Stepping into the world of Social Work
Even more evidence!
March 18, 2012Posted by on
I just came across this from the Family Research Council.
According to the information on the event:
On March 22nd, 1972, the Supreme Court undermined the boundaries and benefits of marriage. In the decision Eisenstadt v. Baird, the Court struck down a Massachusetts law prohibiting the distribution of contraceptives to unmarried people, and implicitly sanctioned unmarried non-procreative sexual intimacy.
Does this really sound like freedom?
A free society, in my opinion, permits individuals and doctors to make medical decisions based on science and the individual’s moral, ethical, and religious beliefs, not that of the state. I’ll even give the doctor an out from prescribing what he doesn’t approve of, so long as s/he is willing to provide a referral to another doctor, though I would be personally very uncomfortable with the idea of an OB/GYN who refused to prescribe birth control medication.
The “logic” appears to be that the availability of birth control somehow discourages marriage. While I consider marriage a great choice. I don’t see how people are going to decide to get married simply because they can’t get birth control without a marriage license.
- Birth Control May Decide This Election (abortion.ws)
- Rick Santorum Favors Making Birth Control Illegal (outsidethebeltway.com)
- Obama, Santorum, Griswold, Roe, Eisenstadt, Lawrence & Limbaugh (donaldrhamilton.com)
- It’s my body and I’ll use birth control if I want to (feministlawprof.wordpress.com)
- Framing Discrimination As Religious Freedom (jonathanturley.org)