Birth Control Harms Women

Neither is Overpopulation a healthy thing. Scientists recently published a study about the disappearance of species associated with the size of the human population. It's easy to find on Google. In a nutshell, overpopulation is killing us. So, in terms of choosing the lesser of two evils, I choose birth control. It's a good thing for families, a good thing for America, a good thing for the world.

#1 c4logic on 2005-07-29 05:48

Yeah, but we need cannon fodder, dammit! We're not producing enough expendable people for all the BS wars we have to fight.

#1.1 Dave from the Lake Effect Zone (Link) on 2005-07-29 05:56

It is now quite lawful for a Catholic woman to avoid pregnancy by a resort to mathematics, though she is still forbidden to resort to physics or chemistry. |H. L. Mencken

#2 majkia on 2005-07-29 05:57

The very existence of Santorum on the face of the earth is the most compelling argument for the necessity of birth control!

#3 K on 2005-07-29 05:57

Rude. Crude. Well Put.

#3.1 Anicetis on 2005-07-29 22:45

Amen!!

#3.2 kcsorci on 2005-08-28 12:25

Rush transcript: "I don't think it works. I think it's harmful to women, I think it's harmful to our society to have a society that says that sex outside of marriage is something that should be encouraged or tolerated, particularly among the young. I think it has, as we've seen, very harmful long-term consequences for society. So birth control to me enables that and I don't think it's a healthy thing for our country."

#4 Aaron Swartz (Link) on 2005-07-29 06:13

So you are saying std's wouldn't happen and pregnancy would go away if abstinence weren't taught. Clue, abstinence works every time. How can it not. I can't even handle condoms what makes you think kids could? Just how many condoms do you think young guys can carry around. They can screw forever. I could wear a condom out in 15 minutes. Used upto 7 a night, when i was a kid. Do you think they have the discipline or even the desire to not have sex just because they have no condom.

#4.1 helmeteey on 2005-07-29 20:22

Look, people can preach abstinence all they want, but 99% of the time it falls on deaf ears. That's the point. No one's saying, "Hey, let's encourage kids to go around and fuck everyone in sight."
You're right-- abstinence does work every time, but only every time that it's practicied, not every time that it's taught. Expecting the majority of teens to say no to sex just because someone tells them to is simply naive.

#4.1.1 edition10 on 2005-07-29 22:13

It's like Ricky thinks that birth control works as sympathetic magic: have access to it and .. ABRACADABRA! Sex will occur! Geez, I wish this worked for me. I keep stocking condoms but I'm still stuck in an unintentionally abstinent lifestyle.
What a totally despicable schmuck he is. And a moron to boot.

Love the Mencken quote, ya'll.

#4.1.2 PeaceBang (Link) on 2005-07-30 08:06

Helmet,
So we're supposed to take your anecdotal evidence as gospel? In the words of Bugs Bunny, "What a maroon." All of your arguments are specious at best, and the worst sort of sophistric argument in support of abstinence that I've ever encountered. And since you were using up to seven condoms a night when you were young, this is just another case of do what I say, not what I do logic that seems to pervade the Republican party, and conservatives in general.

#4.1.3 Stentor on 2005-08-02 14:25

If birth control enables sex outside of marriage then why has abstinance only sex education been show to fail again and again? And surely he can not be suggesting that STD's and unwanted pregnacies are better for our society.

#5 Daniel Scarnecchia (Link) on 2005-07-29 06:20

He can say whatever he wants, because this is America.

But, America has evolved (sorry, Ricky) into a place of infinite diversity, where all can live in peace because minority rights are protected and everyone is allowed their own "pursuit of happiness" as long as they don't hurt anyone else.

Countries that try to control people in the way he wants, based on his religion, are violent un-free places.

Santorum hates America because he hates the freedoms we have.

How can he support Bush, the way he is spreading this freedom all over the world????

#6 lilybart on 2005-07-29 06:28

Lily,
I beg to differ, Albert Einstein said it best, "Only two things are infinite, the universe, and human stupidity, and I'm not exactly sure about the former."

Just because we have a diversity of opinions doesn't mean that all of those opinions are valid, or should even be valued. It's time to start ridiculing people who put forth arguments into the public sphere that are just laughable in their logic. The kind of statement that makes you roll your eyes unintentionally, because yes, it's just that idiotic. Rick Santorum is one of those people who should be laughed at, pointed fingers at, and generally ridiculed until he slinks back into the shadows of Opus Dei, and the netherworld of the Catholic Church fundies.

