Wisconsin lawmakers ban talk and dispensing of post-sex hormonal birth control on UW campuses

Huh, so they were just after emergency contraception (see *update* below post). Well I would have never applied to a university or college in Wisconsin anyway for weather related issues (too_bloody_cold). But this via Egalia of Tennessee Guerilla Women adds on another reason as to why for a whole different issue–definitely for the University of Wisconsin schools. The state’s lawmakers have passed a law banning University of Wisconsin campuses from prescribing, dispensing and advertising postcoital hormonal medical forms of birth control, and education and counseling (even post-rape victim counseling) on the subject. Especially since, you know, birth control–certainly emergency contraception such as Plan B–transforms young ‘pure-soul’ college women into shameless ‘Spring-Break Daytona Beach’ harlots.

[...]“Wisconsin has passed a bill entitled UW Birth Control Ban-AB 343. This bill prohibits University of Wisconsin campuses from prescribing, dispensing and advertising all forms of birth control and emergency contraceptives. Wisconsin State Rep. Dan LeMahieu, R-Oostburg, introduced this bill based on the belief that “dispensing birth control and emergency contraceptives leads to promiscuity.” In reality, full access to all birth control options … including emergency contraceptives … has no effect on the level of women’s promiscuity. Instead, birth control and emergency contraceptives help prevent more than 35,000 unintended births and 800,000 abortions each year.

The bill denies thousands of women essential health-care services and reproductive choices and affects their lives and futures in many ways. With this bill, rape victims will no longer be able to turn to campus health services to obtain emergency contraceptives to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, or receive postrape counseling and education … adding even more stress to a traumatic event. Students who want birth-control prescriptions, emergency contraceptives or even information about preventive birth control are forced to seek out these services at off-campus clinics. ” [...]

But don’t worry, I’m sure all of the unfortunate students of UW’s campuses will practice “abstinence-only” until marriage, and all rapes and sexual assaults will cease entirely on their campuses . ::snickers:: I wonder how long some of these lawmakers who passed this bill have been out of college.

*Update*: Thanks to commenter Niels Jackson, here’s the link to the actual bill. Hope you folks like Adobe.

This entry posted in Anti-Contraceptives/EC zaniness. Bookmark the permalink. 

59 Responses to Wisconsin lawmakers ban talk and dispensing of post-sex hormonal birth control on UW campuses

  1. 1
    Robert says:

    Your headline is dishonest. Contraceptives are not being banned from campus; they are not being dispensed from the campus medical facilities.

  2. 2
    scott says:

    I wonder how long some of these lawmakers who passed this bill have been out of college.

    For real, huh? They must apply the same blind faith that laws like this actually work as they do to their interpretations of religion.

    I can’t imagine what college would’ve been like without the availability of contraceptives. The word disastrous comes to mind. Even though where I went to school most of the sex ed and contraceptive efforts were organized by the students, they played a crucial role in making the campus more informed and responsible.

  3. 3
    ginmar says:

    Christ, Robert, you don’t miss an opportunity to be disingenuous, do you? It’s fucking disgusting.

  4. 4
    ginmar says:

    Oh, and just a few help tips:

    608-266-9175 and tell him to stick his bad bill, AB-343, right up his pasty white ass. Or better yet, call Danny on his dime, and call often, at 888-534-0059. If any angry straight people would prefer to send Danny a note, his mailing address is Room 17 North, State Capitol, P.O. Box 8952, Madison, WI, 53708.

    In case, you know, anybody’s interested in taking the battle to him.

    Dan Savage also noted that his home address is on his website, which can be found via Google. In case you wanted to write him there.

  5. 5
    A Reader from Michigan says:

    Well, Robert, at the school I went to, the student health services provided what might be the only health care that many students could afford. If UW is like my school in providing affordable health care, then this ban discriminates against poor students. (Besides being absolutely lunatic in other aspects already mentioned.) Same comment about affordability applies to college counseling services. To deny post-rape counseling is discriminatory and just plain cruel.

  6. 6
    Nick Kiddle says:

    I suppose by Robert’s logic, cannabis is not banned in my former boyfriend’s hometown in Germany.

