If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   In the latest salvo fired in the Republican War on Women, Governor Bobby Jindal suggests that birth control should be over the counter. Wait, what?   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 224
    More: Interesting, Bobby Jindal, human beings, Equal Pay Act, Paycheck Fairness Act, obstetricians, Priebus tried, shiny objects, Priebus  
•       •       •

1539 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Dec 2012 at 1:20 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



224 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-14 12:58:10 PM

Nabb1: Are you or are you not in favor of making birth control medication available OTC? If the medical community is in favor, then the resistance to it is going to largely be political, which means by restricting women's access by legally requiring a prescription that doctors by and large believe is unnecessary from a medical standpoint, then you are placing a barrier to women that is based on a political agenda.


Sure I'm for OTC BC, given an environment where employers, who are utterly tangential, are restricting access.

If BC and seeing a gynecologist were free to the patient (like it would be under single payer), it wouldn't be a barrier, and thus there wouldn't be any need to expose the patient to a greater risk. You also assume that ACOG's recommendations aren't to some degree driven by a political agenda also. I'm not the only one who would rather it be OTC for the purpose of foiling the religious wingnuts.
 
2012-12-14 01:00:53 PM
Looks like his angling for a wider appeal.
 
2012-12-14 01:03:27 PM

hillbillypharmacist: Nabb1: Are you or are you not in favor of making birth control medication available OTC? If the medical community is in favor, then the resistance to it is going to largely be political, which means by restricting women's access by legally requiring a prescription that doctors by and large believe is unnecessary from a medical standpoint, then you are placing a barrier to women that is based on a political agenda.

Sure I'm for OTC BC, given an environment where employers, who are utterly tangential, are restricting access.

If BC and seeing a gynecologist were free to the patient (like it would be under single payer), it wouldn't be a barrier, and thus there wouldn't be any need to expose the patient to a greater risk. You also assume that ACOG's recommendations aren't to some degree driven by a political agenda also. I'm not the only one who would rather it be OTC for the purpose of foiling the religious wingnuts.


If the medical community is by and large okay with it being OTC from a medical standpoint, then yes, requiring a woman to go to the doctor first, even if being paid for, is still a barrier. It may not be a barrier in terms of a straight financial transaction, but it still requires a woman to take the time to go see a gynecologist when such a visit may not otherwise be necessary. Conversely, if a woman has access to a gynecologist, there is nothing to prevent her from speaking to her doctor about OTC options, which is not much different from me discussing my OTC options for allergy and sinus medication with my doctor or talking about OTC options for exzcema with a dermatologist.
 
2012-12-14 01:05:45 PM

Nabb1: It may not be a barrier in terms of a straight financial transaction, but it still requires a woman to take the time to go see a gynecologist when such a visit may not otherwise be necessary.


It's a small barrier. One that is well outweighed by risk avoidance.

Barriers, in and of themselves, aren't bad. In my hypothetical situation, the barrier of making time to see a doctor is miniscule compared to the barriers in place now.
 
2012-12-14 01:07:15 PM

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: If you're so concerned about that demographic, you should 1) be fighting hard to universal implementation of Obamacare and 2) be pushing hard for extensive funding of Planned Parenthood so that your hypothetical individual in your cherrypicked demographic doesn't *have* to take the whole day off.


Who's cherrypicking? My info on the group I illustrated comes straight from Guttmacher. It is not an insignificant group, either.

This is an opportunity to let a woman put the control of her body in her hands and hers alone. Whether she gets birth control should not be a business decision OR a political decision. She can get her situation taken care of on her time, not when the doctor or the clinic finds it convenient.
 
2012-12-14 01:09:29 PM

hillbillypharmacist: Nabb1: It may not be a barrier in terms of a straight financial transaction, but it still requires a woman to take the time to go see a gynecologist when such a visit may not otherwise be necessary.

It's a small barrier. One that is well outweighed by risk avoidance.

Barriers, in and of themselves, aren't bad. In my hypothetical situation, the barrier of making time to see a doctor is miniscule compared to the barriers in place now.


Right, barriers are fine as long as they advance the political agenda. So, let's arbitrarily block women from access to birth control over the counter, and force them to the doctor (who is probably going to just write the prescription without a moment's hesitation) so that we can keep women firmly in the yoke of government. Making time to see a doctor is a pain in the rear for most people who work. Most doctors only operate during hours when most people work, and even a routine visit usually translates to hours. Maybe that's not a big deal to you, but it is to some people.
 
