Reason Roundup

The Obamacare Birth Control Coverage Fight That Never Ends

Plus: Biden echoes Trump on trade, tech ties to cops revealed, and more...

|

Tuesday's ruling on birth control from the U.S. Supreme Court was a win for freedom of religion and economic liberty. Here's more background on Trump v. Pennsylvania, which was the latest round of legal fighting over the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) contraception mandate. That mandate required employers to offer their workers health insurance plans that provided birth control options with no point-of-sale cost to enrolled employees.

Tuesday's 7–2 ruling in the Trump administration's favor says that the ACA gives the federal Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) "broad discretion to define preventive care and screenings and to create the religious and moral exemptions." Pennsylvania argued that the ACA does not allow some employers to not cover birth control for religious or moral reasons.

The mandate was a top-down way to ensure U.S. women have "access" to birth control, though it did nothing for women who are unemployed, undocumented, stay-at-home caregivers, self-employed, working at small businesses, working as independent contractors, working less than full-time, etc., etc. In the last decade, the ACA mandate has become the be-all-end-all birth control issue for Democrats. Meanwhile, over-the-counter access to birth control has fallen out of fashion or even become a point of contention for many progressive groups, women's advocates, and left-leaning politicians.

Rather than working to expand birth control access through some other mechanism than Obamacare, these groups have focused myopically on the religious/moral exemption to contraception coverage with a public relations campaign on how Republicans want to take away birth control for everyone.

For instance, here's what the Democratic National Committee had to say: "This decision is an egregious attack on the rights of women and those seeking reproductive care, especially in communities of color….Make no mistake: reproductive health care is on the ballot in 2020. And the American people are ready to elect a president they can trust to protect it."

Brigitte Amiri of the American Civil Liberties Union called it "a shameful decision" that "grant[s] a license to discriminate" and "will exacerbate existing inequalities, falling hardest on people with the fewest resources and people of color."

And here's how the New York Times editorial board described it yesterday:

Only days after surprising the nation by striking down a strict anti-abortion law in Louisiana, the Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts reminded Americans once again that it is no friend to reproductive rights, or to the vast majority of women who will use some form of birth control in their lifetime.

The abortion case the Times refers to is June Medical Services LLC v. Russo, in which the Court struck down a Louisiana law requiring abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. The medically unnecessary restriction was viewed by a majority of the court as an unconstitutional requirement designed to deny women access to abortion. June was a good decision for supporters of legal abortion access, and one perfectly in line with previous Supreme Court rulings on similar laws.

But it's simply silly to pretend like that case has anything to do with the ACA birth control rule. They turn on totally different issues, none of which is as simplistic as whether Supreme Court justices are friendly to reproductive rights. And it's downright absurd to cite the ruling in Trump v. Pennsylvania as evidence the Court opposes birth control or is hostile to the majority of American women who will use contraception in their lifetimes.

The fact that a small class of employers may now may now opt out of the Obamacare contraception mandate has no bearing on whether most U.S. women will have access to affordable birth control. The vast majority of U.S. women with employer health insurance still will; and the huge numbers of U.S. women without sponsored health insurance plans will still have to find another way. Luckily, there are still lots of ways to obtain inexpensive birth control pills even without health insurance.

Besides, if access to birth control is the real concern—and it's an important one, in my opinion—there are much better ways to go about it.

Yet these supposedly pro-reproductive rights groups have spent the better part of a decade trying to force certain beliefs and actions on the small minority of people and companies opposed to birth control (to the possible benefit of a very small fraction of U.S. women employed by these entities) and to preserve the sanctity of a complicated employer-based insurance scheme while all but ignoring real barriers to birth control access, like the fact that it requires medical visits and physician permission slips, or is tied to health insurance in the first place.

Friends of reproductive freedom should forget about forcing every single employer in the country to pay for worker's contraception and work more on things that could make a difference to all girls and women, regardless of their employment status or legal and social circumstances. That means removing requirements for a physician's prescription and yearly visits, allowing the over-the-counter sale of safe and much-tested oral contraceptives, expanding options for who can consult on birth control (i.e., letting pharmacists and nurses do it, not just physicians), removing limits on how many packs of pills people can get at a time, and pushing for community-based solutions to making sure the most vulnerable have access.

Instead, Democrats in Congress are doubling down on the health insurance approach.

"In an immediate response to the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the Trump administration's controversial rule that allows employers to refuse to cover their employees' birth control under their company health insurance plan, a group of federal lawmakers announced today they will be filing new legislation tomorrow to repeal the rules before they can take effect," states a press release from Democratic lawmakers who are introducing what they're calling the "Protect Access to Birth Control Act."

The bill, sponsored by Reps. Diana DeGette (D–Colo.), Judy Chu (D–Calif.), Barbara Lee (D–Calif.), and Lois Frankel (D–Florida), "would repeal three rules the Trump administration put in place in October 2017 to allow employers to opt not to provide their employees with access to free birth control as part of their employer-sponsored health care plan" if they have religious or other ethical objections.

In an amazingly Orwellian statement, they're defining this as a blow against having employers involved in people's birth control decisions.

"A decision about whether to use birth control is one that should be between a patient and their doctor—and no one else," said a statement from DeGette, Chu, Lee, and Frankel. "Giving an employer the ability to interject themselves in that decisions—by limiting a patient's access to free birth control—is unconscionable."


FREE MINDS

Tech ties to law enforcement revealed. From NBC News:

On Wednesday, newly published research from the technology accountability nonprofit Tech Inquiry revealed that the Department of Defense and federal law enforcement agencies including Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Agency and the Federal Bureau of Prisons, have secured thousands of deals with Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Dell, IBM, Hewlett Packard and even Facebook that have not been previously reported.


FREE MARKETS

Biden proposes his own version of "America First." Biden "is proposing sweeping new uses of the federal government's regulatory and spending power to bolster U.S. manufacturing and technology firms," reports CNBC.

Biden calls for a $400 billion, four-year increase in government purchasing of U.S.-based goods and services plus $300 billion in new research and development in U.S. technology concerns. Among other policies expected to be announced Thursday, he proposes tightening current "Buy American" laws that are intended to benefit U.S. firms but can be easily circumvented by government agencies.


QUICK HITS

Ugh: "The United States reported more than 60,000 new COVID-19 cases on Wednesday, the biggest increase ever reported by a country in a single day, according to a Reuters tally."

• A British court is ordering Christopher Steele to pay damages for spreading the now-infamous Trump-Russia dossier.

• Protesters are suing Columbus, Ohio, police.