  7. 7
    piny says:

    Campus medical facilities may be the only services many students feel comfortable accessing or can afford. And _rape victims_ probably won’t have the wherewithal to find any other provider. I couldn’t go anywhere else when I was at university, even though I had serious reservations about quality of care–I had no other coverage.

  8. 8
    ginmar says:

    Where does the bill talk about post-rape counseling? I’ve read it and I can’t find it.

  9. 9
    alsis39 says:

    Maybe someone will have to organize some kind of “contraception caravan” for the students of WI. If anyone hears of such a thing, let me know. I’d donate for sure.

  10. 10
    Pseudo-Adrienne says:

    Christ, Robert, you don’t miss an opportunity to be disingenuous, do you? It’s fucking disgusting.

    No, he doesn’t. Because he know he can get away with being a disruptive, derailing troll because he’s buddy-buddy with Amp, and he’ll never ban him. And I believe ginmar that what the author of the article was getting at was with the ban on talking about or dispensing emergency contraception, post-rape counseling will be greatly effected (and the victims), because not all possible options can be–legally—disclosed to the victim. Since a lot of on campus post-rape-counseling goes into e.c. and options relating to it (and that’s how a lot of victims even find out about it), I believe that was the point of mentioning the issue within the author’s article. My university’s clinic even gives victims directions to the Planned Parenthood nearby our campus where you can obtain emergency contraception without a prescription, and our clinic’s staff openly educates people about e.c.

  11. 11
    Angie says:

    Have the lawmakers in Wisconsin nothing better to do with their time then mess with students at colleges?? How is any of this their business to begin with? College students are adults I do believe, and if they wish to be “promiscuity” that is their choice.

    As far as ginmar’s comment — it’s there — 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence — With this bill, rape victims will no longer be able to turn to campus health services to obtain emergency contraceptives to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, or receive postrape counseling and education … adding even more stress to a traumatic event.

  12. 12
    Amanda says:

    ALL contraception was banned from my college campus, including condoms. A lot of students didn’t have cars, either. Luckily, I was generous with my time and made a couple Planned Parenthood runs to get condoms for people who needed them.

    But when it comes to the pill, yeah, a lot state university students can’t realistically go anywhere but their campus health services for health services.

  13. 13
    Amy says:

    Interesting to me that the bias of the article, which is probably the same as that of the legislation, is a concern over WOMEN’S promiscuity. I mean, hell, boys will be boys, but we sure need to keep those GIRLS in line! (Who is it they think the boys are being boys with, I always wonder.)

  14. 14
    ginmar says:

    So it’s a small, back door Gag Rule all over again, huh? That’s what it sounds like.

  15. 15
    Amanda says:

    The thing with this hysteria over EC that concerns me personally is that I don’t use the birth control pill myself so if ever I was to be raped, I would absolutely need EC to protect myself from getting pregnant and having to get an abortion. I expect that if Griswold is overturned, legislators in Texas will immediately ban EC and probably the pill as well, because it can be used as EC. Frankly, I think a lot of this hysteria is being whipped up so the public will be more open to accepting an outright ban on hormonal contraception, which of course means that most people will have to rely on male-controlled methods like condoms in the future.

  16. 16
    Amanda says:

    The thing with this hysteria over EC that concerns me personally is that I don’t use the birth control pill myself so if ever I was to be raped, I would absolutely need EC to protect myself from getting pregnant and having to get an abortion. I expect that if Griswold is overturned, legislators in Texas will immediately ban EC and probably the pill as well, because it can be used as EC. Frankly, I think a lot of this hysteria is being whipped up so the public will be more open to accepting an outright ban on hormonal contraception, which of course means that most people will have to rely on male-controlled methods like condoms in the future.

  17. The bill isn’t law yet, dammit! The (mostly Republican) morons in the General Assembly passed the bill, but now it has to go to the state senate (alas, also Republican-majority). The battle isn’t over yet, and I wish my sisters and brothers in struggle wouldn’t treat us like Wisconsin’s already lost.

  18. 18
    Niels Jackson says:

    In the interest of honesty:

    Wisconsin lawmakers ban all forms of birth control on UW campuses

    This is untrue in two different ways:

    1. Nothing is “banned” from the campuses themselves. No one is going to be arrested for carrying birth control onto the UW campuses, etc. The birth control is merely not prescribed by the UW health services.

    2. If you read the actual bill, rather than relying on a tendentious op-ed, the bill does NOT apply to “all forms of birth control.” That is just completely false. It ONLY applies to medication “administered only after sexual intercourse for the postcoital control of fertility.” In other words, the morning-after pill. NOT condoms, not “the pill,” not any other form of birth control.

    What’s more, if you look at the legislative summary, the bill has an exception for “property leased to the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority.” I’m not sure what that means in effect, but it implies to me that even the morning-after pill could be prescribed on property that is so leased.

    Moral: Try to find the original source.

  19. 19
    ginmar says:

    Actually, Niel, seeing as how the pill can be used as EC this can in fact affect BC. And your first paragraph is more Robert-style obfuscation. Reality: a lot of kids won’t be able to afford other health services.

  20. 20
    Pseudo-Adrienne says:

    That maybe so ginmar, still the link to the actual bill was helpful. They really were just after e.c. But who knows these wingnuts might go after regular women’s birth control later on.

  21. 21
    Niels Jackson says:

    What do you think it means that there is an exception for “property leased to the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority”? Seriously, I’m wondering what that means. It would be nice to know what effect such an exception has; otherwise, it looks to me as if all this outrage is being provoked by misinformation.

  22. 22
    ginmar says:

    Neil, for a lot of students, student health care is all they can get. Saying it’s not banned ignores that fact that for some kids it could very well be.

  23. 23
    Thomas says:

    Amy, the answer to your question, who do they think the boys are being boys with, is this: Sluts. Sluts and whores, who are appropriately punished with God’s chosen punishments for sinners of the sexual kind: pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease.

    That’s what I suspect “they” really think, and I really like it when they drop the pretense and just say it.

  24. 24
    Sydney says:

    What I don’t understand is what right does state rep LaMahieu have to stop promiscuity? Is there a vested state interest in stopping people from shagging? And does that interest outweigh Wisconsin college student’s right to pursue their happiness in bed? And why go after just e.c.? Women use e.c. after unprotected sex which may have taken place under duress or because they had no access to contraception. It’s not like e.c. created the human sex drive.

    Danny boy, if you’re really going to discourage promiscuity than you need to do exactly what we originally thought the bill did and ban all forms of contraception. That means no condoms, no pill, no e.c. And then to really drive it home to the “youngsters” you should make all Wisconsin college students sign chastity contracts and threaten to make them pay exorbitant out of state tuition prices if they break the chastity contract. Or even better, just kick them out of college completely. You wouldn’t want tainted students in Wisconsin universities and colleges anyway. After all, once they go home they won’t be promiscuous. It’s only in college where the contraception is flowing that people want to shag.

    The last paragraph was sarcasm in case anyone missed that.

  25. 25
    jane says:

    while there’s a small clinic for students on campus, there’s also a large teaching hospital/ health complex that provides health care for the general public. this is probably what the exemption for the hospitals and clinics authority is for.

    not only does the bill have to pass the senate, the governor also has to sign it, and i’m positive he will not. but i don’t want to imply that this whole thing isn’t incredibly scary.

    without the EC i was prescribed from the UW, i would have gotten an abortion– or i would have a three-year old, but probably no master’s degree. instead, i’m finishing my thesis in the house i own, with no toddler running around. which is good for me and the non-existent toddler.

    a democrat on public radio had a good point– do the people want these irresponsible women, who have drunken sex on the beach over spring break, to give birth and care for children?

  26. 26
    lucia says:

    Nothing is “banned” from the campuses themselves. No one is going to be arrested for carrying birth control onto the UW campuses, etc. The birth control is merely not prescribed by the UW health services.

    If you are going to claim the headlines is deceptive based on words, you should make sure you permit the full meaning of the word.

    According to the dictionary I checked, “banning” can be mean “prohibiting the distribution of” particularly by “legal means”.

    The fact that students can purchase the items off campus and use them on campus doesn’t make the term “ban” inaccurate. The ban is “on campus”, since, private pharmacies on private property are not, technically “on campus”, they are “near campus”.

