How did Birth Control become a right?

[John Shaw]

It's healthy, and conducive to a fulfilling life. But so is music. And the only reason that's free is because of pirates and youtube.

It is a hobby. It's something you do for enjoyment in your spare time. If you're actually trying to have children, that's different, but obviously you don't use birth control for that.

No, it's a fact of the human condition, not a hobby. How ridiculous.....

Pay for your own "human condition" and I'll pay for mine. You come off as an ingrate who just wants hand-outs. Probably why the democrats are so pathetic; because their liberal followers are pitiful, weak, and entitled.

"Pay for your own "human condition" and I'll pay for mine. "


Actually, we will all pay for your behavioral preferences in our insurance risk pool. Every cheeseburger and pepperoni pizza you ate, cig you smoked, beer you drank, and we will even pay for your genetic defects (how are those MY fault? YOUR parents made the choice to have you, NOT me!!! screw you, pay for your own Muscular Dystrophy treatments, loser!!!!)


Why should women pay for YOUR prostate cancer treatments? Women don't have prostates Having less sex increases your risk for it. Why should anyone pay for YOUR hobby of not having sex very much, you celibate loser?


nah, you will be paying for birth control. You will lose this argument, and you will pay. Sorry pal, you're on the wrong side of history.

I'm okay with helping cover breast cancer because people can actually die if it isn't treated. People don't die from not having birth control.

You really ... aren't very smart, are you? Normally I don't go for ad hom but your argument is so fallacious I can't help but think it's a waste of time.

Peole die from pregnancy and childbirth all the time. Unless you would like to make the absurd claim that none of those were unwanted pregnancies that may have been prevented with contraception....then you might want to reconsider your argument.

You are trying to make this far more complicated than it really is. It's quite simple; (consequence free) sex is a privilege, not a right. You should not be entitled to birth control. It's not even that expensive. Pay for it your own damn self if it's so important to you. What's so hard about that? Are you really so poor that you can't afford it?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So john you do agree then obese people should pay higher premiums because of their choices. I also believe that of fast food eaters. Those that live near certain factories and are exposed to toxins also made a poor choice.

My 2 cents:

Yes, insurance should cover that, because insurance and healthcare should function to prop up our standard of health and living overall, not to cull undesirable behavior from the population. You may pay a little more if you are obese, and that's just reality, in these factioned markets we have.
.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No, it's a fact of the human condition, not a hobby. How ridiculous.....

Pay for your own "human condition" and I'll pay for mine. You come off as an ingrate who just wants hand-outs. Probably why the democrats are so pathetic; because their liberal followers are pitiful, weak, and entitled.

"Pay for your own "human condition" and I'll pay for mine. "


Actually, we will all pay for your behavioral preferences in our insurance risk pool. Every cheeseburger and pepperoni pizza you ate, cig you smoked, beer you drank, and we will even pay for your genetic defects (how are those MY fault? YOUR parents made the choice to have you, NOT me!!! screw you, pay for your own Muscular Dystrophy treatments, loser!!!!)


Why should women pay for YOUR prostate cancer treatments? Women don't have prostates Having less sex increases your risk for it. Why should anyone pay for YOUR hobby of not having sex very much, you celibate loser?


nah, you will be paying for birth control. You will lose this argument, and you will pay. Sorry pal, you're on the wrong side of history.

I'm okay with helping cover breast cancer because people can actually die if it isn't treated. People don't die from not having birth control.

You really ... aren't very smart, are you? Normally I don't go for ad hom but your argument is so fallacious I can't help but think it's a waste of time.

Peole die from pregnancy and childbirth all the time. Unless you would like to make the absurd claim that none of those were unwanted pregnancies that may have been prevented with contraception....then you might want to reconsider your argument.

You are trying to make this far more complicated than it really is. It's quite simple; sex is a privilege, not a right. You should not be entitled to birth control. It's not even that expensive. Pay for it your own damn self if it's so important to you. What's so hard about that? Are you really so poor that you can't afford it?

You are being too simple, that's your problem. Control of one's own reproductive health is the number one most important health and economic issue to a woman. I disagree that it is reasonable to expect woman either not to have sex, or pay out-of-pocket for contraception. It's an absurd standard based in fantasyland, not reality. The issue of individual health supersedes it, and it's not even close . It is a ridiculous idea that pointing at people and saying "Do better!" is effective at all; it actually causes MORE problems, when done in lieu of an actual, smart solution.

Also, depending on the plan, insurance companies may prefer to cover it, simply for economic reasons. As in, you would have to ask for this coverage to be removed.

yes, you are being too simple.

 

[francoHFW]

Me: Maybe the government should start forcing insurance companies to pay for my booze.
You: yes, it should be mandated by the government. yes, all insurance should cover it.

As if sex is a hobby... It's what people do and you will have babies and single mothers if you don't have free birth control. And if you want people to work you have to help them get trained for it. They don't have money if they're unemployed. The GOP is Wrecking the non-rich to save the rich from paying their fair share... 35 years now great job a hole rich and silly Dupes...

 

[John Shaw]

Pay for your own "human condition" and I'll pay for mine. You come off as an ingrate who just wants hand-outs. Probably why the democrats are so pathetic; because their liberal followers are pitiful, weak, and entitled.

"Pay for your own "human condition" and I'll pay for mine. "


Actually, we will all pay for your behavioral preferences in our insurance risk pool. Every cheeseburger and pepperoni pizza you ate, cig you smoked, beer you drank, and we will even pay for your genetic defects (how are those MY fault? YOUR parents made the choice to have you, NOT me!!! screw you, pay for your own Muscular Dystrophy treatments, loser!!!!)


Why should women pay for YOUR prostate cancer treatments? Women don't have prostates Having less sex increases your risk for it. Why should anyone pay for YOUR hobby of not having sex very much, you celibate loser?


nah, you will be paying for birth control. You will lose this argument, and you will pay. Sorry pal, you're on the wrong side of history.

I'm okay with helping cover breast cancer because people can actually die if it isn't treated. People don't die from not having birth control.

You really ... aren't very smart, are you? Normally I don't go for ad hom but your argument is so fallacious I can't help but think it's a waste of time.

Peole die from pregnancy and childbirth all the time. Unless you would like to make the absurd claim that none of those were unwanted pregnancies that may have been prevented with contraception....then you might want to reconsider your argument.

You are trying to make this far more complicated than it really is. It's quite simple; sex is a privilege, not a right. You should not be entitled to birth control. It's not even that expensive. Pay for it your own damn self if it's so important to you. What's so hard about that? Are you really so poor that you can't afford it?

You are being too simple, that's your problem. Control of one's own reproductive health is the number one most important health and economic issue to a woman. I disagree that it is reasonable to expect woman either not to have sex, or pay out-of-pocket for contraception. It's an absurd standard based in fantasyland, not reality. The issue of individual health supersedes it, and it's not even close . It is ridiculous idea that pointing at people and saying "Do better!" is effective at all; it actually causes MORE problems, when done in lieu of an actual, smart solution.

Also, insurance companies prefer to cover it, simply for economic reasons.

yes, you are being too simple.

I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. Why should I? They certainly don't care about men's health. Just take a look at the disparity between R&D on breast and prostate cancer. Men die 5 years younger on average, last I checked. Is anyone really concerned about that? No. They aren't.

So forgive me if I'm not overly concerned if Sally doesn't get to fuck as much as she wants with no consequences, fo' FREE.

Nothing would really change, except women would pay a little bit more. Most women still wouldn't have to pay anything because it would still be covered under their employer's plan.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

"Pay for your own "human condition" and I'll pay for mine. "


Actually, we will all pay for your behavioral preferences in our insurance risk pool. Every cheeseburger and pepperoni pizza you ate, cig you smoked, beer you drank, and we will even pay for your genetic defects (how are those MY fault? YOUR parents made the choice to have you, NOT me!!! screw you, pay for your own Muscular Dystrophy treatments, loser!!!!)


Why should women pay for YOUR prostate cancer treatments? Women don't have prostates Having less sex increases your risk for it. Why should anyone pay for YOUR hobby of not having sex very much, you celibate loser?


nah, you will be paying for birth control. You will lose this argument, and you will pay. Sorry pal, you're on the wrong side of history.

I'm okay with helping cover breast cancer because people can actually die if it isn't treated. People don't die from not having birth control.

You really ... aren't very smart, are you? Normally I don't go for ad hom but your argument is so fallacious I can't help but think it's a waste of time.

Peole die from pregnancy and childbirth all the time. Unless you would like to make the absurd claim that none of those were unwanted pregnancies that may have been prevented with contraception....then you might want to reconsider your argument.

You are trying to make this far more complicated than it really is. It's quite simple; sex is a privilege, not a right. You should not be entitled to birth control. It's not even that expensive. Pay for it your own damn self if it's so important to you. What's so hard about that? Are you really so poor that you can't afford it?

You are being too simple, that's your problem. Control of one's own reproductive health is the number one most important health and economic issue to a woman. I disagree that it is reasonable to expect woman either not to have sex, or pay out-of-pocket for contraception. It's an absurd standard based in fantasyland, not reality. The issue of individual health supersedes it, and it's not even close . It is ridiculous idea that pointing at people and saying "Do better!" is effective at all; it actually causes MORE problems, when done in lieu of an actual, smart solution.

Also, insurance companies prefer to cover it, simply for economic reasons.

yes, you are being too simple.

I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. Why should I? They certainly don't care about men's health. Just take a look at the disparity between R&D on breast and prostate cancer. Men die 5 years younger on average, last I checked. Is anyone really concerned about that? No. They aren't.

