Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Hillary Clinton: Bush Wants to Undermine Women's Rights
huffingtonpost.com — The Bush administration is up to its old tricks again, quietly putting ideology before science and women's health. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is poised to put in place new barriers to accessing common forms of contraception like birth control pills, emergency contraception and IUDs by labeling them "abortion."
MakiMaki- 948 diggs
- digg it
- Persian5Life, on 07/21/2008, -12/+44so i need to get with the times here are we still hating Hillary or are we liking her now?
- nnnick, on 07/21/2008, -9/+27read the article, it doesn't matter who the message is coming from, its the message that counts. Although, consider me warmer to HRC after reading it and a healthy dose of time heals everything.
- Rotzooi, on 07/21/2008, -4/+24Let me clue you in for the future: we like it when someone says (and does) the right thing.
- shutaro, on 07/21/2008, -14/+3Except for those of us who like it when someone says/does the left thing.
- boydrew, on 07/21/2008, -0/+17the truly ironic thing is that, traditionally, the ideology of conservatism is less government intrusion in the lives of the American people (I am a conservative in this sense). It seems that Bush consistently seeks to expand the government..... and that makes me unhappy
- dsmx, on 07/21/2008, -3/+1So that makes bush a democrat then?
- Cnat, on 07/22/2008, -7/+1Still hating...move along...nothing to see here
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1PUMA
- Shellius, on 07/22/2008, -2/+4You have to ask? People who hated Hillary were always losers. It was random hate. She's more progressive and pro-civil rights than Obama and now that fact is obvious. Look at the FISA vote.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Precisely! She has remained consistent on her platform positions. Great to see her continue with her policy positions.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Yes, liking her more and more, especially since the FISA vote. She is one that is keeping her word.
- danibobanny, on 07/21/2008, -14/+25I hate it when the Huffington Post is spot-on.
- t0x2c, on 07/21/2008, -8/+7Well not quite. I still hate Hillary for making this a case of "woman's rights". If, lets say, Bush put restrictions to accessing condoms or dumbbells it wouldn't be a violation of "man's rights", it would just be a regular violation of rights.
- whahaa, on 07/21/2008, -0/+1unfortunately correct. putting restrictions on accessing condoms or dumbells is not a specific violation of any Man Law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_Laws - kayala, on 07/21/2008, -0/+6Hmmmm... if Bush is trying to restrict access to contraceptives which can only be used by women, whose rights is he trampling on?
- spudhead, on 07/22/2008, -0/+4@Kayala
This is spot on. Birth control has provided a great source of empowerment for women.
- whahaa, on 07/21/2008, -0/+1unfortunately correct. putting restrictions on accessing condoms or dumbells is not a specific violation of any Man Law.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1yeah, but it took quite a while to get them to post the facts on this. Huffpo would rather lock up Hillary and toss the key. Shame on them.
- t0x2c, on 07/21/2008, -8/+7Well not quite. I still hate Hillary for making this a case of "woman's rights". If, lets say, Bush put restrictions to accessing condoms or dumbbells it wouldn't be a violation of "man's rights", it would just be a regular violation of rights.
- Jared4, on 07/21/2008, -18/+47Liking her. This is where we need her. In the senate. Nobody speaks on these issues better than her.
- GRTWHT, on 07/21/2008, -15/+3Was this a reply to something someone else posted?
- Naieve, on 07/21/2008, -3/+6I can think of many far better choices of women I would like in the Senate who would be better to speak on this issue and not a complete and utter political tool.
How quickly we forget the past transgressions of politicians.- Larsonal777, on 07/22/2008, -0/+2agreed
- Larsonal777, on 07/22/2008, -0/+2agreed
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Ah, but she would do even better as the President, seeking and endorsing the voice of the people. Dont ever (EVER EVER EVER) think BO will do that for you; he is totally juiced with corporate money from the US and abroad.
- GRTWHT, on 07/21/2008, -15/+3Was this a reply to something someone else posted?
- ginaswo, on 07/21/2008, -9/+38thank you Sen Clinton
- jodimcmullen, on 07/21/2008, -7/+40Liking her!!! The only bush I trust is my Own.
- cusoman, on 07/21/2008, -4/+14Did you name it "Own" or something?
- msheidi, on 07/22/2008, -0/+0own? what are the names of your two on your chest?
- Luvlacie, on 07/21/2008, -7/+27Senator Clinton is the best person on earth to speak out against this type of thing. We need her in the senate.