    If you are are nitpicking, I guess you could argue that “birthcontrol” is not “banned” because it might still be legal to stand in a dorm and hand out free condoms and other forms of non-prescription birth control, but I think readers are used to the idea that headlines convey the gist of the article and that further details will be contained in the article itself.

  27. 27
    Shell says:

    What do you think it means that there is an exception for “property leased to the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority”? Seriously, I’m wondering what that means. It would be nice to know what effect such an exception has; otherwise, it looks to me as if all this outrage is being provoked by misinformation.

    My guess is that this means that the for-the-public clinics operated by the UW Medical school are EXEMPT from this ban.

    “All this outrage” is perfectly legitimate; this is a ban on dispensing both e.c. and information by clinics to which students have access due to their having PAID for said access in tuition/fees. Indeed I am sure there are many students to whom it would be a hardship to find & pay for health care elsewhere just because this dope prefers to punish “promiscuity” with pregnancy. And being raped, also, of course.

    Grrrr.

  28. 28
    Sarah in Chicago says:

    This potential really scares the fuck out of me … and I don’t think it’s accidental that this happens at a state institution, which is where unprivileged students tend to end up, and minorities.

    I personally worry about this stuff because I take the BC pill not for contraception (after all, should my girlfriend get me pregnant accidentally I might have to revisit the whole atheism thing) but rather for moderating hormones, which a LOT of women do too.

    Chemically there’s not a hell of a lot of different between the EC and BC, and if their motivation is curtailing the ‘promiscuity’ of women (because we all know this isn’t targetted at guys at all) then, honestly, BC wouldn’t be far behind, completely fucking up the lives of a lot of women, regardless of if they use it for contraception or whatever.

    Of course, I live in Illinois where G.Rod (as much as I dislike him for other reasons) is insanely pro-choice, and we are a very blue state, so my fears are not so great, but the potential for this to become law as a precendent is fucking disgusting.

    I say the campus feminist/pro-choice student groups should start distributing and handing out directions to planned parenthood and information brochures on EC, BC and condoms.

  29. 29
    ginmar says:

    It now looks like people are getting three different things confused: This guy’s own statements, in which he has expressed the desire to outlaw BC, and this bill and anotehr bill that would strip PP of its funding for post-pregnancy care.

    This is what states’ rights will look like; they’re going to nibble away.
    It’s good that the Gov says he’ll veto it. However, it’s not enough.

  30. 31
    Mary says:

    What. Fucking. Century. Is. This. ?!?!

  31. 32
    Kyra says:

    1) The Wisconsin legislature has its head up its ass.

    2) Students who know about EC need to open dialoge with other students, to let them know it exists and how it is available.

    3) The previous post about “condom runs” could perhaps be applied here–people with access to outside clinics could get some EC and keep it on hand so students who need it (for example, the rape victims the legislature apparently wishes to torture more) can get it from them. (Yes, I know, this is probably illegal. However, I am applying Dr. King’s logic here: an unjust law is no law at all, and not only is this ban unjust in more ways than I can count, but EC would be available without prescriptions if the FDA were not in Bush’s back pocket.

    SO glad they’re not doing this in Minnesota. The nearest pharmacy to my campus is a Wal-Mart. And TRY getting even there without a car.

    4) Somebody ask the Wisconsin legislature where it says that promiscuity is illegal. Then when they can’t answer, ask why they’re punishing it. Then ask why they’re punishing some women for instances of promiscuity that is solely the man’s fault, i.e. rape.

    Seriously, though, if this thing gets passed, it’ll be time for a game of Civil Disobedience/Exploit the Loopholes. Somebody should set up a sort of grapevine that lets everyone know “if you are raped, go to so-and-so, who will tell you about options that the normal counseling center won’t let you know about.” Or the students can post info about EC on the student-controlled bulletin boards, or on T-shirts.

    But I know that if I were working in one of their clinics, I wouldn’t obey this any more than i do the First Commandment.

  32. 33
    Robert says:

    The lease provision does indeed refer to the larger hospital on campus, which is not subject to the proposed rule.

    Because he know he can get away with being a disruptive, derailing troll because he’s buddy-buddy with Amp, and he’ll never ban him.