So forgive me if I'm not overly concerned if Sally doesn't get to fuck as much as she wants with no consequences, fo' FREE.

Nothing would really change, except women would pay a little bit more. Most women still wouldn't have to pay anything because it would still be covered under their employer's plan.

"I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. "


ding ding ding, well done I like you, you are an honest guy.

"why should I?"

Because women represent half the population. Just as insurance pays for health issues specific to males. Again, this is the number one health issue for a woman, overall. #1. Numero Uno.

 

[John Shaw]

I'm okay with helping cover breast cancer because people can actually die if it isn't treated. People don't die from not having birth control.

You really ... aren't very smart, are you? Normally I don't go for ad hom but your argument is so fallacious I can't help but think it's a waste of time.

Peole die from pregnancy and childbirth all the time. Unless you would like to make the absurd claim that none of those were unwanted pregnancies that may have been prevented with contraception....then you might want to reconsider your argument.

You are trying to make this far more complicated than it really is. It's quite simple; sex is a privilege, not a right. You should not be entitled to birth control. It's not even that expensive. Pay for it your own damn self if it's so important to you. What's so hard about that? Are you really so poor that you can't afford it?

You are being too simple, that's your problem. Control of one's own reproductive health is the number one most important health and economic issue to a woman. I disagree that it is reasonable to expect woman either not to have sex, or pay out-of-pocket for contraception. It's an absurd standard based in fantasyland, not reality. The issue of individual health supersedes it, and it's not even close . It is ridiculous idea that pointing at people and saying "Do better!" is effective at all; it actually causes MORE problems, when done in lieu of an actual, smart solution.

Also, insurance companies prefer to cover it, simply for economic reasons.

yes, you are being too simple.

I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. Why should I? They certainly don't care about men's health. Just take a look at the disparity between R&D on breast and prostate cancer. Men die 5 years younger on average, last I checked. Is anyone really concerned about that? No. They aren't.

So forgive me if I'm not overly concerned if Sally doesn't get to fuck as much as she wants with no consequences, fo' FREE.

Nothing would really change, except women would pay a little bit more. Most women still wouldn't have to pay anything because it would still be covered under their employer's plan.

"I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. "


ding ding ding, well done I like you, you are an honest guy.

"why should I?"

Because women represent half the population. Just as insurance pays for health issues specific to males. Again, this is the number one health issue for a woman, overall. #1. Numero Uno.

That's cool. They should pay for it then. They aren't hurting for cash. I know this because the average woman at my company is making $110,000. I'm sure they can afford to pay for the numero uno birth control.

Meanwhile, they might struggle to pay for breast cancer, should they get it. Which is why I consider that fair game, or any other number of maladies.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Because women represent half the population.

Bingo! That's it right there. It was all about vote buying.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Peole die from pregnancy and childbirth all the time. Unless you would like to make the absurd claim that none of those were unwanted pregnancies that may have been prevented with contraception....then you might want to reconsider your argument.

You are trying to make this far more complicated than it really is. It's quite simple; sex is a privilege, not a right. You should not be entitled to birth control. It's not even that expensive. Pay for it your own damn self if it's so important to you. What's so hard about that? Are you really so poor that you can't afford it?

You are being too simple, that's your problem. Control of one's own reproductive health is the number one most important health and economic issue to a woman. I disagree that it is reasonable to expect woman either not to have sex, or pay out-of-pocket for contraception. It's an absurd standard based in fantasyland, not reality. The issue of individual health supersedes it, and it's not even close . It is ridiculous idea that pointing at people and saying "Do better!" is effective at all; it actually causes MORE problems, when done in lieu of an actual, smart solution.

Also, insurance companies prefer to cover it, simply for economic reasons.

yes, you are being too simple.

I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. Why should I? They certainly don't care about men's health. Just take a look at the disparity between R&D on breast and prostate cancer. Men die 5 years younger on average, last I checked. Is anyone really concerned about that? No. They aren't.

So forgive me if I'm not overly concerned if Sally doesn't get to fuck as much as she wants with no consequences, fo' FREE.

Nothing would really change, except women would pay a little bit more. Most women still wouldn't have to pay anything because it would still be covered under their employer's plan.

"I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. "


ding ding ding, well done I like you, you are an honest guy.

"why should I?"

Because women represent half the population. Just as insurance pays for health issues specific to males. Again, this is the number one health issue for a woman, overall. #1. Numero Uno.

That's cool. They should pay for it then. They aren't hurting for cash. I know this because the average woman at my company is making $110,000. I'm sure they can afford to pay for the numero uno birth control.

Meanwhile, they might struggle to pay for breast cancer, should they get it. Which is why I consider that fair game, or any other number of maladies.