- chispito, on 07/21/2008, -10/+1Why?
- chinaman1212, on 07/21/2008, -6/+1what? i cant hear you with your head so far up her ass.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Ah, but she would do even better as the President, seeking and endorsing the voice of the people. Dont ever (EVER EVER EVER) think BO will do that for you; he is totally juiced with corporate money from the US and abroad.
- AwakeningAZ, on 07/21/2008, -13/+9I think Still President Bush is proof of devolution. And I think he just relabeled 'evolution' as 'monkey talk'.
- gquaglia, on 07/21/2008, -19/+4He's out in 6 mos, give it a rest.
- 180andback, on 07/21/2008, -6/+17The damage he's done will outlive his administration, and so I will go ahead and not give it a rest.
- gquaglia, on 07/21/2008, -13/+2And what are you going to do about it, damage is done, move on. Its like beating a dead horse.
- 180andback, on 07/21/2008, -1/+8@gquaglia: Oh, you're so right. I guess I'll just put on my pajamas and watch cartoons. No point crying over spilled milk and the stripping away of our rights and freedoms, eh?
- Rotzooi, on 07/21/2008, -5/+16and that makes everything okay?
- drmangrum, on 07/21/2008, -6/+2No, but if action isn't going to be taken then don't bitch out it. We all know Bush is by far the worst president ever, and one would hope he low point for a long time to come. Endless whining and finger pointing is asinine at this juncture. Now, if congress actually decides to throw his punk ass in jail, then by all means, layer on the accusations.
- joshblufs, on 07/21/2008, -0/+5how bout if we bitch till action is taken.....
- joshblufs, on 07/21/2008, -4/+116 months is enough time for him to do plenty of damage. Please pull your head out of your ass.
- gquaglia, on 07/21/2008, -6/+2Doubt it. Wait until douche bag Obama gets in and the safety of this country is entrusted to someone who has had less then 6 experience in politics
- 180andback, on 07/21/2008, -0/+4@gquaglia: I had a feeling you were an idiot. Now I've got evidence.
- mrsteveman1, on 07/21/2008, -4/+12Yea, silly people wanting to prevent him from screwing things on the way out. We should just sit back and let him do whatever he wants. ***** idiot.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Not even jokingly call Hillary silly. She is one of the most serious thinkers I have ever come across. She has a funny side to her but she will never reduce/ridicule/marginalize a serious topic.
Meanwhile, I know you are being facitious (or however it is spelled). And I agree with the part that relates to Bush.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Not even jokingly call Hillary silly. She is one of the most serious thinkers I have ever come across. She has a funny side to her but she will never reduce/ridicule/marginalize a serious topic.
- 180andback, on 07/21/2008, -6/+17The damage he's done will outlive his administration, and so I will go ahead and not give it a rest.
- dcollins, on 07/21/2008, -24/+20Can you set digg filters to block huff post submissions?
- btschul, on 07/21/2008, -8/+8I ***** wish. It would be called the "Liberal Propaganda *****" filter.
- smash20, on 07/21/2008, -15/+20Lol, women's rights.
- Congobongo, on 07/21/2008, -2/+6Equal rights equal fights? Am I right
- whahaa, on 07/21/2008, -3/+0human rights.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Nothing to laugh about. In particular, a community where woman has to find her man and the right man for herself, it is a difficult issue.
If it was all arranged marriage, that is another story. But I know that even in India amongst arranged marriage communities, birth control is common.
So, it is indeed about women's rights.. and no laughing matter.
- rudeboyskunk, on 07/21/2008, -9/+15Are we really surprised at this point? Every day I go online and see two or three stories about something else terrible Bush has done, and it no longer angers me the way it used to, just because I'm that used to him doing it, and I'm that used to nobody in our government standing up to him.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1That's what we get when we hire a thin resume to the office. The person starts to pretend they are divinity's next coming.
- jabberwolf, on 07/21/2008, -14/+7Huffington
Anything on Bush,,, even if it's Hillary who we hate.
And of there isnt a story, we will MAKE one! - physicsguy, on 07/21/2008, -11/+26Correction: Bush wants to undermine HUMAN rights.
- ruddy, on 07/21/2008, -7/+1but not the one aborted
- jessehadden, on 07/21/2008, -0/+6Read the article. This is about re-labeling contraceptives as "abortions." No one and no thing is being aborted. Essentially, Mr. Bush wishes to outlaw sex for any reason other than procreation. This is just a roundabout manner of corrupting American law to more resemble the ancient wicked laws of Mr. Bush's evil god, who describes himself as a "jealous god."
- ruddy, on 07/21/2008, -4/+1True, except for what the author defines as "emergency contraceptives", meaning morning after pills. Now that would technically be "abortion", and no longer a "contraceptive".
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Yes, as in FISA and Patriot Act and other things.. that Obama has voted for as well.
- ruddy, on 07/21/2008, -7/+1but not the one aborted
- ExRe, on 07/21/2008, -5/+18I don't think it's just women's rights Bush wants to take away...
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Yes, it is the woman's rights that are affected for the most part.
Yes, the men who want to have fun but want to ensure that the woman does not get pregnant, but wants to put the responsibility on the woman is probably also affected.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Yes, it is the woman's rights that are affected for the most part.
- drycounty, on 07/21/2008, -3/+12MUST SIGN THIS. Don't go Dark Ages in 2008.
- flogistan, on 07/21/2008, -8/+3Isn't there other stuff to criticize bush for that should be higher on the priority list, and yet, nobody but Dennis Kucinich will even talk about?
- Suricou, on 07/21/2008, -0/+5I think that using sneaky political tricks to deny access to contraception is quite an important thing to publicise.
- wizzroom, on 07/21/2008, -10/+7HRC writing for the HuffPost, my, my how times have changed.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1HRC writing elsewhere and with much goading Huffpo posts. Times are much the same.
- shutaro, on 07/21/2008, -3/+18George Bush does not like Female people.
- Suricou, on 07/21/2008, -0/+7He likes them perfectly well, so long as they stay in their proper place: At home, doing the housework and ensuring their husband comes home to a well-cooked meal every day.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1And no offense to those women who do that homekeeper role either. There are many women who are in exactly that place who still need birth control.
Otherwise, you will be like my well educated and degreed mother in law - 10 children PLUS 2 still born; each within 1.5 yrs of each other.
On top of supporting the in-laws (brothers and sisters of husband) we could afford only 1 kid.
No kidding.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1And no offense to those women who do that homekeeper role either. There are many women who are in exactly that place who still need birth control.
- Shellius, on 07/22/2008, -1/+1Neither did Obama's super fans.
- Suricou, on 07/21/2008, -0/+7He likes them perfectly well, so long as they stay in their proper place: At home, doing the housework and ensuring their husband comes home to a well-cooked meal every day.
- dracostimpy, on 07/21/2008, -6/+6The interesting thing is that this article says nothing about Heath Ledger, even though it's well-known that he was a huge supporter of women's rights. I had the privilege of exchanging a few words with him once, and I remember him saying to me, "dracostimpy my dear old friend, the one thing I've always tried to do in life is to give women all the respect and birth control pills and jobs and even letting them vote that they deserve because that's just how much I, Heath Ledger, care about the womenfolk." True story.
- Dundasbro, on 07/21/2008, -0/+1Was he particularly serious about it at the time though?
- dracostimpy, on 07/21/2008, -0/+1Dude, he was all like right up in my ear with his arms around me and whispering it ever so softly because he knew the anti-feminists were watching him. I promised I'd take the secret to my grave, but I figure now that he's dead, the truth should be set free. Part of me wonders if he might have lived longer had he let me tell the world that he supports women's rights and *****, especially after what happened to the DC Madame. Anyhow, Heath will forever live on as the better Joker; that's for sure. Cesar Romero was okay, I guess...
- mlagana, on 07/21/2008, -0/+3and his acting in batman as the joker was like, on the endge of the seatt!
- dracostimpy, on 07/21/2008, -1/+1OMG I KNOW! Totally mind-blowing performance... I'm catching a lot of slack from the Nicholsonians in the other threads like "Bush Pushed Maliki to Drop His Support for Obama's Iraq Plan" and "Rabbi believes he has unveiled a secret of God", so it's a relief that I've finally found a fellow Heather out there. Jack must be paying a fortune for the army he's hiring to digg me down when the WORLD knows Heath is the better Joker BY FAR! Hear that Academy? OSCAR OR BLOW ME!
- Dundasbro, on 07/21/2008, -0/+1Was he particularly serious about it at the time though?
- AlbinoRaven, on 07/21/2008, -15/+6Why is anyone talking about this woman?