• Read Jesse Singal and Matt Welch on the Harper's free speech letter.

• "A unanimous U.S. Supreme Court held that the 'ministerial exception' to federal anti-discrimination law shielded a parochial school from a federal disability lawsuit filed by a discharged teacher," Damon Root explains.

NEXT: Today in Supreme Court History: July 9, 1868

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Tuesday’s ruling on birth control from the U.S. Supreme Court was a win for freedom of religion and economic liberty.

    And a blow to women’s health. (NOTE: I have no idea what women’s birth control costs.)

    1. Is pregnancy a disease?

      1. Euthanasia cures it.

        1. Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I am now making over $15k every month just by doing an easy j0b 0nline!AZs I KNOW YOU NOW MAKIG MOR DOLLARS online from $28 k I,TS EASY ONLINE WORKING JOBS…

          go to this SITE for more INFO just copy and paste……Home Profit System

      2. Its not a tumor.

        1. it might be a tumor.

        1. Tony is advertising.

          1. At those prices the only way he can make a profit is Volume.

            1. With Tony, it’s quantity not quality.

      1. Whose Anal? Is she nice?

    2. Hello.

      Quebec made masks mandatory province wide.

      100 cases. In a population of 8.4 million. There’s no sense anymore.

      We’ve succumbed to the virus.

      1. Thank goodness this thing went away in April— like magic.

        1. By all means, continue reveling, have to make sure everyone knows socialism is populated with monsters

          1. Listen… if all it takes is a couple hundred thousand to die in order to usher Dear Leader out of the WH and back into one of his cheesy Palm Beach hotels shouldn’t we at least consider the possibility that all this suffering was worth it?

        2. Yes, it is interesting how nations that are seen as a model for lockdowns end up seeing outbreaks the minute they lighten up even a hair.

          It’s going to be hilarious when this thing finally runs through the entire US population and settles into being just another annual cold bug, while the rest of the world continues to labor under the delusion that they can stop a coronavirus from replicating.

          1. I agree but what this shows is that asymptomatic passage is real, that virus can hide for months. I don’t really care but it is real.

            1. And that’s why efforts to try and keep it from spreading are ultimately pointless. This thing is constantly mutating, and the minute international travel opens up again, there’s going to be millions of new infections across the world anyway. The question is really how severe it’s going to be down the line.

              Short of the entire planet keeping everyone locked inside their home for the next two years with no other person-to-person contact, there’s no way to stop this thing from spreading.

          2. Or maybe someone develops a vaccine that save a million or two from dying.

            1. And maybe I will win the lotto. But I am not budgeting on this outside chance (hell, I am not even buying tickets).

            2. Considering that no other coronavirus vaccine has ever been approved for use in the US, that’s a tall order.

            3. What’s the plan for proving the vaccine is safer and anywhere near as effective as the virus itself?

        3. In glorious workers paradise, anyone against wearing the burka will receive a free re-education.

        4. oh no more people with colds.

          1. They only have a 99.98% chance of survival!

      2. That’s what you get for speaking French.

      3. There are plenty of states and cities in the US that have done the same and saw very different results

    3. Every single woman in america has free, unregulated, and UNLIMITED access to the best birth control there is.

      1. Drano vaginal douches?

    4. Yeah, but last I saw, “reproductive freedom advocates” opposed rx-to-OTC switch of birth control drugs and devices, because those advocates know that such a reform would be overwhelmingly popular with women, whose support would then be lost on the wedge issue of forcing birth control coverage on unwilling employers and their unwilling employees. The advocates would rather birth control be expensive for all, so that it’s “free”. Actually they don’t care about this at all, they’d rather just keep the pot boiling to keep the wedge issue in place.

  2. Tech ties to law enforcement revealed.

    It’s okay, though. Their social media handlers tweeted support for BLM.

    1. Next thing you know, they will reveal that the cops buy cars and guns.

      1. it is silly isn’t it. not like they didn’t use other forms of communications and survelance before like phones video tv etc

  3. Biden proposes his own version of ‘America First.’

    Put America First Again.

    1. QUit Inciting Enraged Followers!

  4. Washington D.C. is poised to abolish felony disenfranchisement…

    Electorally, isn’t this adding a drop to the ocean?

    1. Gotta pump those Democratic voter numbers up–dead people aren’t enough anymore to keep single-party rule going.

  5. The United States reported more than 60,000 new COVID-19 cases on Wednesday, the biggest increase ever reported by a country in a single day, according to a Reuters tally.

    Okay, I’m going to assume since this is being reported as it is that it’s not because of increased testing.

    1. The United States reported… the biggest increase ever reported by a country in a single day

      Biden proposes his own version of ‘America First.’

      America is already first, asshole.

      1. Trump promised us we’d be winning. We’re #1! We’re #1!

    2. Haven’t you seen the dead bodies stacked like cordwood along the streets?

      1. Been counting bodies like sheep to the rhythm of the war drums.

      2. Don’t be ridiculous. There’s a couple dudes with a cart and a bell going around picking them up.

        “Bring out your dead! Bring out your dead!”

  6. A British court is ordering Christopher Steele to pay damages for spreading the now-infamous Trump-Russia dossier.

    The Feds and FISA court should be adding to that payout for wasting everyone’s time for two and a half fucking years.

    1. He was paid to do that, though, so totes cool.

  7. Protesters are suing Columbus, Ohio, police.

    This is not going to prove a terribly effective way to defund the police.

    1. Anyone voluntarily living in a city named Columbus must be racist

    2. I read this as protestors are suing Columbus, and Ohio, and the Police.

      1. Maybe ENB is telling the police that protesters are suing Columbus Ohio.

  8. Read Jesse Singal and Matt Welch on the Harper’s free speech letter.

    I’m not reading these. Not after seeing who else signs documents they sign. (Welch signed in spirit.)

  9. The United States reported more than 60,000 new COVID-19 cases on Wednesday, the biggest increase ever reported by a country in a single day, according to a Reuters tally.
    We’re number one!

    1. I went looking for data to support or refute Trump’s claim that 99% of COVID cases are harmless and found this in Lancet:
      https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X(20)30264-3/fulltext

      “We estimate that 22% of the global population have at least one underlying condition that puts them at increased risk of severe COVID-19 if infected (ranging from 66% of those aged 70 years or older).
      We estimate that 4% of the global population would require hospital admission if infected (ranging from <1% of those younger than 20 years to approximately 20% of those aged 70 years or older)."

      There's room to quibble over 96% vs 99% overall, but old people vote.