#6.1 Stentor on 2005-08-02 14:31

Well Said!
Lisa

#6.1.1 Lisa on 2005-08-18 14:47

what makes him think that only single people use birth control?

#7 empty chair on 2005-07-29 06:47

Agreed. In addition, what makes him think that birth control is only taken to control births? There are actual, real medical problems that can be reduced and overcome by taking estrogen (birth control is a "side effect"). It doesn't harm women. It allows some, who would otherwise have to suffer, comfort and peace from the issues they have. He should be required to have a medical lesson from an OB/GYN.

#7.1 DMR on 2005-07-29 09:25

I am a former Pennsylanian, and as such thought I had heard just about every wacky Santorum statement. But this is STUNNING. Absolutely stunning. Wake up Pennylvania, and dump this bozo!!

#8 thuringer on 2005-07-29 07:00

The only form of birth control anyone needs is a poster of Little Ricky over one's bed.

#9 geek the girl on 2005-07-29 08:15

He should come back as a woman, and have to bear twelve children. With complications.

#10 TAFKA on 2005-07-29 08:51

"He should come back as a woman, and have to bear twelve children. With complications."

I'm no fan of the Rick-ster, but he and his wife have lost more than one child due to complications of pregnancy.

#10.1 Kate on 2005-07-30 00:22

I know this is late, but the very fact that Mr. & Mrs. Santorum lost "more than one" pregnancy is indicative that they need to use birth control, or stop having sex. It is not healthy for women to have repeated complicated pregancies. But I guess he only cares about the health of the unborn. Once an embryo is past the abortable stage, they are no longer important...

#10.1.1 Carolyn on 2005-08-02 11:09

What I want to know is this: Does Rick Santorum actually know anything at all that is, you know, true? Anything?

Or is he just some kind of shallow pan full of purest liquid ignorance, blindly repeating whatever shiny new stupidity his speechwriters pour into him?

#11 Ray Radlein (Link) on 2005-07-29 09:53

Gee, you make him sound like another Repug moron we all know....

#11.1 Mathwiz on 2005-08-01 13:57

It is a crying shame that Ricky's mom failed to practice birth-control.

#12 Spyro on 2005-07-29 10:16

Someone should ask Ricky how he squares statements like this one with his claim that his book represents "the mainstream of thought in Pennsylvania."

#13 poidog on 2005-07-29 10:16

What a strange time we live in when wars are started in the name of freedom-- the freedom for which our own leaders have nothing but disdain.

#14 jim on 2005-07-29 10:22

I weep for this Commonwealth every day this clown is allowed to stay in office.

#15 The Pittsburgh Kid on 2005-07-29 10:30

I knew a guy who reminds me of Santorum. Biggest pervert I ever met yet was a "devout" Catholic always bragging about how religious he was.

His problem? Booze. So that was his excuse for going out and having unprotected sex with random women he picked up in bars. He had a tumultuous relationship with his girlfriend who, too, used some of his same flawed logic and ended up pregnant after getting drunk and sleeping with a stranger while on vacation in a foreign country. No birth control and no acknoledgment of sexual activity ... unless they were drunk and "accidentally" sinned. I hear they are married now and popping out babies (adding to the one with the unknown father) ... Thank God they found each other. You can't tell either of them that they devout and religious.

#16 Qusan (Link) on 2005-07-29 10:33

I don't live in Penn, so can somebody who does tell me--is his opponent using any of this stuff in campaign ads?

It seems like an absolute freebie--you don't even need a script. Just clips of this creepy weirdo saying these astoundingly stupid and mean-spirted things.

Oh, and btw, Ricky--birth control is the best thing that's ever happened to women's health. Having a baby every year or two is much more dangerous to a woman's health than any form of birth control. And bc pills help prevent ovarian cancer.

#17 lolly on 2005-07-29 10:45

I live in PA, lolly, and none of the candidates in this race are running campaign ads because the election is 15 months from now (November 2006). If the election was this year, Santorum wouldn't be out selling books and giving all these interviews.