"hat's cool. They should pay for it then. "

That's a silly response, just as it would be to say you should pay for your own, male specific illnesses.

You're making this kind of easy.

 

[John Shaw]

You are trying to make this far more complicated than it really is. It's quite simple; sex is a privilege, not a right. You should not be entitled to birth control. It's not even that expensive. Pay for it your own damn self if it's so important to you. What's so hard about that? Are you really so poor that you can't afford it?

You are being too simple, that's your problem. Control of one's own reproductive health is the number one most important health and economic issue to a woman. I disagree that it is reasonable to expect woman either not to have sex, or pay out-of-pocket for contraception. It's an absurd standard based in fantasyland, not reality. The issue of individual health supersedes it, and it's not even close . It is ridiculous idea that pointing at people and saying "Do better!" is effective at all; it actually causes MORE problems, when done in lieu of an actual, smart solution.

Also, insurance companies prefer to cover it, simply for economic reasons.

yes, you are being too simple.

I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. Why should I? They certainly don't care about men's health. Just take a look at the disparity between R&D on breast and prostate cancer. Men die 5 years younger on average, last I checked. Is anyone really concerned about that? No. They aren't.

So forgive me if I'm not overly concerned if Sally doesn't get to fuck as much as she wants with no consequences, fo' FREE.

Nothing would really change, except women would pay a little bit more. Most women still wouldn't have to pay anything because it would still be covered under their employer's plan.

"I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. "


ding ding ding, well done I like you, you are an honest guy.

"why should I?"

Because women represent half the population. Just as insurance pays for health issues specific to males. Again, this is the number one health issue for a woman, overall. #1. Numero Uno.

That's cool. They should pay for it then. They aren't hurting for cash. I know this because the average woman at my company is making $110,000. I'm sure they can afford to pay for the numero uno birth control.

Meanwhile, they might struggle to pay for breast cancer, should they get it. Which is why I consider that fair game, or any other number of maladies.

"hat's cool. They should pay for it then. "

That's a silly response, just as it would be to say you should pay for your own, male specific illnesses.

You're making this kind of easy.

You're comparing free birth control to treating actual illnesses. Think you might want to look at your own logic there bud. It doesn't get much more fallacious than that. I have a feeling I'm going to get more of the same in your next response. If so, I wouldn't even bother.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You are being too simple, that's your problem. Control of one's own reproductive health is the number one most important health and economic issue to a woman. I disagree that it is reasonable to expect woman either not to have sex, or pay out-of-pocket for contraception. It's an absurd standard based in fantasyland, not reality. The issue of individual health supersedes it, and it's not even close . It is ridiculous idea that pointing at people and saying "Do better!" is effective at all; it actually causes MORE problems, when done in lieu of an actual, smart solution.

Also, insurance companies prefer to cover it, simply for economic reasons.

yes, you are being too simple.

I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. Why should I? They certainly don't care about men's health. Just take a look at the disparity between R&D on breast and prostate cancer. Men die 5 years younger on average, last I checked. Is anyone really concerned about that? No. They aren't.

So forgive me if I'm not overly concerned if Sally doesn't get to fuck as much as she wants with no consequences, fo' FREE.

Nothing would really change, except women would pay a little bit more. Most women still wouldn't have to pay anything because it would still be covered under their employer's plan.

"I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. "


ding ding ding, well done I like you, you are an honest guy.

"why should I?"

Because women represent half the population. Just as insurance pays for health issues specific to males. Again, this is the number one health issue for a woman, overall. #1. Numero Uno.

That's cool. They should pay for it then. They aren't hurting for cash. I know this because the average woman at my company is making $110,000. I'm sure they can afford to pay for the numero uno birth control.

Meanwhile, they might struggle to pay for breast cancer, should they get it. Which is why I consider that fair game, or any other number of maladies.

"hat's cool. They should pay for it then. "

That's a silly response, just as it would be to say you should pay for your own, male specific illnesses.

You're making this kind of easy.

You're comparing free birth control to treating actual illnesses. Think you might want to look at your own logic there bud. It doesn't get much more fallacious than that. I have a feeling I'm going to get more of the same in your next response. If so, I wouldn't even bother.

"You're comparing free birth control to treating actual illnesses. "

In terms of overall importance and risk, that's right, I am doing exactly that. Again, number one most important health and economic issue over a woman's lifetime: reproduction and control over it. Number one. Numero Uno.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

"Pay for your own "human condition" and I'll pay for mine. "


Actually, we will all pay for your behavioral preferences in our insurance risk pool. Every cheeseburger and pepperoni pizza you ate, cig you smoked, beer you drank, and we will even pay for your genetic defects (how are those MY fault? YOUR parents made the choice to have you, NOT me!!! screw you, pay for your own Muscular Dystrophy treatments, loser!!!!)