      1. They will all be dead by November.

        1. So that’s why NY forced nursing homes to accept patients with COVID leading to large numbers of residents dying. Because not only do old people vote, but they tend to vote Republican more than Democrat. Nevermind that NY is already a very blue state and therefore it won’t matter how many old Republican voters they kill (I never said it was a smart plan).

          *adjusts tinfoil hat*

          1. Now do Michigan…

  10. “…though it did nothing for women who are unemployed, undocumented, stay-at-home caregivers, self-employed, working at small businesses, working as independent contractors, working less than full-time, etc., etc…”

    IOWs, it was ‘signalling’.

    1. At best it was signaling. More realistically it flat-out unconstitutional and nothing more than a wedge issue to garner votes when it was ultimately found to be.

      As ENB points out, if they cared about access to birth control they would make it OTC.

      1. It’s an attack on religious liberty.

      2. It’s not about the birth control, it’s about control.

    2. “Especially in communities of color.” “Falling hardest on……. people of color”.

      Wow. Twice in two paragraphs. Man, if I had a nickel for every time I’ve read that. It’s standard boilerplate grievance now, regardless of topic.

      I guess they’re not worried about diluting this mantra. Haha

  11. “Biden ‘is proposing sweeping new uses of the federal government’s regulatory and spending power to bolster U.S. manufacturing and technology firms,’ reports CNBC.”

    OK, so maybe Biden won’t immediately implement every single aspect of our benefactor Charles Koch’s economic agenda. But he will implement the most important part — unlimited, unrestricted immigration.

    #VoteBidenForOpenBorders
    #ImmigrationAboveAll

    1. Isn’t what Biden is proposing the classic definition of fascism?
      I’m so confused. Are free enterprisers now the commies and fascists now the anti-fascists?

      1. No. You need to read more Shikha Dalmia.

        “Fascism” in contemporary America basically means “opposition to Charles Koch’s immigration agenda.” Therefore Orange Hitler is the only fascist in this year’s Presidential race.

      2. “…I’m so confused…”

        If you think *YOU’RE* confused, take a look at the walking dead offered up by the Ds.

        1. Yeah… and somehow the guy that I truly really believe is pooping in a diaper is leading Dear Leader by 10 points. Why can’t {sniff} people appreciate beautiful and precious Dear Leader for who he is like you do?!?

          1. Why can’t {sniff} people appreciate beautiful and precious Dear Leader for who he is like you do?!?

            It does say something that an early 1990s-era Democrat is considered a fascist by the current left woketards.

          2. In other news, communism is still somewhat unpopular.

            1. And commie kid is still 35-going-on-5.

          3. “Yeah… and somehow the guy that I truly really believe is pooping in a diaper is leading Dear Leader by 10 points.”

            “(CNN)Hillary Clinton has a 12-point lead over Donald Trump and has reached 50% support nationally among likely voters, a new ABC News tracking poll shows…”
            https://www.cnn.com/2016/10/23/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-presidential-polls/index.html

            Commie shits are kinda stupid that way, aren’t they?

          4. “the guy that I truly really believe is pooping in a diaper”

            Sqrlsy licks its lips.

  12. They think there is such a thing as free birth control and there is a right to it. Part of the point of the ACA was to force their morality on sex on everybody ascmatter of law and regulation. They are fanatics in the woke quasi-religion.

    1. Free birth control : keep your knees together.

      1. Or just stick to anal.

        Eh, neither one makes a baby.

        1. You can through oral in there as well. Just for variety.

          1. But preferably not right after anal.

  13. “these groups have focused myopically on the religious”

    Pretty much could end that thought there. Christian conservatives live rent-free in the waking nightmares of every prog.

    1. The Left used to argue that you cannot legislate morality. Now they are legislating their morality as a bastardized vision of reproductive rights.

    2. “Christian conservatives live rent-free in the waking nightmares of every prog”

      Having an enemy to hate feels good, and having a scapegoat to abuse feels even better.
      They are the same old rotten bigots that they always were, they just found a different target for their hatred. Although, the moment minority voters are no longer useful for them, they’ll go rushing back to old tricks like “scientific racism”, etc.

  14. Economic disaster!!!!

    Our benefactor Charles Koch is now only the 20th richest person on the planet!

    This is all Drumpf’s fault. His alt-right white nationalist policies have prevented Mr. Koch from hiring his preferred workers: highly skilled doctors and engineers from Mexico.

    #HowLongMustCharlesKochSuffer?
    #50BillionIsntEnough

    1. You used to be funny. Now you are just predictable and boring.

      1. Add ‘lazy’ to the list of adjectives.

      2. It’s probably because he cant keep up with how insane the left is getting.

    2. Yeah, Rufus, I think this schtick has gone on too long.

  15. I’m surprised nothing has been posted about DeSean Jackson literally posting that “Hitler was right” about the Jews and a bunch of other athletes outing themselves as Farrakhan-following jew haters

    1. But did they sarcastically suggest “Open Borders for Israel”? If not, antisemitism from white nationalists is still obviously the larger problem.

      #LibertariansForTheJewishState

    2. DeSean Jackson
      Never heard of him.

      1. It’s the kind of name a white writer would make up for a generic black person.

        1. Made me chuckle

        2. Dave Chapelle had a whole bit about how Draymond Green was the blackest name you could imagine, but Desean Jackson’s probably pretty close.

      2. Just for the record, DeSean Jackson was among the best wide receivers in the NFL for a long time. His stint in Philadelphia was famous, and he’s back in Philadelphia now.

        The antisemitic statements he made and the Hitler quote was abominable, and he seemed to imagine that making those statements in defense of Black Lives Matter somehow made it okay.

        I’m opposed to cancel culture, pretty much across the board, and I don’t see why the league should punish him for his speech any more than I think anyone else should be cancelled by an angry mob for saying stupid and embarrassing things that anger the mob.

        It should be between Jackson and his employer–not Jackson and an angry mob. ‘

        And the hypocrisy accusations cut both ways. If we think someone’s career should be cancelled for saying something obnoxious and stupid in support of BLM causes, then we have no business opposing cancel culture when it’s BLM going after somebody else for criticizing them. Let’s not be part of the problem.

        1. DeSean Jackson didn’t actually help perpetrate the holocaust.

          He just said something obnoxious and stupid.

          Words. They’re just words . . . unless you’re playing tournament Scrabble.

          1. You seem to miss the point, Ken.

        2. Agree 100% except that the canceling is very lopsided.

        3. If we think someone’s career should be cancelled for saying something obnoxious and stupid in support of BLM causes,

          Not obnoxious and stupid. Hitler (ostensibly).

