Gloria Purvis
Find a Conversation
Gloria Purvis
| Sat, 03-31-2012 - 8:09am |
Latest from the board
- It Couldn't Be More Apropos 11
- If we only hear of schizophrenia in the context of a violence...
- Gun Control Law Fails 5
- Have we loosened up on Terrorism 17
- Margaret Thatcher Dies of Stroke at 87 3
- Marriage and Politics 3
- New Pope: Does he matter politically? 9
- What's Next for Venezuela after Chavez? 3
- Do you have gun control questions for the White House?
- Inauguration Thoughts? 2
Memeber Support
Visit our Member Support area or browse the iVillage Help forum
| Q: | Where can I change my password? |
| A: | Log in, go to Edit My Preferences, and click the Account tab. Make and save your changes. |
Pages
It bothers me that those who oppose choice to the extent they also oppose measures to increase availability of contraception try to couch it in terms of being pro-women. It isn't. Pro-choice means support for full range of options, not those opposed.
One side is anti-options, anti-availability for those of lesser means. Apparently some reshaping of choice becomes if you are of means you get options, if not, too bad, so sad.
I really don't understand how the making minimum health care coverage requirements as recommended by the Institute of Medicine is intrusive and freedom limiting, but transvaginal ultrasound laws by state legislators are just fine.
Which side is anti-women?
The video was about the mandate... I said what I thought about healthcare as a whole already, And the only comparison b/w offering up heatlhcare to everybody but not requiring everybody to pay for it - and - say, auto insurance is if you neglect to pay for a policy but still drive a car. That becomes a cost we all pay for when you're ticketed for speeding, when you're in a wreck and don't pay for that too.
And the other side is, let's keep government in my pants because I can't make these decisions that surround sex by myself, Victim, Wahh.. I do think society has created a lot of its own problems, I am whole so I don't know what you're asking there, Nobody is telling you how you should live. But let's create all these new laws to protect us.... Phooey!
Government wouldn't be in your pants, because it isn't telling you to use anything. It's making sure the *option* is there for you.
We need to cover everyone for health insurance. How do we do this? Please offer up your ideas, because not to do so is to favour the 'let them die' approach, or what I call Repubnocare.
Someone who's words are powerful, as you put it, would make me interested in what she was saying and see her side of what she is discussing, even if I disagree with her.
“Clearly," said Arthur,"you're an idiot- but you're our kind of idiot. Come on.”
― Markus Zusak, The Book Thief
How is the government in your pants now? What exactly is the government telling you that you can or cannot do with your own body?
Pages