Why should women pay for YOUR prostate cancer treatments? Women don't have prostates Having less sex increases your risk for it. Why should anyone pay for YOUR hobby of not having sex very much, you celibate loser?


nah, you will be paying for birth control. You will lose this argument, and you will pay. Sorry pal, you're on the wrong side of history.

I'm okay with helping cover breast cancer because people can actually die if it isn't treated. People don't die from not having birth control.

You really ... aren't very smart, are you? Normally I don't go for ad hom but your argument is so fallacious I can't help but think it's a waste of time.

Peole die from pregnancy and childbirth all the time. Unless you would like to make the absurd claim that none of those were unwanted pregnancies that may have been prevented with contraception....then you might want to reconsider your argument.

You are trying to make this far more complicated than it really is. It's quite simple; sex is a privilege, not a right. You should not be entitled to birth control. It's not even that expensive. Pay for it your own damn self if it's so important to you. What's so hard about that? Are you really so poor that you can't afford it?

You are being too simple, that's your problem. Control of one's own reproductive health is the number one most important health and economic issue to a woman. I disagree that it is reasonable to expect woman either not to have sex, or pay out-of-pocket for contraception. It's an absurd standard based in fantasyland, not reality. The issue of individual health supersedes it, and it's not even close . It is ridiculous idea that pointing at people and saying "Do better!" is effective at all; it actually causes MORE problems, when done in lieu of an actual, smart solution.

Also, insurance companies prefer to cover it, simply for economic reasons.

yes, you are being too simple.

I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. Why should I? They certainly don't care about men's health. Just take a look at the disparity between R&D on breast and prostate cancer. Men die 5 years younger on average, last I checked. Is anyone really concerned about that? No. They aren't.

So forgive me if I'm not overly concerned if Sally doesn't get to fuck as much as she wants with no consequences, fo' FREE.

Nothing would really change, except women would pay a little bit more. Most women still wouldn't have to pay anything because it would still be covered under their employer's plan.

Exactly. I have medical conditions that require life sustaining medications. They cost me around $200.00 a month. So why didn't the commies insist that be in our coverage instead of broads that want to Fk around? Because people like me don't represent a lot of votes.

As far as Democrats are concerned, if I can't afford my medication, die. But if we remove BC coverage, now we have a fight. Because as far as a commie is concerned, force employers to provide for their constituents instead of those of us on life sustaining medications.

It's all about politics with the left.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I'm okay with helping cover breast cancer because people can actually die if it isn't treated. People don't die from not having birth control.

You really ... aren't very smart, are you? Normally I don't go for ad hom but your argument is so fallacious I can't help but think it's a waste of time.

Peole die from pregnancy and childbirth all the time. Unless you would like to make the absurd claim that none of those were unwanted pregnancies that may have been prevented with contraception....then you might want to reconsider your argument.

You are trying to make this far more complicated than it really is. It's quite simple; sex is a privilege, not a right. You should not be entitled to birth control. It's not even that expensive. Pay for it your own damn self if it's so important to you. What's so hard about that? Are you really so poor that you can't afford it?

You are being too simple, that's your problem. Control of one's own reproductive health is the number one most important health and economic issue to a woman. I disagree that it is reasonable to expect woman either not to have sex, or pay out-of-pocket for contraception. It's an absurd standard based in fantasyland, not reality. The issue of individual health supersedes it, and it's not even close . It is ridiculous idea that pointing at people and saying "Do better!" is effective at all; it actually causes MORE problems, when done in lieu of an actual, smart solution.

Also, insurance companies prefer to cover it, simply for economic reasons.

yes, you are being too simple.

I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. Why should I? They certainly don't care about men's health. Just take a look at the disparity between R&D on breast and prostate cancer. Men die 5 years younger on average, last I checked. Is anyone really concerned about that? No. They aren't.

So forgive me if I'm not overly concerned if Sally doesn't get to fuck as much as she wants with no consequences, fo' FREE.

Nothing would really change, except women would pay a little bit more. Most women still wouldn't have to pay anything because it would still be covered under their employer's plan.

Exactly. I have medical conditions that require life sustaining medications. They cost me around $200.00 a month. So why didn't the commies insist that be in our coverage instead of broads that want to Fk around? Because people like me don't represent a lot of votes.

As far as Democrats are concerned, if I can't afford my medication, die. But if we remove BC coverage, now we have a fight. Because as far as a commie is concerned, force employers to provide for their constituents instead of those of us on life sustaining medications.

It's all about politics with the left.

"As far as Democrats are concerned, if I can't afford my medication, die."


Whoah whoah whoah, I want to hear a bit more about this. trust me, I plan no defense of Democrats. I want to hear why your drug is not covered, as relates to legislation.

 

[John Shaw]

I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. Why should I? They certainly don't care about men's health. Just take a look at the disparity between R&D on breast and prostate cancer. Men die 5 years younger on average, last I checked. Is anyone really concerned about that? No. They aren't.

