Free birth control

[ogibillm]

you're right, it's not free.

but it clearly has a much lower cost than not giving out contraception.

OR they can just control themselves hell why not just give out Heroin for free too.

if people were just 'controlling themselves' the free contraceptives wouldnt result in lower birth rates.

so you can bitch about what should be or you can join the rest of us in reality

For people with sense, it is a band aid and not a solution. Band aids are for cowards.

super. you feel it's not a solution.

so what is the solution?

Multitude of things. There isn't just one.

and those are?

 

[TNHarley]

For people with sense, it is a band aid and not a solution. Band aids are for cowards.

super. you feel it's not a solution.

so what is the solution?

Buy your own fucking birth control?

sigh. you really lack in the whole 'logical thinking' department.
clearly if that was the solution the facts in the op wouldn't exist.

So, people will only use it if someone else pays for it?

maybe. maybe they aren't in a position to pay for it themselves. whatever the reason, giving out birth control results in fewer unwanted pregnancies and abortions and is a net gain for the state.

Whatever... not having babies is 100% doable. Some people just lack self control.

no shit.
so what do we do about it?

It definitely isn't give in. You got any kids? Lol

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

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.

 

[Arianrhod]

"free"? LOL

You'd rather pay for the results of the unplanned pregnancies? According to your side, only welfare sluts have unwanted babies and the taxpayer has to pay for them. But you're okay with that?

You're probably anti-choice as well. Wouldn't you welcome something that reduced abortions? If not, why not?

 

[Yousaidwhat]

"free"? LOL

The first thing that crossed my mind.

Progressives. Everything is FREE!

 

[Yousaidwhat]

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.

OK, who's going to pay for the free birth control?

Unfortunately, we are. Or we pay for their offspring.

Bruce called it post #7.

 

[TNHarley]

"free"? LOL

You'd rather pay for the results of the unplanned pregnancies? According to your side, only welfare sluts have unwanted babies and the taxpayer has to pay for them. But you're okay with that?

You're probably anti-choice as well. Wouldn't you welcome something that reduced abortions? If not, why not?

Good gawd almighty. Project much?

 

[Yousaidwhat]

"free"? LOL

good god you're dumb.

you want to complain about the cost of giving out contraception while ignoring the costs that unwanted pregnancies have on a state.

do you not understand how idiotic that is? you'd rather pay $5 later over $1 today because of the use of the word 'free?'

I think "tax payer provided" would be more accurate than "free". Free is very misleading. Kind of like offering free college and free medical care. None of it is free. Someone has to pay for it. I do agree it is cheaper before than after.[/QUOTE

My problem is the middle man.

The fed is not cost effective.

Too much off the top.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

"free"? LOL

good god you're dumb.

you want to complain about the cost of giving out contraception while ignoring the costs that unwanted pregnancies have on a state.

do you not understand how idiotic that is? you'd rather pay $5 later over $1 today because of the use of the word 'free?'

good god you are retarded. How in the fuck did you get that from me pointing out the "free" fallacy?

Extortion. Give me the dollar now. Or give me five dollars later.

It's FREE!

 

[Yousaidwhat]

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.

If what a woman does with her body is her choice, why is it someone else's responsibility to provide her with things related to that choice?

If those things are provided to her for "free" yet she still gets pregnant, will she refuse to have an abortion?

This will never get answered!

 

[ogibillm]

super. you feel it's not a solution.

so what is the solution?

Buy your own fucking birth control?

sigh. you really lack in the whole 'logical thinking' department.
clearly if that was the solution the facts in the op wouldn't exist.

So, people will only use it if someone else pays for it?

maybe. maybe they aren't in a position to pay for it themselves. whatever the reason, giving out birth control results in fewer unwanted pregnancies and abortions and is a net gain for the state.

Whatever... not having babies is 100% doable. Some people just lack self control.

no shit.
so what do we do about it?

It definitely isn't give in. You got any kids? Lol

so you don't have the solution.

maybe until you do we can use an effective and inexpensive band-aid

 

[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.

If what a woman does with her body is her choice, why is it someone else's responsibility to provide her with things related to that choice?

If those things are provided to her for "free" yet she still gets pregnant, will she refuse to have an abortion?

This will never get answered!

I've asked it before in other locations. It was answered and the answer was she should still be able to have an abortion and if she chooses to have the kid, taxpayers should support them if she can't. In other words, people that support things like this have no concept of the one making the choice taking personal responsibility for the results. They expect people to pay for a woman's choice to spread her legs, an abortion if she still gets pregnant, or her kids if she had them and can't support them.

 

[Conservative65]

Buy your own fucking birth control?

sigh. you really lack in the whole 'logical thinking' department.
clearly if that was the solution the facts in the op wouldn't exist.

So, people will only use it if someone else pays for it?

maybe. maybe they aren't in a position to pay for it themselves. whatever the reason, giving out birth control results in fewer unwanted pregnancies and abortions and is a net gain for the state.

Whatever... not having babies is 100% doable. Some people just lack self control.

no shit.
so what do we do about it?

It definitely isn't give in. You got any kids? Lol

so you don't have the solution.

maybe until you do we can use an effective and inexpensive band-aid

That is a solution. Quit offsetting the costs of those that continue to have or have kids they can't afford. Is your solution to enable them to keep doing what they're doing by providing them with funding to make choices for which they take no personal responsibility?

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know, in the military we got "free" (taxpayer provided) birth control in the form of a large bowl of condoms just outside of the Corpsman's office, which were free to anyone that wanted them, and you could take as many as you wanted. They also had a pretty good selection if you took the time to find the ones you preferred.

Why did the Navy do that? Because a condom is a lot cheaper than treating STD's.

BTW..................the Navy (as well as the rest of the military) will provide women with birth control as a part of their health benefits, as well as gives the mother AND the father maternity leave when the mother has a child.

 

[koshergrl]

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.

They've had free birth control everywhere in the us for decades. The study is flawed.

 

[ogibillm]

sigh. you really lack in the whole 'logical thinking' department.
clearly if that was the solution the facts in the op wouldn't exist.

So, people will only use it if someone else pays for it?

maybe. maybe they aren't in a position to pay for it themselves. whatever the reason, giving out birth control results in fewer unwanted pregnancies and abortions and is a net gain for the state.

Whatever... not having babies is 100% doable. Some people just lack self control.

no shit.
so what do we do about it?

It definitely isn't give in. You got any kids? Lol

so you don't have the solution.

maybe until you do we can use an effective and inexpensive band-aid

That is a solution. Quit offsetting the costs of those that continue to have or have kids they can't afford. Is your solution to enable them to keep doing what they're doing by providing them with funding to make choices for which they take no personal responsibility?

while an interesting philosophical debate it's not the world we live in.

we don't turn our backs on kids that through no fault of their own were born to parents either unwilling or unable to care for them.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

"free"? LOL

good god you're dumb.

you want to complain about the cost of giving out contraception while ignoring the costs that unwanted pregnancies have on a state.

do you not understand how idiotic that is? you'd rather pay $5 later over $1 today because of the use of the word 'free?'

Unwanted pregnancies should costs the state absolutely nothing. If what a woman does with her body is her choice, when that choice produces a result she doesn't like, it's not the state's place to pay for it.

It's not $5 later or $1 today. If it's her choice the only one paying that $5 or $1 is her, not anyone else.

Why should anyone but the woman pay for the choices she said she makes with her body are only hers to make?

super. that's not reality, though.

so you can bitch and moan about what you think should be, and try to convince others that it's somehow in the interests of the state to leave kids hungry and without medical care

or you can do the same thing while paying for the food and medical care of fewer unwanted kids.

which option sounds better?

Options?

Option #1.

Your parents raised you.

You made a decision that you cannot financially obligate yourself.

You are stupid.

Your parents are stupid. They coddled you. Never expecting responsibility.

Your boyfriend busted his nut but you told him not to. You got pregnant. He has no job.

All is well. We can fuck and smoke dope. We don't have to work.

We complain to a progressive and get sympathy. It's free now.

You bitch and moan when I question why you are so fucking stupid.

You have a family. It is their problem.

 

[Conservative65]

"free"? LOL

good god you're dumb.

you want to complain about the cost of giving out contraception while ignoring the costs that unwanted pregnancies have on a state.

do you not understand how idiotic that is? you'd rather pay $5 later over $1 today because of the use of the word 'free?'

