Free birth control

[Ray From Cleveland]

Don't include me in the democrats. I pay my way through life.

I didn't mean you. I should have said "they."

 

[Conservative65]

http://www.bustle.com/articles/9528...riment-proves-the-whole-country-needs-free-bc

They did it in Colorado, seems it reduced abortions, reduced unwanted pregnancies, reduced healthcare spending etc.

"According to a study published in October 2014, unintended pregnancies dropped in the state by 40 percent from 2009-2013, and abortion fell by 42 percent over the same period."

"The program saved the state millions in public health coverage for unintended pregnancies, further proving the well-known fact that preventative care is cost-effective and sensible health policy."

Question, what did Republicans do to a program that saves money, reduces problems, and reduces abortion?

"Colorado Republicans succeeded in shooting it down, leaving the program in peril."

The question is, WHY???? Why would someone take something that WORKS on many levels and destroy it just so they can go around preaching their nonsense to others? They want to stop abortion, well this reduces abortion, but without abortion they've got nothing to get people hysterical about, so no one would vote for them if abortion isn't an issue.

How about mandating birth control to people below a certain income level? That will turn ACLU and liberals into pro lifers real fast.

How about not?

Though apparently the world is getting more stupid because the idiots are breeding more than the intelligent people.

The stupid people are those that want to provide something like BC for free then, when the person doesn't use it or it doesn't work, support those for whom it was provided.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Better than free, dupe. Saves so much med and welfare duh...

Oh yes. And if we give criminals $3000 a month in taxpayer money, that would save us thousands of dollars by not having them commit crime and be in prison all those years.

Do you realize how stupid that argument is? That's like saying taxpayers should buy every non working American a new car so they can get a job and go to work everyday. In the long run it would be cheaper.

When you promote irresponsibility, don't be surprised when you end up with more irresponsible people.

So let's add birth control to the list and see what we have:

Free birth control
Free government cell phone
Free medical care for the individual and family
Free food for the individual and family
Free school lunch, breakfast and dinner in some areas
Free HUD home in the suburbs

Did I forget something? Is there anything else you would like to add on that list? You know, maybe a free boat, a free vacation home down south for the winter, all expense paid European vacation?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You're a man so you probably don't know that not all birth control pills are the same.

The pills you want all women to buy because they're cheap would have killed me and the millions of women like me who have or had reproductive conditions.

Millions of women are on the pill not for birth control but because they have a problem in their reproductive organs. Such as endometriosis or ovarian cysts and other problems women face that the pill is the easiest and least expensive way to deal with those problems.

The thing is, the pills at target that are 9 dollars won't work for real problems in reproductive organs.

On top of the fact that the pills at Target need a prescription. Which the only way to get that is to go see a doctor. Doctor's don't see people who don't have insurance so red states that didn't accept Obamacare still have very high rates of uninsured people. Those people can't go to a doctor's office so they rely on Planned Parenthood. When you take away a woman's only source of getting those pills you end up with unplanned pregnancies and abortions.

Pills at Target for 9 dollars mean nothing and are useless to women who can't get that prescription which is all of those who go to Planned Parenthood.

So what percentage of women can't use that kind of pill? I'd be willing to bet very few. And if they can't afford a doctors visit to get any kind of birth control, how do they afford abortions if PP only has a very small percentage of clients that use their abortion services?

I don't have prescription coverage. I pay for all my medical supplies with cash; a couple hundred bucks every month. So my question is, do you think that if we taxpayers are to provide the public with medical anything, don't you think that diabetes should be more important than providing for women that can't keep their legs closed? After all, if I can't afford my insulin, I simply die. To afford my medical supplies, I have to go to work everyday and make the money to afford those supplies. Unlike birth control, it's really not an option for me.

There are a lot of people who need birth control and it's not an option.

I was one of them. I nearly died from a cyst on my ovary rupturing. I didn't have insurance so I didn't go see a doctor so my ovary and tube became infected and I nearly died.

Without those pills I would have put my life at risk and I had no choice.

My insurance paid for it because it was for a medical condition.

There are millions of women like me. Those 9 dollar pills will not work on women who have real medical conditions that can kill them.

As for women who can't pay for a doctor's visit but you say they pay for abortions, no they don't.

I donate to Planned Parenthoods abortion fund. I also donate to another organization whose only business is to pay for abortions for women who can't afford them themselves.

Then there are states like mine that use their state tax dollars to pay for abortions for any reason for those who are on medicaid.