          There’s nothing wrong with that being the line. Call it the Hitmus Test for cancellation.

        4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules”
          Rules for Radicals, Saul Alinsky

          1. Are you proposing that we follow Alinsky?

            1. I am, sort of..
              We’re in a war with insanity and authoritarianism for the soul of the West right now. That said, it doesn’t feel good to use the devil’s tools.

        5. “The antisemitic statements he made and the Hitler quote was abominable, and he seemed to imagine that making those statements in defense of Black Lives Matter somehow made it okay.”

          Even with a public school education, he should know that the fascism of Hitler was opposite the marxism of BLM.

        6. “DeSean Jackson was among the best wide receivers in the NFL for a long time”

          No.
          He was good for many years, but never among the top 5, and maybe except 3 or 4 seasons among the top 10.
          He’s a very good deep threat who’s always been hurt a lot and is fast aging. He missed all but a few snaps last year. The Eagles even have a replacement for him on the roster in Marquis Goodwin.
          All of which is to say: he’s near the end of his career and entirely replaceable.
          Drew Brees, on the other hand, is a certain hall of famer and the Saints aren’t competing for a Superbowl without him. And while Jackson is liked by many fans, he’s nowhere near the icon in the league or community that Brees, who literally helped rebuild New Orleans, is.
          Amazing the difference in how each was treated

        7. Is there an “angry mob”? Somehow I think this guy gets a pass. Pun intended.

      3. Maybe that’s why he posted it.
        Twitter is like fishing if the fish was baiting the hook.

        1. Twitter is like fishing if the fish was baiting the hook.

          So, a fish notices a naked hook dangling from the surface, has some leftover worms in his pocket and thinks, “I wonder how these worms would taste if I attach one to that hook and then swallow it whole.”

          Yep, the analogy describes Twitter perfectly. It really captures the commitment to suffering the consequences of exposing your innermost thoughts to randos on the internetz.

    3. Maybe it’s because nobody cares about athletes’ opinions. Shut up and play the game

      1. Maybe you haven’t noticed; politics IS the game now.

    4. For whatever reason, the staff here seem to be unaware of the sports world generally speaking.

      Welch is a baseball fan.

      The staff is against public financing of stadiums.

      Apart from that, it would surprise me if two of them could tell you the name of the best quarterback to ever play for the Colts in Indianapolis.

      If you told them that Wayne Gretsky scored more touchdowns than any quarterback in history, I doubt they’d bat an eye.

      They couldn’t tell you who DeSean Jackson was to save their lives.

      1. Apart from that, it would surprise me if two of them could tell you the name of the best quarterback to ever play for the Colts in Indianapolis.

        God bless the immortal Jack Trudeau.

        1. What does that Canadian blackface guy have to do with sports?

        2. Definitely Majkowski, chump

          1. Impressive

      2. Apart from that, it would surprise me if two of them could tell you the name of the best quarterback to ever play for the Colts in Indianapolis.
        Jeff George?

        If you told them that Wayne Gretsky
        Or even if you told them how to spell Gretzky

        1. Thanks for correcting my spelling.

          Do you do punctuation, two?

          1. I, never put, commas in the, right places.

      3. Apart from that, it would surprise me if two of them could tell you the name of the best quarterback to ever play for the Colts in Indianapolis.

        Jim Harbaugh is a football God! /sarc

      4. So the staff of a libertarian organization might not know much about sports. What’s your point?

        1. The point was that they probably aren’t betraying a bias for BLM by ignoring a story about someone using horrific antisemitic language in a pro-BLM post on social media and the controversy that’s caused. The staff are probably just oblivious to this story for the same reason they’ve oblivious to sports stories in general.

          They haven’t heard about it for the same reason they don’t know who won the Superbowl last year, the name of the winning coach, what Mahomes new contract pays him over the course of the contract, or which team Mahomes plays for. The reason they don’t know about DeSean Jackson is probably the same reason they don’t know that A-Rod hasn’t scored more three pointers than any left-winger in NHL history.

          Follow?

          P.S. I’d say I was defending them, but being completely out of touch with sports is to be at least somewhat oblivious to what is happening in the culture.

      5. Jim. Harbaugh.

    5. Did they cover Don Lemon’s attack on Terry Crews because Crews criticized BLM for not talking about black on black homicides?

  16. 226 offensive words will no longer be considered words when you’re playing in Scrabble tournaments.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/07/sports/scrabble-racial-slurs-tournaments.html

    1. I bet “sinister” is still ok though.

      1. Has anyone ever called you The craw?

      2. As a left-handed favoring ambidextrous person, should I be properly described as ambi-sinistrous?

    2. And here I thought there were only 7 dirty words.

    3. I’m not clicking the link, but I’ve always wondered: “colored people” used to be socially acceptable, then it wasn’t. But now “people of color” is a preferred term, but “colored people” still isn’t acceptable. Am I get that right? Because it doesn’t make any sense to me.

      1. Next up, People of Darkness.

      2. “colored people” is fine, but not “coloreds” or “you people of color” or “you colored people” or “you people”.

      3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAACP

        Then NAACP named themselves that back when it was still considered a polite term. There may be isolated pockets of the country where people still use it that way because they think it’s the polite term, but I don’t think there are any African-Americans who use that term to describe themselves anymore.

        1. P.S. FWIW, the people I’ve heard use that term because they thought it was polite would also use the term “pop” to describe soft drinks for whatever that’s worth.

          https://www.businessinsider.com/soda-pop-coke-map-2018-10

          1. FWIW, the people I’ve heard use that term because they thought it was polite would also use the term “pop” to describe soft drinks for whatever that’s worth.

            They also seem to me to be on the older side. My grandmother used to use the term, for instance.

            1. Yes, it used to be the preferred term.

              “Madame” didn’t always mean a woman running a whorehouse. It was ironic to refer to a woman of ill-repute as “madame”.

              Catholics call their official Latin version of the Bible “The Vulgate”. It’s based on the word “vulgar”, which, in the 4th century, when it was translated, originally just meant “common”. It was written in the common Latin of average people rather than in the classical Latin of the 1st century. Over time, “vulgar” came to mean something lower than common.

              When people used “colored” back in the day, it was the polite term. We may live to see “black” become socially unacceptable.

              1. In science the term vulgar still is used to describe either the first described or most common member of a species.

          2. I live in Michigan. We all call it pop.

          3. Death to any bastard what calls it ‘pop’

            1. Even Faygo red pop?

        2. If black people using the term is an indication that a term is kosher, “nigger” is back on the table.

          1. That word is special in that only black Scrabble players can use it.

          2. I’ve had discussions with younger African-Americans about the use of that term, and they tried to explain to me that it depended on how it was said. They said that if there wasn’t any anger or hate behind it, it wasn’t offensive to them.

