Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

The CafeMom Newcomers Club The CafeMom Newcomers Club

THIS is NOT an answer for abortion.

Posted by   + Show Post

What a mess. This is scary . I HATE abortion But I LOVE women and they should all have ACCESS to birth control. How did things go so wrong?

The article is extremely long so I am including the link and some pieces of the article. i just think that being pro-life shouldn't mean people cut all funding and availability of BIRT CONTROL , it's wrong and could cause more expensive problems later. Yes I want women to not abort their children but isn't it best, all the way around, if they can get birth control and not get pregnant when they aren't willing to or able to support children? 



http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/05/us-states-slash-birth-control-idUSTRE8240ZM20120305

Mon Mar 5, 2012 10:41am EST

(Reuters) - Even as a national debate rages over contraception insurance, tens of thousands of low-income women and teenagers across the United States have lost access to subsidized birth control as states slash and restructure family planning funds.


the Texas funding cut prompted Planned Parenthood to shut down 11 clinics. It also has jeopardized a $40 million family-planning program run as a Medicaid extension.

The program provides free birth control and annual exams to 130,000 low-income women of reproductive age who don't qualify for regular Medicaid. The federal government pays 90 percent of the cost; Texas puts up just $4 million a year.

About 40 percent of women in the Texas program get subsidized care from Planned Parenthood clinics, but a new state law blocks those clinics from participating. The Obama administration has said that violates federal Medicaid rules. If neither side compromises, the program will likely close by the end of March.

That infuriates Jonee Longoria, a single mother in Houston who relied on the program for free services for several years as she put herself through college. "I had one child living in poverty and I didn't want another," Longoria said.

She now works for a social service agency and refers many clients to the program for contraception. Without it, she said, "where would they go?"

Advocates of defunding Planned Parenthood say they regret any service disruptions for poor women. But they call it a necessary price to pay to take a moral stance on abortion.

"We're just doing what we think is best," said Joe Pojman, executive director of Texas Alliance for Life, 

by on Mar. 5, 2012 at 1:43 PM
Replies (771-780):
Xlandria
by on Mar. 13, 2012 at 3:33 AM
2 moms liked this

Some of you are missing an important aspect on the "I don't want to pay for another woman's contraception." Well honey, I got news for you, 9 times out of 10 you will pay, and much more. Because there's a great chance that woman is already on welfare, (no disrespect, been there before), or by having a child/more children certainly just might put them there. So, you can't have it both ways, pay a little now or pay for 18 years until the child is an adult. And to those of you who's attitude is "just keep your legs shut", don't have a clue, do you? The majority of women, I would guess, are not 'sluts'. I won't say what I think you attitude is.  embarrassed mini

kstchr
by on Mar. 19, 2012 at 6:14 PM

I'm most definitely pro-life (and also Catholic), but I disagree with taking away funding for birth control.  The problem is, there are so many politicians who want to equate abortion with birth control, and that is just WRONG on so many levels.  I can understand the reasoning behind defunding Planned Parenthood, though.  Any extra money they receive for other services actually frees up money for abortions, so even though they can say fed. dollars don't pay for abortion, in effect it does in a way.

Scribbleprints
by on Apr. 16, 2012 at 2:31 PM

The reason many Pro-life people are against birth control like the pill and IUDs and such is because these can cause what some consider an early abortion.  Specifically, they work by doing one of two things:

1.  Forming a mucus layor which prevents sperm from meeting egg. 

2.  Causing the fertilized egg to not implant in the uterus, which some consider an early form of abortion.

Personally, I feel ambiguous enough about this very early stage of life that I neither oppose these types of birth control,  nor feel comfortable using them myself.  I am very stongly pro-life once the fetus/baby can feel pain and is capable of thought, which most people consider to be during the second trimester.   I'm a little uncertain about the earlier stages, though personally I could never get an abortion at any stage. 



Ashley_Carlson
by on Apr. 16, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Some women can't even afford that $30 a month, and NFP doesn't work for everyone.

Quoting notjstanothrmom:

I think people should have access to health care but I don't nessesarily think that birth control or abortion should be funded by state/government run programs. It costs under $30 a month to pay for birth control, if you don't want to get pregnant then that $30 a month is well worth the cost.

I also use NFP to prevent pregnancy. It's free.


Scribbleprints
by on Apr. 16, 2012 at 2:41 PM


Quoting Xlandria:

Some of you are missing an important aspect on the "I don't want to pay for another woman's contraception." Well honey, I got news for you, 9 times out of 10 you will pay, and much more. Because there's a great chance that woman is already on welfare, (no disrespect, been there before), or by having a child/more children certainly just might put them there. So, you can't have it both ways, pay a little now or pay for 18 years until the child is an adult. And to those of you who's attitude is "just keep your legs shut", don't have a clue, do you? The majority of women, I would guess, are not 'sluts'. I won't say what I think you attitude is.  embarrassed mini

But most of the people who oppose paying for this oppose it on moral grounds, not financial ones.  While I disagree that contraception is wrong, and am ambigous about whether the pill and other similar forms of contraception are wrong (they either work by forming a mucas plug which blocks sperm...no problem there...or by preventing the fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus, which some consider an early form of abortion),I understand Catholic schools  not wanting to cover this because they feel they are paying for something they think is a sin.   I don't agree that contraception is a sin, but I don't like the idea of people having to pay for things they are morally opposed to. 

As for "keeping your legs shut" this in not the only form of contraception other than the pill.  We are on our fourth year of successful contraception using condoms...and there is also natural family planning (which is more than just the Rythm method.  The most successful methods of NFT involve charting your waking temperature and sometimes also cervical fluid, and cervical position and can be done even while breastfeeding or if you have irregular periods.  It does involve "closing your legs" during certain times when you are fertile, or using condoms. 

Neither method is fool-proof, but practically no method is (a friend of mine was conceived AFTER her mom had her tubes tied...it happens). 

notjstanothrmom
by Ruby Member on Apr. 16, 2012 at 3:35 PM

I know what it's like to be poor. If you cannot figure out a way to scrape change for $30 a month, then don't have sex until you get a job!

I said lots of time in this debate. I think health insurance companies would be crazy to not cover birth control. It's a cheap way not to have to pay for maternity care and birth then another child... but if they chose to take it off, people will find a way to pay for it because birth control is a hell of a lot cheaper then a baby. Don't want one then protect yourself or refrain until you can afford to.

Quoting Ashley_Carlson:

Some women can't even afford that $30 a month, and NFP doesn't work for everyone.

Quoting notjstanothrmom:

I think people should have access to health care but I don't nessesarily think that birth control or abortion should be funded by state/government run programs. It costs under $30 a month to pay for birth control, if you don't want to get pregnant then that $30 a month is well worth the cost.

I also use NFP to prevent pregnancy. It's free.



Lillymygirl
by on Apr. 19, 2012 at 12:41 PM

But so many planned parenthoods don't even offer abortion . I just don't see anything good coming from making it harder for the most vulnerable women to get birth control.

Quoting kstchr:

I'm most definitely pro-life (and also Catholic), but I disagree with taking away funding for birth control.  The problem is, there are so many politicians who want to equate abortion with birth control, and that is just WRONG on so many levels.  I can understand the reasoning behind defunding Planned Parenthood, though.  Any extra money they receive for other services actually frees up money for abortions, so even though they can say fed. dollars don't pay for abortion, in effect it does in a way.


ddemarco
by on Jun. 5, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Technically, I couldn't afford my pregnancy.  I am in huge debt from my pregancy.  So I should have just aborted my baby?  "Sorry, kiddo.  Mommy and Daddy really shouldn't have had sex because we couldn't afford you, so I'm just going to kill you now.  Bye!"  Abortions should only be used in the case of a medical emergency!

Quoting LoriLou75:

WTH...so if a woman can't afford to continue a pregnancy, we should make sure she can't afford an abortion. Thats a new one, abortions only for the wealthy!!

Quoting ddemarco:

so why not provide free birth control for those 19 and older with the exception of married people who are younger than that?  instead of giving 14 year olds free contraceptives.  or even just giving married people free contraceptives.  with the exclusion of abortions.  abortions should not be covered under anything and they should be darned expensive to get.

just my opinion.  and of course, this is way too easy for politicians...




siouxssie
by on Jun. 5, 2012 at 8:06 PM

The reason Catholics are against hormonal birth control pills is because they are against abortion and the bc pill can prevent a fertilized egg from implanting, thereby causing an abortion of the fertilized egg.

Quoting illinoismommy83:

I'm pro-life and Catholic, but I don't see how birth control is evil.

The people (Catholics, etc) who are so against funding for birth control pills believe in waiting till after marriage before you have sex. Yes, if people did it that way then it wouldn't be such a big deal if you got pregnant. But here in the real world almost no one waits till marriage and you can't have it both ways. Either you give out birth control or you have a lot of abortions.

I wish the rest of the pro-life movement understood that Planned Parenthood is only "evil" because of funding always getting cut. Planned Parenthood used to offer prenatal services at so many locations...

If Planned Parenthood had their funding for prenatal services back, which do you think they would encourage people towards? Come to our prenatal clinic so we can collect thousands from medicaid or go get an abortion so we will only get a couple hundred? The prenatal clinic in my city's PP was so busy... until August of 2007 when they stopped accepting new patients because their funding was cut off.


mommaboudreaux
by on Jun. 5, 2012 at 8:34 PM
That is fucked up. I am so disgusted.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN