Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Isn't the GOP supposed to be about personal freedom?
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=5...
Why, then, are they trying to mandate the size of my family? This isn't about surgical abortion, they want birth control, WHICH PREVENTS SURGICAL ABORTION, labeled as "abortion." How is this more personal freedom? Or do all of my gametes now (we're talking million) officially posess the rights of fully formed people?
Why is this okay for the government to control?
CM, I've read your numerous posts (get a job, my friend, I'm tired of paying your way) and I truly believe that your next original thought will be your first.
Bwana- Fearmongering? No. The truth is that the decision to have or not to have an addition to my family should be up to myself and my wife. No one else. Sorry. I didn't join your church, my wife didn't join your church, my son didn't join your church.
Bias by omission? I guess if they don't have any pro-arson or pro-murder people when they present those stories, that is bias by omission? Bias toward intelligence and common sense, maybe.
1 Answer
- Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer
Hmmmm... you do understand what's going on, right?
The rule change would allow health care providers (corporate or individual) the personal freedom to choose not to provide these because they believe them to be a violation of their beliefs.
A number of years ago, law was passed that prevented people from being discriminated against because their personal religious beliefs did not allow them to support abortion, abortificants or contraceptives.
It's a sticky situation, granted, but it certainly deserves a more reasoned approach than your fearmongering rant. The idea here, whether individuals and organizations can be discriminated against because they refuse to dispense items which violate their religions beliefs, is indeed about personal freedoms, and if there are limits to it.
It's not about government controlling it, but about a proposed rule which would allow individuals the freedom to determine this.
And ABC's treatment, which had 6 paragraphs of criticism and no inclusion of any statements by supporters, is an example of a biased news story, biased by omission.
---
You've completely missed the point. The point is that the government cannot allow government funded institutions, clinics or providers from DISCRIMINATING against employees based on their religious convictions.
It's a much bigger and more fundamental issue than whether a female can get her latest ooopsie scraped out before she whores around again.
-
Another thing, when only one side of an issue is presented, that's bias. If you can't recognize that, then you're not as intellectual as all you screaming emotion-wrought leftwingers claim you are.