It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Ladies; Get Your Birth Control NOW While You Still Can

page: 27
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 05:15 AM
a reply to: Daedalus

Yeah. Because all the citation you're asking for have already been posted, your questions addressed. Read the thread instead of asking to keep reposting what's already been posted.

edit on 17-11-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 06:29 AM
a reply to: windword

I'm asking for GOOD citations....

the Huffington post is trash..EVERYTHING they write is suspect, because of their political and ideological bias, and the other article is written by a feminist idiot, who interned for the same think-tank that wrote the goddamn ACA..

You gotta do better..

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 06:59 AM
a reply to: Daedalus

I've cited Donald Trump's own words and campaign promises. The GOP's Platform. Mike Pence's own words and promises and the administration's published "Health Agenda", as well as corroborating professional and editorial opinions. Others have also contributed to this thread.

You can disagree with mine and other's assessment, but you're coming off as a troll by trying to argue that there is no case being presented here.

edit on 17-11-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 10:16 AM
Total abortion ban proposed in Indiana

An Indiana lawmaker plans to introduce a bill that would outlaw and criminalize all forms of abortion in Indiana.

State Rep. Curt Nisly said Wednesday he will file so-called "Protection at Conception" legislation when the General Assembly convenes in January.

Under his proposal, all abortions would be a crime and prosecutors could file charges against those who participate in the procedure.

okay, another stupid law being made by stupid lawmakers.... hopefully to be shot down by the supreme court...

In situations in which a high-risk pregnancy endangers a woman’s life, he said the proposal would demand that a doctor try to save both mother and child.

“The idea here is always, always try to save the baby,” Nisly said.

okay, oh wise ones, how do you try to "save the baby" in a tubal pregnancy?? are you going to force the women into getting cut open, remove the few cells that make up this baby, along with the making of the placenta, and transfer it to the uterus in hopes that it will replant itself where it's supposed to be??
how many women's lives are you going to risk "trying to save the baby", how many women will you kill???

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 12:42 PM
Still at this? The HuffPo rots the brain. I put it next to the National Enquirer .

Trump has never said he will remove abortions. Or birth Control. Your argument is that he is part of the GOP also does not fit because he is not an establishment GOP'er. He showed that during the election cycle. Would Bush have a gay person introduce him at the inauguration? Nope. If there was such an issue I would think Pence would have said something then.

When did it become illegal to speak you mind? 2008. When did it become legal again? November 9th, 2016.

Get over yourselves. The world is not ending and when it is over we as a country will be in a much better place.

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 12:46 PM
a reply to: matafuchs

When did it become illegal to speak you mind? 2008. When did it become legal again? November 9th, 2016.

when has anybody on ats been unable to speak their mind, as long as their comments have followed the rules?
and, well, we are here speaking our minds... so what is the problem?

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 12:48 PM
a reply to: dawnstar

No, I am not talking about ATS. I am talking about our country.

Can you address the OP response of my post?

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 12:50 PM
SPAM removed by admin
edit on Nov 17th 2016 by Djarums because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 01:28 PM
a reply to: windword

and you're coming off as a troll with all this "sky is falling", alarmist speculation. The man hasn't even taken the goddamn oath of office yet, and all you panic merchants are already oozing out of the woodwork to proclaim him the next Hitler.

What next; "he burns jews in an oven in the white house basement"? or maybe: "he eats babies"?

What'd be awesome, is if you folks could stick a sock in it, until his administration actually does something.
edit on 11-17-2016 by Daedalus because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 02:47 PM
a reply to: matafuchs

I am committed to:

Nominating pro-life justices to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Signing into law the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which would end painful
late-term abortions nationwide.

Defunding Planned Parenthood as long as they continue to perform abortions, and re-
allocating their funding to community health centers that provide comprehensive health care
for women.

