but get a free pass.

How is that better? No coverage is better than coverage of everything you want except one tiny piece?

If this WERE an attack based solely on attacking religion; how would it look different?

If this WERE an attack based on wanting employers to provide coverage for contraception; wouldn’t employers providing no insurance be just as bad (or worse)?

I can’t see how this argument is about anything but attacking people for their religious beliefs; the actions of the people attacking is quite clear what they are and are not offended by. And it isn’t coverage.

gekkobear on March 13, 2014 at 4:07 PM

They might have to cancel their cable or cell phones in order to afford it, and that’s just outrageous….

Annielou on March 13, 2014 at 4:25 PM

Birth control pills are cheap, cheap, cheap. Other than the pills, there are other ways to not get pregnant – one is, females, make sure you keep a penny between your knee whenever around men.

Give me a break – the leftist feminists have become one of the most “entitled” groups, ever. Buy your own pills.

MN J on March 13, 2014 at 4:29 PM

one is, females, make sure you keep a penny between your knee whenever around men.

MN J on March 13, 2014 at 4:29 PM

I have been reliably informed (and am looking for a grant to study the matter) that placing a penny (or dime) between the knees is no guarantee of inability to commit the act that leads to pregnancy. (I have my study parameters already typed up in a proposal if any ladies are interested in participating in the study……….)

GWB on March 13, 2014 at 4:55 PM

I believe that’s what we call an ad hominem attack.

themuppet on March 13, 2014 at 1:16 PM

You are incorrect, but that does explain the quality of your counter “argument”. I don’t understand the perspective that a women can’t get birth control unless her (frequently) male employer pays for it.

BTW you don’t need a doctor visit to buy condoms.

talkingpoints on March 13, 2014 at 5:17 PM

themuppet

Don’t worry, the thread wasn’t a total loss for you. You got listed. ; )

Bmore on March 13, 2014 at 5:54 PM

Disciples of Hedon moan in existential distress that there might be required some discipline involved in pursuing their libertine lifestyle.

Murphy9 on March 13, 2014 at 6:09 PM

Murphy9 on March 13, 2014 at 6:09 PM

Murph, seem like the site is working better to you? Oh, look here when you have a chance.

Bmore on March 13, 2014 at 6:16 PM

Murph, seem like the site is working better to you? Oh, look here when you have a chance.

Bmore on March 13, 2014 at 6:16 PM

I’m not commenting in a TEMS thread especially about your photoshop.

I was thinking more of a Paul Teutel SR.(American Chopper) style mustache. Across the lip then down the side of the mouth to the chin. It would toughen him up. :)

Murphy9 on March 13, 2014 at 6:43 PM

It is all in good fun. :)

Murphy9 on March 13, 2014 at 6:44 PM

Comment pages: 1 2