2012-12-14 01:10:21 PM

Gulper Eel: This is an opportunity to let a woman put the control of her body in her hands and hers alone. Whether she gets birth control should not be a business decision OR a political decision. She can get her situation taken care of on her time, not when the doctor or the clinic finds it convenient.


Absolutely, so supporting Obamacare and Planned Parenthood is the way to go.

Making HBC OTC is not the most efficacious way to achieve that goal.
 
2012-12-14 01:10:43 PM

Gulper Eel: TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: If you're so concerned about that demographic, you should 1) be fighting hard to universal implementation of Obamacare and 2) be pushing hard for extensive funding of Planned Parenthood so that your hypothetical individual in your cherrypicked demographic doesn't *have* to take the whole day off.

Who's cherrypicking? My info on the group I illustrated comes straight from Guttmacher. It is not an insignificant group, either.

This is an opportunity to let a woman put the control of her body in her hands and hers alone. Whether she gets birth control should not be a business decision OR a political decision. She can get her situation taken care of on her time, not when the doctor or the clinic finds it convenient.


Somehow, giving women self-determination on this issue is bad. Really, really bad.
 
2012-12-14 01:11:23 PM

Nabb1: Most doctors only operate during hours when most people work, and even a routine visit usually translates to hours. Maybe that's not a big deal to you, but it is to some people.


So support Planned Parenthood so they can open more locations, since they operate outside of work hours and on weekends.
 
2012-12-14 01:11:50 PM

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Gulper Eel: This is an opportunity to let a woman put the control of her body in her hands and hers alone. Whether she gets birth control should not be a business decision OR a political decision. She can get her situation taken care of on her time, not when the doctor or the clinic finds it convenient.

Absolutely, so supporting Obamacare and Planned Parenthood is the way to go.

Making HBC OTC is not the most efficacious way to achieve that goal.


Those aren't mutually exclusive concepts, you know. You are basically denying a woman the ability to provide birth control for herself unless she embraces your politics.
 
2012-12-14 01:12:20 PM

Nabb1: Right, barriers are fine as long as they advance the political agenda. So, let's arbitrarily block women from access to birth control over the counter, and force them to the doctor (who is probably going to just write the prescription without a moment's hesitation) so that we can keep women firmly in the yoke of government.


Wait, how does it keep them in the yoke of govermnent?

You're sounding less and less like an attorney and more like a crazy. They would be precisely as 'in the yoke of government' as they are right now.
 
2012-12-14 01:13:13 PM

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Nabb1: Most doctors only operate during hours when most people work, and even a routine visit usually translates to hours. Maybe that's not a big deal to you, but it is to some people.

So support Planned Parenthood so they can open more locations, since they operate outside of work hours and on weekends.


Right - Women's access to birth control should be subservient to your political goals. I get it.
 
2012-12-14 01:14:13 PM

hillbillypharmacist: Nabb1: Right, barriers are fine as long as they advance the political agenda. So, let's arbitrarily block women from access to birth control over the counter, and force them to the doctor (who is probably going to just write the prescription without a moment's hesitation) so that we can keep women firmly in the yoke of government.

Wait, how does it keep them in the yoke of govermnent?

You're sounding less and less like an attorney and more like a crazy. They would be precisely as 'in the yoke of government' as they are right now.


Restricting women's access to birth control for policy reasons rather than medical reasons is, in effect, government interference with their reproductive rights. You are pro-choice, right?
 
2012-12-14 01:14:16 PM

Nabb1: Gulper Eel: TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: If you're so concerned about that demographic, you should 1) be fighting hard to universal implementation of Obamacare and 2) be pushing hard for extensive funding of Planned Parenthood so that your hypothetical individual in your cherrypicked demographic doesn't *have* to take the whole day off.

Who's cherrypicking? My info on the group I illustrated comes straight from Guttmacher. It is not an insignificant group, either.

This is an opportunity to let a woman put the control of her body in her hands and hers alone. Whether she gets birth control should not be a business decision OR a political decision. She can get her situation taken care of on her time, not when the doctor or the clinic finds it convenient.

