E. Field: Don't repress civil liberties

Extreme conservatives want to run this country according to their personal religious beliefs, an idea that the founding fathers opposed. Such a change would clearly violate the principle of separation of church and state.

Such people oppose both birth control and social welfare programs, which is illogical since the lack of contraceptives would increase the number of children and families needing government assistance and lead to many more abortions. If conservatives are really serious about stopping abortion they should be handing out contraceptives, not trying to stop their use.

Contraception and abortion are not new issues; both have been legal in all U.S. states since the early 1970s. (Abortions were actually legal in the U.S. at the time the Constitution was adopted but were made illegal in the 1800s.)

Abortion is not mentioned specifically in the Bible, and Jewish law says that an embryo is not reckoned a viable living thing until 30 days after it is born. In any case, conservatives who hate abortion shouldn’t have one; if they don’t approve of birth control, they shouldn’t use birth control. No one is forcing them to do either.

It is ironic that people who are so frightened of Sharia law want to promote their own version of it. They should stop trying to repress civil liberties and imposing their personal beliefs on other people.

The government was legally kicked out of American bedrooms 40 years ago and should stay out.

Ellen Field, New Gloucester

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

In order to make comments, you must create a subscription.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must hold a valid subscription allowing access to this website. You must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your SunJournal.com profile. To subscribe or link your existing subscription click here.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.

Advertisement

Comments

Tina Clukey's picture

Male comments

I fine it very interesting on how much the men on here LOVE to prove that there point it correct and is right, now Im not trying to start up anything but really guys, birth control topic??? Mud slinging over a WOMEN's issue?? Just cracks me up to read the comments,it's personal choice really no need for other opions on what I take or dont take, if I choose to end a unwanted baby,it's not a choice I would do but really who are any of us to comment on someone's privite choice, like Bettys said "getting way off the topic here!!!" But enjoyable to read LOL

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Saturday's Sun Journal

Saturday's Sun Journal editorial page contained a Dave Granlund cartoon that portrayed massive amounts of space junk headed towards Earth. The items ranged in scope from bathroom sinks to dentures, but missing were any signs of contraceptives. Is one to conclude that our astronauts have been denied free access to contraception while in space?

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

"If conservatives are really

"If conservatives are really serious about stopping abortions, they should be handing out contraceptives,not trying to stop their use".
You've taken two separate issues and put them in the same bag. No one on the right is trying to stop the use of contraceptives nor are they trying to deny access to them. The issue on contraceptives is oBAMa's attempt to force religious institutions to provide free contraceptives in their medical coverage plans, which puts them in conflict with Church dogma. oBAMa has since 'compromised' on the mandate and removed it, I believe.

 's picture

Selective activism.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

The best humor always has a

The best humor always has a great deal of truth attached to it.

 's picture

The repressing is left on right.

First the president attempted to dictate to the Catholic church on what their medical insurance must cover. When he got slapped back hard, he shifted his mandate to insurance companies. Both moves are unConstitutional meddling by the state, first in church matters, then in the matters of private companies. This president has never been shy about telling business what to do, with precious little positive results.

Then, by an amazing coincidence, came the silly "testimony" of Ms. Fluke, who wants to engage in nearly continuous recreational sex and demands her insurance pay for her lifestyle choices. One wonders when she finds time to attend classes. Perhaps she doesn't, given she's north of 30 and still in law school.

All this has been stage-managed by Democrats to deflect attention away from matters of more immediate importance. In your case, Ms. Field, they have obviously succeeded.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

..."came the silly

..."came the silly "testimony" of Ms. Fluke, who wants to engage in nearly continuous recreational sex"...
Careful, friend; you saw what happened to Rush. Your sponsors are apt to start jumping ship. 0O:-)

 's picture

Rush Limpbaugh would love you.

First, the President did no such thing. The Catholic Church and all its related organizations are exempt from the medical insurance provisions of RomneyCare (excuse me, The Affordable Care Act. RomneyCare provides no exemption for any organizations). The President's proposal only affected religious affiliated organizations - organizations explicitly set up to receive federal funds because of their secular non-religious function.
Second, please remind us of the part(s)of the US Constitution that prevents the US Government from "meddling" in matters of private companies. Doesn't exist. The US Constitution explicitly gives the Federal Government wide latitude in all matters related to the economy and the functioning of corporations from setting the value of money, weights and measures, company bankruptcy, etc, etc. Implicitly, that latitude is even larger by the commerce clause, the necessary and proper clause, and several others.
Third, Ms Fluke provided no testimony about "nearly continuous recreational sex" or demands that insurance pay for her sex life. Her testimony was that other women at Gerogetown University who had medical conditions (ovarian cysts) could not easily get contraceptive pills which are a medical treatment for those conditions.
Last, all of this was stage managed by Republicans (the Issa committee which brought it up first) to deflect attention away from immediately important matters that they have obstructed for the last 3 years.

 's picture

hah!

Kudos for the chuckle of the day! Everything is unconstitutional all the time.

 's picture

No laughing matter.

Indeed, acts that are unconstitutional are unconstitutional all the time, not just when it's convenient.

Betty Davies's picture

You are mistaken about Ms. Fluke

You appear to have taken Limbaugh's vile slander as truth.

Ms. Fluke did not testify about her sex life. She testified about a friend who needed a birth control prescription to treat polycystic ovarian syndrome--a medical condition.

Limbaugh, who apparently confused birth control pills with Viagra, seems to assume that any woman who takes a birth control pill daily is having sex daily (or perhaps more often), and launched into his loathsome and vindictive diatribe, calling Ms. Fluke a prostitute and inviting her to have sex for him and others to watch.

There is simply no excuse for his behavior.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

I believe Mr. Limbaugh

I believe Mr. Limbaugh included the absence of excuse for his behavior in his apology to Ms. Fluke. It is now time for liberals to display some of that tolerance and forgiveness that they're always preaching to the right about.

 's picture

And you have obviously swallowed the propaganda ...

... that all misogyny originates from the right. Here are some snips from a column today by Larry Elder. The first two sure haven't provoked much attention from the media.

Ed Schultz, … the blowtorch left-wing MSNBC host, called conservative radio show host Laura Ingraham a "right-wing slut" and a "talk slut." … His punishment? One week's suspension without pay.

{Bill} Maher, of HBO's "Real Time," …, on more than one occasion, referred to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin by the "c" word, called her a "dumb 't'-word" (think "twit" with a different vowel), and has called Palin and Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., "bimbos."

And, of course, the misogyny academy's life-time achievement award goes to …

The sexism police long ago exempted Bill Clinton from any conversation about ill-treatment of women. Some of the same people who condemn Limbaugh for his treatment of Fluke go deaf, dumb and blind over Clinton's treatment of and statements about the women who dared confront him.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

HE SCORES!!!!

HE SCORES!!!!

Betty Davies's picture

Changing the topic is the best you can do?

You appear to be attempting to justify Limbaugh's rant, or at least to draw attention away from it, by pointing out that other public figures have insulted women in the past.

I deplore all such slurs. And today's focus is on Limbaugh.

"But Eddie and Billie said something even worse than my buddy Rushie just did, and nobody got mad at THEM!!" surely never worked on the playground, and won't work here, either.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Limbaugh's rant, though

Limbaugh's rant, though unacceptable, doesn't come close to the gutter trash that Maher and Letterman have directed towards Sarah Palin and her family. Where is the outrage and the protests for that?

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

In the land of the blind, the

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed Jack is King.

 's picture

As I said in my first post ...

... this issue was started by Democrats and choreographed by them ever since, aided and abetted by their wholly owned subsidiary, the "mainstream" media, to keep it in the forefront. With Eddie and Billie and, don't forget, Slick, the media delivered crickets. Your memory of playgrounds is conveniently selective.

 's picture

Apparently

Someone by the name of Betty really didn't read or listen to the so called testimony which were only statements staged in front of a loaded Democrat panel. There was no confusion as to Miss Flukes statements.

Betty Davies's picture

A link to Ms. Fluke's comments

Here is a link to her testimony: http://democrats.oversight.house.gov/images/stories/Testimony_-_Sandra_F...

She describes other women who are affected by the university's decision. She does not at any point discuss her own sex life.

Examples: A friend of mine, for example, has polycystic ovarian syndrome and has to take prescription birth control to stop cysts from growing on her ovaries. [...] After months of paying over $100 out of pocket, she just couldn’t afford her medication anymore and had to stop taking it. [...] Without taking the birth control, a massive cyst had grown on her ovary. She had to have surgery to remove her entire ovary. [...]

Since last year’s surgery, she’s been experiencing night sweats, weight gain, and other symptoms of early menopause as a result of the removal of her ovary. She’s 32 years old. As she put it: “If my body is indeed in early menopause, no fertility specialist in the world will be able to help me have my own children.”

 's picture

She describes other women ...

... only after she talks about "a lot of students who, like me, ..." with some vague phrasing so she can't be pinned down. Evidently that's one class she never missed: Dissembling 101.

 's picture

Translation

She said nothing about her sex life.

Betty Davies's picture

What is your point?

If I am correctly interpreting your innuendo, you seem to be arguing that Ms. Fluke gave some indication that, like some of the women she was referencing, she might be using birth control.