    I can “get away with” expressing my opinion, and pointing out clear errors of fact, because Amp runs a forum that has reasonable and moderate respect for views he doesn’t happen to share. I have no doubt that he would ban me if I were to engage in the behavior that leads to banning; which is why I don’t.

    If acknowledging the actual facts, rather than overheated and incorrect rhetoric, is “disingenuous”, Ginmar, then sign me up for the Disingenuity Club. Does it help your cause to embrace counterfactuals? Cf, the boy who cried wolf.

  33. 34
    Niels Jackson says:

    So if the bill applies only to emergency contraception (not to “all” contraception), and if it makes an exception for the largest hospital on campus, what is there to be so alarmed about? Disagree on principle, I can understand that, but alarmed?

  34. 35
    ginmar says:

    Please, Robert, you like to argue semantics till the cows come home. PA said it for a lot of us.

  35. 36
    ginmar says:

    It’s not the only bill and this guy is going to try again.

  36. 37
    yamb says:

    People, people, people–there are many, many (26?) Wisconsin universities; please look beyond the flagship Madison campus. Yes, if you’re there you can go to the hospital; but that won’t help you if you’re going to school in god-forsaken Superior or Menomonie. I agree, it’s a horrible bill; just keep remembering ALL the U of W students throughout the state.

    And yes, if it makes it through the state Senate, Gov. Doyle will veto it in a heartbeat. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t stop talking about the wrongness of it.

  37. Pingback: Bush v. Choice

  38. 38
    DF says:

    You have links to the bill text, so here also are the:

    http://www.legis.state.wi.us/2005/data/AB343hst.html

    bill history, and

    http://www.legis.state.wi.us/2005/data/fe/AB-343fe.pdf

    fiscal estimate.

    —-

    Apparently, this costs the state nothing, by the estimation of the Assembly.

    I can’t find transcripts of committee meetings or the Assembly floor.

  39. 39
    jane says:

    re: 34.

    what is there to be alarmed about? a few public officials are trying to take away the right of the university health programs to advertise, discuss, prescribe, or dispense emergency contraception. many students at universities are returning or grad students, or are for other reasons not covered under their parents’ insurance, which means that even if EC is available across campus at the hospital, one would have to either go to the emergency room or set up a same-day appointment, and pay out-of-pocket for these services. for many students, the university health center is the only health care available. also, these schools are not located in big cities, which tend to have low-cost or sliding-scale fee clinics.

    remember also that the services provided by the university are paid for by student fees, not public taxes.

    how alarmed would you be if you thought you might be pregnant, and your only health care provider wouldn’t discuss or prescribe EC? or if you didn’t even know EC existed, and you thought abortion was your only choice? not everyone is as enlightened about BC choices as readers of this blog.

    this whole thing started when dan saw an ad in the student paper, urging women to get prescriptions for EC to bring along for spring break.

  40. 40
    Kim (basement variety!) says:

    Earlier last month I posted on this topic, though mine more from a perspective of the players involved.

    It’s got a few links to some interesting articles with commentary from state officials (including the fact that Governor Doyle has in fact vowed to veto the bill if it came past his desk), and from anti-choice/pro-choice folks.

    The players involved in this debacle certainly shed a very ominous perspective on the bill.

    Also:

    Robert, the largest problem with your commentary (as I see it) is that your snipes and comments like ‘seeing a wolf’ deny the existence of the very real wolf that is embedded within this legislature, regardless of whether or not PA was provocative in her title. And to be fair, this subject deserves attention, and if provocative titles are what makes that happen, then so be it. You’re throwing out the proverbial baby with the bathwater when you attempt to assert that this is just a blind swing from the left at the right.

  41. 41
    Kim (basement variety!) says:

    Ahh I forgot to add my favorite gem of a quote in the former blogitorial by one of Wisconsin’s representatives:

    “I think it puts young women at great risk when they are told by medical professionals it’s just OK to take these emergency contraceptives at whim,” said state Rep. Jean Hundertmark, R-Clintonville, a co-sponsor of the bill. “It shouldn’t be taken like candy.”