Somehow, giving women self-determination on this issue is bad. Really, really bad.


You're making me smirk and I'm soon putting you in the troll category.

You're right, it should not be business decision or a political decision. Support Obamacare and Planned Parenthood and your stated goal of having her get HBC on her own time in a *safe* and informed manner will be achieved.
 
2012-12-14 01:15:05 PM

Nabb1: TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Nabb1: Most doctors only operate during hours when most people work, and even a routine visit usually translates to hours. Maybe that's not a big deal to you, but it is to some people.

So support Planned Parenthood so they can open more locations, since they operate outside of work hours and on weekends.

Right - Women's access to birth control should be subservient to your political goals. I get it.


Nabb1: TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Gulper Eel: This is an opportunity to let a woman put the control of her body in her hands and hers alone. Whether she gets birth control should not be a business decision OR a political decision. She can get her situation taken care of on her time, not when the doctor or the clinic finds it convenient.

Absolutely, so supporting Obamacare and Planned Parenthood is the way to go.

Making HBC OTC is not the most efficacious way to achieve that goal.

Those aren't mutually exclusive concepts, you know. You are basically denying a woman the ability to provide birth control for herself unless she embraces your politics.


Alright, you're a troll on this matter. Have fun, I'm gonna go do work.
 
2012-12-14 01:17:16 PM

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: ...a political decision. Support Obamacare


Which wasn't a political decision?
 
2012-12-14 01:17:50 PM

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Alright, you're a troll on this matter. Have fun, I'm gonna go do work.


You didn't answer the question, which I think is legitimate. Making birth control OTC and supporting Planned Parenthood/Obamacare are not mutually exclusive. Denying women the option of OTC birth control when doctors are okay with it and demanding they have to go through Planned Parenthood/Obamacare is nothing more than a political agenda.
 
2012-12-14 01:21:36 PM
I agree with the exorcist. OTC is long past due.
 
2012-12-14 01:22:31 PM
Another RINO who thinks he can change his spots and kowtow for liberal votes and who is forgetting that conservatives do not forget these things and he may very well find his butt out fo office.
 
2012-12-14 01:23:01 PM
Yes it should be.

Then we don't need to have pharmacists arguing that they don't have to dispense prescribed medicine because they think it's immoral.
 
2012-12-14 01:23:32 PM
I can't help but wonder if this is a direct response to Rick Perry's abortion comments.
 
2012-12-14 01:24:19 PM

Nabb1: Restricting women's access to birth control for policy reasons rather than medical reasons is, in effect, government interference with their reproductive rights. You are pro-choice, right?


There are medical reasons to restrict it. ACOG recommends making it OTC because of public health reasons that would outweigh the medical reasons to restrict. If the public health reasons to allow free access were fulfilled by a single payer system, then the medical reasons would stand unopposed, and it should not be OTC.
 
2012-12-14 01:27:09 PM
True, birth control should be OTC, but this does not excuse any of the good Governor's derp in 99% of his other political communiques.
 
2012-12-14 01:27:57 PM
Slap sufficient warning labels on the box, and it's not much more harmful than something like Prilosec
 
2012-12-14 01:28:41 PM

hillbillypharmacist: Nabb1: Restricting women's access to birth control for policy reasons rather than medical reasons is, in effect, government interference with their reproductive rights. You are pro-choice, right?

There are medical reasons to restrict it. ACOG recommends making it OTC because of public health reasons that would outweigh the medical reasons to restrict. If the public health reasons to allow free access were fulfilled by a single payer system, then the medical reasons would stand unopposed, and it should not be OTC.


You could say there are medical reasons to restrict a number of medications that are now over the counter. Many of them were once available by prescription only. I think this is an artificial barrier driven by a political agenda that, as Jindal points out, would remove the debate from the political sphere. But, many have been making a lot of hay out of it, and it is not in their interests to see women have unfettered access to OTC birth control.
 
2012-12-14 01:29:38 PM
I know this may come as a shock but most of Republicans actually think a woman should be able to buy BC OTC.
 
2012-12-14 01:30:02 PM

hillbillypharmacist: It's an interesting idea, and I certainly like it better than some busybody religious folks sticking their noses where it doesn't belong and determining how employees may use their benefits.