#17.1 PhillyGirl on 2005-07-29 14:03

PA Dems are running Bob Casey, Jr against Santorum and ignoring CHuck Pennachio b/c Casey has a name based on his dad and is basically Santorum-lite from a political stand-point. Casey will let Santorum continue to shoot himself in the foot (prior to putting it back in his mouth, I guess). In short, Casey will keep his mouth shut while he can so he can play the good guy to the right-wing misogynists w/o ticking off those who are pro-choice.

#17.2 ol cranky (Link) on 2005-07-29 17:25

That bit about 'particularly the young' in conjunction with 'tolerated', should give grievous pause to any unmarried voter planning to do the dirty without benefit of nuptials. How is it possible that this fool is not relegated to 'neighborhood crank' status?

#18 tsynnott on 2005-07-29 10:46

So does Santorum think that men should abstain from sex before marriage. What would he say to all those conservative men who seperate the opposite sex into virgins and whores. Is is okay for a guy to sow his wild oats and sleep with a promiscuous (aka not a virgin) woman and get her pregnant? Is this the 50's?

#19 yeehaw on 2005-07-29 12:16

Is Rick telling us he was a virgin before he got married? A man of God like him must have been and his statement on birth control proves it.

#20 Dillion on 2005-07-29 14:04

I wonder if he's morally opposed to sunblock? That also allows one to do something without suffering the consequences.

I love it-- in his quest to raise his profile so he can run for President he has had to own up to all these stupid ideas that are just sinking him.

#21 Tree Hugger on 2005-07-29 14:06

I wonder if Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts, since he is so devout, was one as well. He got married at 41. What are the chances that he waited that long?

#22 Qusan (Link) on 2005-07-29 14:08

I can't believe what I'm reading. I'm in Chicago, and a friend told me I better check this out. What are y'all doing in Pennsylvania? How'd he get elected? Does HE have kids? Married? I guess he must have stayed a virgin until he was married,huh? If his wife and he ever have sex, I guess they'll just have about 1 baby each year until the poor woman leaves him or dies. Unless he is just some frigid ass who doesn't like to have sex. Then I guess I can understand.

#23 Tanya on 2005-07-29 20:41

You know it wouldn't be so bad if he were the only "pious" knob running around the halls of power, the place is
teeming with them. One can only look at what makes up the American government and be grateful we are not!
S.D.,>>the outsider

#24 sandie Drake on 2005-07-30 08:51

This is truly a golden age for American political satire, with comic geniuses like Santorum, and the hilarious Bush & Cheney show where even the secondary characters like doddering death cultist Rumsfeld and minority double-threat Condi Rice are fully realized charicatures of some of the more demented aspects of contemporary American political life.

But as undeniably brilliant and deadly accurate as this new breed of political satirists are, it sometimes seems to me that they are getting so much media coverage that they are almost entirely obscuring the reporting on the real president, his White House advisors, and the top players in both parties. In fact, up here in Canada, we only ever hear of the satirical politicians now, and a lot of people actually believe Bush really is the US President!

So where can I go to find out what the real US president and government are up to these days? And who they are, for that matter? I've been googling for a couple hours now, but I can only find stuff on the comedy "President Bush" and his demented cronies. Is stuff about real US politics not being let into Canada or something?

It's all very odd, and vaguely disturbing.

#25 Delysid on 2005-07-30 10:01

I just love good satire myself. Santorum is not really satirical, he's a caricature given life by equally cartoonish cohorts. If he's mainstream, then the United States has taken a detour through the Twilight Zone in its thinking. How can these complete nut cases be in power? If this doesn't prove vote rigging, I don't know what would. Clearly, no one with two brain cells to rub together would vote for this guy.

With respect to birth control, I don't get it. If you're not born, they really care about you. They will put your mother in jail to make sure that you get here and prosecute her if she takes drugs that might harm you. Once you're born however, the story changes. You become a burden, another statistic to be dealt with in some heinous fashion. Currently, starting illegal wars and sending kids out to be slaughtered along with their parents up to the age of 42 is the norm. Or they send you to a foster home in Florida where no one will ever be able to retrieve you from, because you'll be lost.

#25.1 Madame Karnak (Link) on 2005-07-30 16:24

Why does the media let this nutjob get away with calling himself a "conservative"? This guy's conservative the way a tsunami is a day at the beach.

In the same interview in which he made the infamous "man on dog" comment, likening gayness to bestiality, Retro Rick also made another little-noted reference that ought to send chills down the spine of even diehard Republicans.

