On the contrary Kent. The thread is about the Bush administration's attempt to change the commonly accepted and legal definitions of abortion to include what is now considered by those without sneaky agendas as various types of contraceptives. Below is the thread that started the post.

In the ninth thread Kent did point out that he didn't consider certain "anti-implantation technologies" to be contraception. But he did not take into account that in most people's eyes and in the eyes of the law, that they are

The issue is whether some fanatical Bush appointee should be allowed to change these definitions by stealth and fiat or whether there should be a public debate.

The issue is whether hypocrites who will blather until the cows come home about "activist judges" should get away with end runs around the constitution as activist administrators.



>>>Subject: BS: Contraception = Abortion
From: michaelr
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 10:45 PM

Just got this from MoveOn.org - unbelievable:


Dear MoveOn member,
Can you imagine living in a place where birth control is considered an "abortion" and health insurers won't cover it? Where even rape victims are denied emergency contraception?<<<