Nabb1: I think it's a good idea. Also, most health insurance doesn't cover OTC medication, so that would solve that issue, too.


And would thus remove it as a talking point and single-issue politic.
 
2012-12-14 01:31:18 PM
Aren't these republicans afraid that their daughters will buy OTC HBC and become dirty, slutty, whores?
 
2012-12-14 01:31:33 PM

Nabb1: I think this is an artificial barrier driven by a political agenda that, as Jindal points out, would remove the debate from the political sphere. But, many have been making a lot of hay out of it, and it is not in their interests to see women have unfettered access to OTC birth control.


What interest would the rotten old big gummint liberals have in making a woman see a doctor before getting BC, especially if the doctor visit and the medicine were free? Spite? Communism? Political correctness?
 
2012-12-14 01:32:01 PM
My wife was on 4 different kinds of oral contraceptives, one after the other for 3 month courses each, before she gave up and went off the pill -- the hormonal imbalances were impossible for her to deal with and we almost ended up divorced because there was no balance at all and we were fighting over everything. I did my best to be supportive but she was absolutely manic all the time over everything, no matter how inconsequential, and I was the scapegoat. Please hold your "lol women" comments because she was not herself in any sense.

Making an untrained woman personally in charge of ingesting medicine that has enormous hormonal change is hilariously irresponsible. People are still so damn hung up on this being about not getting pregnant, instead of the host of other effects BC pills have on a woman from cyst prevention to cycle regulation. Making it OTC divorces the process of consultation and medical expertise from it, and endangers women everywhere.

Also it is another huge payout to insurance industries who were only just recently mandated to cover BC. So.
 
2012-12-14 01:32:23 PM

sweetmelissa31: Is this a ploy to get people to pay more out of pocket for birth control?


Not exactly. The GOP was hit hard because of their opposition to birth control being covered by insurance. If birth control is OTC they can separate it from insurance coverage since insurance doesn't cover most OTC medications. That means that criticism of the GOP no longer exists.
 
2012-12-14 01:33:53 PM

sweetmelissa31: Is this a ploy to get people to pay more out of pocket for birth control?


Came here to say something like this. If it's OTC, then insurance won't cover any of it, making it more expensive to low-income women. If it's a prescription then they get a break.
 
2012-12-14 01:34:31 PM

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Nabb1: The objections to this seem more political than scientific, to me, anyway.

Having seen the tribulations of what my various female friends have gone through to find the correct HBC, I'm firmly in the camp of having it be RX only (through PP or some gyn or whatever).


That's like saying aspirin doesn't alleviate all pain so let's make it prescription-only. If you're still having problems while taking OTC meds, then by all means go see a doctor. Part of being an adult is taking charge of your own life decisions and not relying on others to do it for you.
 
2012-12-14 01:35:01 PM

hillbillypharmacist: Nabb1: I think this is an artificial barrier driven by a political agenda that, as Jindal points out, would remove the debate from the political sphere. But, many have been making a lot of hay out of it, and it is not in their interests to see women have unfettered access to OTC birth control.

What interest would the rotten old big gummint liberals have in making a woman see a doctor before getting BC, especially if the doctor visit and the medicine were free? Spite? Communism? Political correctness?


I don't know, but if the prevailing view in the medical community is that, from a medical standpoint, birth control should be available OTC, why force a woman to get a prescription? If a woman wants to talk to a doctor before taking OTC birth control, then good for her. No one should stop her. But why make her go through that step if it is not medically necessary?
 
2012-12-14 01:35:11 PM
If women could buy birth control without a prescription, he argues, employers would not have to pay for it against their moral objections, and Democrats could no longer accuse Republicans of being anti-birth control.

Yeah, that's the ticket. We should make drugs over the counter if it's politically beneficial to do so. What a great reason you have there, Bobby.

I agree they should be OTC but not because of politics. Because doctors say its safe, that's the only relevant thing to ask.
 
2012-12-14 01:35:11 PM

Elandriel: Making an untrained woman personally in charge of ingesting medicine that has enormous hormonal change is hilariously irresponsible. People are still so damn hung up on this being about not getting pregnant, instead of the host of other effects BC pills have on a woman from cyst prevention to cycle regulation. Making it OTC divorces the process of consultation and medical expertise from it, and endangers women everywhere.