Unwanted pregnancies should costs the state absolutely nothing. If what a woman does with her body is her choice, when that choice produces a result she doesn't like, it's not the state's place to pay for it.

It's not $5 later or $1 today. If it's her choice the only one paying that $5 or $1 is her, not anyone else.

Why should anyone but the woman pay for the choices she said she makes with her body are only hers to make?

super. that's not reality, though.

so you can bitch and moan about what you think should be, and try to convince others that it's somehow in the interests of the state to leave kids hungry and without medical care

or you can do the same thing while paying for the food and medical care of fewer unwanted kids.

which option sounds better?

Options?

Option #1.

Your parents raised you.

You made a decision that you cannot financially obligate yourself.

You are stupid.

Your parents are stupid. They coddled you. Never expecting responsibility.

Your boyfriend busted his nut but you told him not to. You got pregnant. He has no job.

All is well. We can fuck and smoke dope. We don't have to work.

We complain to a progressive and get sympathy. It's free now.

You bitch and moan when I question why you are so fucking stupid.

You have a family. It is their problem.

That's the ONLY option. The one that created the situation by making choices or those that voluntarily want to pay are the ONLY ones that should be paying.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

"free"? LOL

good god you're dumb.

you want to complain about the cost of giving out contraception while ignoring the costs that unwanted pregnancies have on a state.

do you not understand how idiotic that is? you'd rather pay $5 later over $1 today because of the use of the word 'free?'

Unwanted pregnancies should costs the state absolutely nothing. If what a woman does with her body is her choice, when that choice produces a result she doesn't like, it's not the state's place to pay for it.

It's not $5 later or $1 today. If it's her choice the only one paying that $5 or $1 is her, not anyone else.

Why should anyone but the woman pay for the choices she said she makes with her body are only hers to make?

super. that's not reality, though.

so you can bitch and moan about what you think should be, and try to convince others that it's somehow in the interests of the state to leave kids hungry and without medical care

or you can do the same thing while paying for the food and medical care of fewer unwanted kids.

which option sounds better?

Options?

Option #1.

Your parents raised you.

You made a decision that you cannot financially obligate yourself.

You are stupid.

Your parents are stupid. They coddled you. Never expecting responsibility.

Your boyfriend busted his nut but you told him not to. You got pregnant. He has no job.

All is well. We can fuck and smoke dope. We don't have to work.

We complain to a progressive and get sympathy. It's free now.

You bitch and moan when I question why you are so fucking stupid.

You have a family. It is their problem.

That's the ONLY option. The one that created the situation by making choices or those that voluntarily want to pay are the ONLY ones that should be paying.

You will never get progressives to accept reality.

 

[Conservative65]

So, people will only use it if someone else pays for it?

maybe. maybe they aren't in a position to pay for it themselves. whatever the reason, giving out birth control results in fewer unwanted pregnancies and abortions and is a net gain for the state.

Whatever... not having babies is 100% doable. Some people just lack self control.

no shit.
so what do we do about it?

It definitely isn't give in. You got any kids? Lol

so you don't have the solution.

maybe until you do we can use an effective and inexpensive band-aid

That is a solution. Quit offsetting the costs of those that continue to have or have kids they can't afford. Is your solution to enable them to keep doing what they're doing by providing them with funding to make choices for which they take no personal responsibility?

while an interesting philosophical debate it's not the world we live in.

we don't turn our backs on kids that through no fault of their own were born to parents either unwilling or unable to care for them.

You don't mind turning your back on the concept of personal responsibility when it comes to supporting the rest of us being forced for a choice we didn't make.

It's not my fault, either but you don't have a problem holding me and others responsible for something we didn't do. The kid is closer to the situation that I am. If the kids can't pay, since you think it's such a good idea, set the example and do it yourself. I don't owe those parents or the kids they have they can't afford a damn thing. That's not a philosophical debate. That's a fact you ignore.

How do you ever expect people to do what's right if you continue to pick up their slack when they don't take responsibility for their own actions. It doesn't mean, by default, that those of us that do take care of their own kids should take care of kids we didn't produce.