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1She is doing her job and doing it well. Find a way to support her.
The work she is doing encourages me to liberate her of her pesky debt.
All, please help Hillary with her primary debt. www.hillaryclinton.com CONTRIBUTE.
Let us help her focus on things that are important, like this one.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1She is doing her job and doing it well. Find a way to support her.
- laserdog, on 07/21/2008, -2/+12This is such a smart move by the GOP.
Roe v Wade withstanding, they've essentially made abortion logistically impossible to get in all the conservative states.
The test bed for this was the "rebranding" of a medical procedure as "partial birth abortion".
Now if they rebrand birth control the same way, suddenly they've blown wind back into long silent windmills, and all the crazies who have had to find meaning in heckling young girls at the one abortion clinic in the state will have a whole myriad of fresh targets.- freedomkeeper, on 07/21/2008, -5/+0I know what you mean. Just because it LOOKS like baby and has heartbeat and all that, does really make it one.
/s- Suricou, on 07/21/2008, -0/+1I can't even work out what side you are on.
- laserdog, on 07/23/2008, -0/+1I think he was referring to my "partial birth abortion" bit.
If so, allow me to retort:
Because banning medical procedures regardless of the health of the mother is exactly the sort of decision congress should be making.
/s
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1John McCain support birth control through insurance. Carly Fiorina has assured us of this.
- freedomkeeper, on 07/21/2008, -5/+0I know what you mean. Just because it LOOKS like baby and has heartbeat and all that, does really make it one.
- SaperKain, on 07/21/2008, -8/+11If John McCain becomes president all women should consider sex change operation. The conservatives will have 7-2 majority in the Supreme Court meaning that Row Vs. Wade is going bye bye. Next thing on the agenda will be overturning women right to vote.
- Fragle1980, on 07/21/2008, -6/+9What happened to gynecologists practicing their love of woman…?
- LukasSmith, on 07/21/2008, -19/+6Hillary and Bush are both History. More Obama spam please, huffington post.
- JoeJim, on 07/21/2008, -11/+7Wow. The undiluted vitriol that this woman was met with until she dropped out of the race can not be reconciled with some of the comments here, yet many of the commentators are the same. Pathetic, even by digg's rapidly descending standards.
- trackerbishop, on 07/21/2008, -13/+2are you all dumb enough to eat this up? the clintons and the bush's are friends. if hillary was a real feminist and was really angry over bush trying to take away women's rights she wouldn't be.
more political football from our two party sham system designed to polarize voters. - btschul, on 07/21/2008, -17/+2Hillary doesn't give a ***** about women's rights. She has enough money that things like this don't affect her (and she is so ***** butt ugly even her husband won't ***** her anymore, so birth control isn't really even an issue for her). She saw an opportunity to get some publicity, and she took it. She is just a selfish, power hungry attention whore who will say anything to keep from drifting into obscurity.
- mlagana, on 07/21/2008, -2/+4way off
- briLo, on 07/21/2008, -11/+0Hillary.........I thought I told you to shut your face last month!?!?!??!
- thedogfatherx, on 07/21/2008, -14/+3Huffington Post? Piss on it. Pass. I think I need to start a liberal news site that spews ***** everyday. Everybody eats it up. I could give thousands of people orgasms everyday! It would be great.
- plecostomus, on 07/21/2008, -4/+16Here's a not exactly completely relevant story but anyway...
The first time I went to an OBGYN I was 17, and I wanted birth control. My doctor walked in wearing a cross and I almost did an actual facepalm, but I gave her the benefit of the doubt as we began our little conversation about my sexual history (which was, at the time, nada). I mean, just because she's an OBGYN wearing a cross to work doesn't mean she's a religious whacko trying to enforce her twisted view of the world on other women right?
.....
After a few uncomfortable conversations about abstinence I mentioned that I had a problem getting birth control before with (insert imaginary doctor here) because that doctor was religious. Then in an "oh, what's that?" moment I made a guess that she had religious objections to me having sex. She said "well I do believe in abstinence because our lord Jesus Christ...(etc)" but "there are also some health ramifications to having sex." At this point, despite exaggerating the conditions of my period (birth control can be used to regulate that as well as the whole pregnancy bit), it didn't look like I could convince her to give me any birth control. So I switched tactics.
She asked "Are you sexually active?"