Yup - its a clever way to seem magnanimous but at root is another way of saying: if them sluts want to get their humpin' pills, why should employers have to pay for it (please ignore the fact that to properly use these drugs you probably do need a medical consult).
 
2012-12-14 01:35:25 PM
Question: does making birth control available without a prescription remove the need for health insurance to get involved?

I ask for two reasons. One, it would probably end the messy debate over health insurance from groups with religious affiliations. Two, it could open up a new can of worms as costs are no longer offset by health insurance.

What I'm driving at here is, if birth control is OTC, what's to stop an anti-BC pharmacy owner from charging $100 per dose that can't be billed to your insurance?
 
2012-12-14 01:37:26 PM

qorkfiend: What I'm driving at here is, if birth control is OTC, what's to stop an anti-BC pharmacy owner from charging $100 per dose that can't be billed to your insurance?


They wouldnt charge $100 per dose. They just wouldnt stock it at all - and the laws requiring a pharmacy to fill a doctor's scrip would not apply.
 
2012-12-14 01:38:00 PM

hillbillypharmacist: What interest would the rotten old big gummint liberals have in making a woman see a doctor before getting BC, especially if the doctor visit and the medicine were free? Spite? Communism? Political correctness?


THE GREATER ENTITLEMENT AGENDA AND FURTHERMORE,
 
2012-12-14 01:38:29 PM

qorkfiend: Question: does making birth control available without a prescription remove the need for health insurance to get involved?

I ask for two reasons. One, it would probably end the messy debate over health insurance from groups with religious affiliations. Two, it could open up a new can of worms as costs are no longer offset by health insurance.

What I'm driving at here is, if birth control is OTC, what's to stop an anti-BC pharmacy owner from charging $100 per dose that can't be billed to your insurance?


Most insurance does not cover OTC medication. If it's OTC, then it will come in a slick packaged box somewhere on the aisle near the Advil or whatever else and not be locked up in the pharmacy (unless tweakers figure out how to cook BC into meth). There are some birth control pills that cost as little as $8-10 per month, which is less than a box of condoms.
 
2012-12-14 01:38:32 PM

what_now: I actually disagree. Hormonal birth control should be monitored by a doctor. There can serious emotional and physical side effects from using BC, and a woman should be able to have a doctor prescribe and monitor her use, until they find the correct dosage.

Now, we should have single payer healthcare and BC should be free, but someone needs to prescribe it.


Very true. Hormones are not to be farked with. There are also more chances of misuse if it's OTC.
 
2012-12-14 01:38:35 PM

Nabb1: hillbillypharmacist: Nabb1: Restricting women's access to birth control for policy reasons rather than medical reasons is, in effect, government interference with their reproductive rights. You are pro-choice, right?

There are medical reasons to restrict it. ACOG recommends making it OTC because of public health reasons that would outweigh the medical reasons to restrict. If the public health reasons to allow free access were fulfilled by a single payer system, then the medical reasons would stand unopposed, and it should not be OTC.

You could say there are medical reasons to restrict a number of medications that are now over the counter. Many of them were once available by prescription only. I think this is an artificial barrier driven by a political agenda that, as Jindal points out, would remove the debate from the political sphere. But, many have been making a lot of hay out of it, and it is not in their interests to see women have unfettered access to OTC birth control.


No, this is why it should be prescription.
 
2012-12-14 01:39:50 PM

HeartBurnKid: Nabb1: hillbillypharmacist: Nabb1: Restricting women's access to birth control for policy reasons rather than medical reasons is, in effect, government interference with their reproductive rights. You are pro-choice, right?

There are medical reasons to restrict it. ACOG recommends making it OTC because of public health reasons that would outweigh the medical reasons to restrict. If the public health reasons to allow free access were fulfilled by a single payer system, then the medical reasons would stand unopposed, and it should not be OTC.

You could say there are medical reasons to restrict a number of medications that are now over the counter. Many of them were once available by prescription only. I think this is an artificial barrier driven by a political agenda that, as Jindal points out, would remove the debate from the political sphere. But, many have been making a lot of hay out of it, and it is not in their interests to see women have unfettered access to OTC birth control.

No, this is why it should be prescription.