            I tried to explain to them that the most hateful ways I’ve heard the term used, over the years, was when it was used without any emotion at all. Unless we’re quoting someone, writing fiction, or discussing the word itself, I can’t imagine why it would be necessary for a white person to use the word.

            At best, it’d be like open carrying to parents’ night at your kid’s preschool. The things I have to say about people of all races: 1) parasiting off of the taxpayer, 2) not providing for their own kid’s education 3) not taking care of their elderly parents, etc., etc. Those things are already offensive enough.

            I want to replace half the government workers out there with a short shell script. If you can’t compete with Chinese labor or Mexican immigrants with an 8th grade education, then I think you should go get your GED and stop using meth. I think we willingly obligate ourselves to carry a child to term and pay for it until the child turns 18 when we willingly engage in activity that might create a child. I think people who sell our constitutional rights short because they’re afraid of terrorists are fucking cowards.

            I don’t need slurs to be offensive. I’m a libertarian capitalist, and that’s more offensive to more people than anything.

            1. “I can’t imagine why it would be necessary for a white person to use the word. ”

              Then you should not be able to imagine why it would be necessary for any person to use the word. The last person who should use the word is a black person. Nobody should know better how inappropriate it is. The word will disappear when black people refuse to say it.

              1. Well, I’m not saying it should be against the law. It’s just that certain people find it extremely offensive, and that a good enough reason for me to choose not to use it.

                Look, um, ten years ago we had a huge food fight in a thread about the use of the word “cunt”. People in the UK use that term all the time, where it isn’t as offensive, but here in the U.S., women find that term much more offensive. In the UK, they find the term “bastard” extremely offensive.

                I don’t make the rules on what people find offensive or why, and I highly resent people trying to write rules about what is and what isn’t offensive to say. One reason is because it’s largely unnecessary. There don’t need to be official rules about these things for the same reason that there doesn’t need to be official rules against picking your nose at a dinner party. There are rules against that already, and there are social rules.

                People don’t use racial slurs as much as they used to because it became socially unacceptable, and that’s fine. That’s all we need.

                1. Yeah, I’m dating an Aussie lass these days, and I just know that at some point I’m going to bust out with “cunt” in the wrong context and then I’mma get canceled.

                  1. I’m not co-managing this band with anyone. Especially not someone who dresses like an Australian’s nightmare.

            2. Back in the 1990s many of the blacks I served with told me they only used the term to describe deadbeats and criminals. Somehow, it shifted (possibly as a result of gangster and rap culture?) to now be a friendly greeting.

              1. Note: this shift was evident among younger blacks even in the late 1990s.

              2. God damnit … white people need to understand that us black folk can pronounce the hard R and that nigga and nigger are not interchangeable, at least not to people who use the word nigga.

                We used to call people niggers the way you call people white trash or rednecks. At some point nigga became popular way to refer to someone along the lines of brother, dude, motherfucker, guy, etc. Sometimes its derisive, sometimes not. Its very similar to how canadians call people boys,

                Nigger is always offensive. Nigga is only offensive if used improperly and wont get close to the same reaction.

        3. All my black friends prefer “black”, and this has been true throughout my life

          1. i call everyone dude. can’t miss.

            1. It abides.

          2. Most Indians I know (and I grew up on a reservation and work aside one today and often work with tribal members as part of my job) prefer the term American Indian or just Indian, the few exceptions I’ve met that demanded the use of Native American were usually doing so in a weaponized manner to achieve a political goal. One of the Amerindians girls I grew up with posted about how she was accused recently by a white woman of not being sensitive enough to Native culture because she referred to herself as a Coeur d’Alene Indian. Just FYI, she is a social worker for the tribe and is running for tribal council.

        4. I have heard “Negro” by Black Americans used in some form of “n…e…g…r…o” toward another Black American.

    4. For those who objected to removing the words, Chew said, the three main arguments were: A word’s meaning is irrelevant in Scrabble; it’s a slippery slope, and — one he repeated with a tone of incredulity — if some people are not offended by the presence of those words, why should anyone else be?

      I love how the idea that “I am not responsible for what offends you” is treated with the utmost derision.

      1. There will certainly be questions about where to draw the line on offensive terms.

        Is “karen” an offensive term?

        It’s a stereotypical word for a certain type of white woman.

        What about “breeder”?

        It’s like a slur for heterosexuals used by some people in the LGBT community.

        What about “redneck”.

        Will they say it’s okay to use “redneck” because some white people call themselves and each other “redneck”?

        1. How about we put the “line” back in the junk drawer in the kitchen? Line-drawing is for slavers.

    5. Am I the only one who thought the OED was the official Scrabble word list?

      1. No proper nouns are allowed.

  17. “• Ugh:”

    This is something of a linguistic crutch for you.

    1. Very Karen.

    2. ENB may be trolling us at this point.

    3. I thought that said linguistic crotch, which would be a great band name

      1. I’ve seen a few that definitely had some stories to tell.

    4. It’s what happens when you’re a brandamaged stupid fucking cunt. The reason she got so pissed off, doxxed that guy, and tried to get him fired for telling him to make her a sandwich is because she was embarrassed that she didn’t know how.

  18. “A decision about whether to use birth control is one that should be between a patient and their doctor—and no one else,” said a statement from DeGette, Chu, Lee, and Frankel. “Giving an employer the ability to interject themselves in that decisions—by limiting a patient’s access to free birth control—is unconscionable.”

    You’re sooooo close, and yet you remain sooooo clueless.

    1. “The decision is between a patient and their doctor, but you’re the one that needs to pay for it.”

    2. Actually, the decision is between the politicians, the insurance company accountants, and the courts.

      1. Actually, the decision is between the politicians, the insurance company accountants, and the courts.

        This applies to pretty much every area of medicine. And the patient’s desires and the Doctor’s professional opinion on the best way to treat the patient are somewhere way the hell down towards the bottom of the list.

          1. Bolsonaro saw the news

          2. It is widely understood that the only thing that can save us from the dreaded RONA is multiple-times-per-day at-home testing, mandatory face masks, on-patent Remdesivir, and a mandatory vaccine.

  19. “Friends of reproductive freedom should forget about forcing every single employer in the country to pay for worker’s contraception and work more on things that could make a difference to all girls and women”

    They’ll never do that. That doesn’t raise money for them. “John Roberts and Donald Trump are invading your uterus!!!!!” does.