Then there are the women who were raped, who are survivors of incest or the pregnancy will kill them whose abortions are paid with federal medicaid dollars.

Poor women in red conservative states don't have insurance because their republican politicians refused to join Obamacare. It's a very well known fact that no doctor will give an appointment to anyone who doesn't have a way to pay for their services so poor and low income women are locked out of doctor's offices. Which is the ONLY place to get those prescriptions that are REQUIRED to get that 9 dollar birth control.

It's useless to anyone who doesn't have insurance and those are the ones who go to Planned Parenthood. When you close those doors you're denying very much needed health care to people who don't have the money to pay for their health care.

You might have a job that pays you enough to pay for your medical supplies. But women who make minimum wage don't. They rely on Planned Parenthood and other organizations like that to get their much needed health care and birth control.

Just because you can pay for your medical supplies doesn't mean everyone can.

But you know that fact and you choose to ignore it.

Absolutely false.

Nobody in this country goes without medical care. One way or another, it is provided. That's what Medicaid is for.

Besides that, I have the best medical care in the country and perhaps the world. The Cleveland Clinic offers free medical care to people that make less than four times the poverty rate. If you are making more than four times the poverty rate, you can afford to see a doctor and pay for your prescriptions. Many health facilities operate the same way. They do this with a mix of government funds and private donations.

What this is really about is vote buying. Ask yourself why government will pay for (in most cases) non-life sustaining recreational drugs for women, but won't pay for life sustaining drugs for other people? You may be a minority of women who need birth control pills for something other than screwing around, but I'd bet a years paycheck to your weeks paycheck that most women don't need BC for that reason.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

‘"Colorado Republicans succeeded in shooting it down, leaving the program in peril."


The question is, WHY????’

Because it conflicts with errant, wrongheaded conservative dogma.

Because it ‘offends’ the social conservative, Evangelical base who must be appeased.

And because conservatives incorrectly believe that it will ‘facilitate’ premarital sex.

Most on the reactionary right still live in the Dark Ages.

 

[Norman]

Now it's the republicans fault because people who want to fuck
can't buy their own birth control.....

Are you kidding me....

Are people responsible for anything in their lives....
Anything?

Yes, right wingers are responsible for everything.

Including providing leftist loonies with the goodies.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Women want to be treated as irresponsible animals. Abortion and contraception are like spay and neuter dogs and cats. Naturally no one expects the dogs and cats to pay. They don't decide to have sex. It just happens as part of an uncontrollable urge. Women want to be considered the same.

Well crap!, Maybe Bernie was right, women do have fantasies of big strapping black bucks raping them.
I honestly thought that was some ignorant shit that he said at first,,, but now....?

 

[Maryland Patriot]

‘"Colorado Republicans succeeded in shooting it down, leaving the program in peril."


The question is, WHY????’

Because it conflicts with errant, wrongheaded conservative dogma.

Because it ‘offends’ the social conservative, Evangelical base who must be appeased.

And because conservatives incorrectly believe that it will ‘facilitate’ premarital sex.

Most on the reactionary right still live in the Dark Ages.

You're a man so you probably don't know that not all birth control pills are the same.

The pills you want all women to buy because they're cheap would have killed me and the millions of women like me who have or had reproductive conditions.

Millions of women are on the pill not for birth control but because they have a problem in their reproductive organs. Such as endometriosis or ovarian cysts and other problems women face that the pill is the easiest and least expensive way to deal with those problems.

The thing is, the pills at target that are 9 dollars won't work for real problems in reproductive organs.

On top of the fact that the pills at Target need a prescription. Which the only way to get that is to go see a doctor. Doctor's don't see people who don't have insurance so red states that didn't accept Obamacare still have very high rates of uninsured people. Those people can't go to a doctor's office so they rely on Planned Parenthood. When you take away a woman's only source of getting those pills you end up with unplanned pregnancies and abortions.

Pills at Target for 9 dollars mean nothing and are useless to women who can't get that prescription which is all of those who go to Planned Parenthood.

So what percentage of women can't use that kind of pill? I'd be willing to bet very few. And if they can't afford a doctors visit to get any kind of birth control, how do they afford abortions if PP only has a very small percentage of clients that use their abortion services?

I don't have prescription coverage. I pay for all my medical supplies with cash; a couple hundred bucks every month. So my question is, do you think that if we taxpayers are to provide the public with medical anything, don't you think that diabetes should be more important than providing for women that can't keep their legs closed? After all, if I can't afford my insulin, I simply die. To afford my medical supplies, I have to go to work everyday and make the money to afford those supplies. Unlike birth control, it's really not an option for me.