I portrayed myself as a 17-year-old chain-smoking sexaholic (who has mysteriously never gotten pregnant or had any STDs). The kind of person that I think Diggers might say "shouldn't breed in the first place." Apparently this lady agrees. She finally gave me a trial of Yasmin after I chickened out at getting an o-ring type of birth control. I was worried that she might notice the whole "virgin" thing during the exam, but if she did she didn't say anything.
The only time I ever returned to that particular clinic was to pick up the test results for STDs from the sex I never had.- floridiot2, on 07/21/2008, -6/+2Wait.. why did you want birth control again?
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1So she can start finding an appropriate mate, you moron!
this society has only one approach to finding their match in life.. you have to get to know people.. and that may lead to sex.
Now, 17 may be a bit early.. but I can understand the situation. What if she has found a boyfriend?
And by the way, I am near 50 and was raised in conservative society in India. And, I am not an proponent of early sex. But, I think girls even at 17 should have the option to make their own decisions on this matter. I'd rather they do this and hold an unexpected kid at 18.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1So she can start finding an appropriate mate, you moron!
- freedomkeeper, on 07/21/2008, -5/+1So, the first time I went to the proctologist, I was like 20. and I wanted a rectal exam. My doctor walked in and he had rainbow necklace on; I almost ***** my pants...
/s - thebigshane, on 07/22/2008, -4/+1Yay, lying to doctors for birth control is cool.
- amoirae, on 07/22/2008, -1/+4Just like doctors lying to patients about birth control and sex is "cool", *****.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1It is not. It should not happen. There should not be any guilt associated with it.
That is just the point.
- floridiot2, on 07/21/2008, -6/+2Wait.. why did you want birth control again?
- rjseals, on 07/21/2008, -17/+4Abortion stops a beating heart.
It's a child not a choice.
Guns don't kill people, abortion clinics kill people.
I survived Roe V. Wade.
Choose life, your mother did.
So you're for abortion but against killing terrorists?
It's easy to be pro-choice when you're not the one getting killed.
Abortion is murder.- Hetman, on 07/21/2008, -3/+10What does that have to do with contraceptives? When I wack off I do not consider myself a mass murderer.
- mlagana, on 07/21/2008, -1/+10you must be the sign maker of the group!!
- KeillRandor, on 07/21/2008, -5/+1Depends how late/early the abortion is...
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Sometimes, you just dont know... e.g., I was in my 4th month of pregnancy when I realized I was pregnant; it took a doctor's test to say so. We wanted to have a baby for so long that it was a great positive news.
But my point is that you dont always know and cannot always make a decision on this within 3 months.
There are many situations where health circumstances call for termination of pregnancy further into pregnancy.
And, I would rather people dont bring kid to the world at the cusp of a dividing family; it is terrible punishment on the kid, often for life.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Sometimes, you just dont know... e.g., I was in my 4th month of pregnancy when I realized I was pregnant; it took a doctor's test to say so. We wanted to have a baby for so long that it was a great positive news.
- floridiot2, on 07/21/2008, -1/+5So if there isn't a heart to stop beating, is it still murder?
- kayala, on 07/21/2008, -0/+7I might have slightly more respect for you if any of those lines were an original thought. No such luck. I might also have slightly more respect for you if any of those lines were rationally based, not designed for emotional manipulation. Again, no such luck. Piss off.
- barstegry, on 07/21/2008, -13/+3HiIlary + Huffington = buried
- 32bytes, on 07/21/2008, -7/+2I read:
Hillary Clinton's bush wants to Undermine Women's Rights. - raybury, on 07/21/2008, -11/+1Wow, Hillary is disingenuous. What the White House is doing is allowing freedom of conscience, saying that medical agencies that receive funding may not discriminate against doctors or nurses who have a consciencious objection to participating in abortion, including those who view abortion as including preventing the implantation of a fertilized egg.
The problem with this is that it attempts to delineate along the lines of personal belief. It violates Robert Jackson's ruling that "if there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion." The proposed guideline would, as best I can tell, prevent discrimination against a Catholic doctor might have an objection to prescribing an implantation-preventing contraceptive (a contraimplantation pill), and an objection to using, but not to presribing, a fertilization-preventing contraceptive. But it would not prevent discrimination against a Catholic doctor (or an Athiest doctor) who objects to prescribing both the "abortive" type and the "non-abortive" type of contraception.
