Pro-life vid of day: Hobby Lobby protesters are ill-informed
by Hans Johnson
With political leaders like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) saying that the Hobby Lobby case, which prevailed by a 5-4 vote in the Supreme Court, was based on “vague moral objections”, it’s no wonder that much of the public is also ignorant of the issues at stake. Of the 20 federally approved contraceptives to be subsidized, only four were objected to because they crossed the line from preventative to potentially abortifacient methods.
The Daily Signal interviewed protesters of the Court’s decision, showing which side really has “vague moral objections”:
[youtube]http://youtu.be/5JSwxcVt3e0[/youtube]
Email dailyvid@jillstanek.com with your video suggestions.
[HT: Kelli]
Jul.02, 2014 12:00 pm |
Video of the day |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Even Alan Dershowitz, who is about as liberal as someone can get, said that the decision is limited in its scope, yet some people are going hysterical.
The IUD is an abortifacient. That is its primary mechanism. Wow NOW ladies…put down the signs and learn a little.
It is not about what is actually true. Marxist strategy is about cultivating divisiveness between groups, and forming the idea that one group is down-trodden or oppressed, suffering under the social position and power of the superior group.
This way of thinking has been around so long that people just accept the next exposure of injustice.
Our friends and associates on facebook have been posting with equal ignorance – and NONE have decently responded to corrective, accurate information politely posted. However, these corrective comments have been getting “like”s from other facebook friends of these “friended” facebook friends of ours.
This tells me it is likely that those who are receptive to this line of political rhetoric are emotionally invested, or hooked, while others who have not bought the “oppression of women” argument are not blinded by the political jingo-ism, and can still use their faculties of reason.
Faux-chohontas Elizabeth Warren is a presidential contender. This explains why her views have been noted in national stories lately.
The democratic powers-that-be are in a hard place right now: Hiraly has a great deal of built-in support among demo voters as the prez nominee, but the powers-that-be are aware of a lot of negatives that will be thrown out there if she gets the nomination –
including, there is a lot on the Clantons that has not been aired in the major media much, or at all. -and Hiraly cannot distance herself from Bill, since Hiraly was so integrated in his political life from day 1 – she was intimately involved in their first two efforts, upon Bill’s election: first was Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in the military, then was healthcare reform, where Hiraly was very prominent.
She has also been connected in the funny financial deals, and in the bundling of campaign money from Red China.
So, the demo party has to figure out whether they can promote her, or, alternately, ease her out of the picture despite huge popularity amongst democrats, such as the huge PUMA (“party unity my a zz”) group that stayed faithful when Obama superceded her in the prez nomination process.
If the republicans or conservatives could figure out how to function at the national level, they could grab this one easy, unless someone as popular as Hiraly is the nominee. This is the dilemma for the democrats right now.
Myself, I believe we need yet another Marxist in the White House – the general populace has not yet realized how harmful these Marxists-marketed-as-democrats are, and we will not be free from this until it is again generally recognized that we should stay away from these reds.
A lot have, but not enough. In the long-term, we will be better to elect yet another Red, like Warren, rather than for the reds to keep simmering along, forming more victim groups and becoming more entrenched via entitlements and govt-funded money-laundering scams like the Planned Parenthood Medicaid fraud-to-election-coffer cycle.
They didnt even know what they were there for.
Yes. Potentially. We don’t even know.
So the case comes down to activist judges overturning a law by saying corporations are people, and this person believes something to be immoral, whether or not it truly is.
It’s quite startling actually.
Well, Sydney, we don’t know that IUDs are abortifacient. There’s evidence that effect would be negligible if at all. Copper IUDs are toxic to sperm, destroy the vast majority of them before they get anywhere near the ovum, and there’s little evidence that fertilization occurs at all, much less as a primary action. Actually ALL the evidence points away from IUDs acting as a post-fertilization mechanism primarily or even at all.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17531610
So yeah, exactly what I was saying. Toxic to sperm and ovum. There’s not much evidence that fertilizations occur at anything other than negligible amounts, and it’s false by all the evidence to say that IUDs destroy embryos as a primary mechanism.
That doesn’t mean people cannot be opposed to them of course, if you believe that a .00001% or whatever chance that a zygote could be formed and die in a hostile womb is immoral, definitely don’t use them or support their use. Because the evidence suggests that is a possible mechanism. It’s definitely not a primary mechanism though, and it’s false to say so.
I would like to know if IUD users actually have lower rates of embryos dying in their wombs than people using no protection at all, because that’s pretty common especially with women with stress and anxiety or other things going on. Not saying it’s great to use IUDs, I’m just curious about which method ends up with less dead babies.
The IUD provides a hostile environment for a fertilized egg. I know it comes with risks like uterine perforation and you can also become pregnant with an IUD and it causes miscarriage.
Who’s Hiraly? Who are the Clantons?