  42. 42
    jane says:

    for all those saying ‘thank god that’s happening in wisconsin, not minnesota’:

    ‘(AP) St. Paul Minnesota doctors were trying to figure how to implement the new “Unborn Child Pain Prevention Act,” which requires physicians who perform abortions to offer anesthesia for late-term fetuses.

    Abortion foes applauded the passage of the act last week by the Minnesota Legislature as part of a major health bill, but it has raised many questions for doctors specializing in prenatal medicine.’
    (this is from http://wcco.com/topstories/local_story_197151606.html)

  43. 43
    Pseudo-Adrienne says:

    “It shouldn’t be taken like candy.”

    Yep, because promiscuous girls just love taking candy that makes them sick-as-a-dying-animal for a few days. ::rolls eyes::

  44. 44
    Amanda says:

    Why is post-coitus contraception so damn threatening? Is it because no mere woman should be able to control her body after a man’s done his thing? Jesus H. Christ. The most alarming part of this is that time is so critical and trying to scrounge this drug up when you don’t know where else to go but the uni’s health clinic could be the difference between getting pregnant and not getting pregnant.

    Of course, this is going to hurt rape victims disproportionately. And it’s especially going to hurt those who are TRYING to be “good” girls by the reckoning of social conservatives and don’t have sex so therefore are less likely to know what their resources are if they are raped. Dirty sluts like me know our various options, but more virginal types may not have any clue. So that’s your morality right there–let’s make the “good” girls run around freaking out looking for help that’s not available in the sad event that they are raped.

  45. 45
    Josh Jasper says:

    Perfect timing for the new Bush SCOUS to try and overturn Griswold.

  46. 46
    mythago says:

    and if provocative titles are what makes that happen, then so be it

    Sorry, I don’t buy the “pee on the rug to get attention” school of thought. If you present a subject with hype and fear that turns out not to be true, then you teach people that you’re not playing entirely straight, and they aren’t quite as likely to believe the true parts. (Cf.: The War on Drugs.)

  47. 47
    Denise says:

    “So if the bill applies only to emergency contraception (not to “all” contraception), and if it makes an exception for the largest hospital on campus, what is there to be so alarmed about? Disagree on principle, I can understand that, but alarmed?”

    Niels – One reason this is alarming is that UW has many branch campuses which offer 4-year degrees nowhere near their medical schools. The UW system is scattered across the state, and only a couple of the campuses are near the particular locations which are exempted. Women in La Crosse, Platteville, and Oshkosh will only be able to get EC at off-campus clinics, if they exist in these otherwise mostly rural areas. The off-campus clinics won’t be able to advertise their EC services on campus. many women don’t hear about EC until they get to college, with the prevalence of abstinence only sex ed and strict christian families (many Catholic in WI). That is the cause for alarm.

  48. 48
    Kim (basement variety!) says:

    Sorry, I don’t buy the “pee on the rug to get attention” school of thought. If you present a subject with hype and fear that turns out not to be true, then you teach people that you’re not playing entirely straight, and they aren’t quite as likely to believe the true parts. (Cf.: The War on Drugs.)

    Good thing I wasn’t selling anything then. =P.

    The point being, Mythago, that I did a story that pretty much was the same thing (though focused more on the players that surrounded the issue) and it didn’t generate nearly as much attention. Maybe I’m not creative enough, but to me it seems that the theory ‘the more commotion, the more promotion’ gets attention. This story absolutely is deserving of attention, and attempting to pass it off as anything but a wolf is far more dishonest than a title that might be questionable.

  49. 49
    Mary says:

    I put in a trackback to this entry on my blog but I don’t see it. Hope your trackbacks are working. :)

  50. 50
    Shell says:

    So if the bill applies only to emergency contraception (not to “all” contraception), and if it makes an exception for the largest hospital on campus, what is there to be so alarmed about? Disagree on principle, I can understand that, but alarmed?

    The largest hospital on campus is *not* where students get their health care. If they go there they will have to pay–and it’s not cheap, or even moderate in cost, I’ll betcha (if our local uni is anything to go by). Others have mentioned the UW campuses in the hinterlands where there may not be *any* sort of alternative, let alone one on campus.