    1. It is telling that before the ACA, progressives were the one demanding birth control and the morning after pill be sold without prescription, but since the passage of the ACA now it is sexist to mention allowing birth control to be OTC. It eliminating the need for yearly doctor’s visits to renew your prescriptions. I wonder how long until we are living in the Seinfeld episode where Elaine was trying to buy as much of the sponge as possible after it was removed from the market.

      1. +1 Spongeworthy

  20. “Biden “is proposing sweeping new uses of the federal government’s regulatory and spending power to bolster U.S. manufacturing and technology firms,” reports CNBC.”

    Mandating the Feds buy overpriced, shitty products is not “bolstering” anything but cronies.

    1. This should bolster the phonograph needle and mimeograph machine industries.

    2. Well, I find it amusing that Biden can only order the feds to buy American if he gets a bunch of new money. Why has no ‘reporter’ asked him why he wouldn’t just tell them to buy American with the money they already have?
      Oh, wait; democrat.

  21. So, in addition to the potential loss of foreign student tuition that Shika wrote about yesterday, colleges are about to get their shit pushed in if sports have to be suspended. Sports Illustrated had an article about Stanford slashing a bunch of sports, along with the Ivies cancelling athletics until 2021 at the earliest. This is on top of a whole bunch of schools, mostly at the Division II level or under, nuking their athletic offerings.

    This is going to be an interesting development because, generally speaking, college football is the only sport that is a consistent money-maker for most of these schools, mostly due to TV broadcast rights and ad revenue–the money it brings in subsidizes a shit-load of sports that colleges offer to meet Title IX requirements. A lot of these programs could go away and no one would actually miss them. So what happens to these kids when their college scholarship is taken away? What choices will they make from a real-life perspective if they’re not getting their full or partial-ride anymore?

    1. I shall not shed one tear for school athletes.

      1. This. Long before there were gender studies students wasting college resources, there were student athletes.

      2. Just to be clear, I’m not nearly as broken up about it as the SI folks are. College athletics is the epitome of the limits of scale. I’d be fine with seeing every college sport either eliminated to reduced to the club level.

    2. Most colleges these days are run by women. Their immediate concern is to make all colleges man free zones. Financial concerns (sexist as they are) are way down the list.

      1. I get where you’re coming from, but a lot of these programs getting cut are the women’s programs, too. These cuts are being made not just due to ChinaFlu concerns, but because in reality they’re money losers that were only getting propped up by revenue from the football team.

        Women’s college athletics is the definition of a first-world indulgence, because in reality the vast majority of people have no interest in watching them.

        1. Maybe they see it as a way of avoiding the issue of tranny’s in women’s sports.

    3. They’ll just be replaced by foreign students who can’t have their visas revoked for any reason.

  22. Rather than working to expand birth control access through some other mechanism than Obamacare, these groups have focused myopically on the religious/moral exemption to contraception coverage with a public relations campaign on how Republicans want to take away birth control for everyone.

    That’s because they don’t actually care about “expand[ing] birth control access,” they just want to use the issue as a cudgel to beat Republicans over the heads with in an election year.

    1. Gee, what do you know, the very next paragraph confirms it:

      For instance, here’s what the Democratic National Committee had to say: “This decision is an egregious attack on the rights of women and those seeking reproductive care, especially in communities of color…. Make no mistake: reproductive health care is on the ballot in 2020. And the American people are ready to elect a president they can trust to protect it.”

      Christ, these assholes are so fucking predictable.

      1. Of course, their true interest in “communities of color” (?) is shown by their devotion to Sanger.

      2. But Tony assures me that only the right uses culture issues for elections.

    2. Theocracy is now not being able to force religious conservatives to pay for birth control.

      The question of where the federal government gets the authority to create such a mandate or that was something the feds should do.

      1. Who cares about a 209+ year old document that was written by at least some people who owned slaves and the rest who were rich white guys?

  23. Supreme Court says eastern half of Oklahoma is Native American land:
    “The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a huge swath of the state of Oklahoma is Native American land for certain purposes, siding with a Native American man who had challenged his rape conviction by state authorities in the territory.

    The 5-4 decision authored by Justice Neil Gorsuch endorsed the claim of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation to the lan, “Today we are asked whether the land these treaties promised remains an Indian reservation for purposes of federal criminal law,” Gorsuch wrote. “Because Congress has not said otherwise, we hold the government to its word,”

    1. That is certainly a novel way to get out from under a rape conviction.

      1. How?

      2. It wasn’t rape, he was counting cooz coup.

    2. Well, I guess we gotta conquer them again. No treaties this time.

      1. The little known truth is many treaties had sunset clauses but have since been renewed. Tribes will, if they don’t automatically get renewal, just declare war and the US government just rolls over.

    3. what the actual fuck? How exactly do they plan on enforcing that when 1.8 million people decide that they aren’t having any part of this clown show?!

  24. “The religious education and formation of students is the very reason for the existence of most private religious schools, and therefore the selection and supervision of the teachers upon whom the schools rely to do this work lie at the core of their missions, Alito wrote.”

    Alito wants it both ways. These indoctrination projects should not be funded with public money. This is not education. What stops Saudi Arabia from opening up jihadi training centers across America and having it all funded with public money? Fucking bs.

    1. Yet we have to pay for the public school indoctrination centers.

      1. But The State is his religion, so he’s ok with that.

    2. What makes you think religious schools in the U.S. are getting taxpayer funding?

      Religious people who send their kids to religious school are also forced to pay for public schools with their taxes, for some reason, but the complaint about all the taxpayer money that goes to religious schools seems to be based on a fabrication.

      Where are these schools that are getting taxpayer money?

      1. at the k-12 level, there’s none.

        At the collegiate level, there’s tons of it. That seems to be ok though.

        1. Yeah, I was talking about high schools and under.

          They’re giving financial aid directly to students.

          They’re giving research grants to professors to do things that aren’t related to religion.

          Are you talking about anything else?

    3. What stops Saudi Arabia from opening up jihadi training centers across America and having it all funded with public money?

      They already have, and public schools in most jurisdictions have prayer rooms, prayer mats, and religious supplies for Muslim students (and no other religious students, btw).

      1. citation? A quick google gave me nothin.

        1. There are several in Virginia. Fox News reported extensively (and breathlessly) on them after 9/11.

  25. “Make no mistake: reproductive health care is on the ballot in 2020.”

    “Because one way or the other: we’re fucked!”

    1. “Make no mistake: reproductive health care is on the ballot in 2020.”

      People are going to vote that they don’t like a SCOTUS decision?

  26. OT….My guess is Reason will have a field day with the Trump tax records decision allowing the NY Manhattan DA Vance access to eight years of POTUS Trump tax returns.

    Now….How long before they get leaked to NYT and WaPo and CNN?

    BTW, Vance has some ‘peculiar’ issues of his own relative to Weinstein and Epstein. Glass houses.

    1. Don’t be silly; everyone know it is illegal to release ANY information from a grand jury other than the actual indictment.

    2. Democrats really think that Trumps tax records will make any difference in him getting reelected.

      The decision also makes Presidents immune from petty political actions of local prosecutors until they leave office and/or are Impeached.

      I demand that any action for not claiming a $250k sex payout be preceded by a complete NYC investigation of every member of Congress for doing the exact same thing. I would bet every member of Congress has traveled to NYC. Congress would enact a law granting federal workers from local prosecutors so fast.

      unreason wont cover but every one of the SCOTUS that Gorsuch sided with is a setup against Democrats.

      This SCOTUS decision means that every local prosecutor in every rural county can go after records of federal politicians. I have a letter in to my local county prosecutor to convene a Grand Jury and investigate Hillary Clinton. Then charge her for destruction of evidence.

    3. DA isn’t allowed access, he’s only allowed to subpoena the records. There are still battles to be fought about whether that subpoena should be enforced and the records turned over – which will most likely go all the way up to SCOTUS again. My guess, by the time anyone gets the records, Trump will be out of office either after this election or after 2024.

  27. Tucker Carlson owns Tucker Carlson:

    https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=kUu8H_1594189068

    1. Nobody cares bitch.

    2. How dumb are you? There isn’t even a contradiction. School kids don’t get sick and rarely even asymptomatically spread – that was the point.

  28. The bill, sponsored by Reps. Diana DeGette (D–Colo.), Judy Chu (D–Calif.), Barbara Lee (D–Calif.), and Lois Frankel (D–Florida),

    Democrats are tyrants. The Democrat Party is the Party of slavery. Is anyone really surprised that Democrats would want to control what birth control Americans want and should easily get over the counter.

    Democrats also support the Controlled Substances Act which is unconstitutional. Even the Prohibitionists knew that in the USA, you need a Constitutional Amendment to make product or service illegal.

    1. ” Even the Prohibitionists knew that in the USA, you need a Constitutional Amendment to make product or service illegal.”

      That was then, this is now. Not only can the feds make a product illegal, they can mandate purchase of products.

      1. Just say “no”. Politicians and the Nazgul hate it when you just tell them “no”.

        Also jury nullification undermines their dictates.

        1. Get a load of the new guy.

      2. The Miller case held that the federal government can’t ban people from using and owning weapons that are in common use by the militia and military. Yet somehow that has morphed it to making it nearly illegal to own any military grade firearm and that the left believes the 2A only applies to militia. But Miller (the USSC actually remanded the case back to a lower court for rehearing) was convicted of owning a sawed off shotgun, which the lower court ruled was illegal because it had no military purpose (his lawyers fucked up by not showing how shotguns have been used in combat from nearly the start of the country, hell, even the standard musket round during the Revolution and War of 1812 was the buck and ball, by US troops).

      3. Ah, but can they mandate purchases of illegal products?

  29. Superstition-based access to contraception is one more problem to be solved — and relatively soon — by universal healthcare.

    1. Government is a jealous god.

    2. Are you a card-carrying member of Libertarians for Government Run Healthcare, Art?

      I’m not ready to join just yet. Not sure if the program would benefit billionaires like Charles Koch.

    3. Superstition-based access to contraception

      Is that the belief that if someone else doesn’t pay for whichever birth control you want to use, it’s literally rape?

    4. “Superstition-based access to contraception…”

      Yep, according to asshole bigot here, the government just said if you believe something, you can’t have contraceptives.
      Asshole bigots are sort of stupid that way.

    5. Please tell us more about how the bucktoothed hillbilly white supremacists are getting curbstomped in the culture war by elite warriors like yourself while you lose yet other SCOTUS case Artie you chunk of dried up dog shit.

  30. Feminists are promoting the patriarchy by demanding that the Federal government act as a surrogate male. The surrogate male that is the bread winner. The surrogate male that provides for them. A surrogate male that denies their independence.

    Less birth controls pills over the counter without a prescription and every female can afford it, just like every male can afford condoms. It’s not a universal solution, but there are better ways to solve that problem than to force every employer to directly pay for it.

    This issue is pure symbolism. On both sides frankly, but the Left squawking about their right to the taxpayer’s wallet is most disturbing.

    Give women agency!

    1. ^ Exactly this.

      Add to that, if BC pills were more universally available and not subsidized through health plans there would certainly be private charities willing to help women afford them. Why must everything always fall to government?

      1. Why must everything always fall to government?

        Because government is force and these people are all about using force to make everyone do what they want them to do.

    2. Notably, feminist organizations were all for OTC birth control (in some countries like Thailand, you can buy most contraceptives OTC) until a Republican, Cory Gardner, proposed a bill that would have done exactly that. Suddenly, there were “serious concerns” about side effects of using birth control pills and that “only a doctor can determine the right dose or women can die,” despite the fact that no such female holocaust was taking place in these other countries.

      These women don’t really care about birth control access, they just want someone else to pay for it.

      1. It’s not even that, not directly anyway, it’s that progressives have discovered birth control is a useful hook for universal healthcare. As long as you need a doctor you need insurance, and as long as you need insurance you can be convinced that the government should give it to you

        Unsurprisingly, this is also the reason Republicans generally favor OTC birth control now

    3. Give women agency!

      Nobody hates women more than feminist organizations.

    4. Agency is white, cisgendered, heterosexual, patriarchal colinialism. I actually would not be surprised if someone has already claimed this.

  31. wouldn’t have to “Ugh” the covid numbers if you’d analyze and report them in any real sense.

    1. That sounds like a lot of work.

  32. Steele’s book deal will cover the damages.

    1. Maybe the profits from that will end up in Trump’s bank account, too.

  33. I think it’s kinda interesting that the Left is resisting the idea of reopening the schools. It’s interesting because the public schools are an important part of their long range plan to “transform” the country into a “democratic socialist” state.

    It seems a risky plan. In the short term, a lot of parents are going to be really brassed off about the burdens this will place on them; I wonder how that will play at the polls come November.

    If the schools stay shut down for a long time, more and more parents will perhaps be thinking they don’t really need the government’s schools. And taxpayers will be wondering why they have to keep paying high property taxes to support schools that don’t even pretend to do anything useful.

