Religion

muriel_volestrangler

(106,276 posts)

22. Could be; it was British dictionaries and an encyclopedia I used

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 08:24 PM

Jan 2013

(OED, "The Royal Society of Medicine: Medicines" and the Hutchinson Enc. respectively), since I wanted authorities who speak English, but don't get mixed up with political arguments about pregnancy. Your reference does point out:
"In multivariable analysis, the consideration that religion is the most important thing in one's life (odds ratio, 0.5; 95% confidence interval, 0.2–0.9) and an objection to abortion (odds ratio, 0.4; 95% confidence interval, 0.2–0.9) were associated independently and inversely with believing that pregnancy begins at implantation."
so it does look like it's an American right wing thing. I presume you don't agree with it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

57 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A Flood of Suits Fights Coverage of Birth Control [View all] rug Jan 2013 OP

What a mess. cbayer Jan 2013 #1

I still think the ultimate result will be Catholic hosptals closing or selling. rug Jan 2013 #2

I'm not so sure about that. I think they will find a way around it. cbayer Jan 2013 #3

What about those states that have contraception coverage requirements already? Freddie Jan 2013 #4

Got any links to those states and statutes? rug Jan 2013 #6

28 states including CA & NY Freddie Jan 2013 #9

Whew, there's a lot on that site. Can you point me in the right direction cbayer Jan 2013 #10

www.guttmacher.org/statecenter Freddie Jan 2013 #13

RU-486 is permitted under the ACA. rug Jan 2013 #11

'permitted', perhaps, but not required muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #18

But it does require coverage of abortifacients. rug Jan 2013 #19

Only if you accept the right wing re-definition of 'abortifacient' muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #20

Then you must believe 57% of U.S. OBs are rightwing. rug Jan 2013 #21

Could be; it was British dictionaries and an encyclopedia I used muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #22

I'm not a biologist but the only political issue is whether it should be legal. rug Jan 2013 #23

How contraception and abortion is paid for is also a political issue muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #24

Biology is not "right wing" or left wing. rug Jan 2013 #25

Of course abortifacients shouldn't be banned muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #26

So, a right winger is someone who subordinates facts to ideology. rug Jan 2013 #27

You did, in #19 (nt) muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #28

Wrong, you put a political spin on a medical term in #20. rug Jan 2013 #29

You were acccepting the right wing redefinition muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #30

I'm accepting the obstetricians' definition. rug Jan 2013 #32

You're agreeing with 57% of American obstetricians in a survey muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #35

Lol. So, the political party determines the fact, not the science. rug Jan 2013 #41

No, that's not the only issue; in fact, it's not actually one of the issues at hand here muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #43

Contraception, as well as abortifacients, are part of the litigation. rug Jan 2013 #46

"witch hunting"? You asked the question first. After I answered it, I asked you, twice muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #47

You yourself brought it up and asked iit in#30. rug Jan 2013 #48

Can you read your posts #6, #11, #19 and #25? muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #49

Of course I can. rug Jan 2013 #50

#25 muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #51

The litigation is about abortifacients. rug Jan 2013 #52

Since I have shown that the re-definition was indeed a right wing move muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #53

Oh, now you say I'm championing Bush? rug Jan 2013 #54

Moroever... LeftishBrit Jan 2013 #55

I'm curious as to which states those are and what kind of language cbayer Jan 2013 #7

Here: rug Jan 2013 #12

Thanks so much. Looks like 28 states have requirements similar to ACA. cbayer Jan 2013 #14

That narrows it done. rug Jan 2013 #15

Right. I would think that if they have complied without dissent, it would cbayer Jan 2013 #16

Exactly. rug Jan 2013 #17

As you pointed out skepticscott Jan 2013 #5

If they wish to maintain the affiliation they do. rug Jan 2013 #8

the usual religious crap Skittles Jan 2013 #31

Yea, all that religious stuff is such crap cbayer Jan 2013 #33

Yes, it cetainly is. cleanhippie Jan 2013 #34

religion is not required for charity Skittles Jan 2013 #36

No it's definitely not, but many religious people and organizations are focused cbayer Jan 2013 #37

again, RELIGION IS NOT NEEDED for charity, civil liberties, social justice, environmental issues Skittles Jan 2013 #38

No, it's not, but it's still there anyway cbayer Jan 2013 #39

yes and don't we ALL know it Skittles Jan 2013 #40

One last thing (then you can have the last word) cbayer Jan 2013 #42

and I prefer doing the right thing because it is simply the right thing Skittles Jan 2013 #44

Aw, jeez, I said I was done, but I have to say one more thing. cbayer Jan 2013 #45

Trying to deny people the right to birth control is indeed crap... LeftishBrit Jan 2013 #56

Completely agree. cbayer Jan 2013 #57