    And…excuse me, but isn’t emergency contraception for – well, emergencies? I find it MORE alarming that EC not be available. If BC of any sort is not available through the uni, people will indeed find some way to make arrangements, even if it is a (completely unnecessary) hardship, especially given that they have the time to do so.

    But the nature of emergency contraception is that the necessity for it is…you know, kinda unexpected. Thus the “emergency” part, hmmmm? And the fact that no exception is made for rape victims I find more than alarming, I find it PURPOSELY VICIOUS, CRUEL and CALLOUS. Not to mention STUPID and INDEFENSIBLE.

    Again, Grrrrr.

  51. 51
    alex says:

    What I don’t understand is what right does state rep LaMahieu have to stop promiscuity?

    Because sluts that have premarital sex are going to HELL. If Representative LaMahieu doesn’t stop people from going to HELL he is as guilty as if he was selling tickets for the train that goes there.

    This is really, truly the way that some of the more guilt-ridden denominations work: you are given an impossible task, you fail, and therefore are proven a sinner! Put another twenty in the collection plate and come back next week, you poor soul. It’s the ugly side of Christianity, the one that stretches the new testament over the bones of the old, giving us fear, triumphalism, and misogyny in Christ’s name…

    This is a stupid, ugly bill, and I predict stupid, ugly results if it passes.

  52. 52
    Lee says:

    Here’s a quote from an old favorite:

    “Guns have little or nothing to do with juvenile violence. The causes of youth violence are working parents who put their kids into daycare, the teaching of evolution in the schools, and working mothers who take birth control pills.” –Tom Delay

    Admittedly, he was discussing teenagers and violence, but I’m sure the Wisconsin legislature is working from the same page.

  53. 53
    alsis39 says:

    DeLay is right. Those damn pills really hurt if some juvenile delinquent puts one on a plastic spoon and then flicks it at the back of your neck. It hurts much worse than some stupid bullet in your neck would.

  54. 54
    Brian Vaughan says:

    Flicking pills IS juvenile. It’s not like ordering a cruise missile strike, which would be manly.

  55. 55
    Jon says:

    Hey I have no problem dispensing birth control on Wisconsin campuses, but I don’t want any of my Wisconsin taxes used for this.

  56. 56
    Q Grrl says:

    Yeah, it’s better to use your tax monies to blow up Iraqis. Wise choice dude.

  57. 57
    RonF says:

    Sarah, our current status as a “very blue state” is not in accord with history and could be transitory. For those of you not familiar with Illinois politics, the state has for a long time been divided; Chicago and environs is Democratic, the suburbs were split, and Downstate (that part of the state not part of Chicago or the suburbs, mostly farm country) is Republican. We often have had one Republican and one Democratic Senator. Our governors have been mostly Republican (the occasional Democrats are usually one-term), but they’ve also tended to be moderate Republicans.

    For the last few years, the Illinois GOP has been getting raked over the coals due to a corruption scandal that came to light when an accident involving a part that fell off of a truck with a driver who got his license by bribery caused a van with a minister, his wife, and their 9 kids to catch on fire, incinerating 6 of the kids. The Republican then-Secretary of State denied everything, and was elected Governor. But the whole thing blew up during his term, and he couldn’t run for re-election. The scandal has resulted in 67 indictments, 59 convictions, and the now ex-Governor is currently on trial. The scandal also gutted the infrastructure and the reputation of the Illinois GOP, who put on a ridiculously ineffective effort in the last election. Democrats are now in all but one state-wide office (Treasurer) and both Senate seats.

    But this is unusual. It doesn’t necessarily reflect the long-term makeup of the Illinois electorate. And the same prosecutor (Fitzgerald, the same one working on Rove) has just nailed a Democratic big-wig and is about to try to climb the ladder to Mayor Daley II. If he succeeds, it could fry up the Illinois Democratic party and we could see a reversal; it’s not like the Illinois Democratic party is known for being corruption-free. Also, Governor Blagoyevich (sp? anyway, Blago for short) is not all popular and is looking like he’s vulnerable to a decent GOP challenger.

    I say all this to give everyone a perspective that Illinois could start turning purple at least (if not red) fairly soon. Don’t assume that Illinois will stay true-blue.

  58. Pingback: Being Amber Rhea » Blog Archive » No Unifying Theme