For Those in Kansas

The law does not address real birth control, it addresses the "morning after pill." While the morning after pill has some benefits to fit certain needs, if you are using it as a regular means of birth control, you need to be sat down and talked to about it.

I do suspect that some states will try to introduce a complete ban on birth control as championed by Santorum.

Funny thing is that Ireland, one of the most Catholic nations in the world, previously had laws against birth control but finally threw off the religious shackles and made it legal. Yet, her in the states we want to be ruled by our religious leaders. Hmmm, that seems to be working well in Iran.....

I find it rich that the women who constantly and loudly declare "It's my business and I can refuse service to anyone I feel like" are the ones who would prefer to deny the same freedom to other businesses. If this is a big concern, you could call a few drugstores and find out if this is an issue before bringing the scrip in - or again, just take the scrip with you.

And Stacy - you know I love you and you know I respect you - BUT we both also know that Stormont-Vail is right across the street from St. Francis. Now personally I wouldn't even take someone I didn't like to St. Francis, but that's my own preference.

I'd also point out that this bill probably wouldn't even exist were it not for ObamaCare or libs trotting out that silly Sandra Fluke bitch. Originally Posted by Kshunter

yah men know so much more about a womans body and their needs it would be useless to have one on the panel of men who were before congress.give me a break,

According to most of the articles I've read, it DOES include birth control. Here is one of the articles which is from American Medical News:

http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/201...8/gvsc0528.htm

Here is an excerpt: "A new Kansas law will allow physicians and pharmacists to refuse to prescribe, dispense and make referrals for drugs they “reasonably believe” could terminate a pregnancy. Critics said the law restricts doctors’ ability to prescribe reliably for their patients and prevents women from obtaining such medications as conventional birth control and the morning-after pill. Supporters argued that the law is in line with past state statutes affording health professionals the right not to participate in abortions."

Kayla this is more of the distraction strategy of the left. They can't talk about reality (jobs, the economy, the border with Mexico, Afghanistan, national security violations, etc) so they want to talk about possibilities and assumptions.

Kayla this is more of the distraction strategy of the left. They can't talk about reality (jobs, the economy, the border with Mexico, Afghanistan, national security violations, etc) so they want to talk about possibilities and assumptions. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

So they focus on one law in Kansas where people are trying to regulate morality. Pretty sure the left gave up doing anything in Kansas but keeping us out of the dark ages. What's next trying to make it illegal to talk about evolution or making science teachers teach that if you can't explain it now chalk it up to "god did it", oh they already tried that... I wonder why we have a shortage of engineers and math and science majors? And all the issues you list republicans don't have answers for either. They have short term political talking points, not the same as answers but I digress.

This isn't a distraction by the left so much as the media who wants to exploit any type of drama, left or right, for ratings. It is a concern but like the Kansas house members talking about how making it a crime for people to refuse to blow (dui) trampled on the 4th and 5th amendments, they don't care. Well they don't care until they need to run for reelection and want to drape themselves in the flag and constitution.

(sorry know I'm off topic again)

They would just say it wasn't theirs. After all, she's a provider and should have taken more precautions given that she's a provider, how would the said client be sure the baby was his?

That would be their argument. Originally Posted by MsElena

Something called a DNA patnerity test would legally clear up that argument up

Kayla this is more of the distraction strategy of the left. They can't talk about reality (jobs, the economy, the border with Mexico, Afghanistan, national security violations, etc) so they want to talk about possibilities and assumptions. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I removed my comment as it was too off topic and would take this thread down a different path, rather than debate the pros and cons of this law....

Tell them COG I have your back!

So they focus on one law in Kansas where people are trying to regulate morality. Originally Posted by shamrock55

I'm more of a Libertarian than a Conservative/Republican or Liberal/Progressive/Democrat. I think people for the most part should be left the fuck alone to make their own decisions and live their life they way they want to without interfering in OTHERS lives or having THEIR LIVES interfered with.

If I want to see hookers then as long as I'm not hurting anyone I should be able to do that. If a girl wants to put a for rent sign out then as long as she's not hurting anyone else she should be able to do that.

I'll admit that TO ME, abortion is killing a human being, therefore TO ME, it is hurting someone else so in that regard I guess I'm conservative. Now when it comes to the pill, or condoms, or the depo shot, or any of the other various methods of PREVENTING pregnancy, that again is a personal choice and I don't have any say so about it except when it comes to ME, PERSONALLY.

I write about the constitution regularly. I know it well. In fact, I have a good part of it committed to memory. Nowhere in that document is there anything about forcing doctors to do things against their moral values. Nowhere. And before you jump in and say "well, they didn't have that back then", yes, they did. There have been methods of birth control and abortion dating back to the ancient Egyptians and Greeks including the writings of Hippocrates (you know, the guy the Hippocratic Oath was named after...).

Now this being the case, I also respect the right of the doctors, pharmacists, and other medical practitioners to have their own feelings and moral judgements on what is right for them to do and if THEY don't believe it's morally right to perform an abortion, prescribe the morning after pill, or even if they are staunch Catholics and don't believe it's right to sell condoms or other birth control methods, THAT IS THEIR RIGHT TO DO SO. If I need those items, I'll go somewhere else. It's just that simple. I have NO RIGHT to insist they adopt my moral or ethical code if it might violate theirs. Likewise, they have no right to tell me I shouldn't be able to buy a condom somewhere else if I want to. It's all about personal freedom to me. Everybody's personal freedom, not just mine.

Throughout this thread the people complaining the loudest about how backwards KS is and how the doctors and pharmacists should be FORCED BY LAW to sell things or provide services that are morally repulsive to them are claiming some kind of superiority in their enlightenment and insulting those with other belief systems than theirs.

Who is really trying to IMPOSE BY LAW their moral values on others? Is it the KS law that says the medical professionals DO NOT HAVE TO sell or provide services that go against their values (not forbidding anything, just giving THEM a choice) or is it the people on the left that are DEMANDING that they have their way even if it violates another's personal values?

Think about who is the intolerant group here.

KsJack