![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Mar. 7th, 2012 11:04 amThere is a fuck-off huge black currawong sidling along the guttering, with staring yellow eye and gaping beak. It looks like a total psychopath.
Mar. 7th, 2012
(no subject)
Mar. 7th, 2012 12:05 pmListening to Rush's 1975 album Fly By Night while revising a scene for Chapter 8. Lots of fun, energetic prog rock. But oh dear, the lyrics! Anthem can be excused on the grounds of (a) being a kick-ass song and (b) Neil being twenty-three. But what on earth is Beneath, Between, Behind actually saying about the US? And what the hell's a tobe?!
Taking responsibility
Mar. 7th, 2012 05:13 pmSome important points raised in discussion of health insurance and contraception in the US.
In the US, health insurance is provided by employers. It is not paid for by taxpayers, but is earned by employees and constitutes part of their wages. The actual issue - a bit lost in all the noise - is whether employers and insurers should be allowed to refuse to cover contraception.
(Ensuring access to contraception for those without health insurance is enlightened self-interest; it efficiently saves taxpayers' money.)
Now, I read a very interesting article in New Scientist yesterday which explored some of the differences in thinking between 'liberal' and 'conservative' people. In previous postings here, I grumbled that the basis of opposition to contraception was that women are not entitled to have sex, and should not be able to escape the consequences of having sex. The NS article suggested that, for some socially conservative folks at least, it seems profoundly wrong and unfair that people should be able to escape the consequences of their decisions. Surely almost everyone shares some version of this belief. However, I'd argue that someone using contraception is preventing unwanted consequences. They are taking responsibility for how their choices affect their own lives and the lives of others. Rather than castigation and mockery, they deserve admiration and support.
ETA: Another important point: the withdrawal by Rush's sponsors is not a First Amendment / free speech issue, but the free market at work.
In the US, health insurance is provided by employers. It is not paid for by taxpayers, but is earned by employees and constitutes part of their wages. The actual issue - a bit lost in all the noise - is whether employers and insurers should be allowed to refuse to cover contraception.
(Ensuring access to contraception for those without health insurance is enlightened self-interest; it efficiently saves taxpayers' money.)
Now, I read a very interesting article in New Scientist yesterday which explored some of the differences in thinking between 'liberal' and 'conservative' people. In previous postings here, I grumbled that the basis of opposition to contraception was that women are not entitled to have sex, and should not be able to escape the consequences of having sex. The NS article suggested that, for some socially conservative folks at least, it seems profoundly wrong and unfair that people should be able to escape the consequences of their decisions. Surely almost everyone shares some version of this belief. However, I'd argue that someone using contraception is preventing unwanted consequences. They are taking responsibility for how their choices affect their own lives and the lives of others. Rather than castigation and mockery, they deserve admiration and support.
ETA: Another important point: the withdrawal by Rush's sponsors is not a First Amendment / free speech issue, but the free market at work.
(no subject)
Mar. 7th, 2012 05:32 pmHaving a setback. Came home to work an hour and a half ago but still haven't done anything. (Is it possible to be manic and depressed simultaneously?)