Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
If women know, in advance, that they won't get a benefit from having children, and won't get a free abortion perhaps they might become a teensy bit more responsible. To assume that women can't do anything, are totally controlled by their urges and have no way of dealing with them other than having sex indiscriminately, is a disservice to women
First, you must first stop operating from the proposition that unintended pregnancy only results from a failure to be responsible. For someone who says we shouldn't assume such low things of women, you sure seem to be assuming that there's a whole lot of women out there being totally controlled by their urges with no way of dealing with them other than having sex indiscriminately. I have to tell you, that's really a disservice to women.
If women know, in advance, that they won't get a benefit from having children, and won't get a free abortion perhaps they might become a teensy bit more responsible. To assume that women can't do anything, are totally controlled by their urges and have no way of dealing with them other than having sex indiscriminately, is a disservice to women
First, you must first stop operating from the proposition that unintended pregnancy only results from a failure to be responsible. For someone who says we shouldn't assume such low things of women, you sure seem to be assuming that there's a whole lot of women out there being totally controlled by their urges with no way of dealing with them other than having sex indiscriminately. I have to tell you, that's really a disservice to women.
True, the causes of unintended pregnancy are complex and varied. And compelling personal responsibility alone is naïve and pointless; providing free contraceptives is an intelligent and pragmatic component of a comprehensive strategy to address a serious social issue.
Why can't more girls be like Bristol Palin?
Oh, something about letting people control their own bodies...
Conservatives... they want government small enough to fit in a woman's uterus.
If you want to control your own body don't ask for my money, which I control.
Just saying.
Tell you what, you pay for aid to Israel and F-22 Raptors, I'll pay for PBS and birth control.
Sounds fair to me.
Sigh.....you really are stupid huh? Those things you get to pick and choose are PRESET and low because you pool your resources together with other people.
I proved you are a moron, who thinks your rate is the only reason you pay so little.
Also the bond thing is irrelevant.
I see you are in Cali, thank god i left that state.
You keep talking about those pools like they control my rate. They don't, they control the risk the insurance company takes. This enables them to charge rates based on the individual choices I make and my driving record. This works in auto insurance because the companies are not mandated to take everyone regardless of risk, and charge them all the same rate while offering full coverage that cover things most drivers do not wont, or need.
That is not how Obamacare works, so claiming that the huge pool will help keep rates low is stupid.
well yes these large pools do control your rate. I already explained as to why they do, and it seems you are ignoring that fact. Your driving record is only part of the reason as to why your rates are lower but not the main reason.
Well yes you are mandated to get insurance ( minus New Hampshire ) or you don't get to drive. Well you can drive but if something happens you are fucked. Just like health insurance.
Anyways its the same deal with Healthcare. The reason co-pays and such are low is because you have a large pool to create funds to cover people. Obamacare goes slightly further in Mandating people have private insurance. Which really has nothing to do with why things cost what they cost. Sure it increases the pool and resources more, which should lower costs in theory.
The end result is still the same. large pool, preset rates depending on what you pick, costs etc. The more fat people Private insurance companies have the higher the risk for more expensive procedures. Thus your rates may go up and thus you pay for those procedures.
Its really simple, and you are making it into something its really not. I know you like to find one little area of a debate and center around that. It doesn't matter what you do, you are wrong.
if you look at the chart you will notice it peaked under Reagan.....Just saying
The word you are looking for there is plateaued.
nope peaked.
The word you are looking for there is plateaued.
nope peaked.
I looked at that chart, and it actually peaked under Carter, and remained flat until just before Reagan left office.
You keep talking about those pools like they control my rate. They don't, they control the risk the insurance company takes. This enables them to charge rates based on the individual choices I make and my driving record. This works in auto insurance because the companies are not mandated to take everyone regardless of risk, and charge them all the same rate while offering full coverage that cover things most drivers do not wont, or need.
That is not how Obamacare works, so claiming that the huge pool will help keep rates low is stupid.
well yes these large pools do control your rate. I already explained as to why they do, and it seems you are ignoring that fact. Your driving record is only part of the reason as to why your rates are lower but not the main reason.
Well yes you are mandated to get insurance ( minus New Hampshire ) or you don't get to drive. Well you can drive but if something happens you are fucked. Just like health insurance.
Anyways its the same deal with Healthcare. The reason co-pays and such are low is because you have a large pool to create funds to cover people. Obamacare goes slightly further in Mandating people have private insurance. Which really has nothing to do with why things cost what they cost. Sure it increases the pool and resources more, which should lower costs in theory.
The end result is still the same. large pool, preset rates depending on what you pick, costs etc. The more fat people Private insurance companies have the higher the risk for more expensive procedures. Thus your rates may go up and thus you pay for those procedures.
Its really simple, and you are making it into something its really not. I know you like to find one little area of a debate and center around that. It doesn't matter what you do, you are wrong.
The large pools do not control my rate. I can actually prove that since I use one of the smaller insurance companies in the state, and I get lower rates than people who use larger companies. If it worked the way you believe the opposite would be true, wouldn't it?
well yes these large pools do control your rate. I already explained as to why they do, and it seems you are ignoring that fact. Your driving record is only part of the reason as to why your rates are lower but not the main reason.
