Obama Will Stop Blocking Emergency Contraception Access for Teenage Girls


It is, literally, about fucking time.
Thanks for some good news for a change.
Fantastic news. It took one of Dan's magnum lovecasty prelude rants to show me the extent of the horror this policy was. This makes my day.
I guess I was torn on this, being minors it seems logical for have the age of 18 for this, but plenty of girls do have sex before then and if boys can buy condoms before 18 only seems fair girls have access to birth control. And hey now if I have a daughter I won't have to have an awkward convo about birth control.
This is awesome.

Now, any guesses how long it will be before some cashier refuses to sell it because Religion, or "too young"?
Good News!
I'm sure the Utard legislators are working on something right now to block it.

Plan B should be on the 24 Hour drive thru menu at Jack-In-The-Box.

Labored, unnecessary use of the word "fuck" demeans post and news. Is this what you have to do to fit in at The Stranger?
@8, that's just too fucking precious.
Any "political repercussions" would be a boost for Obama. Anyone on the right has already decided he's the anti-Christ, so there's no bothering trying to please them. The only repercussions are from those who are disgusted w/ his NSA/surveillance policy (or, rather, that he's done nothing to change the Bush policy), and who can now point out a few things about his administration that are positive.
@ Seattle14,

Perhaps I have misunderstood you, but age of consent differs by state. Twenty-nine states and the District of Columbia have it set at 16 years, and 9 states have it set at 17. By the way, Washington law is one of the 29 who have set the age of consent to 16.

From Wikipedia.

Each U.S. state (and the District of Columbia) has its own age of consent. Currently state laws set the age of consent at 16, 17 or 18. The most common age is 16.

age of consent 16 (30): Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia

age of consent 17 (9): Colorado, Illinois, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Texas, Wyoming

age of consent 18 (12): Arizona, California, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, North Dakota, Oregon, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania
@8 You must be new here. Welcome! Also: get fucked.
@12 Check the nym @8. I suspect that was sarcasm.

Fucking well done, too.
@ 11 Good point, I was just thinking 18 across the board, didn't think of age of consent.
I'm counting this as a victory for the liberals... and a loss for Obama. For god's sake, why the hell was he fighting this in the first place? Is he still trying to regain the legendary Reagan Democrats?
@ 15 Lots of democrats are uncomfortable with people under 18 getting birth control, hell I know several liberals that way. Is this something they should evolve on this, sure? But there a reason for their thinking.
In response to: "It's about offering women and girls a little more control over their biology"

Given that everyone reading this article was at one time a completely helpless fetus in their mother's womb -- what about the biological rights of the women and girls who are innocently murdered so that someone else can go get their holes filled by cock for the sole purpose of pleasure?
Ideological subversion, also called "active measures," of the existing society is necessary to pave the way for communism. Destroy the traditions, history, value system and self-reliance, and you will have a willing supply of humanity who will embrace a philosophy that has killed 100 million people in the last 100 years.
@16 (Seattle14): I used to know some folks in a country where parental consent was necessary for minor daughters to go on the pill. The parents were too devoutly Catholic to okay the pill before the fact, but, as it turns out, not too devoutly Catholic to okay abortions for both of their daughters after the fact. Shortly thereafter, they changed their minds about the pill. The country as a whole also changed its mind about setting up this kind of hypocritical charade. Parental consent is no longer required for either contraception or abortion, and national health picks up 100% of the tab for minors.
Once again Siddha rides in to bloviate on a topic she/he knows dick all about: communism. Once again his/her paranoia borders on delusion.
@20 Typical KGB-style response. Label the opposition as "crazy." You learned your tired, worn-out techniques well, Comrade.

You need to actually tie this news to the supposed plan to turn the US into a Soviet-style communist country in order to make the points you are making.

Actually the age of consent can be much lower, at least it is in Washington, depending on the age of the partner.

So while 16 is the age of consent for a partner of any age. For a person 14 to 16, there is consent for a partner up to 4 years age difference ( example, a 14 year old and an 18 year old). For ages 12-14, there is 3 year difference allowed. And for 11-12 a two year difference. So, yes, a person as young as 11, at least in Washington, can have consent even at that age!

A common misperception about statutory rape is that state codes define a single age at which an individual can legally consent to sex. Only 12 states have a single age of consent, below which an individual cannot consent to sexual intercourse under any circumstances, and above which it is legal to engage in sexual intercourse with another person above the age of consent. For example, in Massachusetts, the age of consent is 16.


@22 Nice to see that you delegated yourself as the voice of all logic and reason. Considering you're oblivious to what's going on around you, I'll let that speak for itself.
15: this is a pattern with Obama, many times he has staked out a position well to the right of his base (and the country as a whole) and has to be forced to abandon that position even when there is little real political price to be paid for switching. It's been his approach to LGBT rights as well - he's had to be dragged along on DADT, defending DOMA in court, endorsing marriage equality, and his latest head-scratcher is refusing to issue a federal order prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation by government contractors. I can't tell whether he's crazy as a fox, or just plain crazy. Maybe he just overthinks things. Then again, he's a Chicago pol and never does anything for anybody unless there's something in it for him.

Typical misandrist. You are only concerned about the "women and girls" being "innocently murdered," and don't give a fig for all the similarly murdered males.
@26 Ha! :)
Is Siddha going to be Slog"s new toy troll? Loveschild and Seattleblues have been gone for so long. It's nice to see a fresh batch of batshittery once and awhile.
@28 So quick to adopt the communist method of calling your opposition "crazy." Where did you learn this debate technique, Comrade? Practicing your Delphi Technique lately?

Ever consider becoming an honorable human being and using logic and reason to actually discuss facts, rather than relying on social engineering techniques? Is your cause so utterly important that you have to debase yourself with immoral strategy at every opportunity?
@25 (Dr. Z): He's neither crazy as a fox nor just plain crazy. He's just as Blue Dog as they come. He makes Democratic-sounding noises in his speeches, but when it comes to what he actually does, he tracks right-wing Republican policy very closely, tactically (and reluctantly?) diverging to the left on only a handful of social wedge issues.

It looks like gay equality is going away as a wedge issue in the near future. It's demographically doomed -- being strongly and durably favored by younger American cohorts -- and even Republicans are beginning to give up on it. My guess is that abortion is going to be revived as the big wedge issue of the coming years, the key remaining distinction between the two corporatist parties. (After all, Republican legislatures and Catholic hospitals have all but neutralized Roe v. Wade is in all of the states where it once made a difference. We can politick and legislate and litigate it all over again!)

Anyway, Obama hasn't been playing "eleven-dimensional chess," he's been playing "two-step chess." Step One: What do the most powerful corporations and wealthy élite want? Step Two: How can I give it to them while provoking the least resistance from the hoi polloi? Lip service, PR, fluff, and wedge issues have been working pretty well for him so far -- a lot of Democratic voters still seem to actually still believe he's "on their side" -- and I'm sure he'll be very richly rewarded when he leaves the presidency.
Regarding Siddha, why bother engaging with someone who doesn't see a meaningful difference between a freshly fertilized egg and a sentient child? Contraception and abortion have done more to prevent child poverty, neglect, abuse, and abandonment than all of the Siddhas of the world put together. I say we let Siddha continue the conversation with Siddha's sex-hating, misery-and-overpopulation-loving God on their own.
And may I add on behalf of U.S. District Judge Edward Korman, whose ruling now prevails but who is doubtless too decorous to say it to the Obama administration himself, "In your face, bitches!"
I don't quite understand how this helps so very much. Is Plan B cheap in the U.S.? Up here in Canada it's $40 and kept behind the counter at the pharmacy.

Don't get me wrong - I think increased access is a very good thing - I just worry about the cost for a woman who's working a minimum wage job.
I wish every parent - liberal, conservative, religious, whatever - got a little ping every time their sons or daughters fucked. Just so they'd realize that yes, their precious snowflakes are indeed fucking in their early teens.

Parents need to pull their fucking heads out of the sand forever. Wake up. Your snowflakes are fucking and you can't stop them.
If I were a parent, I'd be having serious discussions about sex by age ten. With biological facts and not religious bullshit.

$40 is still cheaper than several hundred dollars for an abortion.

Also, popular misconceptions aside, there's no proof that emergency birth control interferes with a fertilized egg in any way whatsoever. Emergency birth control prevents ovulation, period. It doesn't interfere with implantation of an already fertilized egg.
@17- At one time you were a collection of dust from an exploded star. Won't someone thing of the poor exploded stars?!!!???!!!!

@29: All I'm sayin' is it's nice to see some one clutching a fresh straw when it comes to justifying homophobia and sexism instead of the usual BECUZ JEEEESUS.

BECUZ ZOMG COMMMIES11!!1 is a nice change of pace, and as that seems to be your particular bugbear, I look forward to the many inventive ways you will undoubtedly apply it to other issues we may discuss.

Like maybe bike helmets!
@31 If you knew your history, you would know that most human suffering has been caused by the activities of corrupt central bankers the last 300 years. These same central bankers purchased the media, hired the best social engineers at the Tavistock Institute, and then used it to convince people such as yourself that the central bankers agenda is good.

The Rockefeller Foundation (central banker money) founded Planned Parenthood in the US and is the single greatest financial contributor to birth control, worldwide. You see, when you own the resources and you happen to be farming humans for profit, it makes sense to keep them culled and their numbers within reason. Makes them easier to control.
Regarding @40 (Siddha):: Did anyone else hear a roomful of cuckoo clocks go off as they read that?
Oh I'll say!
I feel the exact same way about having a womb. The fear I have of it, and it's ability to ruin my life, keeps me up at night sometimes. So, thanks for that.