Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 8 years ago

Why is GOP against affordable access to contraception - would not that cause decline in abortions?

I just don't get it. I just don't see the paradigm. Can you enlighten me??

Curbing Affordable Contraception

The GOP offensive to scale back access to affordable birth control also perked up again in 2013, with Republicans taking most intent aim at an Obamacare contraception mandate that they have repeatedly called an attack on religious freedom.

The push back against the measure -- which requires most insurance providers and employers to offer free contraception coverage -- first cropped up on the state level, but in March, a group of House Republicans threw it into the crossfire of budget negotiations when they tacked a measure to repeal the mandate on to a continuing resolution. It was a non-starter.

18 Answers

Relevance
  • 8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    there are extremists out there that are even against any contraception. contraception is very cheap, anyone against free contraception fall into the "no lawful contraception" group as far as I'm concerned

  • ?
    Lv 7
    8 years ago

    How is the government paying for contraception? If they mean Medicaid, the taxpayers are paying for Medicaid anyway, contraception or not, and it is legal, and if there is no easy contraception for many women, they will go ahead and have more children they cannot afford and that means more cost for Medicaid and taxpayers. If Catholics dont want to use contraception and use the rhythm method, they have no stake in what insurance benefits are or what Medicaid coverage is. Obama did not add contraception as an insurance benefit. It is available under most insurance plans unless the states individually have prohibited it.

  • ?
    Lv 7
    8 years ago

    There are two different reasons for that. One consists of GOP members who are just against the government having to pay for contraception, but are OK with people using it. The other group think introducing people (especially kids) to contraception is immoral because somehow it encourages sex (as if kids would never have considered sex otherwise).

    But agree that it is ambiguous to be against contraception and abortion at the same time. Its like first causing the problem, then denying you a solution.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    I don't know that I really understand the question.

    There is affordable, then there's free, then there's making someone else pay for it for you, even if that person has an objection to it or is otherwise totally uninvolved in your life.

    Which are the republicans REALLY against?

    Frequently when you are trying to come down on the side of someone's "rights", you trample on someone else's "rights".

    Condoms are very inexpensive in a pharmacy or online - you can get a 36-pack of Trojans for $20 here -

    http://www.vitacost.com/trojan-ultra-thin-lubricat...

    Wal-mart and Target have been offering $9 birth control since 2007

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/03...

    Planned Parenthood, which is funded by government and private corporations, offers the pill for $30/month, the patch for $30/patch, and the ring for $35. How much is your cable TV bill? How much is your texting plan?

    http://www.plannedparenthood.org/ma/birth-control-...

    If you really read and understand the GOP objection it is about forcing someone who may be personally, morally, spiritually against birth control - or even someone who is past child-bearing age or sexually inactive or infertile - to have to pay, via a government mandate, for this "right" for someone else to get them for free.

    The "unaffordable" argument simply doesn't fly.

    And as for the "It's for the woman's health" issue - that's also completely false. If a physician prescribes birth control pills for a woman because of a medical necessity such as hormone replacement, controlling endometriosis or some other reason, these are generally covered by insurance. If a woman is taking these pills to control acne, well, I'm not sure that's a good enough case for me.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • ?
    Lv 4
    8 years ago

    The problem is, the democrats want taxpayers to pay for it. I see nothing wrong with this, but Catholics don't believe in any form of birth control, and the Republicans claim that putting tax money towards affordable birth control would be a violation of freedom of religion for Catholics.

    ^and Right Wing Extremist, lol!

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Bro, the GOP has very specific convictions. They believe in less government intrusion in our lives. Contraception may be a small issue however where does it end. We are all big boys and girls we can buy our own contraception. Just because the government is giving something away doesnt mean its good for you, especially when looking at the bigger picture.

  • JJ
    Lv 4
    8 years ago

    The GOP does not think taxpayers should have to pay for contraception or abortions. Everyone says stay out of my bedroom but they want us to pay for what happens in their bedroom. Pay for it yourselves. It's your responsibility. For those that do not know what responsibility means, look it up. Check out the link below for information about why increased use of contraception does not lead to fewer abortions.

    http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-...

  • 8 years ago

    I'm against it being subsidized by taxpayer dollars.

    And a months birth control prescription is $9 at Walmart... How is that not "affordable?"

  • 8 years ago

    HELL NO BECAUSE THE HEALTHCARE COVER THE ****

  • ?
    Lv 6
    8 years ago

    We're not against affordable contraceptives sparky. We're against our tax dollars paying for it. If a woman wants a contraceptive, she can pay for it. If a man wants to buy rubbers, he can pay for it. If you want to help a woman buy contraceptives, knock yourself out.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.