So forgive me if I'm not overly concerned if Sally doesn't get to fuck as much as she wants with no consequences, fo' FREE.

Nothing would really change, except women would pay a little bit more. Most women still wouldn't have to pay anything because it would still be covered under their employer's plan.

"I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. "


ding ding ding, well done I like you, you are an honest guy.

"why should I?"

Because women represent half the population. Just as insurance pays for health issues specific to males. Again, this is the number one health issue for a woman, overall. #1. Numero Uno.

That's cool. They should pay for it then. They aren't hurting for cash. I know this because the average woman at my company is making $110,000. I'm sure they can afford to pay for the numero uno birth control.

Meanwhile, they might struggle to pay for breast cancer, should they get it. Which is why I consider that fair game, or any other number of maladies.

"hat's cool. They should pay for it then. "

That's a silly response, just as it would be to say you should pay for your own, male specific illnesses.

You're making this kind of easy.

You're comparing free birth control to treating actual illnesses. Think you might want to look at your own logic there bud. It doesn't get much more fallacious than that. I have a feeling I'm going to get more of the same in your next response. If so, I wouldn't even bother.

"You're comparing free birth control to treating actual illnesses. "

In terms of overall importance and risk, that's right, I am doing exactly that. Again, number one most important health and economic issue over a woman's lifetime: reproduction and control over it. Number one. Numero Uno.

Obviously you or your female relatives have never had breast cancer, because I have a feeling you'd find that (dying) much more important than birth control.

Not even birth control. FREE birth control. That's what all this fuss is about. A stupid government mandate over something that's inexpensive for most women anyway.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Pay for your own "human condition" and I'll pay for mine. You come off as an ingrate who just wants hand-outs. Probably why the democrats are so pathetic; because their liberal followers are pitiful, weak, and entitled.

"Pay for your own "human condition" and I'll pay for mine. "


Actually, we will all pay for your behavioral preferences in our insurance risk pool. Every cheeseburger and pepperoni pizza you ate, cig you smoked, beer you drank, and we will even pay for your genetic defects (how are those MY fault? YOUR parents made the choice to have you, NOT me!!! screw you, pay for your own Muscular Dystrophy treatments, loser!!!!)


Why should women pay for YOUR prostate cancer treatments? Women don't have prostates Having less sex increases your risk for it. Why should anyone pay for YOUR hobby of not having sex very much, you celibate loser?


nah, you will be paying for birth control. You will lose this argument, and you will pay. Sorry pal, you're on the wrong side of history.

I'm okay with helping cover breast cancer because people can actually die if it isn't treated. People don't die from not having birth control.

You really ... aren't very smart, are you? Normally I don't go for ad hom but your argument is so fallacious I can't help but think it's a waste of time.

Peole die from pregnancy and childbirth all the time. Unless you would like to make the absurd claim that none of those were unwanted pregnancies that may have been prevented with contraception....then you might want to reconsider your argument.

You are trying to make this far more complicated than it really is. It's quite simple; sex is a privilege, not a right. You should not be entitled to birth control. It's not even that expensive. Pay for it your own damn self if it's so important to you. What's so hard about that? Are you really so poor that you can't afford it?

You are being too simple, that's your problem. Control of one's own reproductive health is the number one most important health and economic issue to a woman. I disagree that it is reasonable to expect woman either not to have sex, or pay out-of-pocket for contraception. It's an absurd standard based in fantasyland, not reality. The issue of individual health supersedes it, and it's not even close . It is a ridiculous idea that pointing at people and saying "Do better!" is effective at all; it actually causes MORE problems, when done in lieu of an actual, smart solution.

Also, depending on the plan, insurance companies may prefer to cover it, simply for economic reasons. As in, you would have to ask for this coverage to be removed.

yes, you are being too simple.

Well if insurance companies believe that providing BC is cheaper than the alternative, let them make that decision--not government.

But of course since you know you are FOS, that's the reason insurance companies don't provide free BC.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Peole die from pregnancy and childbirth all the time. Unless you would like to make the absurd claim that none of those were unwanted pregnancies that may have been prevented with contraception....then you might want to reconsider your argument.

You are trying to make this far more complicated than it really is. It's quite simple; sex is a privilege, not a right. You should not be entitled to birth control. It's not even that expensive. Pay for it your own damn self if it's so important to you. What's so hard about that? Are you really so poor that you can't afford it?

You are being too simple, that's your problem. Control of one's own reproductive health is the number one most important health and economic issue to a woman. I disagree that it is reasonable to expect woman either not to have sex, or pay out-of-pocket for contraception. It's an absurd standard based in fantasyland, not reality. The issue of individual health supersedes it, and it's not even close . It is ridiculous idea that pointing at people and saying "Do better!" is effective at all; it actually causes MORE problems, when done in lieu of an actual, smart solution.