“If the republicans or conservatives could figure out how to function at the national level, they could grab this one easy,” – oh well, there goes that hope.
“unless someone as popular as Hiraly is the nominee. This is the dilemma for the democrats right now.” – how is her being popular a dilemma for the dems?
“Myself, I believe we need yet another Marxist in the White House – the general populace has not yet realized how harmful these Marxists-marketed-as-democrats are, and we will not be free from this until it is again generally recognized that we should stay away from these reds.” – which appears to indicate that you don’t know what a marxist is.
Of the 20 federally approved contraceptives to be subsidized, only four were objected to because they crossed the line from preventative to potentially abortifacient methods.
The Supreme Court’s decisions on a number of cases yesterday indicate that they intend to allow “religious” for-profits to opt out of all contraception coverage, not merely the four methods that Hobby Lobby objected to.
“The Supreme Court’s decisions on a number of cases yesterday indicate that they intend to allow “religious” for-profits to opt out of all contraception coverage, not merely the four methods that Hobby Lobby objected to.”
Well, contraception, and anything else that people can however tenuously claim is a religious objection. Like I said, I’m expecting people to all of a sudden have all kinds of problems with all kinds of procedures or meds.
Deluded is it me or is this entire thing deluded? *Chuckle* I mean heck condoms are cheap AND prevent diseases. Also I dont really have a full understanding on this issue but with all the funding and $$$$$ PP has why dont women just drop it and GO THERE?! PP boasts free abortions at times and low cost and affordable healthcare is offered.
Well, PP isn’t free. I am pretty sure they are sliding scale. A lot of county health departments have free or low cost/sliding scale birth control of many varieties as well.
Honestly, I just want so many employers to start refusing to cover random things on “religious” objections to make universal healthcare happen quicker.
Eh I hated to say healthcare but PP does offer birth control paid for by welfare. Ik women who have gotten Plan B on Caresource. AKA medicaid. Abortions are done on welfare so what more to they want free?
Maybe young people don’t think they may also need diabetic care, cardiac care, rehab after disease or accident? Do they not see that nothing is free? If we pay for our own elective stuff, then our other care would be more fully covered, under this system. Birth control, especially of the abortifacients type, is pretty clearly elective, and neither the tax payer nor your employer should have to pay for it.
Sure, the gov’t does often fund abortion, but anyone who has needed public health care for something other than birth control can see how their care is inferior, and they’re not able to get better care because there’s not enough in the gov’t budget for it. People get denied the physical therapy that would help their bodies so somebody else can abort the baby they don’t want. It’s disgusting. People need to wake up.
Uh, my kids had public healthcare (and it was even in Florida where healthcare in general sucks if you’re not old or rich, preferably both), and it was fine. We have employer-provided insurance now and it’s fine too, don’t notice much difference either way. The public healthcare my kids got was good. And my babies certainly weren’t getting birth control, lol.
People get denied a lot of things under private healthcare too, a lot. Denying this is ridiculous. The public healthcare wasn’t where “pre-existing” conditions were created.
And still, absolutely no one will explain to me if our private healthcare system is awesome, and public healthcare so awful, why we have worse outcomes than pretty much ever other country in regards to healthcare (when most of them are universal care).
Yes Deluded…dont forget I used to be PC and I was a PP customer for 14 years. They do work on a sliding scale but medicaid also pays for Depo shots. If you pay out of pocket a Depo shot is 40$ every 3 months.
Also as Ive stated above IK women who have had Plan B covered under welfare and abortions. In some cases multiple abortions. And many abortion clinics add in same day birth control prescribed. However former Cleveland abortionist Martin Ruddocks clinic would not let women come in for just birth control. You had to be having an abortion first!
Birth control, especially of the abortifacients type, is pretty clearly elective, and neither the tax payer nor your employer should have to pay for it.
Pregnancies are elective. Do you believe that employers should be allowed to refuse to cover all maternity care, or only maternity care when the woman elected to become pregnant?
*Chuckle* I mean heck condoms are cheap AND prevent diseases.
And why would anyone want to use a more effective method of contraception? *Snicker*
Abortions are done on welfare so what more to they want free?
Even if it were true that Plan B causes abortion,
a) many women are not eligible for welfare, and
b) many women would prefer to use a different method.
So Lisa C I was a PP customer for 14 years. If you want another method an IUD lasts 7 to ten years. Go to PP and get it! Im sure you can afford a one time insertion. Im a nurse so PP went on my income and my BC was still dirt cheap. Im not promoting them but if they are so great then women should just go there and put a sock in it.
Im sure you can afford a one time insertion. Im a nurse so PP went on my income and my BC was still dirt cheap.
Things aren’t all about you, heather. Or about me.
[…] What Hobby Lobby will not cover are four contraceptive methods that its owners fear are abortifacients: […]