It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Ladies; Get Your Birth Control NOW While You Still Can

page: 24
134
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

No, there is not. You are being too literal, dear one...

I tossed that out there as a hypothetical, to see if i could get you to understand the point i was making...sadly, it would appear that i failed.

I agree, this is very silly...why did you start it?




posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

And what, pray-tell, Is he attempting to subvert, or deny, in the area of constitutional rights?
spell it out for us.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 10:28 AM
link   
Why would he have said this then? Birth Control without a prescription?

www.cnn.com...



A half-dozen Republican senators have signed onto a bill from Republican Cory Gardner of Colorado. Apparently, Trump's comment already has support from this corner of his party.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Daedalus




I agree, this is very silly...why did you start it?


Because I happen to believe Trump's goal to meet his campaign promises, unlike his supporters, and want to speak to the consequences of that reality.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 10:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Daedalus
a reply to: windword

And what, pray-tell, Is he attempting to subvert, or deny, in the area of constitutional rights?
spell it out for us.


Trump has promised to support and sign the First Amendment Defense Act , which actually violates the 1st Amendment, and the The Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life constitutional amendment, which would make Roe V Wade obsolete and deny states' rights on the issue.

He wants to reinstate and expand "Stop and Frisk", declared unconstitutional (4th Amendment) by a high court, to all major US cities.

He has also said that he would like to amend the 1st Amendment (libel laws) to reflect those in England where the press would no longer be "innocent until proven guilty".


edit on 15-11-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs
Why would he have said this then? Birth Control without a prescription?

www.cnn.com...



A half-dozen Republican senators have signed onto a bill from Republican Cory Gardner of Colorado. Apparently, Trump's comment already has support from this corner of his party.




I'm surprised that this doesn't fall under the FDA's purview.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 11:11 AM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

insurance companies don't usually pay for over the counter drugs, so therefore,
if birth control pills were made to be over the counter, all you people griping about it being covered in your insurance policy would be happy...
of course, doing so might also cause many people to go for those other birth control methods that are a tad bit more expensive (at least initially, in the long run they're cheaper). right not there is a few things that are taken into consideration as to which birth control is best for each individual person... although cost is a consideration sometimes actual medical facts have to be taken into consideration, like has already been stated many time, the actual birth control is used for things other than preventing pregnancy. and as a women ages, the hormonal birth control methods often become more risky to her.
by taking the pill and making it over the counter and thus removing it from insurance coverage, I am afraid that those medical facts might take second place to the financial. in other words... your are decreasing the quality of women's healthcare, all for an attitude that is based more on "principles" than on actual medical facts and logic.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

Can't please everyone but my point was nothing is going away. It is idiotic to state Trump is ready to strip rights away from women. It is careless and is causing a lot of unneeded stress for a lot of women.

Saying

Ladies; Get Your Birth Control NOW While You Still Can
is not even remotely true and this should be in the Hoax bin.




posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 11:28 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

Stop and Frisk. In NYC in 2011 there were over 650k stops. In 2015 only a little over 20k. Because of new leadership. In 2015, in the first five months of the year this happened.


As the number of stops fell, the number of murders spiked 19.5% during the first five months of the year, the number of people shot is up 9.2% and the number of shooting incidents jumped 9%.


The murder rate has decreased over the years but if you stop what prevented it in less than a decade it will be back to where it was.

Profiling is needed. If there is a white kid in the ghetto at 2:30 in the morning what is he doing? If there are kids out at 3 AM in a neighborhood why should they not be stopped? Because of color?

Stop and Frisk also shows the community the police care. More police is also an answer to deter crime.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

her voice didn't cover so far that women across the country are calling their ob/gyn, planned parenthood and such wanting to switch over to a longer lasting birth control method like the IUD's though...
she isn't the only one thinking this is possible!!

and it IS possible!



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs




It is idiotic to state Trump is ready to strip rights away from women


So do you believe his campaign promise to work towards reversing Roe V Wade was a lie?


edit on 15-11-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

I'm not going to argue with you, point by point. I was asked a question, and I answered it by presenting actual things that Trump said he wanted to do that concern me.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 11:46 AM
link   
Considering the legal precedent for over 2 decades is Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), and also the Whole Women's Health v. Hellerstedt (20015) which gave pro choice advocates a huge victory over restrictive state-level abortion regulation. Then overturning Roe vs Wade seams like a fallacy really.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 11:52 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

Show me where he said he will repeal Roe v Wade. I think what you are referring to is a few recent interviews where he said he supported gay marriage unions and has said he will appoint SCOTUS that would more than likely be pro life.

NOT ONCE has he said he was going to reverse Roe v Wade. Again, fear mongering for women....



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 11:54 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

Because of fear mongering and BS headlines on the HuffPo and all the other media outlets are lying. Wanting to give no Federal Funds to planned parenthood is not removing the rights of women. How about they hit up ol Soros for some funding?



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

Huh?..I heard it out of his own mouth yesterday..might of been part of the 60 minutes interview, said it was clearly a goal but going to take time.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

just about all of the funding that they get is from medicaid reimbursements and title x...
FOR THOSE ELIGIBLE SERVICES THAT THEY RENDERED..

why do they have to go running to soros when they can just refuse to take all those patients carrying medicaid cards and title x eligibles. heck, I don't know, send them all over to the country health clinic, or some poor dentist that will take medicaid I guess.... just for the fun of it. they are still really a top quality healthcare provider.... they can just aim their services towards those that are of a little higher income is all...



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs




Show me where he said he will repeal Roe v Wade.


He never said that HE would do it. He said that he would appointed judges that would. It's been a GOP wet dream for decades!



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 12:31 PM
link   


the pro-life crowd seems to believe it..

by the way, I don't see an election win that although it wins the electoral college, it doesn't win the popular vote anything close to a "mandate"..


edit on 15-11-2016 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: vonclod

You heard what you wanted to hear.




President-elect Donald Trump said in a wide-ranging interview with “60 Minutes” that his role of appointing a Supreme Court justice is “very important” -- and that he plans to appoint pro-life justices.

“I’m pro-life,” he said. “The judges will be pro-life.” President-elect Trump's business plans Play VIDEO President-elect Trump's business plans Asked specifically whether he wants the Supreme Court to repeal the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, which legalized abortion nationwide, Trump replied that if the decision were overturned the issue of abortion would be decided by each state. “If it ever were overturned, it would go back to the states,” he said.

But does that mean some women would be unable to receive abortions, assuming their home states ban them? Asked to clarify, Trump replied: “Yeah, well, they’ll perhaps have to go, they’ll have to go to another state.”

When Stahl followed up on the question, asking whether it’s okay that some women might have to travel to other states to receive abortions, Trump said there’s a “long way to go” before discussing that. “Well, we’ll see what happens,” he said. “It’s got a long way to go, just so you understand. That has a long, long way to go.”


He states IF it was overturned. Never does he say he wants to remove it.




top topics



 
134
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join