Birth Control, Politics,etc

I recently saw this post, and it got me thinking. I have recently been looking a little closer at how most contraceptives work, and well, I am not happy with what I am finding.

So, in the beginning, the "pill" was meant to prevent ovulation and conception. Personally, I have no problems with contraceptives that are designed like this. But, it turns out that the "pill" was not effective enough. The hormones didn't work for everyone, so they decided to change it. Now, the "pills" also affect the uterine wall, which prevents implantation OR promotes a very early miscarriage. This is were most Christians (including myself) have problems. I believe life begins at conception. I don't want to add something to my body that will promote the loss of life. I know it happens naturally sometimes, but that doesn't mean I want it to happen artificially. Some might take the stand that preventing implantation is okay (often the medical definition of life begins at implantation), but what the "pill" does now even would be a loss of life to those people. This goes for the mini pill too! Oh, and the IUD. And the patch, and well, pretty much all non-barrier contraceptives...

So, now to Santorum's point. I am not completely up on politics. I live in a state with a later primary, so I am waiting until things "thin out" to look too closely. But, I wonder if SOME of his point is that this should be a state issue - not a federal issue. Our federal government has definitely overstepped its rights recently. If you look at the rolls of the federal government, many of the things our current government handles it shouldn't. The states have a lot less power than our founding fathers planned/desired/wanted.

Now, with that being said, do I think all contraceptives should be outlawed? No. I personally have 0 problem with the barrier options. Condoms, etc I don't think should ever be outlawed. But, I think those methods of birth control that do increase the likelihood of an early miscarriage should, at the VERY LEAST, be only offered once how they work is fully explained. People need to know that it isn't that much different than the morning after pill.

Now for those that say without contraceptives women are going to have a ton of babies are also wrong. There are also natural ways to control when you get pregnant. NFP, etc are almost as affective when you have regular cycles. Now there are devices to help even those with irregular cycles determine when they are fertile, which means a form of NFP can be used (I don't know if they are available in the US just yet, but one article I read said they are in Europe and the FDA is working on approving them here). But, it means women have to do a little more than taking a pill a day, which I guess some people don't want. But, if it was the only option, I bet most would use it! Add in the barrier options, and I bet our birth rates wouldn't change much. I would venture to bet that the abortion rate (assuming it was still legal) would even drop because women would be more aware of their bodies, etc...

How your health insurance may change...

With the new health care bill about to be passed, what is going to happen to those people who currently have insurance through their employer? Well, if you work for a for-profit company, be prepared for some unwanted changes!

To abide by this bill, companies have to find a way to deal with the taxes, etc that will be imposed on them. And, for most of us, that means our coverage will change one way or the other. For some it will be a reduction in what is covered or how much is covered. For others it will be increased premiums. Regardless, it means your insurance won't be as good for the money you spend.

So, what do I think will happen in the long run? If there is a public option in the final bill, then eventually that will be the only option. Individuals and companies will realize that it is cheaper to go that route, and so they will. Then, insurance companies will fold because they don't have enough clients. In the end, there may be one or two insurance companies out there, but the majority of Americans will use the public option because it is really their only choice...

Health Care

Okay, so there is a lot of debate about the current health care bill out there. Personally, I like the coverage we have now. But, in a little over a year, it will change. My husband's employer can no longer afford to offer the plans it does now. Instead, it is going to a one-sized fits all approach with a health savings plan. All of the details haven't been announced, but it doesn't sound as good as what we have now!

That being said, I think the coverage we are going to get will still be better than the government's plan. It will still be a PPO. It will still be managed by the same carrier we have now. We just may have to pay more for things 9but pay less each month for that coverage).

What scares me about the government's plan? Well, a lot of things. Here is an article I read today (very short). I really feel that within 10 years of the plan being in place that private insurance will be gone. The government will be able to offer its plan at very low cost. There are also rumors of having private insurance taxed, meaning more Americans would pick the government option. So, what is the problem? With only one option, we won't have choices. We will have to jump through unnecessary hoops to get the care we want. There will probably be longer waits to see a doctor (like there is in Canada and the UK already). Basically, the quality of care we have now will not be there.

