It’s raining Ortho-Novum


Nearly lost in all the wailing and gnashing of teeth over the budget deal yesterday came the news that the Obama Administration did us lady folks a solid:

The federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) was expected Monday to announce new guidelines that would require health insurance companies to cover women’s health care services, including birth control and breast exams, without a co-pays or deductibles.

The new rules, made possible by President Obama’s Affordable Care act, would begin Aug. 1, 2012.

“We know that half of women, according to studies, forego or delay preventive care because they can’t afford it and under the affordable care act that all changes,” White House advisor Stephanie Cutter told ABC News.

Services covered will include well-woman exams, screening for gestational diabetes, breastfeeding support, domestic violence screenings, and all FDA-approved birth control methods — including emergency contraception like the morning-after pill.

Not everyone is happy about this. Last month, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly commented on the recommendation that prompted the policy change:

“Many women who get pregnant are blasted out of their minds when they have sex, and they’re not going to use birth control anyway.”

True. However, many aging, splotchy bullies who sexually harass their subordinates confuse falafels for loofahs, but there’s no movement afoot to restrict the use of those items.

K-Lo over at NRO, whose views on contraception are shaped by the decrees of dress-wearing old men who are publicly celibate, said this:

Those opposing the new rules are simply saying: You can disagree with me on whether or not contraception has helped make a wreck of our lives. But don’t make me violate my conscience.

Also invoking “conscience” objections was Americans United for Life president Charmaine Yoest:

“Ideologically-driven recommendations became policy,” Yoest noted, “when the Obama Administration adopted the Institute of Medicine recommendations. Nearly every American will be forced to pay for the abortion-inducing drug ella in the name of ‘preventive care.’ In addition, the conscience rights of Americans who choose not to distribute life-ending prescriptions may be trampled.”

The “abortion-inducing drug” in question prevents uterine implantation of blastocysts for up to five days after conception, which is exactly the same as MURDERING INFANTS, as the above illustration makes clear. I’d give the pharmacists who think blastocyst = baby the same advice I’d give devout Muslims or Mormons who think drinking alcohol is a sin and yet aspire to be bartenders: Find another line of work.

Posted by Betty Cracker on 08/02/11 at 06:35 AM • Permalink

Categories: NewsPoliticsBarack ObamaBedwettersHealth CareNuttersRelijun

Share this post:  Share via Twitter   Share via BlinkList   Share via   Share via Digg   Share via Email   Share via Facebook   Share via Fark   Share via NewsVine   Share via Propeller   Share via Reddit   Share via StumbleUpon   Share via Technorati  

This is a very good thing. And it offers the tiny little extra benefit of provoking a K-Lo response which - much like a sand grain can provoke an irritated oyster to produce a pearl - brings forth the TBogg snark.

Seeing Pammycakes’ role as cheerleader for the Norwegian mass murderer (and lord knows who else out there) brought back memories of how Ol’ Splotchy served a similar role regarding the late Dr. George Tiller, a truly good man, whose patients’ accounts of what brought them to his clinic brought me to tears.

I’m sure K-Lo does a certain amount of damage in her own way, but I feel more pity for her.  I have nothing but disgust and contempt for O’Reilly and Geller, both of whom have blood on their hands - the blood of people who, unlike these media vampires, did a lot of good in their lives, even given the short duration of some of those lives.

Comment by meepmeep09 on 08/02/11 at 07:28 AM

You ladies aren’t the only one taking a moral risk. Let’s not forget:

If a sperm is wasted/God gets quite irate!

Love the title!

I have to go schedule my breast exam for August 2nd, 2012.

Great news. Really great news. I’ve got two teenage daughters. Changes in the law like this will really benefit them—and everyone who loves them.  Plus, added benefit, K Lo becomes hysterical.


Many women who get pregnant are blasted out of their minds when they have sex

Bill probably thinks this is the only time women have sex because it’s the only way they would ever have sex with him.

Obama Administration did us lady folks a solid:

They don’t mean it, though. You can tell.

Not to rain on the parade, but “religious” institutions can still deny their employees this new benefit under a moral exemption. There was something about it on NPR.

Well, they wouldn’t let me post this over there:

Would it be ok if I chose to withdraw my insurance pool payments from covering Catholics?  If not, why not? I disagree with many Catholic teachings on health care, and Catholic practices.  If Catholic health insurance purchasers want to purchase separate insurance to cover permanent imprisonment/torture of brain dead victims (like Terri Schiavo) against the wishes of their families, should they be forced to purchase them?  What about Catholic families who refuse to pay insurance premiums that pay for prenatal care for illegitimate babies? Should I, and other health care purchasers, refuse to allow those families to buy into our shared insurance pools? 

I’m a married woman with two children.  I fully support both contraception services and abortion services since I, unlike Kathryn Lopez, know perfectly well that the right to a therapeutic abortion might be the right to life, as opposed to death, to a married woman in a healthy, loving, monogamous relationship.  Should I have the right to refuse Kathryn Lopez and people like her insurance coverage for health care relating to their reproductive organs since she’s not married and not “using” them properly?

Health Insurance plans work, to the extent that they do, by pooling the risks of a large number of people.  Everyone is at risk for every disease either themselves or through family members. The notion that you can pick and choose what is covered because you don’t “need” or “approve” of the coverage is a childish and spiteful approach that harms everyone in the pool.  I would far prefer to exclude people like Kathryn Lopez from my health care pool than I would submit to the blackmail of having her remove her petty payments as a way of hurting all of us.

If Catholic Hospitals want to withdraw from offering needed services to everyone they are free to do so.  The medical field will simply open up to more doctors and nurses who truly care about their patients and don’t put ideology first.


Excellent comment, Aimai.

Thanks, Aimai; you’ve stated the argument perfectly. 

I’m glad to (1) see you commenting here more, and (2) being a voice of reason in another blog I frequent.

Oh thank you stringonastick, I enjoy your comments and your nym very much.  Your comments are always thoughtful, and your nym always makes me giggle—something that is often in short supply these days! 

I want to say again that I just really love *this* site,as well, of course, as alicublog.  Sometimes they are just the only thing that keeps me going and on an even keel.


Word, aimai.  If they want freedom of religion to mean they are free to discriminate based on their religion, then it should cut both ways.

And, Betty, I totally agree that if something is against one’s religion, a person should not be in that profession. 

As I said on another blog, to quote our VP, this is a big fucking deal.  But, AHCB doesn’t do anything for anyone, amirite?

Would it be ok if I chose to withdraw my insurance pool payments from covering Catholics.

No it wouldn’t. My kids are still in school, and they’re on my insurance—till 26, thanks to PPACA!

Wait four years… then, ok.

(All politics is really, really local.)

Christ, Betty, you are such a kool-aid guzzler. Clearly, this is all part of O’Bummer’s big payoff to Big Pharma!

(And as for the “conscience clause” thing, as always my answer is that I’m starting a new religion—The First United Church of Do Your Fucking Job, Asshole.)

Also, too, the fact that Obummer’s administration did this JUST AFTER I have a total hysterectomy is proof that they hippie-punched me in my phantom ovaries and threw me under the bus.

Page 1 of 1 pages

Sorry, commenting is closed for this post.

<< Back to main