Making the Hyde Amendment permanent law to protect taxpayers from having to pay for

so, put in pro-life judges...

even if these pro-life judges don't completely overturn roe v. wade... they can do alot of damage. when states write laws trying to bypass woe v. wade, like many have done of late, by placing extreme restrictions on abortion providers, like the Texas bill the supreme court recently shot down, well, there is no thought in that process when it comes to the life or health of any pregnant women in the state is there? I mean, their only desire is to shut down the abortion clinics, for ALL WOMEN... even those who do have valid reasons to seek an abortion.
my pet peeve is the catholic hospitals, their numbers have grown over the years to the point where they might be the only hospital for a hundred or more miles. and, there have been times when these hospitals has put their religious ethics above the well being of the women who end up at these hospitals. and, they are still being taken to court for it and winning because of the way their system is set up. well, I've been hoping that they might find a way to actually win one of these cases, and then I got a feeling it might end up in that supreme court... and if it ever does, it would be nice if the supreme court didn't have a large majority of members that will rule by reason, logic, and law instead of political and religious ideologies.

signing the pain capable act..

Prohibits an abortion from being performed if the probable post-fertilization age of the unborn child is 20 weeks or greater, except: (1) where necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, illness, or injury, excluding psychological or emotional conditions; (2) where the pregnancy is the result of rape against an adult woman and, at least 48 hours prior to the abortion, such woman has obtained counseling for the rape or medical treatment for the rape or an injury related to the rape; or (3) where the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest against a minor and the rape or incest has been reported prior to the abortion to a law enforcement agency or a government agency legally authorized to act on reports of child abuse. Requires the physician, prior to performing such an abortion, to place appropriate documentation in the patient's medical file of the receipt of such medical treatment or counseling or of the reporting of such rape or incest.

okay... first it's debatable as to weather or not a fetus can feel pain at 20 weeks, many doctors says they can't. but bypassing that...
20 weeks is about halfway through the second trimester. but, it's been found that because of the laws that the states have passed, unnecessary hoops for the women to jump through before she can get an abortion, that in those states that these laws are in, the number of abortions occurring in the first trimester is dropping while the number in the second is increasing. the stupid laws are pushing the abortions into the second trimester in other words. and, now I am looking at the exceptions...

(1) where necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, illness, or injury, excluding psychological or emotional conditions

no mention of the danger to the women's health though?? ya know, like, a pregnancy can cause lifetime disability in a a women without actually endangering her life...

and, what if the treatment of that psychological condition is harmful to the baby?? no consideration of that either...

and, then there is the fact that some birth defects can't be found until past the 20 week mark... and, well, I already addressed that one on the thread.

oh, yes, defunding planned parenthood... of course!! as if they are the only ones doing abortions, or are cooperating with researchers providing tissue samples... okay.... but..... just for the record...
a person cannot get a pap smear from a dentist, or while they are visiting granny at the nursing home, or some of the other weird places that states have listed as alternatives to planned parenthood... just about all that funding is coming from services rendered through medicaid or title x, meaning that it's not being used for abortions. ever wondered why there seems to be less and less doctors willing to accept medicaid, it's because the gov't has been paying less and less in reimbursements, in some cases, it doesn't even come close to covering the actual cost. so, where are these people going to go?? or is the prevalent idea that planned parenthood just won't mind and take care of them for free, heck, take it out of that ceo's high salary...

the last one is the hyde ammendment, which I'm afraid, I don't really care about, as long as those women who need an abortion because of health reasons are covered by the medicaid.

but, I've posted a law a page or so back, heck might even be on this page, of the law that is going to be submitted in the Indiana state legislature come the first of the year that is more like a total ban, no exceptions whatsoever...
kind of the same position that the catholic hospitals take..
and that one, like the catholic hospitals will endanger women!! weather it would pass or not, I don't know, weather it would make it to the supreme court, I don't know, weather it would be upheld by a supreme court stacked by pro-life judges I don't know... but, there is a chance that it would be!!!

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 03:09 PM
First off...I am and have always been pro-choice. But this is always a good topic to discuss when you want to explore the reasons some people feel so strongly about their opinion.

These two examples, which I have heard recently...have no bearing and are not meant to change minds or anything. Just throwing them out there.

Did you know that some religious people aren't so much against abortion as they are worried that the aborted fetus could be the second coming of Christ? Yup...I've heard it from a few.

