Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

It wasn't *that* long ago that birth control products were ILLEGAL.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Lex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 11:26 PM
Original message
It wasn't *that* long ago that birth control products were ILLEGAL.
Even for married people.

It was in the 1960's (seriously) that the US Supreme Court said it was a basic privacy right to have birth control methods available. Up to then, birth control was illegal in some states.


So how far back are the right-wing nutjobs willing to push the clock?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 11:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. I think they really want to go back to the colonial days.
That seems like their dream, although I suspect they realize they could never quite accomplish THAT!

Really, they would love it if BC were illegal, along with abortion, civil rights, equal rights, and of course bring back abolition!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
renaissanceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 11:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. They'll go as far as
putting cameras in your bedroom to make sure that you are having sex with an opposite-sex spouse, in the missionary position, only to procreate.


http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues.21326737
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMDemDist2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 11:53 PM
Response to Reply #3
13. in the dark with your nightclothes on for modesty
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 12:10 AM by AZDemDist6
don't forget

:yoiks:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #13
19. yeah, close your eyes and think of England!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RPM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. that's from a song somewhere no?
it's rattling in my head like it is....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suigeneris Donating Member (471 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #3
15. Right, that's called sex with a
government approved partner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
getmeouttahere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 11:31 PM
Response to Original message
2. There's no limit to have far backward they will take us....
their record speaks for itself
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DBoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 11:32 PM
Response to Original message
4. Griswold v. Connecticut
in the mid-1960s used the right of privacy to strike down laws that prevented married couples from obtaining birth control.

A later decision extended the right to unmarried couples.

Rove v. Wade included pregnancy termination.

If Rove v. Wade is overthrown, I believe these precedents are weakened.

We may end up with birth control being illegal in some states, and restricted in others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starbucks Anarchist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Sticky Ricky Santorum railed against this very decision.
He claimed it was a slippery slope. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robert Oak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 11:34 PM
Response to Original message
5. 1896 I believe
that's when the robber barrons had a strangle hold on the country, there was child labor, no workers rights, no social safety nets and women
were property and could be beaten legally by their husbands.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheFarseer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 11:34 PM
Response to Original message
6. I want to say people will draw the line at that
but people are such zombies these days, they might just roll over and take it. I'd have to say people would oppose that in polls by a wide margin, but would they vote on it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 11:48 PM
Response to Original message
8. Scarier yet, it was in the 70's! Not the 60's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #8
20. Griswold v Connecticut was a 1960's case I think.
It established the right of privacy to have birth control for married couples.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. I don't think we unpersons (singles) got the right to BC
until about 1972, can't recall the case, I think it went to the SC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 09:18 AM
Response to Reply #21
23. Ah, okay, I see.
Crazy, isn't it? Just that short a time ago . . .

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firefox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 11:48 PM
Response to Original message
9. In Ireland
Homosexuality was only decriminalised in this country in 1993. In fact, up until 1861, the crime of sodomy was punishable by death. This persecution was inflicted on the grounds that homosexuality was damaging to society; that it was damaging to health; that it lead people into even greater "depravity"; and that legalising it might send out the "wrong message". And so gay people were persecuted, causing huge suffering and disruption to thousands of people and destroying the lives and reputations of such figures as Oscar Wilde and Roger Casement. When homosexuality was legalised, society did not collapse; indeed, most people now find it hard to understand how a civilised society could inflict such persecution.

The sale of condoms was illegal in this country up until 1979. Even after that, it was not until 1989 that it was made legal for unmarried people to buy them. The reasoning of people such as Charles J. Haughey on this issue was that this would discourage sex outside marriage. The idiocy of this is obvious: apart from the fact that this was an unwarranted imposition of religious "morals" in a secular state, it did not work as a deterrent. Instead, it meant that unmarried people quite often could not get access to contraception, even on the black market, and had to endure all the problems that naturally ensued from this. Again, we were told that sex outside marriage would spell the end of civilisation; that it was damaging to health (which it can be without protection!); that it caused a deterioration of morals in other areas; and that legalising it would send out the message that promiscuous sex was acceptable.

link: http://www.cannabisireland.com/why.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 11:49 PM
Response to Original message
10. I think there are those of them who truly wish to return to...............
the Dark Ages, times of Inquisition and plague and ignorance.

Goddess help us all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catzies Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 11:51 PM
Response to Original message
11. Kicked and nominated to make people think about this.
C'mon people, these are the folks who are working hard to bring you...a better yesterday? :wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 11:52 PM
Response to Original message
12. They're positively priapic at the thought of overturning Griswold.

They'll push the clock back to Torquemada, if they can. They may stop short of burning people at the stake for saying the Earth is round, but that's probably about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
getmeouttahere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:02 AM
Response to Original message
14. Who has the wherewithal to get an underground railroad started?
we should get something like that going now, for women who will need access to birth control/abortion. I'm certainly willing to contribute whatever I can to that cause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DELUSIONAL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:32 AM
Response to Original message
16. Even in the 70s in New England
anyone wanting any "over the counter" birth control products (condoms or foam etc) had to go the the pharmacists and ask . . . .

married people had to ask -- as did teenagers -- anyone who wanted common, ordinary condoms. Very often the clerks were less than helpful -- or were very judgmental. This according to my sister-in-law.

Now condoms etc can be found on the isles of drug stores and even grocery stores.

The 1970s were not that long ago.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
getmeouttahere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:36 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. But of course, if its a male form of birth control
it's readily avaiable, but a female method, it's practically like getting your driver's license, actually harder if you think about it. A pain in the ass regardless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMMNG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:38 AM
Response to Original message
18. Well, women wouldn't need that stuff if they'd keep their legs crossed
Like a decent, proper woman should! :sarcasm:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Jul 25th 2014, 11:35 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC