Amid abortion battle, DeSantis vetoes birth-control funding – again

Are you drinking this early in the day? That's exactly what you were saying, that without taxpayer paid BC there will be more abortions.

Nope, but you seem to be still hungover from last night.

What I am saying is that BC use leads to less abortions. How is this confusing for you?
 
Nope, but you seem to be still hungover from last night.

What I am saying is that BC use leads to less abortions. How is this confusing for you?

It must be confusing to you. You said without taxpayer funded BC we must want more abortions. If you didn't mean without paid BC, then WTF did you mean?
 
It must be confusing to you. You said without taxpayer funded BC we must want more abortions. If you didn't mean without paid BC, then WTF did you mean?

Taxpayer funded BC makes BC even more readily available, which leads to less abortions. But you do not want that for some reason, even though you pretend to be against abortion

To you, 2 million dollars is too much to pay for less abortions. I think it is a better investment than paying 15 times that much to help manatees.
 
Taxpayer funded BC makes BC even more readily available, which leads to less abortions. But you do not want that for some reason, even though you pretend to be against abortion

To you, 2 million dollars is too much to pay for less abortions. I think it is a better investment than paying 15 times that much to help manatees.
I think Ray's postiion is clear. He believes women should bear (literally) the fruits of fornication.

Now we've had abortion since somewhere around 1500 BC, and the christian church was somewhat inconsistent in the first couple of centuries AD, and "rubbers" have been around since before Shakespeare ... but of course women were dependent upon men to use them. So, personally, I find Ray's position to be ... not well considered. But he's entitled to his opinion, and he's not being inconsistent. And I'll give him the benefit of not being a hypocrite and believing men should be hauled into court and ordered to support their spawn. Not that that actually happens.
 
Really???
Ahhh, the pill?

Griswold v. Connecticut - Planned Parenthood …

  • Background
  • Significance
  • Effects
  • In 1965 the Supreme Court ruled on a case concerning a Connecticut law that criminalized the use of birth control. Ruling that the states had no right to ban contraception for married couples, the landmark case of Griswold v. Connecticut established for the first time a constitutional right to privacy regarding reprodu…

You said "all" and never stayed the restrictions were limited to certain areas. The original statement was all encompassing.
 
Raymond ffs. We have established on this thread that you cant "influence" anybody into being Gay. It just oesnt work like thaat.

To suggest that it is possible is to illustrate how fucking dumb you are..Or perhaps you can tell me when you chose to be straight (or Gay) or whatever you identify as.
Yet being groomed to be gay is just what Milo Yiannopolous said happened to him. He is not gay now, or maybe he never was
 
The government has no authority to take one man's money to fund another's contraception.
 
I think Ray's postiion is clear. He believes women should bear (literally) the fruits of fornication.

Now we've had abortion since somewhere around 1500 BC, and the christian church was somewhat inconsistent in the first couple of centuries AD, and "rubbers" have been around since before Shakespeare ... but of course women were dependent upon men to use them. So, personally, I find Ray's position to be ... not well considered. But he's entitled to his opinion, and he's not being inconsistent. And I'll give him the benefit of not being a hypocrite and believing men should be hauled into court and ordered to support their spawn. Not that that actually happens.

I could care less about anybody using BC just as long as you pay for it yourself.
 
Taxpayer funded BC makes BC even more readily available, which leads to less abortions. But you do not want that for some reason, even though you pretend to be against abortion

To you, 2 million dollars is too much to pay for less abortions. I think it is a better investment than paying 15 times that much to help manatees.

First of all again, you have no evidence that government funded BX stops or slows down anything. Secondly. it does not make it anymore available. You go to the doctor, get a RX and pick it up at the drug store. How much more convenient can it get than that? If you are really Fn lazy, you can get RX by mail and they'll deliver it right to your door. If you're really, really Fn lazy, you can sign up for a Doctor virtual visit to get the RX and you'll never have to leave your home.

Again, you back up what I said earlier, with you, it's a choice of government BC or have more abortions and there is simply no truth to that.
 
rst of all again, you have no evidence that government funded BX stops or slows down anything. Secondly. it does not make it anymore available. You go to the doctor, get a RX and pick it up at the drug store. How much more convenient can it get than that? If you are really Fn lazy, you can get RX by mail and they'll deliver it right to your door. If you're really, really Fn lazy, you can sign up for a Doctor virtual visit to get the RX and you'll never have to leave your home.

It is simple if you have a doctor and can afford the visit and the BC. The point of this money was to help those that do not. Thus even more people would have access to birth control, which leads to less pregnancies which leads to less abortions. But you do not want that to happen, because you really do not actually care about abortions. Are you not willing to compromise even a tiny bit to see less abortions taking place?
 
The cost of this extra BC comes about to about 9 cents per resident of Florida. But that is too much to pay to have less abortions.
 
It is simple if you have a doctor and can afford the visit and the BC. The point of this money was to help those that do not. Thus even more people would have access to birth control, which leads to less pregnancies which leads to less abortions. But you do not want that to happen, because you really do not actually care about abortions. Are you not willing to compromise even a tiny bit to see less abortions taking place?

No I am not willing to compromise. I've compromised enough to support other people. Over half my property taxes (about $4,000 a year) go to support the schools other people send their kids to. Why should I support their kids education? I lost my employer sponsored healthcare I've had all my life because of Commie Care which was targeted to favor Democrat voters. I paid my taxes all of my life. I'm sick of compromises. And besides the food, housing, daycare,school lunches, utilities, government cell phones, I'm expected to pay for their whoopie time as well? No, forget about it.
 
No I am not willing to compromise. I've compromised enough to support other people. Over half my property taxes (about $4,000 a year) go to support the schools other people send their kids to. Why should I support their kids education? I lost my employer sponsored healthcare I've had all my life because of Commie Care which was targeted to favor Democrat voters. I paid my taxes all of my life. I'm sick of compromises. And besides the food, housing, daycare,school lunches, utilities, government cell phones, I'm expected to pay for their whoopie time as well? No, forget about it.

Thanks. We all have priorities, and yours is not less abortions.
 
And they can't come up with 9 cents to pay for their BC themselves?

1654712878076.png
 

Forum List

Back
Top