Also, insurance companies prefer to cover it, simply for economic reasons.

yes, you are being too simple.

I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. Why should I? They certainly don't care about men's health. Just take a look at the disparity between R&D on breast and prostate cancer. Men die 5 years younger on average, last I checked. Is anyone really concerned about that? No. They aren't.

So forgive me if I'm not overly concerned if Sally doesn't get to fuck as much as she wants with no consequences, fo' FREE.

Nothing would really change, except women would pay a little bit more. Most women still wouldn't have to pay anything because it would still be covered under their employer's plan.

Exactly. I have medical conditions that require life sustaining medications. They cost me around $200.00 a month. So why didn't the commies insist that be in our coverage instead of broads that want to Fk around? Because people like me don't represent a lot of votes.

As far as Democrats are concerned, if I can't afford my medication, die. But if we remove BC coverage, now we have a fight. Because as far as a commie is concerned, force employers to provide for their constituents instead of those of us on life sustaining medications.

It's all about politics with the left.

"As far as Democrats are concerned, if I can't afford my medication, die."


Whoah whoah whoah, I want to hear a bit more about this. trust me, I plan no defense of Democrats. I want to hear why your drug is not covered, as relates to legislation.

So where in Commie Care is it stated that insurance plans must cover life sustaining medications? After all, it's stated they must include birth control. Thats the reason for the OP.

In my case, I'm an insulin dependent diabetic. I have heart failure. If I don't take one of the many medications I need to survive, I die, and that's just fine by the commies.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

"I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. "


ding ding ding, well done I like you, you are an honest guy.

"why should I?"

Because women represent half the population. Just as insurance pays for health issues specific to males. Again, this is the number one health issue for a woman, overall. #1. Numero Uno.

That's cool. They should pay for it then. They aren't hurting for cash. I know this because the average woman at my company is making $110,000. I'm sure they can afford to pay for the numero uno birth control.

Meanwhile, they might struggle to pay for breast cancer, should they get it. Which is why I consider that fair game, or any other number of maladies.

"hat's cool. They should pay for it then. "

That's a silly response, just as it would be to say you should pay for your own, male specific illnesses.

You're making this kind of easy.

You're comparing free birth control to treating actual illnesses. Think you might want to look at your own logic there bud. It doesn't get much more fallacious than that. I have a feeling I'm going to get more of the same in your next response. If so, I wouldn't even bother.

"You're comparing free birth control to treating actual illnesses. "

In terms of overall importance and risk, that's right, I am doing exactly that. Again, number one most important health and economic issue over a woman's lifetime: reproduction and control over it. Number one. Numero Uno.

Obviously you or your female relatives have never had breast cancer, because I have a feeling you'd find that much more important than birth control.

"Obviously you or your female relatives have never had breast cancer, because I have a feeling you'd find that much more important than birth control."


That's not how policy works, or an insurance risk pool. To illustrate: a terminal disease is worse than chickenpox, but we don't vaccinate against ALL terminal diseases. Overall, over a population of women, or you can look at it as a probability for each, the number one issue is reproductive health.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You are trying to make this far more complicated than it really is. It's quite simple; sex is a privilege, not a right. You should not be entitled to birth control. It's not even that expensive. Pay for it your own damn self if it's so important to you. What's so hard about that? Are you really so poor that you can't afford it?

You are being too simple, that's your problem. Control of one's own reproductive health is the number one most important health and economic issue to a woman. I disagree that it is reasonable to expect woman either not to have sex, or pay out-of-pocket for contraception. It's an absurd standard based in fantasyland, not reality. The issue of individual health supersedes it, and it's not even close . It is ridiculous idea that pointing at people and saying "Do better!" is effective at all; it actually causes MORE problems, when done in lieu of an actual, smart solution.

Also, insurance companies prefer to cover it, simply for economic reasons.

yes, you are being too simple.

I'm not a woman, so I don't really care. Why should I? They certainly don't care about men's health. Just take a look at the disparity between R&D on breast and prostate cancer. Men die 5 years younger on average, last I checked. Is anyone really concerned about that? No. They aren't.

So forgive me if I'm not overly concerned if Sally doesn't get to fuck as much as she wants with no consequences, fo' FREE.

Nothing would really change, except women would pay a little bit more. Most women still wouldn't have to pay anything because it would still be covered under their employer's plan.

Exactly. I have medical conditions that require life sustaining medications. They cost me around $200.00 a month. So why didn't the commies insist that be in our coverage instead of broads that want to Fk around? Because people like me don't represent a lot of votes.

As far as Democrats are concerned, if I can't afford my medication, die. But if we remove BC coverage, now we have a fight. Because as far as a commie is concerned, force employers to provide for their constituents instead of those of us on life sustaining medications.

It's all about politics with the left.