There are a lot of people who need birth control and it's not an option.

I was one of them. I nearly died from a cyst on my ovary rupturing. I didn't have insurance so I didn't go see a doctor so my ovary and tube became infected and I nearly died.

Without those pills I would have put my life at risk and I had no choice.

My insurance paid for it because it was for a medical condition.

There are millions of women like me. Those 9 dollar pills will not work on women who have real medical conditions that can kill them.

As for women who can't pay for a doctor's visit but you say they pay for abortions, no they don't.

I donate to Planned Parenthoods abortion fund. I also donate to another organization whose only business is to pay for abortions for women who can't afford them themselves.

Then there are states like mine that use their state tax dollars to pay for abortions for any reason for those who are on medicaid.

Then there are the women who were raped, who are survivors of incest or the pregnancy will kill them whose abortions are paid with federal medicaid dollars.

Poor women in red conservative states don't have insurance because their republican politicians refused to join Obamacare. It's a very well known fact that no doctor will give an appointment to anyone who doesn't have a way to pay for their services so poor and low income women are locked out of doctor's offices. Which is the ONLY place to get those prescriptions that are REQUIRED to get that 9 dollar birth control.

It's useless to anyone who doesn't have insurance and those are the ones who go to Planned Parenthood. When you close those doors you're denying very much needed health care to people who don't have the money to pay for their health care.

You might have a job that pays you enough to pay for your medical supplies. But women who make minimum wage don't. They rely on Planned Parenthood and other organizations like that to get their much needed health care and birth control.

Just because you can pay for your medical supplies doesn't mean everyone can.

But you know that fact and you choose to ignore it.

sad story, now, explain why everyone else should pay your way?
as far as not being able to afford birth control? I call bullshit. Its less than the cost of your internet connection. Whats more important to you. Internet or living. If you dont care, why should we.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The question is, WHY????’

Because it conflicts with errant, wrongheaded conservative dogma.

Because it ‘offends’ the social conservative, Evangelical base who must be appeased.

And because conservatives incorrectly believe that it will ‘facilitate’ premarital sex.

Most on the reactionary right still live in the Dark Ages.

Or it could be none of those things and Republicans feel that people should be able to take care of themselves and not be a liability to taxpayers.

Every time a liberal wants something, just provide it and send the bill to somebody else. What the hell, what's 20 trillion in the hole anyways?

 

[frigidweirdo]

You do realize you don't have to spend a dime on birth control when you simply don't have sex when you don't want a child, right?

If society just listened to the Lord when He warns us of being unchaste we would wipe out unwed pregnancies and STDs within a generation

And back in the real world, WE WANT SEX.... why shouldn't people have sex? Oh, yeah, let's make up some crap about God not wanting people to have sex, yet you claim God made us all, and therefore made us want to have sex. Does anyone get that contradiction?

Welcome back to the real world. "WE" also, love to have sex. No one is stopping anyone from having sex.

Let's make up some crap about your desire to engage in your profligacy at the expense of everyone else when you acquire an unwanted pregnancy, or an STD and expect those you vilify to accept your demands to support you till you secumb to the repercussions of the decisions that you make.

Fuck all you want.

At who's expense?

I didn't say anyone was stopping anyone having sex. I was referring to someone who was being all religious and go on about how people should not have sex.

At whose expense? That's all people care about isn't it? You'd rather fork out money for having people locked up rather than programs that make these people functioning members of society because you feel you're paying for something you shouldn't, but you'll pay for people to rot in prison cells because it makes you feel good.

You'll pay for the costs of unwanted children, like prison, more police, more judges, more social workers and so on, rather than pay for things that work that actually stop the problem before it's begun.

Now, I just don't get it. Why anyone would want to pay MORE for a WORSE society, just so they can say "I'm not paying for that".

The problem is that we continue to pay more and it has not gotten better. It has only gotten worse.

I don't want to have to pay more for unwanted children, prisons, police, judges or social workers, etc. But we do.

Those making these decisions are not taking the necessary precautions and demand society pay for their profligacy. Responsibility starts with the individual.

The whole point is the expectation that everything is "free." None of it is free.

Helping these people is not my complaint. It is the desire that since we are helping them for "free" then the expectations are that everything else should be free as well.

All I am asking is that the effort be made to be a productive member of society and help offset the expense by not being so profligate.

