Post by Bayes on Apr 26, 2012 16:45:44 GMT
So the republicans lately have been doing a lot to restrict the freedoms of women, mostly in the reproductive sphere. There have been severe restrictions on abortion put into place, including Arizona's rather odd law that makes women technically pregnant whenever they aren't menstruating. There have been the laws in Mississippi that have some women in prison for miscarrying, and there is the other Arizona law that allows an employer to terminate a woman for using contraception.
One of the stated reasons for these actions is to cut down on sexual promiscuity, however if this is actually the goal then the way in which it is being carried out is odd. The ideal form of birth control for someone who is sexually promiscuous is condoms. Condoms protect against STD's, something which women's contraception such as the pill and IUD's do not do. Condoms are also something that is used as needed and the promiscuous usually do not know exactly who they will be having sex with or when until fairly close to the actual occurence. For a single encounter condoms are far less expensive and less trouble than any other form of contraception.
Women's birth control is ideal in a monogamous relationship where a certain regularity of sexual activity is expected. A marriage is the most obvious example and many married women use contraception to prevent unexpected pregnancies so that they can ensure that when they have children they are financially prepared for it and that either they or their husbands will have time to raise the child.
What the republicans are attacking is not an aid to sexual promiscuity but an aid to financial and social stability for people involved in long term monogamous relationships, particularly those in the middle class. It is a war not only on women's freedoms but on the ability of men and women in the middle class to have any control of their economic and genetic destinies.
One of the stated reasons for these actions is to cut down on sexual promiscuity, however if this is actually the goal then the way in which it is being carried out is odd. The ideal form of birth control for someone who is sexually promiscuous is condoms. Condoms protect against STD's, something which women's contraception such as the pill and IUD's do not do. Condoms are also something that is used as needed and the promiscuous usually do not know exactly who they will be having sex with or when until fairly close to the actual occurence. For a single encounter condoms are far less expensive and less trouble than any other form of contraception.
Women's birth control is ideal in a monogamous relationship where a certain regularity of sexual activity is expected. A marriage is the most obvious example and many married women use contraception to prevent unexpected pregnancies so that they can ensure that when they have children they are financially prepared for it and that either they or their husbands will have time to raise the child.
What the republicans are attacking is not an aid to sexual promiscuity but an aid to financial and social stability for people involved in long term monogamous relationships, particularly those in the middle class. It is a war not only on women's freedoms but on the ability of men and women in the middle class to have any control of their economic and genetic destinies.