    1. >>an important part of their long range plan

      that battle is a smoldering pile of rubble. they won. mho.

    2. It seems a risky plan. In the short term, a lot of parents are going to be really brassed off about the burdens this will place on them; I wonder how that will play at the polls come November.

      One thing that’s come out with these school closures is how dependent a lot of people are on the schools to basically act as a baby-sitting service, especially in poorer neighborhoods. Online learning for these people is utterly pointless because the parents are largely uninvested in making sure their kids do well in school anyway.

    3. “I think it’s kinda interesting that the Left is resisting the idea of reopening the schools.”

      This seems to me like election year politics.

      Trump can make the news media oppose anything (including national monuments on the 4th of July) simply by stating his support for them.

      I bet there are a lot of anxious moms and dads out there who are looking forward to getting the kids out of the house and back to school–so one of them doesn’t have to stay home all the time. If Trump can make the Democrats support keeping the schools closed, the Democrats are likely to tick off a lot of suburban moms in particular, and that can only go well for his campaign. He doesn’t need to get those Karens to vote for him. He just needs them to not bother showing up on election day.

      1. <1% of those younger than 20 years get hospitalized from COVID.
        There are other studies that show kids don't spread it, and schools in Europe are open

  34. ” [some politician] calls for a $400 billion, four-year increase in government purchasing of U.S.-based goods and services plus $300 billion in new research and development in U.S. technology concerns. Among other policies expected to be announced Thursday, he proposes tightening current “Buy American” laws that are intended to benefit U.S. firms but can be easily circumvented by government agencies.”

    This could easily be Trump.

    1. But if Trump said it, that would be bad.

  35. http://twitter.com/robbysoave/status/1281030014260125698?s=19

    “I’ve criticized the Southern Poverty Law Center on numerous occasions for tarring perfectly normal people as extremists. This does not look like one of those times.”

    1. Yup, another piece of white supremacist trash found on your cult leader’s favorite batshit “news” network. OAN. Oh, and look, now he’s lying about using (((they))) codes and “1488” in his frequent rants.

      He’s nazi trash on a network that promotes abject lies. Not the hill you guys want to die on.

      1. Hey cytotoxic, remember when your chocolate messiah posed for pictures with Louis Farrakhan and hosted Malik Shabazz at the white house?

      2. You’re a brainwashed npc

  36. “The fact that a small class of employers may now may now opt out of the Obamacare contraception mandate has no bearing on whether most U.S. women will have access to affordable birth control.”

    The reason progressives are clinging to this is because the logic behind it is the central theme of progressivism. Being a progressive is all about using the coercive power of government to force individuals to make sacrifices for the common good (as progressives see it)–and the contraception mandate hits that theme squarely on the head.

    There isn’t anything that progressives support that doesn’t have that as its foundation. Their support for the Paris Agreement was all about using the government to force Americans to sacrifice their standard of living for the environment and for the benefit of less fortunate people in the developing world. The ACA was all about forcing middle class Americans to sacrifice their healthcare for the benefit of an expansion of Medicaid. Using the coercive power of government by way of the ACA to force people to sacrifice their religious rights on the alter of the common good is another excellent example of what being a progressive is all about.

    The whole purpose of government in the progressive mind is to force people they don’t like to make sacrifices for the benefit of people they like. Whatever issue you imagine they support, that issue isn’t anywhere as important to them as forcing unfavored groups to make sacrifices for favored groups. Compared to that, everything else is trivial.

    1. You needn’t tell Elizabeth Nolan Brown the reasons why progressives believe the things they do. She was busily regurgitating the correct talking points for her entire life up to and including several months after she got hired at Reason. Her handlers at the time thought it might be a bad idea to go full on pro-insurance-mandate radical progressive feminist leftist. This was before Trump got elected and the entire staff finally dropped the mask on their crypto-Marxism.

  37. The fact that a small class of employers may now may now opt out of the Obamacare contraception mandate has no bearing on whether most U.S. women will have access to affordable birth control.

    HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Remember about a day before you got hired to work for a ”””””libertarian””””” website when you wrote a screed about how nobody should be exempt from any form of insurance mandate ever?

    In any discussion of whether religious employers should have to cover contraceptive services, I feel it’s important to note: People use the pill for things other than pregnancy prevention (thanks, Erin, for reminding me of this). A Guttmacher Institute study found 14% of all birth control users rely on the pill solely for non-contraceptive reasons, such as reducing menstrual pain, treating acne or trying to tame irregular periods.

    Churches are already exempt from the contraception mandate, but religious employers—like hospitals and universities—want to be able to (and can, now) opt out of covering contraception. And everyone’s framing it like a matter of choice—well, you choose to go to a religious school, or you choose to work for a religiously-affiliated employer. If covered/free contraption was so important to you, you could choose to go to school or work elsewhere (nevermind for now that just going to work elsewhere sometimes really isn’t that simple).

    But I think framing it in terms of individual choice is a bad idea; it’s about whether a broad-spectrum of individual employers should be able to opt out of insurance coverage mandates they don’t like. I don’t think they should. Right now, we’re talking contraception, but it opens the door for any employer to opt out any insurance coverage requirements they don’t like.

    1. “But I think framing it in terms of individual choice is a bad idea; it’s about whether a broad-spectrum of individual employers should be able to opt out of insurance coverage mandates they don’t like. I don’t think they should. Right now, we’re talking contraception, but it opens the door for any employer to opt out any insurance coverage requirements they don’t like.”

      Individual choice being a good idea is probably the central theme of libertarian capitalism.

      Some journalists write about automobiles without being an automobile, and just because some journalists write about . . .

    1. The walls are closing in now! They’ve got him for sure, right cytotoxic!

    2. yeah now do what happens next.

  38. The Obamacare Birth Control Coverage Fight That Never Ends

    It will end as soon as Democrats have gotten their way: birth control for life in the US for every woman, paid for by taxes/mandatory fees on men at massively inflated prices that make their donors and cronies happy.

  39. Me and my wife are 60 years old. I don’t want a religious exemption from birth control but a biological one. I don’t need insurance coverage for it nor maternity, pediatric care, pediatric dental care etc that are all required by the insurance lobby’s Obamacare regulations.

    1. Google easily work and google pays me every hour and every week just $5K to $8K for doing online work from home. I am a universty student and I work n my part time just 2 to 3 hours a day easily from home. Now every one can earn extra cash for doing online home system and make a good life by just open this website and follow instructions on this page… CLICK HERE.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.