Birth control has been basically free since I can remember.

Birth control and a box of condoms don't work unless you use them.

But then it's been shown that doing this makes things work to a much larger extent than without them being "free".

I understand what you're saying about things being free and an expectation that other stuff will be free. However in this case I don't think people would associate it like this.

It's like getting free flu jabs or something to prevent disease and illness, rather than free other stuff just because.

 

[Dana7360]

You're a man so you probably don't know that not all birth control pills are the same.

The pills you want all women to buy because they're cheap would have killed me and the millions of women like me who have or had reproductive conditions.

Millions of women are on the pill not for birth control but because they have a problem in their reproductive organs. Such as endometriosis or ovarian cysts and other problems women face that the pill is the easiest and least expensive way to deal with those problems.

The thing is, the pills at target that are 9 dollars won't work for real problems in reproductive organs.

On top of the fact that the pills at Target need a prescription. Which the only way to get that is to go see a doctor. Doctor's don't see people who don't have insurance so red states that didn't accept Obamacare still have very high rates of uninsured people. Those people can't go to a doctor's office so they rely on Planned Parenthood. When you take away a woman's only source of getting those pills you end up with unplanned pregnancies and abortions.

Pills at Target for 9 dollars mean nothing and are useless to women who can't get that prescription which is all of those who go to Planned Parenthood.

So what percentage of women can't use that kind of pill? I'd be willing to bet very few. And if they can't afford a doctors visit to get any kind of birth control, how do they afford abortions if PP only has a very small percentage of clients that use their abortion services?

I don't have prescription coverage. I pay for all my medical supplies with cash; a couple hundred bucks every month. So my question is, do you think that if we taxpayers are to provide the public with medical anything, don't you think that diabetes should be more important than providing for women that can't keep their legs closed? After all, if I can't afford my insulin, I simply die. To afford my medical supplies, I have to go to work everyday and make the money to afford those supplies. Unlike birth control, it's really not an option for me.

There are a lot of people who need birth control and it's not an option.

I was one of them. I nearly died from a cyst on my ovary rupturing. I didn't have insurance so I didn't go see a doctor so my ovary and tube became infected and I nearly died.

Without those pills I would have put my life at risk and I had no choice.

My insurance paid for it because it was for a medical condition.

There are millions of women like me. Those 9 dollar pills will not work on women who have real medical conditions that can kill them.

As for women who can't pay for a doctor's visit but you say they pay for abortions, no they don't.

I donate to Planned Parenthoods abortion fund. I also donate to another organization whose only business is to pay for abortions for women who can't afford them themselves.

Then there are states like mine that use their state tax dollars to pay for abortions for any reason for those who are on medicaid.

Then there are the women who were raped, who are survivors of incest or the pregnancy will kill them whose abortions are paid with federal medicaid dollars.

Poor women in red conservative states don't have insurance because their republican politicians refused to join Obamacare. It's a very well known fact that no doctor will give an appointment to anyone who doesn't have a way to pay for their services so poor and low income women are locked out of doctor's offices. Which is the ONLY place to get those prescriptions that are REQUIRED to get that 9 dollar birth control.

It's useless to anyone who doesn't have insurance and those are the ones who go to Planned Parenthood. When you close those doors you're denying very much needed health care to people who don't have the money to pay for their health care.

You might have a job that pays you enough to pay for your medical supplies. But women who make minimum wage don't. They rely on Planned Parenthood and other organizations like that to get their much needed health care and birth control.

Just because you can pay for your medical supplies doesn't mean everyone can.

But you know that fact and you choose to ignore it.

Absolutely false.

Nobody in this country goes without medical care. One way or another, it is provided. That's what Medicaid is for.

Besides that, I have the best medical care in the country and perhaps the world. The Cleveland Clinic offers free medical care to people that make less than four times the poverty rate. If you are making more than four times the poverty rate, you can afford to see a doctor and pay for your prescriptions. Many health facilities operate the same way. They do this with a mix of government funds and private donations.

What this is really about is vote buying. Ask yourself why government will pay for (in most cases) non-life sustaining recreational drugs for women, but won't pay for life sustaining drugs for other people? You may be a minority of women who need birth control pills for something other than screwing around, but I'd bet a years paycheck to your weeks paycheck that most women don't need BC for that reason.

Why do you believe that just because a facility in your area helps people with health care, that all areas of this nation does.

Did you know that a lot of our nation is rural and they don't have such options?

Did you know that the law requires for a hospital to stabilize a patient and then advise them to see the proper doctor once the patient is stable?

No hospital or ER is required to treat a patient beyond stabilizing them so they won't die. Anything after that isn't required by law and most places don't go beyond what the law requires.

You're going to have to prove to me that what you say about women who use the pill for medical conditions are a small minority of women because most of the women I know used it for reasons other than birth control. From teen years to menopause. There's a pill to stabilize perimenopause which millions of women in their 40s take, not for birth control but to minimize the side effects of menopause. I did it in my 40s. You just saying you don't believe a large part of our population is only using it for birth control doesn't make it true.

You having a facility by you that helps people doesn't make it true that all people have that option especially places that are very rural.

You can bring up all the excuses you want to justify your position but you're wrong.

Your flippant comment about 9 dollar pills is useless to the women who go to Planned Parenthood. They can't get the prescription that Target requires women to have to be able to buy those pills because they are locked out of doctor's offices because they have no insurance or a way to pay the bill for the services.

You can lie to yourself all you want, it won't change actual reality.

Oh you can reply to this post all you want, I'm done reading your posts about this. You're not dealing in reality and you're forcing your own situation on other people it can never apply to only for the reason that you say you don't want your tax dollars going to pay for birth control.

Too bad, Your tax dollar do pay for it and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it. No one who is any authority to do anything about it will actually listen to you and do anything you want.

Last, before you go on anymore rants about not wanting to pay for birth control, you need to read a law that richard nixon signed. It's called Title X.

You and all others who want to not pay for birth control are VIOLATING that law. That law requires federal dollars to be spent on birth control and health care for women who don't qualify for medicaid. In fact that law requires 90% of those funds to go to nothing but family planning services. Which is one of the reasons it's illegal to defund places like Planned Parenthood.

 

[francoHFW]

trick question for the left.
if the box of condoms is cheaper, why dont more leeches use them?
answer, the fact that more kids means more money coming in.
why does it always fall on someone else paying for peoples mistakes. When will self responsibility ever be a thing?

When you leave the Democrat party.

Don't include me in the democrats. I pay my way through life.

WTF are you talking about, brainwashed functional moron?
Ay caramba.

you should be a little nicer to the people that pay you to exist.
Perhaps kissing my ass would be a good start?

What a stupid a-hole...all hail the boss in dupe world. You're pathetic.

 

[francoHFW]

You do realize you don't have to spend a dime on birth control when you simply don't have sex when you don't want a child, right?

If society just listened to the Lord when He warns us of being unchaste we would wipe out unwed pregnancies and STDs within a generation

And back in the real world, WE WANT SEX.... why shouldn't people have sex? Oh, yeah, let's make up some crap about God not wanting people to have sex, yet you claim God made us all, and therefore made us want to have sex. Does anyone get that contradiction?

Welcome back to the real world. "WE" also, love to have sex. No one is stopping anyone from having sex.

Let's make up some crap about your desire to engage in your profligacy at the expense of everyone else when you acquire an unwanted pregnancy, or an STD and expect those you vilify to accept your demands to support you till you secumb to the repercussions of the decisions that you make.

Fuck all you want.

At who's expense?

I didn't say anyone was stopping anyone having sex. I was referring to someone who was being all religious and go on about how people should not have sex.

At whose expense? That's all people care about isn't it? You'd rather fork out money for having people locked up rather than programs that make these people functioning members of society because you feel you're paying for something you shouldn't, but you'll pay for people to rot in prison cells because it makes you feel good.

You'll pay for the costs of unwanted children, like prison, more police, more judges, more social workers and so on, rather than pay for things that work that actually stop the problem before it's begun.

Now, I just don't get it. Why anyone would want to pay MORE for a WORSE society, just so they can say "I'm not paying for that".

The problem is that we continue to pay more and it has not gotten better. It has only gotten worse.

I don't want to have to pay more for unwanted children, prisons, police, judges or social workers, etc. But we do.

Those making these decisions are not taking the necessary precautions and demand society pay for their profligacy. Responsibility starts with the individual.

The whole point is the expectation that everything is "free." None of it is free.

Helping these people is not my complaint. It is the desire that since we are helping them for "free" then the expectations are that everything else should be free as well.

All I am asking is that the effort be made to be a productive member of society and help offset the expense by not being so profligate.

Birth control has been basically free since I can remember.

Birth control and a box of condoms don't work unless you use them.

But then it's been shown that doing this makes things work to a much larger extent than without them being "free".