This is much easier when dealing with privately-owned pharmacies than with programs with a focus on reproductive health. But as usual, Bush's opponents are attacking on the wrong point.- kayala, on 07/21/2008, -0/+6This is kind of ridiculous. Why would you hire a person that's not going to do their job correctly? An overly sympathetic person who gets hired as a repo man is going to have to choose between their conscience and their job; in this case, it's far more serious because a woman's health is at risk. If your conscience prevents you from providing decent medical care to women in need, then pick another career! This is the logical equivalent of a conscientious objector in the military demanding to be put on the front lines, gun in hand, and then not be punished for refusing to fire at the enemy. Why would we reward or even tolerate that?
- raybury, on 07/22/2008, -3/+1Because government is already too involved in medicine, The proposed rule would apply to any medical practice or hospital receiving government funding (read: almost all), not solely reproductive health clinics. Hopefully there would be some self-selection by doctors. This is a tough thing because some Americans really do view some types of contraception, and anything you would call abortion, as murder, and certainly don't want to pay for it, nor to see their money denied to someone BECAUSE he agrees with them.
- kayala, on 07/22/2008, -0/+3I do not find that acceptable in the least. If popular opinion is that contraception is abortifacient, then popular opinion is factually wrong and should be treated as such. We should not be made to pay for the ignorance of others.
- kayala, on 07/21/2008, -0/+6This is kind of ridiculous. Why would you hire a person that's not going to do their job correctly? An overly sympathetic person who gets hired as a repo man is going to have to choose between their conscience and their job; in this case, it's far more serious because a woman's health is at risk. If your conscience prevents you from providing decent medical care to women in need, then pick another career! This is the logical equivalent of a conscientious objector in the military demanding to be put on the front lines, gun in hand, and then not be punished for refusing to fire at the enemy. Why would we reward or even tolerate that?
- scamper22, on 07/21/2008, -7/+0Obligatory Ron Paul promo:
Well, why do you need to go to your doctor to get birth control in the first place? Why can you just pick up the pills at any store? This isn't surgery here folks.
Then all these women's groups could hand out birth control by themselves. They wouldn't need to force a OBGYN to go against their beliefs.- scamper22, on 07/21/2008, -2/+0Not to trivialize it, but since this is DIGG. Imagine if the federal government mandated a law that said software engineers are required to implement DRM whether they agreed with it or not. They could not refuse to provide DRM.
You'd be upset too.
I don't have a problem with birth control or abortion, but if some doctor has a belief that they don't agree with birth control, who am I to force them into it? Let them have their beliefs and you can go elsewhere.
The fact that Clinton is for big healthcare instead of liberating healthcare from the monopolies means she is the cause of the very problem she talks about. What she's pointing to is just a sympton of her own policies.- phrenzy, on 07/21/2008, -0/+3Yeah, to hell with professional responsibilities. I mean, if a police officer has a belief that they "dont agree" that honor killings are bad, just call some other police officer! J
Also, Maybe muslim Doctors should be allowed to refuse to treat female patients when they are menstruating..
ass. - Morchades, on 07/22/2008, -0/+3No, this is the equivalent of a peace activist joining the military and refusing to shoot the enemy
- phrenzy, on 07/21/2008, -0/+3Yeah, to hell with professional responsibilities. I mean, if a police officer has a belief that they "dont agree" that honor killings are bad, just call some other police officer! J
- doublethink84, on 07/21/2008, -0/+3Because many birth controls can cause liver damage if ingested by a person with a drinking problem or weak liver.
Hardly any medicine or medication comes without its potential dangers, we need to know what we are taking and be aware every effect that it will have on us. - kayala, on 07/21/2008, -0/+2I'd say because it's probably not a good idea to mess with the hormones in your body without a doctor's consultation. Birth control pills do carry some risks, for instance, the risk of deep-vein thrombosis is raised. A woman who is already predisposed to DVT would want her doctor to know that and keep that in mind when recommending a specific type of birth control. What's more, having a doctor there to answer questions is much better than drawing from inference things that aren't specifically listed in the instructions on the package.
- scamper22, on 07/22/2008, -1/+1take all the doctors, nurses, pharmacists, other health professionals, you don't think you could find one to give you proper advice about birth control? Liberate the medical system and these people would take the charge. Do you really think in reality doctors pay attention to every single birth control prescription they give out?
And this is not to say you shouldn't consult a doctor. If you want to and you think its neccessary... go right ahead. What is not right is to force a doctor to go against their beliefs. Especially a belief that they think is saving the life of the unborn child.
Sorry, the police analogy is just off. The police are the only people trusted by society to use force against citizens. They are special in that sense. - kayala, on 07/22/2008, -0/+2Why would you begin taking a medication about which you know very little without a consultation from a medical professional? Yes, sir, I do think that doctors pay attention to every single prescription they hand out, period, because if they don't, they'll get their asses sued off. That's called malpractice or criminal negligence.
I'll tell you what is not right: a doctor thinking that their beliefs trump another woman's health and safety. Or any professional charged with the care of their fellow man thinking that their personal "moral values" trump the health and safety of the people they've sworn to protect. That's not moral at all, and that's completely unethical. I think that doctors who violate their duties, which in this case would include family planning, should have their licenses revoked. Why the hell would a "conscientious objector" be working at a family planning clinic, anyway? The only thing a person like that could do would be screw up a woman's life by telling her that she can't get the birth control or abortion that she needs. If you don't believe in the morality of the job, then pick another ***** job.
- scamper22, on 07/22/2008, -1/+1take all the doctors, nurses, pharmacists, other health professionals, you don't think you could find one to give you proper advice about birth control? Liberate the medical system and these people would take the charge. Do you really think in reality doctors pay attention to every single birth control prescription they give out?
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Not that simple. It has prescription ingredients. + There are many alternatives to pills.
- scamper22, on 07/21/2008, -2/+0Not to trivialize it, but since this is DIGG. Imagine if the federal government mandated a law that said software engineers are required to implement DRM whether they agreed with it or not. They could not refuse to provide DRM.
- Redraf, on 07/21/2008, -10/+1It annoys me that she says its women's rights being infringed upon, as if men's rights aren't being infringed upon. I really friggin hate that.
- kayala, on 07/21/2008, -1/+6Think for just a second. If Bush is trying to restrict access to contraceptives that only women can use, whose rights do you think he is trampling on in that case...?
- jellygraph, on 07/21/2008, -3/+6hahaha... It's not just women... Bush wants to undermine _everyones_ rights (except for his rich buddies)
- Morchades, on 07/22/2008, -0/+2Yeah, but in this particular case it's women. That's the attention getter.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Seems that you dont want to give it any attention? Because it is women?
- Morchades, on 07/22/2008, -0/+2Yeah, but in this particular case it's women. That's the attention getter.
- thatevilcupcake, on 07/21/2008, -4/+1Interesting, but is there a link to the actual legislation she's talking about? The first paragraph suggests that this would be outlawing all contraception, but later in the article it sounds like it's only referring to the Morning After pill. I would be very interested in looking at the verbage of the proposed legislation and what it's actually suggesting before I completely freak out.
- Suricou, on 07/21/2008, -0/+2I would like to see too, but based on my knowledge of contraception and my extensive experience of pro-life propaganda:
Morning after pill: Definatly out.
IUD: Definatly out.
Barrier contraception: Definatly safe, at least from the reclassify-as-abortion approach.
Hormonal contraception (The Pill, injections): Probably safe.- Suricou, on 07/21/2008, -0/+3Oh, note the particular importance of the morning after pill as it's the only means of preventing pregnency after sex - thus it's oftoen offered to rape victims. If I am interpreting this correctly, then one of the impacts of the proposed changes will be that no hospital or medical program getting federal funding will be able to offer this pill. Get raped and go to hospital? Sorry, you're screwed. Be a good Christian and have the rapists baby.
- Suricou, on 07/21/2008, -0/+2I would like to see too, but based on my knowledge of contraception and my extensive experience of pro-life propaganda:
- uberchaoslord, on 07/21/2008, -4/+5The GOP realizes that you americans will need all the little soldiers you can if you're gonna keep fighting terrorism the way they have been :)
- Suricou, on 07/21/2008, -0/+6I know you are joking, but this is actually a serious concern of the religious right - they worry that if Americans don't breed fast enough, the Muslims will overrun the country(/world) through simple demographics because of their high birth rates. They point to Europe as an example of what happens to cultures that don't make enough babies.
- msheidi, on 07/22/2008, -1/+0who is the ubiquitous 'they". we "americans' cannot catch up quickly enough anyhow, so keep buying that birth control. the life you may prevent is your child.
- Suricou, on 07/23/2008, -0/+2I would have thought the 'they' quite obviously refers to the 'religious right' mentioned earlier in the sentence.
