Study: Free birth control leads to fewer abortions; Romney wants to cut access.

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

Common sense tells me that killing kids that have sex leads to fewer abortions, which is why I never listen to it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

If it is being paid for it is not free.

 

[candycorn]

People have to start taking responsibility for their lives and his has to start NOW.

Freudian slip?

Or what? What is the alternative? Not spending the money, right? Not spending it. Then what happens? Tell me how this ends...if you would, please?

Sure...we did that with "Just Say No". The response is the largest prison population ever. We criminalized it, made it dangerous, increased the violence to deal, make, distribute it instead of making it legal, taxing it and making it safer. The result, we spend bookoo bucks on prisons. Its the price we pay for the choices we make as a society. I would wonder what the proponents of that program back in the 1980's would say if they could see it in a 2012 light.

Okay, I missed the "t" on "this". Got that. "Just say No" ( to providing contraceptives) Got that.

Yes...and what happens after word? More Abortions to be sure because we'll have more pregnancies--no argument there right? But lets talk about what happens to the pregnancies carried to term. Would it bother you that we'll have more people on assistance, more kids in the classrooms and ultimately--if unwanted pregnancy statistics are to be believed, more people in prison. You'll have to pay for it.

Maybe you have a different version. Share it, will you please?

Now what in the hell are you talking about? criminalizing what? increasing violence about what..prisons? You lost me BIG time....

I was just saying that in the 1980's we made a decision to double down on prevention and interdiction. It hasn't worked very well. Now we have bloated courts, bloated prisons, and drugs are rampant in our society.

Making a decision that sounds good to pacify a silly political plank and save a whopping $300M ($1 per citizen) doesn't always result in good decision making.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It's free upfront to the individual and is currently being paid for by our tax dollars.

So it's not free.

And I shouldn't have to pay for the sexual habits of my neighbors

then i suggest you cancel any health and car insurance you have.
Seeing how you are paying for those people who can't drive good and fat people who eat unhealthy.

Tell me something, a friend of yours parent has lung cancer because of smoking. Do you say **** them, i shouldnt have to pay for their own choices!

No i doubt you have the balls to say that to your friend.

If it wasn't for Obamacare my health insurance wouldn't be forcing me to pay for fat people, would it? As for my car insurance, the only way it would force me to pay for uninsured drivers is if I opt for that on my insurance. Since I do not, it doesn't.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Old, white Republican men have a better understanding of women and woman's bodies. That's why they need to be in charge.

If wimmen folks don't want me talking about them they can stop asking me to pay for their wimmen problems.

And Republicans wonder why they are seen as being anti-women.

And Democrats wonder why they are seen as being stupid.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It's free upfront to the individual and is currently being paid for by our tax dollars.

So it's not free.

And I shouldn't have to pay for the sexual habits of my neighbors

And you shouldn't have to pay for what else...entitlements, prisons, school taxes etc...right? I'm guessing you'll say no. Which is fine but the current system we have--until it's changed into a pure libertarian system where you're on your own consequences be damned...you're paying for all sorts of crapolla that you had nothing to do with. If your neighbor does blow, gets arrested and is locked up in Joplin...well thats something you're paying for; about $30K a year. Paying a few pennies (300M dollars according to Romney--$1 of your tax money) is a bargain.

I see your point though. It would be much better if people just stopped having sex. But that doesn't seem to be on the horizon.

The best idea of all, cut taxes to allow a single income house hold and allow a parent to stay home to make sure that the kids aren't promiscuous. But we like our bombers, tanks, parks, Air Force 1 and it's ridiculous expenditure, having mail delivered on Saturdays, etc...

That fact that the system is screwed up is proof that we need to screw it up more?

 

[candycorn]

So it's not free.

And I shouldn't have to pay for the sexual habits of my neighbors

And you shouldn't have to pay for what else...entitlements, prisons, school taxes etc...right? I'm guessing you'll say no. Which is fine but the current system we have--until it's changed into a pure libertarian system where you're on your own consequences be damned...you're paying for all sorts of crapolla that you had nothing to do with. If your neighbor does blow, gets arrested and is locked up in Joplin...well thats something you're paying for; about $30K a year. Paying a few pennies (300M dollars according to Romney--$1 of your tax money) is a bargain.

I see your point though. It would be much better if people just stopped having sex. But that doesn't seem to be on the horizon.

The best idea of all, cut taxes to allow a single income house hold and allow a parent to stay home to make sure that the kids aren't promiscuous. But we like our bombers, tanks, parks, Air Force 1 and it's ridiculous expenditure, having mail delivered on Saturdays, etc...

I have no problem paying for the things you listed. New entitlements, I do. What's here is here and no amount of complaining about it is going to change anything. But this new bullshit needs to be nipped in the bud before it becomes the norm.

What "new bullshit" are you talking about?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

It's free upfront to the individual and is currently being paid for by our tax dollars.

So it's not free.

And I shouldn't have to pay for the sexual habits of my neighbors

then i suggest you cancel any health and car insurance you have.
Seeing how you are paying for those people who can't drive good and fat people who eat unhealthy.

Tell me something, a friend of yours parent has lung cancer because of smoking. Do you say **** them, i shouldnt have to pay for their own choices!

No i doubt you have the balls to say that to your friend.

you don't know me very well then. I speak my mind always.

My ex-wife tried using her handicapped permit to park in handicap during bad weather even if her daughter with cp wasn't with us. I told her if she did I would call the police.

She never tried it again

 

[candycorn]

Well, you know, it's that pesky thing called personal responsibility, something I doubt you would understand.

And it's not free, by the way. Someone is paying for it, like me.

Which is why I didn't say "free". You're also paying for schools that aren't doing a good job of preparing our children, entitlements to feed impoverished people, and prison cells to house criminals.

None of which justify nor have any relevancy whatsoever to handing out "free" birth control to people.

Only to the most ignorant among us (namely you).

Not paying for it at all saves the most

Not really. Pay dimes now or dollars later.

And also, the irony is that the elimination (not cut--elimination) in Title X funding is supposedly being done to prevent funding from going to "abortion groups like Planned Parenthood."

Planned Parenthood is a strong enough organization to stand on their own two feet without my money.

That actually is true. Which is why Title X funding doesn't only go to PP.

Riddle me this; what do you think happens when you have more unwanted pregnancies that contraception would have prevented?

Obviously, you have more abortions or more children running around. What was the riddle, Batman?

And Romney's rationale for cutting the funding is because it goes to "abortion groups". For some sort of management whiz, he seems pretty daft.

 

[candycorn]

If wimmen folks don't want me talking about them they can stop asking me to pay for their wimmen problems.

And Republicans wonder why they are seen as being anti-women.

And Democrats wonder why they are seen as being stupid.

Stupid enough to get the Women's vote in nearly every presidential election. Scoreboard.

 

[candycorn]

So it's not free.

And I shouldn't have to pay for the sexual habits of my neighbors

And you shouldn't have to pay for what else...entitlements, prisons, school taxes etc...right? I'm guessing you'll say no. Which is fine but the current system we have--until it's changed into a pure libertarian system where you're on your own consequences be damned...you're paying for all sorts of crapolla that you had nothing to do with. If your neighbor does blow, gets arrested and is locked up in Joplin...well thats something you're paying for; about $30K a year. Paying a few pennies (300M dollars according to Romney--$1 of your tax money) is a bargain.

I see your point though. It would be much better if people just stopped having sex. But that doesn't seem to be on the horizon.

The best idea of all, cut taxes to allow a single income house hold and allow a parent to stay home to make sure that the kids aren't promiscuous. But we like our bombers, tanks, parks, Air Force 1 and it's ridiculous expenditure, having mail delivered on Saturdays, etc...

That fact that the system is screwed up is proof that we need to screw it up more?

Well, the answer to climbing out of poverty, in my mind, is education and not having kids you can't afford. Not to portray myself as Horatio Alger but I didn't have a lot growing up and I don't have all that much more now. But I do have what our financial advisor said was a "platinum plan" for retirement. We had this guy come by our office and help us with retirement planning. He called my mixture of retirement vehicles "platinum".

How did I do "it"? I didn't have babies and I got an education and will be getting my Masters sooner or later. Big whoop.

To the discussion at hand though; having fewer babies is good for a person to climb themselves out of poverty--I feel. Title X funding which costs each citizen a buck in taxes does that. And it benefits those citizens by reducing the tax burden down the line.

What we have in place is what we have in place. My message is to leave it alone--don't cut the funding. Having the "status quo" remain the satus quo is not screwing it up more, I don't think.

 

[Amazed]

The upside to this study is that it cuts the number of brain dead libs.

 

[Plasmaball]

So it's not free.

And I shouldn't have to pay for the sexual habits of my neighbors

then i suggest you cancel any health and car insurance you have.
Seeing how you are paying for those people who can't drive good and fat people who eat unhealthy.

Tell me something, a friend of yours parent has lung cancer because of smoking. Do you say **** them, i shouldnt have to pay for their own choices!

No i doubt you have the balls to say that to your friend.

If it wasn't for Obamacare my health insurance wouldn't be forcing me to pay for fat people, would it? As for my car insurance, the only way it would force me to pay for uninsured drivers is if I opt for that on my insurance. Since I do not, it doesn't.

yes it would but nice try.
that wasnt what i said stupid. im not talking about uninsured drivers.
moron

 

[Plasmaball]

So it's not free.