I understand what you're saying about things being free and an expectation that other stuff will be free. However in this case I don't think people would associate it like this.

It's like getting free flu jabs or something to prevent disease and illness, rather than free other stuff just because.

BC has been free? What a dupe/idiot...You live in a dream world. Reaganism has done away with that old world. Great job!
Dear middle class: Welcome to poverty

 

[oreo]

Sticking a free IUD up a teenager's vagina is not the solution to abortion, it's a favor to liberal men and boys who prey on teenage girls. We need to take a look at the motivation for on demand abortion, selling body parts and the free IUD's for (poor and ignorant) teens movement. It obviously ain't aimed at women's physical and mental health issues. It's easy to see that the abortion on demand and free IUD's for teenage girls is motivated by organized crime and created by liberal men to absolve their responsibilities when they ruin the lives of vulnerable girls and turn teenagers into sluts.

IUD'S work to prevent abortions, and you have no right whatsoever to intervene into a doctor/patient relationship, as to what device or type of contraceptive that a doctor will prescribe or recommend. It's NONE of your BUSINESS.

And while many of you are screaming about Religious freedoms, opposed to paying for a legal "prescription" drug called Birth Control pills, I sure don't see you screaming about all the male enhancement drugs out there like Viagra--that you don't include on your hit list. Which btw--are considerably more expensive than birth control pills. IUD'S are much more cost effective than Birth Control pills, as they work until they're taken out, versus a monthly cost for Birth control pills. They work great for the "forget to take the pill women."

 

[frigidweirdo]

And back in the real world, WE WANT SEX.... why shouldn't people have sex? Oh, yeah, let's make up some crap about God not wanting people to have sex, yet you claim God made us all, and therefore made us want to have sex. Does anyone get that contradiction?

Welcome back to the real world. "WE" also, love to have sex. No one is stopping anyone from having sex.

Let's make up some crap about your desire to engage in your profligacy at the expense of everyone else when you acquire an unwanted pregnancy, or an STD and expect those you vilify to accept your demands to support you till you secumb to the repercussions of the decisions that you make.

Fuck all you want.

At who's expense?

I didn't say anyone was stopping anyone having sex. I was referring to someone who was being all religious and go on about how people should not have sex.

At whose expense? That's all people care about isn't it? You'd rather fork out money for having people locked up rather than programs that make these people functioning members of society because you feel you're paying for something you shouldn't, but you'll pay for people to rot in prison cells because it makes you feel good.

You'll pay for the costs of unwanted children, like prison, more police, more judges, more social workers and so on, rather than pay for things that work that actually stop the problem before it's begun.

Now, I just don't get it. Why anyone would want to pay MORE for a WORSE society, just so they can say "I'm not paying for that".

The problem is that we continue to pay more and it has not gotten better. It has only gotten worse.

I don't want to have to pay more for unwanted children, prisons, police, judges or social workers, etc. But we do.

Those making these decisions are not taking the necessary precautions and demand society pay for their profligacy. Responsibility starts with the individual.

The whole point is the expectation that everything is "free." None of it is free.

Helping these people is not my complaint. It is the desire that since we are helping them for "free" then the expectations are that everything else should be free as well.

All I am asking is that the effort be made to be a productive member of society and help offset the expense by not being so profligate.

Birth control has been basically free since I can remember.

Birth control and a box of condoms don't work unless you use them.

But then it's been shown that doing this makes things work to a much larger extent than without them being "free".

I understand what you're saying about things being free and an expectation that other stuff will be free. However in this case I don't think people would associate it like this.

It's like getting free flu jabs or something to prevent disease and illness, rather than free other stuff just because.

BC has been free? What a dupe/idiot...You live in a dream world. Reaganism has done away with that old world. Great job!
Dear middle class: Welcome to poverty

You might want to explain yourself here. I don't have a clue what your point is.

 

[francoHFW]

Welcome back to the real world. "WE" also, love to have sex. No one is stopping anyone from having sex.

Let's make up some crap about your desire to engage in your profligacy at the expense of everyone else when you acquire an unwanted pregnancy, or an STD and expect those you vilify to accept your demands to support you till you secumb to the repercussions of the decisions that you make.

Fuck all you want.

At who's expense?

I didn't say anyone was stopping anyone having sex. I was referring to someone who was being all religious and go on about how people should not have sex.

At whose expense? That's all people care about isn't it? You'd rather fork out money for having people locked up rather than programs that make these people functioning members of society because you feel you're paying for something you shouldn't, but you'll pay for people to rot in prison cells because it makes you feel good.

