New Birth Control Pill Legislation
The Sacramento Bee reports on a bill headed to Governor Brown that will increase the allowed purchase of birth control pills. Currently the limit is a three month supply. This legislation will increase the limit to a one year supply. The bill's author, Fran Pavley, says, “Increasing access to birth control is good for women, families and the health of our state,”
Maybe so but, setting aside arguments for or against how many of the pills women should be able to buy at one time, I have to ask why this should be government business in the first place? How much medication one buys should be one's personal business, especially in regards birth control pills.
This is a good example that when you give the government a hammer, everything ends up looking like a nail.
posted by Fred Mangels @ 8:53 AM
4 comments
4 Comments:
I disagree. I think the part of government should be to promote practices that are for the general good. I have no doubt that there is a population crisis, which is also an economic/social class crisis: the poorer people, the ones unable to raise children properly, are having more kids than the ones who can afford to do it right. Not that you need fancy gew-gaws to raise good kids, but stability, good nutrition, lack of drug deals and violence, a certain level of education, etc., are more likely to produce the kinds of people we want to live with. I think birth control should be free, widely available, and encouraged; and would even go so far as to suggest that a good-sized financial reward (say, $20,000 a woman) for permanent sterilization would both prevent feral kids/future lowlife tweaker thugs from being born, and save the gov't (the people) a lot of social services money in the long run.
It's the government's business insofar as it vastly reduces the cost to government that is caused by unwanted births from low income and poor people (who now comprise half of all Americans). Pick your issue. There are many costs associated with unintended or unwanted pregnancies that last 18 years easy, and often for the life of those unwanted individuals. We're talking everything associated with generational poverty, the very issue that is pervasive in Humboldt County.
In short, government can say "It's not our business to get involved," or it can say, "If we get involved, it's better for government and better for the state and country, from an economic perspective."
I'm with you Fred. Why is govt in this in the first place? It is not a delegated duty. The Constitution does not say we need to Bow to the king, hand over your principles, money, businesses, churches, & homes. The DoI & BoR & Constitution assured it would be the other way around.
Good question. My guess is that republicans for some reason want to limit access to BC or the dr. lobby wants to make sure women on BC come in for check-ups more frequently.
Post a Comment
<< Home