So, what do I want to see? Well, in a perfect world, the cost of insurance would not be so high. That would mean the actual cost for service would have to drop. But, with our sue-happy nation, that isn't going to happen! (Also, covering for illegal immigrants getting treatment in the ERs is killing many states' healthcare systems.) So, here is one idea:
The government would provide catastrophic coverage for all Americans. Then, those with chronic conditions would be offered insurance through the government on a buy-in basis (i.e. the amount they have to pay will be dependent upon their income and very affordable). For the rest of us, we would be able to buy private insurance like we can now. Because catastrophic coverage is already provided by the government, the insurance premiums should be less. They aren't going to have to make as many big pay-outs, so their costs would be less. Each American could then decide what level of coverage they want. For some, it might just be having a health savings plan if they are young and healthy. Others would opt for more coverage based on their projected needs. For example, if you are planning on having kids, you would want a plan that has good coverage for prenatal care and delivery. If you are accident-prone, you would want good ER coverage.

What do you think about this whole health care thing?

New Post - Finally (Economy)

Sorry it has been so long since i posted. First was the terrible, horrible, little to no good morning sickness that rendered me pretty much useless for a few weeks. Then there was the 9 days traveling. Between those and now, I have had some ideas, but I always forgot them before I got to the computer. But, today, I am able to get a post out!

So, do you think any thing Obama has done has or will help the economy in the next 24 months? IS there good int he stimulus package? Is there good in the bail-outs?

Will the "good" affect you or just the nation as a whole? Will you be hurt by some of his plans?

I want comments!

Gay Marriage

Personally, I don't think it should be legal. But there is more to this than that. Most of it comes down to what rights they don't have/do have.

Does a gay/homosexual person have the right to marry?
Yes

Does a gay have the right to marry the person he/she loves?
No, but we aren't guaranteed that right either. What if you loved your sister? Could you marry her? No. What if you loved a married man, could you marry him? No. There are lots of cases where you can't marry the person you love... and I don't hear people crying foul on these...

Are there things the government needs to work out in terms of rights?
Depends on the state. Most states have expanded the next o kin to include persons chosen by the injured/sick/deceased. But, you have to have a will/living will for this to work. Many companies and states have allowed domestic partners to receive benefits as well. The only thing that I know of that is totally not accessible to domestic partners (verses married couples) is Social Security. And personally, I think this program is falling apart enough as it is... I just wish we could get rid of it because it is going bankrupt. No one should depend on getting money out of it if you aren't at or very near retirement right now...

What are your thoughts? What rights do gays not have? By giving them those rights, are we opening ourselves up for greater issues later?

The Problem with the Medical Industry

Here is what It hink needs to happen to make medical care more affordable:
People need to stop blaming others for things!

So, I bet you are think what is she talking about!
Well, I think the main reason costs are so high is because of malpractice insurance. Doctors, hospitals, etc are being sued so often that their insurance is high. As a result, they pass that cost on to us. Now, I am not saying we shouldn't be able to sue these people.groups. But, I think something needs to be done to make it so they aren't being sued in cases that nothing (within reason) could have been done. If the doctor followed standard procedure and something happened, then I don't think it is the doctor's fault. Now, if the doctor made a mistake or didn't follow standard procedure, then he/she should be sued.

I think lawyers are partly to blame (and not all lawyers - just some). Have you seen the commercials some of them have? They are just fishing for people with cases that could go to court. I bet they have a pretty large stake in these cases - receiving a good percentage of the award. Maybe legislation should be passed to set guidelines for lawyers?

I don't know exactly how we are going to get people to sue less, but if it were to happen, I bet medical costs would drop! Maybe then health insurance would be affordable! Maybe then a simple visit to the doctor wouldn't be so expensive!

(I am not a fan of socialized health care. I do not want the government controlling insurance, etc. See some of my comments on this back in November - after the election.)

Sanctity of Life

Thirty-six years ago, Roe v. Wade was decided, allowing abortion on demand in the United States. I have already posted my views on abortion, but after suffering a miscarriage at the beginning of the year, I have an even greater feeling for babies aborted at six weeks or later. I have ultrasound pictures of our Junior #2 that measured him/her at 6 wks 5 d (although now we feel that the baby may have been old gestationally). It looked like a baby. It is our baby. Our AJU5 is a big sister, with a baby brother or sister in heaven waiting for us. Focus on the Family has a campaign to get women considering an abortion an ultrasound to see their children. I hope this helps these women see what they are doing...