You'll pay for the costs of unwanted children, like prison, more police, more judges, more social workers and so on, rather than pay for things that work that actually stop the problem before it's begun.

Now, I just don't get it. Why anyone would want to pay MORE for a WORSE society, just so they can say "I'm not paying for that".

The problem is that we continue to pay more and it has not gotten better. It has only gotten worse.

I don't want to have to pay more for unwanted children, prisons, police, judges or social workers, etc. But we do.

Those making these decisions are not taking the necessary precautions and demand society pay for their profligacy. Responsibility starts with the individual.

The whole point is the expectation that everything is "free." None of it is free.

Helping these people is not my complaint. It is the desire that since we are helping them for "free" then the expectations are that everything else should be free as well.

All I am asking is that the effort be made to be a productive member of society and help offset the expense by not being so profligate.

Birth control has been basically free since I can remember.

Birth control and a box of condoms don't work unless you use them.

But then it's been shown that doing this makes things work to a much larger extent than without them being "free".

I understand what you're saying about things being free and an expectation that other stuff will be free. However in this case I don't think people would associate it like this.

It's like getting free flu jabs or something to prevent disease and illness, rather than free other stuff just because.

BC has been free? What a dupe/idiot...You live in a dream world. Reaganism has done away with that old world. Great job!
Dear middle class: Welcome to poverty

You might want to explain yourself here. I don't have a clue what your point is.

BC only became free under O-Care.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I didn't say anyone was stopping anyone having sex. I was referring to someone who was being all religious and go on about how people should not have sex.

At whose expense? That's all people care about isn't it? You'd rather fork out money for having people locked up rather than programs that make these people functioning members of society because you feel you're paying for something you shouldn't, but you'll pay for people to rot in prison cells because it makes you feel good.

You'll pay for the costs of unwanted children, like prison, more police, more judges, more social workers and so on, rather than pay for things that work that actually stop the problem before it's begun.

Now, I just don't get it. Why anyone would want to pay MORE for a WORSE society, just so they can say "I'm not paying for that".

The problem is that we continue to pay more and it has not gotten better. It has only gotten worse.

I don't want to have to pay more for unwanted children, prisons, police, judges or social workers, etc. But we do.

Those making these decisions are not taking the necessary precautions and demand society pay for their profligacy. Responsibility starts with the individual.

The whole point is the expectation that everything is "free." None of it is free.

Helping these people is not my complaint. It is the desire that since we are helping them for "free" then the expectations are that everything else should be free as well.

All I am asking is that the effort be made to be a productive member of society and help offset the expense by not being so profligate.

Birth control has been basically free since I can remember.

Birth control and a box of condoms don't work unless you use them.

But then it's been shown that doing this makes things work to a much larger extent than without them being "free".

I understand what you're saying about things being free and an expectation that other stuff will be free. However in this case I don't think people would associate it like this.

It's like getting free flu jabs or something to prevent disease and illness, rather than free other stuff just because.

BC has been free? What a dupe/idiot...You live in a dream world. Reaganism has done away with that old world. Great job!
Dear middle class: Welcome to poverty

You might want to explain yourself here. I don't have a clue what your point is.

BC only became free under O-Care.

So what's your point?

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know, there ARE times that those assistance programs do a lot of good and help out those who need it.

One of those groups of people is those in the U.S. Military who are E-1 through E-5, because they don't make enough money and qualify for WIC. I know, because I used it when my 2 boys were born. I came in the military single, but because of the crappy pay that E3 and below make, I decided to wait until I made E-4 to get married. Soon after, my wife decided that we should start a family and she was pregnant 6 months later.

Well, if you're in the military, your command doesn't like it when you get a second job because they fear it may conflict with your military obligation, and civilian businesses are hesitant to hire you because they know that the military comes before them.

Well...................kids are expensive, and I started looking into what I could do to stretch my meager paycheck a bit farther. My supervisor told me that I qualified for WIC and to apply, because they would provide her with healthy fresh veggies, fruit, milk and other groceries, as well as check ups (but those were taken care of by the military), and they also provided the children with formula (at that time it was 10 bucks a can and the boys went through 2 cans per day EACH) for the first 6 months of their life.

Now, some have said that if you're making 10 bucks/hour, you need to get better skills to get a better job. Well..............the military already trains you for what you need, and the only way to get more money is to get more rank, but in some cases you have to wait 3 years before being allowed to test for the next rank.