Is this an attempt to justify Limbaugh labeling her a slut and demanding to see her perform sex acts?

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Some have even dared to say

Some have even dared to say that abstinence can be quite an effective means of contraception. What a bold concept.

Betty Davies's picture

Unrealistic

Human nature being what it is, basing public health policy on abstinence simply doesn't work out in practice.

And don't forget that one of the reprehensible things Georgetown does is to deny insurance benefits that cover treatment for medical conditions (such as polycystic ovarian syndrome), simply because the treatment involves a substance that is also used for contraception.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Don't we ever get tired of

Don't we ever get tired of blaming character flaws and weaknesses on "human nature being what it is"?

Betty Davies's picture

Depends on your views...

I don't regard human sexuality as a character flaw. I spend zero time worrying about what others are doing sexually or making assertions about their characters based on their sexuality.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Maybe not, but uncontrolled

Maybe not, but uncontrolled sexual activity might be. There's a great tendency to say we practice human nature, but the reality is we are engaging in animal behavior. Our moral compass is askew.

 's picture

No

Its an attempt to inform you that Miss Kluke is a fraud. She is listed in professional web sites, as a 30yr old legal assistant and women's activist who has been down this road before. Not a young innocent student like the Democrat leadership is making her out to be.

Betty Davies's picture

Heavens forfend!

She's a legal assistant? Dear me, how reprehensible.

She advocates for women? Perhaps you would be willing to listen only to a woman who advocates AGAINST women?

She's 30 years old? A certain sign of depravity.

Golly, you folks are grasping at straws.

 's picture

No

The fraud came into play when Miss Polozi and her fake panel tried to portray this lady as an innocent victim, of a policy that Miss Fluke, knew all to well in advance when applying to attend Georgetown. She researched the school and knew about the policy before hand. When you accept attendance to a school like Georgetown, you accept the rules and policies. If refuse to accept these rules policies you move on to another school.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Beautiful; keep it coming,

Beautiful; keep it coming, David.

Betty Davies's picture

The fraud came into play...

The fraud originated when Georgetown decided it could accept Federal funds yet abide by only certain Federal rules, and not others.

If it doesn't want to cover contraception for students, it can decline to accept Federal funds.

 's picture

Well then

if that's the case then people who receive aid like food stamps and the like should be tested for drugs before they are allowed to get in the program. Correct? It's federal and state money.

Betty Davies's picture

Getting wa-a-a-ay off topic...

But I'd consider what you propose, as long as it applies to all elected officials, as well.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

There is no justification for

There is no justification for the terms Mr. Limbaugh used in reference to Ms. Fluke. He clearly stated that in his apology to her.The horse is dead; how long do you intend to beat it?

Joe Morin's picture

My Guess

'Till November. The real issue to the supporters of Ms. Fluke, that no one is brave enough to say, is that they realize that the Fed. is infringing upon religious liberties but they simply don't care. Progressives have not !YET! reached the point where they are openly admitting that they feel the constitution is irrelevant. Specifically when it stands in the way of the progressive agenda.
Why haven't they conceived a reality where the Fed has centralized all power and a "right wing zealot" is in control. Furthermore, why do we call them progressives when their ideas are anything but.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

"Progressive" is another way

"Progressive" is another way of saying constantly changing. That is their agenda; to constantly keep changing things to the extent of trying to fix things that aren't broken, which of course, only tends to worsen them.An example is, instead of attempting to fix the things that are wrong with our health insurance system, they prefer to abandon the whole thing in favor of a comprehensive one payer plan;ie, obamacare. Progressives worship at the altar of incrementation.For example, it started with the desire for acceptance of homosexuality, then it went to granting them protected class status; ie, hate crime protection, next came legalization of civil unions, followed by the current quest for the recognition of same sex marriage. The progression is constant and ongoing. Who knows what the next incremental demand will be, but I'm sure of one thing; it's coming.

Betty Davies's picture

You're against protection from hate crimes?

I really can't see any justification from allowing hate crimes against any individual or group.

If gays do win the right to marry in Maine, worst case in terms of incremental demands--you'll receive a wedding invitation from a couple of men or women, whom you did not realize were homosexual. You can always politely decline to attend.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

P.S.--I'm not in favor of

P.S.--I'm not in favor of protection from hate crimes and I'll tell you why; all crimes are hate crimes, so why do certain groups have to be specifically protected from them? How many crimes are committed as acts of love? I am in favor of protection from all crimes, though, and that protection already exists for ALL of us; it's called laws.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Haha...Not a problem, as long

Haha...Not a problem, as long as they don't exclude the parrot.

Advertisement

Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...