Damnit, wrong link. Try this one
 
2012-12-14 01:40:41 PM

Nabb1: I don't know, but if the prevailing view in the medical community is that, from a medical standpoint, birth control should be available OTC, why force a woman to get a prescription? If a woman wants to talk to a doctor before taking OTC birth control, then good for her. No one should stop her. But why make her go through that step if it is not medically necessary?


There is not a bright line definition of 'medically necessary'. If a public health good can be accomplished by making it OTC, then it weighs against restricting it to a prescription. ACOG (and myself) think that, at the moment, we would be better served by making it OTC. However, if the public health good can be accomplished without it being OTC by using a single payer or other comprehensive system, then the medical reasons to keep it prescription only should prevail instead.
 
2012-12-14 01:40:44 PM

HeartBurnKid: Nabb1: hillbillypharmacist: Nabb1: Restricting women's access to birth control for policy reasons rather than medical reasons is, in effect, government interference with their reproductive rights. You are pro-choice, right?

There are medical reasons to restrict it. ACOG recommends making it OTC because of public health reasons that would outweigh the medical reasons to restrict. If the public health reasons to allow free access were fulfilled by a single payer system, then the medical reasons would stand unopposed, and it should not be OTC.

You could say there are medical reasons to restrict a number of medications that are now over the counter. Many of them were once available by prescription only. I think this is an artificial barrier driven by a political agenda that, as Jindal points out, would remove the debate from the political sphere. But, many have been making a lot of hay out of it, and it is not in their interests to see women have unfettered access to OTC birth control.

No, this is why it should be prescription.


You better let the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists know that they've made a grievous error.
 
2012-12-14 01:40:58 PM
Isn't aspirin already OTC?

// would hormone-infused IUDs fall under "HBC"?
// no, as that's an implanted device as well
// ladies, consider an IUD - the GOP can't take 'em out of your hoo-ha once they're there, and it's "set it and forget it" in terms of usage
 
2012-12-14 01:41:48 PM

sweetmelissa31: Is this a ploy to get people to pay more out of pocket for birth control?


I already do pay out-of-pocket for OTC birth control.

t2.gstatic.com
 
2012-12-14 01:42:09 PM

hillbillypharmacist: Nabb1: I don't know, but if the prevailing view in the medical community is that, from a medical standpoint, birth control should be available OTC, why force a woman to get a prescription? If a woman wants to talk to a doctor before taking OTC birth control, then good for her. No one should stop her. But why make her go through that step if it is not medically necessary?

There is not a bright line definition of 'medically necessary'. If a public health good can be accomplished by making it OTC, then it weighs against restricting it to a prescription. ACOG (and myself) think that, at the moment, we would be better served by making it OTC. However, if the public health good can be accomplished without it being OTC by using a single payer or other comprehensive system, then the medical reasons to keep it prescription only should prevail instead.


So, again, you would keep women from getting birth control OTC in order to advance your political agenda for a much larger nationalization of the health care industry.
 
2012-12-14 01:42:25 PM

Mr_Fabulous: sweetmelissa31: Is this a ploy to get people to pay more out of pocket for birth control?

I already do pay out-of-pocket for OTC birth control.

[t2.gstatic.com image 268x188]


Sure, but you bet your ass we'd be billing it to insurance if we could.
 
2012-12-14 01:42:56 PM

Nabb1: HeartBurnKid: Nabb1: hillbillypharmacist: Nabb1: Restricting women's access to birth control for policy reasons rather than medical reasons is, in effect, government interference with their reproductive rights. You are pro-choice, right?

There are medical reasons to restrict it. ACOG recommends making it OTC because of public health reasons that would outweigh the medical reasons to restrict. If the public health reasons to allow free access were fulfilled by a single payer system, then the medical reasons would stand unopposed, and it should not be OTC.

You could say there are medical reasons to restrict a number of medications that are now over the counter. Many of them were once available by prescription only. I think this is an artificial barrier driven by a political agenda that, as Jindal points out, would remove the debate from the political sphere. But, many have been making a lot of hay out of it, and it is not in their interests to see women have unfettered access to OTC birth control.

No, this is why it should be prescription.

You better let the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists know that they've made a grievous error.


They have their opinion, I have mine. I thought you Republican types were all about not blindly submitting to "experts"; what happened to that?
 
Displayed 50 of 224 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report