"As far as Democrats are concerned, if I can't afford my medication, die."


Whoah whoah whoah, I want to hear a bit more about this. trust me, I plan no defense of Democrats. I want to hear why your drug is not covered, as relates to legislation.

So where in Commie Care is it stated that insurance plans must cover life sustaining medications? After all, it's stated they must include birth control. Thats the reason for the OP.

In my case, I'm an insulin dependent diabetic. I have heart failure. If I don't take one of the many medications I need to survive, I die, and that's just fine by the commies.

I don't think there is anything tabled by the GOP to pay for your medicine, is there? lay off the commie nonsense. Medicare doesn't pay for this?

 

[John Shaw]

That's cool. They should pay for it then. They aren't hurting for cash. I know this because the average woman at my company is making $110,000. I'm sure they can afford to pay for the numero uno birth control.

Meanwhile, they might struggle to pay for breast cancer, should they get it. Which is why I consider that fair game, or any other number of maladies.

"hat's cool. They should pay for it then. "

That's a silly response, just as it would be to say you should pay for your own, male specific illnesses.

You're making this kind of easy.

You're comparing free birth control to treating actual illnesses. Think you might want to look at your own logic there bud. It doesn't get much more fallacious than that. I have a feeling I'm going to get more of the same in your next response. If so, I wouldn't even bother.

"You're comparing free birth control to treating actual illnesses. "

In terms of overall importance and risk, that's right, I am doing exactly that. Again, number one most important health and economic issue over a woman's lifetime: reproduction and control over it. Number one. Numero Uno.

Obviously you or your female relatives have never had breast cancer, because I have a feeling you'd find that much more important than birth control.

"Obviously you or your female relatives have never had breast cancer, because I have a feeling you'd find that much more important than birth control."


That's not how policy works, or an insurance risk pool. To illustrate: a terminal disease is worse than chickenpox, but we don't vaccinate against ALL terminal diseases. Overall, over a population of women, or you can look at it as a probability for each, the number one issue is reproductive health.

Pregnancy is not an illness. Control over it is a phenomenal privilege.

So, let's see here, just to sum it up

1. Many if not most women would still have it covered even without the mandate. No change there.

2. Those remaining would pay, but not at some outrageous, un-affordable cost. Or they could just go with condoms if they're too poor to pay for cheap birth control. Or just stay celibate until they get their shit together. It's crazy how many choices are actually out there for women, right? You'd think frequent unprotected sex was mandatory for them, the way you talk about it.

3. Despite all these caveats, this is still more important to you than treating terminal illnesses, somehow.

Okay, welp, don't know what more there is to say about that. I think I'll stick to my original POV, being; I don't care about women's sex lives and reproductive control, because they certainly, ABSOLUTELY, do not care about mine, or men's in general. You get what you give in this world.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

"hat's cool. They should pay for it then. "

That's a silly response, just as it would be to say you should pay for your own, male specific illnesses.

You're making this kind of easy.

You're comparing free birth control to treating actual illnesses. Think you might want to look at your own logic there bud. It doesn't get much more fallacious than that. I have a feeling I'm going to get more of the same in your next response. If so, I wouldn't even bother.

"You're comparing free birth control to treating actual illnesses. "

In terms of overall importance and risk, that's right, I am doing exactly that. Again, number one most important health and economic issue over a woman's lifetime: reproduction and control over it. Number one. Numero Uno.

Obviously you or your female relatives have never had breast cancer, because I have a feeling you'd find that much more important than birth control.

"Obviously you or your female relatives have never had breast cancer, because I have a feeling you'd find that much more important than birth control."


That's not how policy works, or an insurance risk pool. To illustrate: a terminal disease is worse than chickenpox, but we don't vaccinate against ALL terminal diseases. Overall, over a population of women, or you can look at it as a probability for each, the number one issue is reproductive health.

Pregnancy is not an illness. Control over it is a phenomenal privilege.

So, let's see here, just to sum it up

1. Many if not most women would still have it covered even without the mandate. No change there.

2. Those remaining would pay, but not at some outrageous, un-affordable cost. Or they could just go with condoms if they're too poor to pay for cheap birth control. Or just stay celibate until they get their shit together. It's crazy how many choices are actually out there for women, right? You'd think frequent unprotected sex was mandatory for them, the way you talk about it.

3. Despite all these caveats, this is still more important to you than treating terminal illnesses, somehow.

Okay, welp, don't know what more there is to say about that. I think I'll stick to my original POV, being; I don't care about women's sex lives and control thereof, because they certainly, ABSOLUTELY, do not care about mine, or men's in general. You get what you give in this world.

"Pregnancy is not an illness".... nor is a broken leg. You're not thinking this stuff through very far, John.

"Most women" is not enough.

I didn't suggest that we shouldn't insure treatment of terminal illness..... way off the mark, there...