In discussing the "moral decline" of the past oh, 40 years or so, Santorum happened to let fly that he thought Griswold v. Connecticut, the 1962 7-2 Supreme Court ruling granting married couples the right to birth control, was "a mistake."

GRISWOLD? Right, folks---Rick thinks we ALL have a duty to bear whatever progeny Fate sees fit to send us, married ot not.

Now, how can a guy with views that would return Americans to the 19th century should they be enacted, be allowed the umbrage of the mild category of "conservative"? Even the staunchest Republican, I would imagine, believes in the right of married folks to control their fertility.

We should begin a mass mailing to every news organ in the co8untry enjoining them to call Santorum a Santorum: that is, a rightwing nutcase.

There is nothing remotely conservative about this man.

#26 Joanne G Murphy on 2005-07-30 10:24

Philly Girl,

Thanks for the plug/link and for forwarding the info to your friends. We want to make sure we get this info out to as many people as possible. Building a large, involved community is the key to exposing Rick. I hope you'll continue to stay involved.

#26.1 Brian (Link) on 2005-07-30 15:42

To paraphrase a line from "Heartbreak Ridge" that's appropriate for this topic, Santorum is the poster child for a prophylactic. The more this high and mighty whackjob talks, the more people are convinced he's a few cans short of a six-pack. Clearly Santorum is a five-alarm embarrassment for Pennsylvania, if not the Republican party (thank God I'm a Democrat), yet he continues to make an ass clown of himself on an almost daily basis. I'm flat out amazed Santorum actually believes the crap that spews from his mouth. But we Keystone Staters are just marking time until the election and we can finally plant a well deserved size 12 on his rear end and get him the hell out of office!

#27 JeffB on 2005-07-31 08:09

On the Daily Show he defended his position on gay marriage, despite begrudgingly admitting that gay people aren't by definition immoral, by saying that he had to push for and vote for the ideal scenario because our government should push for and promote the ideal scenario. Yet in this video clip he states he believes that the widespread use of contraception is harmful to women, relationships in this country. If he must always vote for government upholding the ideal scenario, how can he vote for allowing contraception? I'm sure if 40% of the country thought contraception should be illegal, he'd probably be acting all holier than though on that in the halls of Congress as well. As it is he basically exposed himself for being the hypocrite that we always knew he was. Thanks Ricky!

#28 Mr. Moderate on 2005-07-31 22:21

This guy is a nut. We here in PA are doomed! So, he thinks that you shouldn't use birth control because it's a way to allow you to do whatever you want without having to deal with the consequences. By that token, I guess he thinks that people who ride bikes or motorcycles shouldn't wear helmets, because hey, if they're going to ride, they should be forced to deal with the consequences of their actions. Sheesh!

#29 Amy G. on 2005-08-01 09:14

Interested people can learn about prehistorical contraception in the book The Prehistory of Sex: Four Million Years of Human Sexual Culture
by Timothy Taylor. Self imposed limitations on reproduction are as natural, biological and necessary to our continued existence as a species as language, the opposable thumb, or any other product of our evolutionary past. The inescapable conclusion is that we co-evolved with contraceptive and abortifacient plants. Another source on this is The Lost Language of Plants: The Ecological Importance of Plant Medicines to Life on Earth
by Stephen Harrod Buhner. People who fail to respond respectfully to truth based on evidence are either perpetrators or their victims.

herb

#30 herb on 2005-08-01 17:34

You should all google Kay Grigg's shocking revelations on the sexual corruption of GOP elites. She doesn't mention Santorum but I bet he's gay or a hetero pedophile, and like the pedophile and playboy politician-serving Vatican, he views adult women as useful fool broodmares. Also, the early Church was grossed out by smelly, unfixable childbirth bladder and bowel tears that turned moms into pariah. Banning effective birth control, like Jersalem's RU-486 weed, guaranteed pedophile priests plenty of orphan kids and Newt Gingriches frequent widowerhood and trophy wives. If the Santorums think miscarried fetuses are such cuddly toys for their born kids, how come Mrs. Santorum doesn't also introduce her kids to her bloody sanitary napkins which contain even younger miscarried "baby siblings?!" The misses should also save and freeze her bloody urine that may contain embryos too. Meanwhile, she should lay off abortificant caffeine and 450 other GOD-GIVEN contraceptive plants.

