Birth control access increasingly restricted: Is it time to worry? (Yes.)

In the war against women's reproductive rights, when will enough be enough?

That's the question that women need to be asking, as draconian laws which increasingly restrict our access to birth control continue to be enacted by states.

On May 15, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback signed a law which allows pharmacists to refuse to fill birth control prescriptions, and allows doctors to refuse to refer patients to pharmacists who will.

According to Reuters' Kevin Murphy,

"The law states that no person can be required to provide any device or drug that he or she "reasonably believes may result in the termination of a pregnancy" - but does not specifically lay out which drugs could be refused."

Waaaiiiit a minute. Any "device"? Are condoms and diaphragms next on the hit list of birth control methods? What about surgical sterilization? Are they next?

Do we really want huge families sprouting up across America? Do YOU want to have a baby, year after year after year because you- or your wife's- birth control has become illegal?

Birth control has been around since recorded history.  The use of herbal contraceptives were part of folk medicine, and are well-documented in literature. Women have used barrier methods since the first woman figured out the link between ejaculation and insemination. Ancient societies used wads of sea sponges, paper, cloth, and even grass to block sperm. Aristotle recommended using oil as a pessary (vaginal suppository).

Obviously, we've been invested in preventing pregnancy for a long, long time.

Women have been fighting to control their own destiny for thousands of years. That's not hyperbole; it's fact. Being able to decide if we want children- or not- is a part of that fight. I don't understand women who undermine their own success and independence by supporting draconian birth control laws.

Considering that studies show the vast majority of American women have used birth control, it seems likely that some of the same female legislators and activists who support these types of laws have themselves used birth control at some point during their reproductive years.

Why, then, are they intent on denying access to birth control to others? And to themselves?

I don't get it. I understand that some people have religious objections to birth control, but since when did religion trump science, and individual rights? Why are their religious views more important than mine? Isn't that why we have a separation of church and state?

If we're not careful, we're going to wake up in a country that outlaws birth control.

And that's no longer just a "oh, you're being overreactionary to drum up support for your waaay left-leaning liberal fringe ways"  kind of statement, is it?

Go back to Oz, Dorothy. It's safer there.

Comments

Leave a comment
  • You'd think for someone that writes articles for a living wouldn't use scare tactics and outright garbage points to get theirs across. This is classless and tasteless. Nobody's telling you not to use birth control. No religious group is telling you that you can't. They may not agree with it, but nobody's trying to force you to stop. That's YOUR choice! But don't ask taxpayers to pay for it!!! When will you people understand that? This "war on women" line that continues to be used is garbage and is just as tacky as pulling the race card every chance you get. Is this the way for a struggling publication and site to get attention? It's sad, pathetic and flat out full of lies. Stay out of politics if you don't understand it and don't make up and promote lies to get people to see your side. It doesn't work that way!

  • Where is taxpayer money mentioned in "On May 15, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback signed a law which allows pharmacists to refuse to fill birth control prescriptions, and allows doctors to refuse to refer patients to pharmacists who will"? It isn't! This is about religious pharmacists and doctors refusing BC to women. If that isn't telling someone that they cannot use BC, then I don't know what is!

  • No, it is not. Do your homework. This bill has nothing to do with religious pharmacists. Did you just make that up? Find out why that law was signed and under what conditions they are allowed to refuse under. Google should help you find that. This article is leaving out many, many details to get a fear BS point across.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to BigMike:

    Mike, can you provide specific information to back you up? I would like to believe that there is no draconian anti-woman legislation going on but I haven't seen any proof yet. And, for sure my state, Texas, is a proven leading state in the War on Women.

  • What is wrong with being pro-choice? If a pharmacist does not want to fill a birth control script -- or one for viagra-- for that matter -- so what? The other pharmacy down the street will.

    As an aside, because America is hardly reproducing itself, larger families would go a long way towards ensuring a strong economy and payments for the spoiled rotten baby boomers Medicare and Social Security.

  • Women have the ultimate power AND THEY WONT USE IT

    WOMEN DO NOT DEMAND THEIR MAN USE A CONDOM

    So instead of blaming "the others" for the ills of birth control funding start demanding WYMEN EITHER DEMAND THEIR MAN WEAR A CONDOM

    OR THE WOMEN IS COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE for the outcome of the sexual acts she performs in

  • OUR BODIES

    OUR RIGHTS

    YOUR WALLET

    and I thought you didnt want ANY ONE INTERFERING IN YOUR BUSINESS

    LIARS!!

Leave a comment

  • ChicagoNow is full of win

    Welcome to ChicagoNow.

    Meet our bloggers,
    post comments, or
    pitch your blog idea.

  • Advertisement:
  • Meet The Blogger

    fb_avatar

    Lucy Lloyd

    Writer, reporter, researcher, hockey mom. I'm an inveterate reader, relentlessly curious, and rarely without an opinion. I want to know the rest of the story and then I have to write it down. So I do.

  • Categories

  • Latest on ChicagoNow

  • Advertisement: