The Right Wing's Idea of "Freedom"

[paft.livejournal.com]

From Statepress:

Arizona House Bill 2625, authored by Majority Whip Debbie Lesko, R-Glendale, would permit employers to ask their employees for proof of medical prescription if they seek contraceptives for non-reproductive purposes, such as hormone control or acne treatment.


‘I believe we live in America. We don’t live in the Soviet Union,’ Lesko said. ‘So, government should not be telling the organizations or mom and pop employers to do something against their moral beliefs.’

Jezebel points out that Arizona is an “at will” state. This means that bosses in Arizona will be able to fire women for being depraved enough to take birth control pills to prevent pregnancy.

As we all know, what made the Soviet Union infamous were not the gulags, its treatment of dissidents, and the rigid control over the press, but the fact that women could take pills for the purpose of contraception without fear of losing their jobs over it.

Yes, here it is -- the right wing's idea of "freedom" is a society where a woman has to ask her boss' permission to use oral contraceptives.

Does anyone else find this more than a little weird?

Crossposted from Thoughtcrimes

Comments

[paft.livejournal.com]

bdj: There's no significant push or desire for this sort of legislation, and the only reason it's receiving any attention at all is because it's feeding the media-driven narrative in play currently.

You've not noticed a concerted attack from the Republicans on birth control, in particular oral contraceptives?

[dwer.livejournal.com]

he thinks that panel with all the men was about religious freedom.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Not think, but know.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

in that blessedly singular BDJ way.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

Reality and a significant segment of the voting public differ, but tilt away.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Reality agrees with me. The "significant segment of the voting public" might not, but it wouldn't be the first time.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

If reality means a world where anarchism, fascism, Communism, and liberalism are all the same thing, where Bush's Administration never went to war with Iraq over WMDs, where totalitarian mass-murdering dictatorships and liberal democracies are moral equals, and where the Confederacy had nothing to do with slavery while the North allowing the South to butcher entire poor black towns was going to lead to freedom before the 40th Millennium, then yes, reality does agree with you.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I'd like you to cite the times I've claimed any of these things, please.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

The one on Colin Powell:

http://talk-politics.livejournal.com/950003.html?thread=73692147#t73692147

The one on fascism, communism, and anarchism all being the same thing:

http://talk-politics.livejournal.com/1061509.html?thread=84849541#t84849541

But I'm sure this was someone using your account both these times and not you, as you seem to have a Goldfish issue.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

The Colin Powell thing does not support your claim, or anyhting you've claimed.

The second part "all in the same ideological area" does not equal "all the same thing."

So you're 0/2. Try again or admit you're wrong and find something else to do.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

As I said, I've no interest in debating someone too cowardly to stand up by his own posts. You know damned well what I said and what you said, but you don't have the capability to be honest enough to stand by your own words, or for that matter in all the time I've seen you "debate" anything approximating intellectual depth or honesty in the first place. I said that I did not want to get into this, and now this ends this rendition of funhouse logic. Sorry, I'm not going to play again the game of "But it's right here" "No it's not" "shows post" "talks about something completely different" "shows post again" rinse wash repeat.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

This is me standing up exactly to what I've said. What I'm doing, specifically, is standing up against your continued distortions of what I've said.

As you're so far proving incapable of understanding what you read, perhaps you may want to refrain from attempting to tell anyone else what they're saying and instead worry about making yourself clear, hm?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Not at all, no. I've seen a media-generated and left-wing-generated (but I repeat myself) concoction based around the concept that the right wing is supposedly anti-contraception, but no real actual concerted attack by the right or Republicans.

[existentme.livejournal.com]

Yes, right, not concerted in the sense of a symphony with a common conductor, but if all the musicians one side of a hall are playing the same music, conductor aside, it's sure still going to look and act like a concert.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Indeed. That orchestra is sitting off to the left, and the media is printing the programs.

[existentme.livejournal.com]

Pfft, media: an arm of the state who's function is to convince the masses there are significant differences between various of its chosen owners' reps - so yes, left, right, center, you got that right, the show must go on and on.

[paft.livejournal.com]

LOL! Riiight, Jeff. All those legislative attacks on contraception, etc. from the Republican Party are a liberal Democratic plot.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

What legislative attacks, specifically?

[paft.livejournal.com]

Like the one in the OP and the various threats to defund Planned Parenthood.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

So one state-level bill that has no evidence of traction, and a defunding attempt because of abortion. That's all you have to sustain your claim?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

So list 'em.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

So I did make an error, since I should have held you to what was being challenged (http://talk-politics.livejournal.com/1381463.html?thread=110045271#t110045271), which is that contraception is being fought against. As I've noted throughout, there's definitely continued work against abortion.

Of what you've listed, it's almost entirely about abortion, so you're not doing much to sustain the idea that contraception is being battled against widely. Your opinion piece from the NYT is simply the opinion of one woman that cites no actual attacks on contraception, and your CNN link is about a pretty stupid joke by someone who is not even an elected official, and surrounding the religious exemption clauses at that.

While your links, ThinkProgress aside, are good ones, you're kind of making my point that contraception isn't actually being attacked.