Well yes you are mandated to get insurance ( minus New Hampshire ) or you don't get to drive. Well you can drive but if something happens you are fucked. Just like health insurance.
Anyways its the same deal with Healthcare. The reason co-pays and such are low is because you have a large pool to create funds to cover people. Obamacare goes slightly further in Mandating people have private insurance. Which really has nothing to do with why things cost what they cost. Sure it increases the pool and resources more, which should lower costs in theory.
The end result is still the same. large pool, preset rates depending on what you pick, costs etc. The more fat people Private insurance companies have the higher the risk for more expensive procedures. Thus your rates may go up and thus you pay for those procedures.
Its really simple, and you are making it into something its really not. I know you like to find one little area of a debate and center around that. It doesn't matter what you do, you are wrong.
The large pools do not control my rate. I can actually prove that since I use one of the smaller insurance companies in the state, and I get lower rates than people who use larger companies. If it worked the way you believe the opposite would be true, wouldn't it?
no.....no it really doesnt but you go on thinking that.
But what do i know? my wife only worked for a insurance company in Boston.
This from The Associated Press.
-----------
One has to wonder why the Governor wants to cut off the primary source for low cost contraception to financially challenged women. From his website:
Associated Press | The Register-Guard | Eugene, Oregon
For $300M (or less than 1/3 the cost of a new destroyer the Navy is building), we could prevent a great many abortions, unwanted pregnancies, and help ensure women's health choices. The $300M spent now will be a lot less than building more schools, expanding entitlements, and building more prisons later on when the unwanted pregnancies are carried to term.
Also it should be noted that Title X money is not only provided to Planned Parenthood (no Title money is used for abortions by the way) but to public health departments across the nation; in red states as well as blue states. It is used to pay for everything from iron tablets to condoms to contraceptive foams and creams.
Forum copyright policy, to be found HERE, prohibits posting of pieces in their entirety and requires that you provide a link.
~Oddball
Conservatives are not interested in reducing teen pregnancy; that would require acknowledging facts, cooperation, and an open mind.
Conservatives are only interested in compelling others to conform to rightist social dogma. In this case absence only is their solution.
Indeed, most conservatives adhere to the fallacy that providing contraceptives free of charge to young people would condone and facilitate teen sex.
Its tragic many citizens must suffer as a consequence of conservative ignorance and stupidity.
At the end of the day, it is the woman's responsibility to be responsible for her body. That being said, we all pay for the irresponsibility. We can pay a little now or a lot more later on.
So explain to me why we are paying so much more now that abortion is legal and birth control is available to all...
then we were in 1971?
You and I do have to pay for it, because that poor woman qualifies for pages of government programs and assistance she didn't qualify for as soon as that baby pops out, some even before than.Providing low cost/free birth control to poor women saves taxpayers money and reduces the number of abortions.
True, it may reduce the number of abortions, but regarding saving taxpayer money that is a false dichotomy predicated on the idea that we have to pay for their bastard child rather than choosing to pay for him.
Common sense tells me birth control leads to fewer abortions regardless of how it's paid for.
Common sense also tells me NOTHING in life is free.
It's free upfront to the individual and is currently being paid for by our tax dollars.
you already got your cable from the gvt funding (via taxes and fees), the cable lines run in your neighborhood!!! (Just look at your telephone and cable bill and all the fees and taxes added to them!!!) that's the gvt or we the people funding the spreading of cable and telephones lines to all!Common sense tells me birth control leads to fewer abortions regardless of how it's paid for.
Common sense also tells me NOTHING in life is free.
It's free upfront to the individual and is currently being paid for by our tax dollars.
Since I lead a celebate life and have no need for birth control, will you pay for my cable TV instead? I mean, just because I'm not running around fucking everything that doesn't move faster than I do doesn't mean there isn't something you can do to provide for my entertainment.
:I'll help:So explain to me why we are paying so much more now that abortion is legal and birth control is available to all...
then we were in 1971?
You must substantiate this claim with full contex before a response is given.
you already got your cable from the gvt funding (via taxes and fees), the cable lines run in your neighborhood!!! (Just look at your telephone and cable bill and all the fees and taxes added to them!!!) that's the gvt or we the people funding the spreading of cable and telephones lines to all!It's free upfront to the individual and is currently being paid for by our tax dollars.
Since I lead a celebate life and have no need for birth control, will you pay for my cable TV instead? I mean, just because I'm not running around fucking everything that doesn't move faster than I do doesn't mean there isn't something you can do to provide for my entertainment.
First, you must first stop operating from the proposition that unintended pregnancy only results from a failure to be responsible. For someone who says we shouldn't assume such low things of women, you sure seem to be assuming that there's a whole lot of women out there being totally controlled by their urges with no way of dealing with them other than having sex indiscriminately. I have to tell you, that's really a disservice to women.
True, the causes of unintended pregnancy are complex and varied. And compelling ‘personal responsibility’ alone is naïve and pointless; providing free contraceptives is an intelligent and pragmatic component of a comprehensive strategy to address a serious social issue.
Why can't more girls be like Bristol Palin?
