https://www.cbsnews.com/news/over-the-counter-birth-control-…
For the first time, a pharmaceutical company has asked for permission to sell a birth control pill over the counter in the U.S.
HRA Pharma’s application on Monday sets up a high-stakes decision for health regulators amid legal and political battles over women’s reproductive health. The company says the timing was unrelated to the Supreme Court’s recent decision overturning Roe v. Wade.
over women’s reproductive health.
Over women’s reproductive rights?
The Captain
Robin Williams on Thomas’s nomination responding to questions, “Roe v Wade, I just want to float”.
without going into politics, this will be probably be determined by what party is in power.
The Evangelicals are going to be fervently against this, if they are the subset of the
American population being catered to, then I don’t think approval will be granted for OTC
birth control.
( this is a pretty big macroeconomic investment/personal autonomy issue that is highly dependent on
politics )
The Evangelicals are going to be fervently against this, … then I don’t think approval will be granted for OTC birth control.
Everything will be available via mail order (Amazon, eBay, etc) or a quick trip to a neighboring state that does allow it. The mothers will be sure their daughters have it–regardless of “the law”.
Jerry,
That is true only for now. This court will roll back things even further.
Over women’s reproductive rights?
No, reproductive health is the more accurate term. The whole problem here is people wanting to get in between the person and her doctor in a way that doesn’t occur for any other area of medicine.
The whole problem here is people wanting to get in between the person and her doctor in a way that doesn’t occur for any other area of medicine.
That’s infringing a right that has medical consequences but it is still a right.
The Captain
tamas,
The entire thing was mistermed for decades to advantage the other position.
Terming this as rights is crucial.
There is the medical care and the legal discussion.
For our purposes here this is a legal discussion. Even as medical treatments are discussed.
The Captain: That’s infringing a right that has medical consequences but it is still a right.
Within context, I agree.
But the crucial point for a sane and functional civil society is to put many issues far far away from governmental control, and sex and reproduction and functioning of families is one of those issues. Thus, it is mostly not a personal right that is at issue, but rather a civil right.
Picky picky david, but I think the nuances in these issues are crucial. Why? Well, gay rights are more solidly founded in “none of your business” than “I have a right.”
david fb
david fb,
Gay rights and abortion rights were both planted in the legal concepts of privacy rights before prior courts.
Unfortunately neither one is satisfactorily decided by congress.
Either we all have rights or we take your rights away eventually. Then we take away my rights as well.
There’s a Dutch non-profit group that’s already mailing abortion pills to women in the craphole states.
A Dutch doctor and the internet are making sure Americans have access to abortion pills
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/dutch-doctor-internet…
intercst
That’s infringing a right that has medical consequences but it is still a right.
The problem with focusing on the abortion as the right is that it is easy for the opposition to say “says who?”. Whereas, most people are likely to get behind the idea of not having the government interfere in the relationship between a person and their doctor as a general principle, of which abortion is only one manifestation.
Indeed, as we are discovering post-Dobbs, there is actually a whole lot of other medical issues impacted, not just abortion … IVF, ectopic pregnancies, some forms of birth control, miscarriages, etc. All of which should be medical issues between the doctor and patient. Not to mention, of course, the other rights which are threatened by this direction, including birth control, same sex marriage, and regulating allowable forms of sex.
Picky picky david, but I think the nuances in these issues are crucial. Why? Well, gay rights are more solidly founded in “none of your business” than “I have a right.”
Indeed! This is another way of stating the principle I was attempting to express.
tamas,
I hear all of that differently.
I hear it as under the umbrella of “women’s rights”. People can and are rallying behind that.
tamhas,
I just realized your spelling. Sorry.
I hear it as under the umbrella of “women’s rights”. People can and are rallying behind that.
Yes, people can rally around it, but people can also oppose it based on their prejudices whereas no one wants the government getting in between them and their doctor.
No problem.
BTW, Tamhas is the Gaelic version of Thomas and is pronounced Ta’as, where the ’ is a glottal stop. I say this because there used to be a certain unpleasant person on TMF who would constantly refer to me as Tammy. Nothing wrong with Tammy as a name, but it has nothing to do with me.
Yes, people can rally around it, but people can also oppose it based on their prejudices whereas no one wants the government getting in between them and their doctor.
I am beginning to get you, Tamhas. The difference is to codify all of these matters in congress as privacy rights.
The problem with focusing on the abortion as the right is that it is easy for the opposition to say “says who?”.
This is the same argument for people calling themselves “progressive” and “liberal” because it sells better. And that was the reason for my ‘rights’ post. I hate to see language destroyed.
Hayek 1956:
"The fact that this book was originally written with only the British public in mind does not appear to have seriously affected its intelligibility for the American reader. But there is one point of phraseology which I ought to explain here to forestall any misunderstanding. I use throughout the term ‘liberal’ in the original, nineteenth-century sense in which it is still current in Britain. In current American usage it often means very nearly the opposite of this. It has been part of the camouflage of leftist movements in this country, helped by the muddleheadedness of many who really believe in liberty, that ‘liberal’ has come to mean the advocacy of almost every kind of government control.
https://softwaretimes.com/files/hayek%20and%20election%20200…
The Captain