#31 Heil Mary on 2005-08-04 14:07

we seek modesty in our social order
and setting prudent examples for our youth so that they can make better decisions in adulthood, marriage and
starting families. The frailties of humans are many but just promoting
promiscuity as your argument suggests
is a hopeless measure. R. Santorum
is a champion of traditional family
values. I and many others support
his effort to affect change in our country where sexual expression has
no limits. I also find your Heil Mary
quite offensive but understand you are
a liberal. I wish you peace.

#31.1 Cristo Rey on 2005-08-18 09:33

Um, Cristo, nobody suggested "promoting promiscuity" so it must have been those voices in your head again.

How about you go back to your home planet and leave us Earthlings to sort out our own reproductive concerns?

And please take your comrade Santorum with you.

Muchas gracias.

#31.1.1 Delysid on 2005-08-29 05:58

Deciding to use contraception IS taking responsibility! Weighing the risks and minimising them if you decide to go ahead.... How does this harm women? or men?? Why does Ricky object if two people he never met have sex? how does this hurt him? how does it hurt anyone?

#32 Jonny on 2005-08-16 05:27

This is one of the biggest problems with these ultra-right conservative nutjobs when given positions of power and influence. They are literally retrograde, and drag back the whole society, forcing us to revisit old arguments and debates that were conclusively settled decades ago, while real and pressing issues in the here and now are ignored or made worse. These throwbacks rant and rave about reproductive rights, gay marriage, and now contraception, issues they lost decades ago in the face of sound research and evolving standards of tolerance and respect for the rights of all.

Meanwhile the US steadily slides downward in international rankings on quality of life and health care, with infant mortality and literacy approaching 3rd world levels in many areas; record numbers of Americans are without health insurance (41 million I think I heard?); decent jobs are vanishing as corporate greedheads outsource every possible position to foreign lands, liquidating the nation's productive capacity and replacing the middle class with a polarized landscape of many poor and a few filthy rich; and the country is ruthlessly crushing Iraq in a new fit of imperialist aggression, apparently oblivious to the atrocities of the 19th and 20th centuries that made clear to any thinking person that imperialism -- empires in general, taking over other people's land and denying them the right to self-rule -- is an invariably bad and destructive endeavor for both the agressor nation and its target states.

Oh, and of course environmental degradation, the continuing threat of accidental or deliberate nuclear self-annihilation, and a "war on terror" that is having exactly the opposite of its intended effect (like the "war on drugs" before it, which filled prisons while drugs became ever more widely available, potent, and cheap).

In the face of all these real, present-day problems, Santorum and his ilk want to rehash 19th century debates over sexual mores.

Can we please let the sane people have a turn and talk about reality for a change?

#32.1 Delysid on 2005-08-16 08:29

Senator Gomer is trying to cover his own insecurity about his masculinity. The only way he can prove his is by breeding and in order to validate it to himself, he has to make sure that everyone else does what he does.

#32.2 Qusan (Link) on 2005-08-18 16:02

If I ever have a chance to vote against this guy, I will. I'll remember to remind my wife that she's not allowed to take her BC because some kid might be tempted to use it and think sex is ok now. He reminds me of an ex-pastor of mine who said Palm Pilots are the tool of the devil because you don't schedule time for God. Yet, that church bought all the "employees" a Palm Pilot to keep track of church activities. I stopped going after that.

#33 Danny on 2005-08-23 07:04

There are too many great comments here for me to read right now, so I don't know if someone's already pointed this out but: Does Santorum know that married people use birth control too? He repeatedly states that BC leads to pre-marital sex, but what about marital sex where you don't want kids? And what about extramarital sex? I mean, come on, you gotta make sure you don't get your mistress or hooker knocked up while your perfect Republican wife is at home knocked out on Wild Turkey Rare Breed and Xanax!

#34 Alexis Hidell on 2005-10-13 15:01

Out of respect and deep love for my wife, we always used a rubber when having sex. thus sparing her and her dislike of the pill, iud, etc. contrary to reports they work without fail, allowing our up bring two lovely daughters and a great sex life together.Any man that truly loves his wife should be willing to use a rubber for birth control.

#35 e.t.johnson (Link) on 2006-03-29 08:33

Quicksearch

Archives

Calendar

Categories

Syndicate This Blog

Thursday, July 28. 2005