I'm not a single issue voter, and yes, this election will be mostly determined by economic policy issues. But could you vote for someone who supports (or claims to support) "personhood" laws that would make hormonal birth control illegal?
Would you vote for a candidate who supports outlawing hormonal birth control?
Quote:
Took the words right from me. I would be absolutely against it/them!
Originally posted by
indiglo
I would be bedridden 2-3 weeks each month if hormonal bc were outlawed... so I would not support anyone who thought it should be. I can't imagine why anyone would want to outlaw it anyway.
Jan 13, 5:16 pm
Quote:
Has a candidate said this? That would be crazy!
Originally posted by
Rawhide
I'm not a single issue voter, and yes, this election will be mostly determined by economic policy issues. But could you vote for someone who supports (or claims to support) "personhood" laws that would make hormonal birth control illegal?
Jan 13, 6:21 pm
Quote:
Some people are against forms of birth control that only prevent implantation, rather than fertilization. In that case, they would be for condoms, sterilization, and forms of birth control that prevent the release of an egg, or prevent the fertilization of that egg.
Originally posted by
Silverdrop
My understanding is that people who are opposed to birth control are opposed to all forms of it - surgical, hormonal, and barrier methods. I've never heard anyone say they were opposed to pills but not condoms.
Jan 13, 9:39 pm
Quote:
Absolutely not.
Originally posted by
Rawhide
I'm not a single issue voter, and yes, this election will be mostly determined by economic policy issues. But could you vote for someone who supports (or claims to support) "personhood" laws that would make hormonal birth control illegal?
Jan 14, 1:27 am
Many current Republican candidates for president have gone on record in support for "personhood" amendments, which would outlaw hormonal birth control, among other things. That group includes "Massachusetts moderate" Mitt Romney, even though you know he's just saying that to pander to conservatives. He'll take any position that suits him at the time. But somehow, that makes me even angrier.
Jan 14, 3:22 am
The Republican part is too entrenched in theology for me to consider voting for any of them, anyway.
I have nothing against religion, but it doesn't belong as a lawmaker any more.
It's a shame, really, but I just can't overlook their horrific stances on quasi-religious matters to listen to anything else they're saying because until they cut that out, I couldn't bring myself to vote for them, anyway.
I wrote a small essay on abortion once, and it's a very tricky subject and I don't believe either stereotypical party is going about things exactly the right way.
Meh.
Politics. :/
I have nothing against religion, but it doesn't belong as a lawmaker any more.
It's a shame, really, but I just can't overlook their horrific stances on quasi-religious matters to listen to anything else they're saying because until they cut that out, I couldn't bring myself to vote for them, anyway.
I wrote a small essay on abortion once, and it's a very tricky subject and I don't believe either stereotypical party is going about things exactly the right way.
Meh.
Politics. :/
Jan 14, 4:47 am
Quote:
My sister is the same way. Poor thing even throws up when she isn't on hormonal bc.
Originally posted by
indiglo
I would be bedridden 2-3 weeks each month if hormonal bc were outlawed... so I would not support anyone who thought it should be. I can't imagine why anyone would want to outlaw it anyway.
Jan 25, 12:22 am