And I shouldn't have to pay for the sexual habits of my neighbors

then i suggest you cancel any health and car insurance you have.
Seeing how you are paying for those people who can't drive good and fat people who eat unhealthy.

Tell me something, a friend of yours parent has lung cancer because of smoking. Do you say **** them, i shouldnt have to pay for their own choices!

No i doubt you have the balls to say that to your friend.

The difference is, taxpayers don't provide cigarettes to people who smoke. We should not have to pay for the sexual enjoyment of our neighbors the same way we don't buy people who smoke cigarettes!

you do understand what insurance is correct?

seems from here you dont.

 

[Plasmaball]

So it's not free.

And I shouldn't have to pay for the sexual habits of my neighbors

then i suggest you cancel any health and car insurance you have.
Seeing how you are paying for those people who can't drive good and fat people who eat unhealthy.

Tell me something, a friend of yours parent has lung cancer because of smoking. Do you say **** them, i shouldnt have to pay for their own choices!

No i doubt you have the balls to say that to your friend.

you don't know me very well then. I speak my mind always.

My ex-wife tried using her handicapped permit to park in handicap during bad weather even if her daughter with cp wasn't with us. I told her if she did I would call the police.

She never tried it again

thats nice and an ex wife is not cancer.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

then i suggest you cancel any health and car insurance you have.
Seeing how you are paying for those people who can't drive good and fat people who eat unhealthy.

Tell me something, a friend of yours parent has lung cancer because of smoking. Do you say **** them, i shouldnt have to pay for their own choices!

No i doubt you have the balls to say that to your friend.

If it wasn't for Obamacare my health insurance wouldn't be forcing me to pay for fat people, would it? As for my car insurance, the only way it would force me to pay for uninsured drivers is if I opt for that on my insurance. Since I do not, it doesn't.

yes it would but nice try.
that wasnt what i said stupid. im not talking about uninsured drivers.
moron

I carry strict liability insurance, the only thing it covers is my driving. It doesn't cover me getting hit by anyone else. the reason for that is I trust my driving, but not theirs, and I do not want to pay for their accidents.

Face it, you are wrong, I am not paying for them.

 

[JoeB131]

"Cutting access" = Someone else won't pay for services rendered and products consumed.

Or that we are spending money smartly.

We spend 300 million a year on birth control.

We spend 32 billion on prisons, mostly inhabited by people born to single parents who had no business having kids.

We spend hundreds of billions on welfare, mostly people who had babies before they got the skills to support them.

Stuff is going to happen. It's spending smart vs. spending stubbornly.

 

[Plasmaball]

If it wasn't for Obamacare my health insurance wouldn't be forcing me to pay for fat people, would it? As for my car insurance, the only way it would force me to pay for uninsured drivers is if I opt for that on my insurance. Since I do not, it doesn't.

yes it would but nice try.
that wasnt what i said stupid. im not talking about uninsured drivers.
moron

I carry strict liability insurance, the only thing it covers is my driving. It doesn't cover me getting hit by anyone else. the reason for that is I trust my driving, but not theirs, and I do not want to pay for their accidents.

Face it, you are wrong, I am not paying for them.

When you have insurance you pay into a pool. The reason your rate is low is because you have a lot of people pitching in. So yes you are paying for them.

Keep trying, but you can't avoid how a insurance system works skippy.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"Cutting access" = Someone else won't pay for services rendered and products consumed.

Or that we are spending money smartly.

We spend 300 million a year on birth control.

We spend 32 billion on prisons, mostly inhabited by people born to single parents who had no business having kids.

We spend hundreds of billions on welfare, mostly people who had babies before they got the skills to support them.

Stuff is going to happen. It's spending smart vs. spending stubbornly.

Why not sterilize everyone, that is the progressive solution.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

yes it would but nice try.
that wasnt what i said stupid. im not talking about uninsured drivers.
moron

I carry strict liability insurance, the only thing it covers is my driving. It doesn't cover me getting hit by anyone else. the reason for that is I trust my driving, but not theirs, and I do not want to pay for their accidents.

Face it, you are wrong, I am not paying for them.

When you have insurance you pay into a pool. The reason your rate is low is because you have a lot of people pitching in. So yes you are paying for them.

Keep trying, but you can't avoid how a insurance system works skippy.

The reason my rate is low is I do not have accidents. If I have accidents my rate will go up even though the size of the pool does not change. If the number of drivers decrease my rates go down because fewer drivers actually mean less chance of my mistake causing damage I am liable for.