The breeding war is a bad idea. All it does is result in excessive resource use, and there is no way America or Europe can out-breed anyway - we expect women to recieve an education and give them the possibility of a career, how can we compete with cultures where they are married off at twenty or younger to start churning out babies?
- Suricou, on 07/21/2008, -0/+6I know you are joking, but this is actually a serious concern of the religious right - they worry that if Americans don't breed fast enough, the Muslims will overrun the country(/world) through simple demographics because of their high birth rates. They point to Europe as an example of what happens to cultures that don't make enough babies.
- AlienMushroom, on 07/21/2008, -5/+1It's like saying terrorists wants to kill Americans.
- Zuggy, on 07/21/2008, -0/+10I've said it before and I'll say it again. Pushing an abstinence only agenda is stupid. In this case not only will it keep birth control away from women that want to plan childhood but it keeps birth control away from women that need it for other health reasons. It's bad for health, it can lead to unwanted children and broken homes.
Bush is the christian equivalent of muslim extremists. He wants to rule the world under a male dominated christian society, where women have no rights and the only law we follow is the one givenin the Holy Bible- Kzoo, on 07/22/2008, -1/+2"In this case not only will it keep birth control away from women that want to plan childhood but it keeps birth control away from women that need it for other health reasons."
Wish I could dig you up more for this. I was unaware of this sort of use before it was prescribed for me, and I suspect a great many other people are unaware as well. I'd be curious at the proportion of women who use birth control off label vs. normal use.
- Kzoo, on 07/22/2008, -1/+2"In this case not only will it keep birth control away from women that want to plan childhood but it keeps birth control away from women that need it for other health reasons."
- blipblipbeep, on 07/21/2008, -4/+0Ah bush you did it again. You kidder
What a joke.- msheidi, on 07/22/2008, -0/+1I don't buy that he is doing anything like that. (congress is under democrat control remember) She is keeping her name alive and waiting in the wings just incase something happens to open the slot for the presidential candidate or vp.
- crackberri, on 07/21/2008, -9/+2Sorry Hitler lovers, buried as Huffspam….
- NonLeftistDiggr, on 07/21/2008, -9/+2For caring so much about women's rights she sure FKed up Bill's mistresses.
- induren, on 07/21/2008, -6/+2I like the fact that she's speaking out about things now... this style of effective, impassioned denunciation would have won her the nomination. Instead she triangulated, just like Obama is doing now. Woeful.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1She spoke up all the time. The media did not amplify her voice. It has taken a LOT of work to get Huffpo to post this one - work from supporters pushing for the post to come out. Huffpo would rather lock her up and toss away the key. It is disgraceful how media is simply not journalistic anymore and it takes so much effort to get them to post the actual facts.
- phrenzy, on 07/21/2008, -5/+1Ahh, that old joke...
Q: What's George Bush's position on Roe v. Wade?
A: ??- Suricou, on 07/21/2008, -1/+3"I'll have it overturned 'tomorrow.'"
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1No one will shake R v. W. It is simply not the smart thing to do.
Now, partial and full birth abortion that Obama favors.. that everyone will watch closely.
And of course high taxes that Obama is proposing, that certainly is something that everyone will care about.
- eccitante, on 07/21/2008, -5/+2He has undermined everyones rights... where was she when it mattered?
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1She was fighting hard. We know. We live in NY state. She has been a rock and our party has failed to embrace the best thing that came along. Hillary Clinton can win against John McCain but Obama cannot. Our party has failed us once again.
- skmckinny, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1She is doing her job and doing it well. Find a way to support her.
The work she is doing encourages me to liberate her of her pesky debt.
All, please help Hillary with her primary debt. www.hillaryclinton.com CONTRIBUTE.
Let us help her focus on things that are important, like this one.
- iamnotrich, on 07/21/2008, -4/+6a positive story about Hillary on the huffpo.?
oh I forgot she is not running against obama anymore. - phrenzy, on 07/22/2008, -4/+1Nah - the answer is:
"He doesn't care HOW they get out of New Orleans"- msheidi, on 07/22/2008, -0/+1it wasn't his job to personally go and rescue those people. chain of command started squarely with the mayor and then the governor. THEY DROPPED THE BALL.
- bjbprice, on 07/22/2008, -2/+13Thanks, Hillary! We're glad you are still doing your progressive leadership role for us. Never give up!
-
Show 51 - 61 of 61 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by