Today in the local university's student newspaper, a letter to the editor claims that those of us who are pro-life want to return to the back alley abortion days. This is not the case! We want no child to be aborted (with the exception of to save a mother's life). I wish we lived in a world where sex was saved for marriage. I wish no child was conceived to parents that would consider to abort it. I wish we lived in a perfect world. But, we live in a human world. And our human sin nature is always causing problems. Children are conceived to parents who aren't ready and willing to raise the child. They are conceived to women who aren't wiling to allow the chld to grow inside of them and then give the baby to two adults that are willing to raise it. Instead, we live in a selfish society. We live where what "I" want is more important than what is means to others around me.

Support Our New President!

Romans 13:1-7
1 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. 4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. 5 Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers attending continually to this very thing. 7 Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.

Hope?

Okay, I voted for McCain. But, I knew what the results were most likely going to be. The problem I am having is figuring out why people think the Obama is going to bring so many good changes to the US.

Health Care/Insurance?
Well, right now we have shortage of medical professionals. It is hard to get into a doctor's office a lot of the time. If everyone has insurance, this is only going to get worse... Also, if the government is helping to pay for the insurance, then there is going to be less profits for the insurance companies and medical professionals. People are going to be even less likely to go into these fields, only making the problems worse. We only need to look at the Medicare/Medicade issues right now for how this is going to turn out... Or to Britain and Canada...
That isn't to say I don't think people should have to go without health care - especially kids. I think something needs to be done within the medical field to make things better. But, I don't think that Obama's plans will help most people...

Economy??
The main reason we are in a recession is because people think they DESERVE to have all of the luxury items. As a nation, we are spending more than we are making. We are buying things we dont' need and spending money on things we can do without. As a result, people have gotten into such large amounts of debt that the interest we are paying is killing the economy... People can't pay for things now and therefore the banks are loosing lots of money. It is their own fault though. They are the ones that gave the loans... and they need to pay as a result (instead of bailing them out). Redistributing the wealth is just going to make things worse - people are going to think they are entitled to more than they really are. They have shown (scientifically) that we don't take care of our gifts as much as we take care of the things we have worked for...

Where is the hope in Obama? Is it that he isn't Bush? Let me know - I am really confused here...

<><><><><><><><><><><>

Now, the following kind of worry me:

1. Freedom of Speech and Religion
   Is the US going to follow some other countries and make it illegal to say things like homosexuality is a sin? The abortion is murder? I hope not...
2. Freedom to Bare Arms
   Are will no longer going to allowed to have guns? I hope not...
3. The Right to Educate Our Children as We See Fit
   Is it going to become illegal to home school? How about private schools?

I don't know if these things will actually pass, but there have definitely been those in politics that have said they want some of this passed. It scares me...

My Dislike of Elections...

FIrst, let me say I have no issues with voting. Yes, the lines can be long, but I am willing to wait to exercise my right. I have no problems with the actual voting process.

But what I hate is the length of the election. They seem to start earlier and earlier campaigning for office these days. After about a month or so, they have made their ideas known. The rest of the election is mostly spent tearing apart the opponent(s). Not much new is ever said these days. Instead, it is just a mud fight between candidates. Regardless of the race, both candidates are making half truths about what the other has done.

"He voted against this, but I voted for it."
"No, he isn't for this because he voted against this bill."
"He doesn't understand us"
"He is so much like this person"

It is getting very old. I listen to a local talk radio station a lot. At 3 they have on a local host who is pretty middle of the road. I used to love listening to the conversations about the presidential and congressional races. But, after about 3 months of listening half the time it got old. The same basic things are being said. I still listen sometimes. He is good about playing the ads and sound bites that are just crazy (from both sides). But the comments from the listeners are always the same things over and over again.

I am pretty sure that 90% (or more) of Americans already know who they are going to vote for. What is said between now and the election probably isn't going to change anyone's mind. The undecideds are probably undecided because they haven't thought too much about it yet. So, all that is happening is only causing the two sides of the country to fight against each other more. Instead of uniting the country, elections tend to divide us more than anything.

So, here is what I wish would happen:
Public campaigning for an election can only occur 3 months prior to the election. That means if there is a primary, there would be 6 months total of campaigning.
All primaries would be on the same day. The primary system for the presidency is way to long!

Benefits: I bet it would be cheaper! Also, there would be less time to drag your opponent through the mud but still enough time to get important things on the table. Finally, the nation could spend more time working on things together instead of being divided!

Your thoughts?