Does that mean military members who have children and are E-5 and below are "leeches" for not making more money and utilizing WIC?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You know, there ARE times that those assistance programs do a lot of good and help out those who need it.

One of those groups of people is those in the U.S. Military who are E-1 through E-5, because they don't make enough money and qualify for WIC. I know, because I used it when my 2 boys were born. I came in the military single, but because of the crappy pay that E3 and below make, I decided to wait until I made E-4 to get married. Soon after, my wife decided that we should start a family and she was pregnant 6 months later.

Well, if you're in the military, your command doesn't like it when you get a second job because they fear it may conflict with your military obligation, and civilian businesses are hesitant to hire you because they know that the military comes before them.

Well...................kids are expensive, and I started looking into what I could do to stretch my meager paycheck a bit farther. My supervisor told me that I qualified for WIC and to apply, because they would provide her with healthy fresh veggies, fruit, milk and other groceries, as well as check ups (but those were taken care of by the military), and they also provided the children with formula (at that time it was 10 bucks a can and the boys went through 2 cans per day EACH) for the first 6 months of their life.

Now, some have said that if you're making 10 bucks/hour, you need to get better skills to get a better job. Well..............the military already trains you for what you need, and the only way to get more money is to get more rank, but in some cases you have to wait 3 years before being allowed to test for the next rank.

Does that mean military members who have children and are E-5 and below are "leeches" for not making more money and utilizing WIC?

No, but with all due respect, children are an option, not a necessity.

I never had children because I didn't want the financial burden. I always lived within my means. I would rather use the money I make to advance myself and make a better life if I can.

The problem with our welfare systems are that they promote procreation especially if you can't afford children. Those children are not a burden on the parent, those children are a burden on taxpayers like myself.

But you are comparing apples to oranges trying to equate yourself to those people. In my opinion, our military should get anything we can afford to give them including help in raising a family. That's because your service to this country is invaluable and no matter what you get from the military, you deserve everything you get and much more.

People who were raised by taxpayers and continue to live on taxpayer dollars their adult life is much different. They didn't contribute anything to society. They likely never will. They just pop out kids and put the bill in our mailbox and say "pay it!"

 

[frigidweirdo]

You know, there ARE times that those assistance programs do a lot of good and help out those who need it.

One of those groups of people is those in the U.S. Military who are E-1 through E-5, because they don't make enough money and qualify for WIC. I know, because I used it when my 2 boys were born. I came in the military single, but because of the crappy pay that E3 and below make, I decided to wait until I made E-4 to get married. Soon after, my wife decided that we should start a family and she was pregnant 6 months later.

Well, if you're in the military, your command doesn't like it when you get a second job because they fear it may conflict with your military obligation, and civilian businesses are hesitant to hire you because they know that the military comes before them.

Well...................kids are expensive, and I started looking into what I could do to stretch my meager paycheck a bit farther. My supervisor told me that I qualified for WIC and to apply, because they would provide her with healthy fresh veggies, fruit, milk and other groceries, as well as check ups (but those were taken care of by the military), and they also provided the children with formula (at that time it was 10 bucks a can and the boys went through 2 cans per day EACH) for the first 6 months of their life.

Now, some have said that if you're making 10 bucks/hour, you need to get better skills to get a better job. Well..............the military already trains you for what you need, and the only way to get more money is to get more rank, but in some cases you have to wait 3 years before being allowed to test for the next rank.

Does that mean military members who have children and are E-5 and below are "leeches" for not making more money and utilizing WIC?

No, but with all due respect, children are an option, not a necessity.

I never had children because I didn't want the financial burden. I always lived within my means. I would rather use the money I make to advance myself and make a better life if I can.

The problem with our welfare systems are that they promote procreation especially if you can't afford children. Those children are not a burden on the parent, those children are a burden on taxpayers like myself.

But you are comparing apples to oranges trying to equate yourself to those people. In my opinion, our military should get anything we can afford to give them including help in raising a family. That's because your service to this country is invaluable and no matter what you get from the military, you deserve everything you get and much more.

People who were raised by taxpayers and continue to live on taxpayer dollars their adult life is much different. They didn't contribute anything to society. They likely never will. They just pop out kids and put the bill in our mailbox and say "pay it!"

The biggest problem here is that richer people have less kids because they want to live their life, poorer people are more likely to have more kids but can't really afford it, the birth rate is going down and this means the number of immigrants needed increases which then annoys the rich who don't want to have to deal with the problems associated with immigration.