The one that really caught my attention and I had to really consider for a while is this. People have sex but if every time a person had sex it resulted in a pregnancy...some of those people wouldn't have sex. If after getting pregnant there was no option but to deliver and raise the child, even more people wouldn't. The thought being that as long as you add a method to undo pregnancy...people would use it. For example...if from birth to 30 days old it were 100% legal to have a doctor give a pain-free shot to the baby and terminate it's life...some people would take that option. If you added a 6 months option...some people would take that option. The idea being that the less options there are after the first "mistake", the less likely the first "mistake" will happen. Human nature I guess. other one. Not my words: Women say that it is their body and therefore they should have the ultimate say. But it is also another person's (the males) life that will dramatically change. Why doesn't that count for anything one way or the other?

Just some interesting thoughts...I think.
edit on 11/17/2016 by WeAreAWAKE because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 03:12 PM
A person can be pro-life but it does not mean RvW will be overturned. It is like being afraid of someone because there are Muslim who would be in office. As far as I see on TV and the news Muslims like to kill US citizens so why would they not, if in office, kill the infidels? Do you see how that argument works?

As far as Planned Parenthood is concerned there are over 3000 other clinics in the US that are available and readily used. It is not going to cause women to not have access to care. The issue that people have is Medicaid funds used for abortions. So are state funds. That is a separate argument but the main reason many conservatives have an issue.

PP is not the only option.

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 03:18 PM
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

your first example, about the second coming of christ.....
if one believes in christ, and one believes in god, the one should also believe that the god that produced that christ from a virgin birth would also be able to ensure that he is born???

if you took away all the options that prevented women from avoiding the birth... no you wouldn't have a sexless world..
you would have a world with very large families!!!

weather or not the man's desires count for anything is dependent on a few things....
not the least of which is what kind of relationship the two had before she became pregnant. if they are in a stable marriage he will have far more say than if it was just a one night fling.

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 03:26 PM
a reply to: Daedalus

You're wrong. There is a persistent and steady attack on women's rights, with the Republican religious right relentlessly and recklessly chipping away at Roe V Wade access to reproductive health care.

Women Are Preparing for Trump and Pence’s Inevitable Assault on Reproductive Rights

Many of us are still processing the results of the election, but it’s worth looking to the future to see what women’s health care would look like in a Trump administration. The short answer: It’s not going to be good.

Women consider long-term birth control now that Trump victory looms over reproductive health

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 03:48 PM
a reply to: matafuchs

did you just pull that 3000 out of your hat or something.... because it's a rather rediculous number. there are 3144 counties in this country, that 3000 wouldn't even provide on for each country, and there are over 19,000 cities... so I really don't think that that 3000 is even close to being an accurate number....

Nowhere is this struggle more apparent than in a recent declaration by Louisiana's attorneys that there are 2,000 family planning providers ready to accommodate new patients. A federal judge, reviewing the list in an early September court hearing, found hundreds of entries for specialists such as ophthalmologists; nursing homes caregivers; dentists; ear, nose, and throat doctors; and even cosmetic surgeons.

"It strikes me as extremely odd that you have a dermatologist, an audiologist, a dentist who are billing for family planning services," said the judge, John deGravelles, who will determine in the next week whether it is legal for the state to end Planned Parenthood's Medicaid contracts. "But that is what you're representing to the court? You're telling me that they can provide family planning and related services?"
The war on women is over—and women lost. Read Mother Jones' investigation into what happened after conservatives fundamentally rewrote America's abortion laws.

His harsh questioning sent the state back to the drawing board. On Tuesday, the state's attorneys acknowledged that the dentists and other specialists didn't belong on the list. They filed a pared-down version that lists just 29 health care providers.

so, there is around 29 real healthcare providers in louisiana outside of planned parenthood providing these services.

if I counted them right there are 353 cities in louisiana that would be sharing those 29 healthcare providers. heck, even with the few planned parenthood clinics they have, I doubt if there is enough to cover the need..

A big problem, even for those who do live in Medicaid expansion states, is that there are not enough primary care physicians to treat people on the government insurance plan. This was a problem even before the expansion.

A recent report by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services shows the problem is even worse than previously feared. The report revealed that half of doctors listed on health insurance websites as serving Medicaid patients aren’t actually available to do so.

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 04:03 PM
a reply to: dawnstar

No, I did not.

The first thing to get clear is that Planned Parenthood actually doesn’t provide all that much for poor, vulnerable women — particularly if they don’t live in cities. Indeed, you may remember that, in wake of the Susan J. Komen defunding ridiculousness from a few years ago, lots of charges were thrown around about women losing out on mammograms. But it turns out that Planned Parenthood doesn’t even provide them. As Democrats for Life has pointed out numerous times in recent days, the number of local community health centers outnumber Planned Parenthood clinics ten to one. Rather than the one-size-fits-all franchise approach of Planned Parenthood, these community health centers nicely embody the principle of subsidiarity in responding to the diverse local needs of women — whether in the Bronx, rural Kansas, or southern California.

Actually, there are 9000. Sorry, I had read a different article regarding I believe it was Medicaid supported clinics.

Planned Parenthood has - less than 700
Community Health Centers - over 9000

NO mammograms at PP
450,000 at community clinics.

Your platform you defend it about abortion and who takes Medicaid. Not women's health. It is a sick platform to defend as it does not give the care needed. I would rather women had access to mammograms to prevent CANCER then abortions at a Medicaid funded clinic.

edit on 11pm30pmf0000002016-11-17T16:03:40-06:000440 by matafuchs because: (no reason given)

edit on 11pm30pmf0000002016-11-17T16:04:23-06:000423 by matafuchs because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 04:13 PM
a reply to: matafuchs

9000 sound a little bit better....

so now we got what, 9,700 total....
to cover 19,000 cities???
and, you want to get rid of 700 hundred of them??

by the way, if not providing mammograms is a problem deserving of losing funding, if any of those 9000 are county health clinics, you might want to check to see if they provide them.... the one in my county doesn't..

ya know what, those catholic hospitals won't provide tubal litigations, they won't provide what is considered to be standard treatment to tubal pregnancies and miscarriages.... and guess what, they get medicaid reimbursements also.

medicaid only reimburses for the services that are given out that is covered by medicaid!!!

edit on 17-11-2016 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 04:23 PM
a reply to: dawnstar

I think he's talking about those lists that includes dentists, The Salvation Army, school nurses, podiatrists, correctional institutions.....

Florida GOP to send women to dentists for reproductive care?

“I don’t understand how they put this list together,” said Kheyanna Suarez, a student at Florida Atlantic University who first started visiting Planned Parenthood when she was 16. “Were they blind and mashed everything from Google on to one list? A dental office, a Salvation Army, an elementary school – I can’t go and get care at those places. If I have to leave my healthcare up to the places on that list, I am scared. I don’t think an elementary school can prescribe me birth control.”

I have seen the list of the groups,” counters Berman, “And some of those groups include podiatrists, correctional facilities, healthcare, school-based healthcare clinics. So I am just wondering if that is the list you are referring to?”

Ohio Republicans want women to use food b

In defense of the cuts, senators disseminated list of alternative providers that include dentist offices, school nurses and a food bank as options for Ohio women.

edit on 17-11-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 04:25 PM
a reply to: dawnstar

ya know what, those catholic hospitals won't provide tubal litigations, they won't provide what is considered to be standard treatment to tubal pregnancies and miscarriages.... and guess what, they get medicaid reimbursements also.

Catholic clinics won't even provide birth control.

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 04:41 PM
a reply to: windword

I think it was the list lousiana provided that actually had nursing homes on it...
isn't neat that you can get your birth control pills at the same time you are visiting your grandmother!!! a group of smart alecks went around visiting the dental clinics that were on the lists asking for pap smears or something or other, insisting that the gov't said they could get them there... there's a video of it on you tube.
now there's a state, not sure which one it is, that has a law written that would require all the remains from abortions and miscarriages be disposed of respectfully....
in any given cycle, a women might be miscarrying and not know it... so I think that they should be sending their sanitary napkins somewhere for evaluation, just to make sure!!!

I was about to say that I think that they just downloaded the list of medicaid providers and gave that to the judge, but, well, then I saw ohio with their food bank, so I guess not.

new topics

top topics

<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in