Why the fight against Birth Control?

Seriously...I just don't get it.

What's wrong with letting women have it?

The argument that they shouldn't have it free doesn't fly. ACA includes a bunch of different free items: Preventive care benefits for adults - but I have yet to hear an argument against aspirin or vaccinations being offered and birth control is a relatively cheap thing to offer.

The Pill is, as of this time, the most reliable method of pregnancy prevention. Yes...abstinence itself works, but isn't realistic as few people stick with it and, frankly, why should they if the pill can offer a more reliable option if they don't want to be abstinent? There is a direct correlation between preventing unwanted pregnancies, particularly teens, and the availability of reliable contraception.
Are really this fucking delusional?
Are you really incapable of a coherent reply?

Try again. Why such opposition to free birth control?
My jab was better then yours and more accurate. There aint no fight against birth control There is only a fight to stop the unneeded murder of unborn children by soulless liberals like you.

And if that were truly your fight, you ought to be promoting free birth control. Lower rates of abortion and teen pregnancies in countries where that is offered.
I gave up promoting anything years ago, except clear thinking. Taking Birth control pharmaceuticals requires that you see a doctor. It's for the safety of the person taking it. You have to pay the doctor and for the pills because the people working to make them and working for the doctor, as well as the doctor have bills to pay, Bernie. You see, liberals always have simple minded and short sighted answers, which is why we have the mess we are in now, and skank hoes like Sandra Fluke.
 
No one is against them having birth control. but I see no reason society should be paying for it any more than we should be paying for Viagra
Don't fall for the OPs straw man. No one is against BC. Just having to pay for hers.
 
Wait a minute...are the commies pretending that if the government doesn't pay for it, birth control will no longer exist?

That's right along the lines of the Hills campaign people claiming that if the Clinton Foundation disbanded, there would be no treatment for AIDS patients lololol....

Nice strawman.

I think you're confusing opposing the use of birth control with the opposition to taxpayers paying for birth control. Use it to your heart's content but you pay for it.
 
No one is against them having birth control. but I see no reason society should be paying for it any more than we should be paying for Viagra

Well I guess you're not going to be in charge of someone else's healthcare just as you wouldn't want them in yours. You also pay for someone else's birth control in any other insurance plan.
 
Seriously...I just don't get it.

What's wrong with letting women have it?

The argument that they shouldn't have it free doesn't fly. ACA includes a bunch of different free items: Preventive care benefits for adults - but I have yet to hear an argument against aspirin or vaccinations being offered and birth control is a relatively cheap thing to offer.

The Pill is, as of this time, the most reliable method of pregnancy prevention. Yes...abstinence itself works, but isn't realistic as few people stick with it and, frankly, why should they if the pill can offer a more reliable option if they don't want to be abstinent? There is a direct correlation between preventing unwanted pregnancies, particularly teens, and the availability of reliable contraception.
Are really this fucking delusional?
Are you really incapable of a coherent reply?

Try again. Why such opposition to free birth control?
Probably because it isn't free at all. There are no wild birth control berry bushes where anyone could run out and gather pills and condoms.

Free, in this case, means someone else has to pay. Pay for your own birth control like you pay for your own lube.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #68
No one is against them having birth control. but I see no reason society should be paying for it any more than we should be paying for Viagra

When I think of things society should pay for - it's things that effect the public and public health. Birth control, vaccinations, education for example.
 
Wait a minute...are the commies pretending that if the government doesn't pay for it, birth control will no longer exist?

That's right along the lines of the Hills campaign people claiming that if the Clinton Foundation disbanded, there would be no treatment for AIDS patients lololol....

Nice strawman.

I think you're confusing opposing the use of birth control with the opposition to taxpayers paying for birth control. Use it to your heart's content but you pay for it.

Same for your SSRI love.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #70
Seriously...I just don't get it.

What's wrong with letting women have it?

The argument that they shouldn't have it free doesn't fly. ACA includes a bunch of different free items: Preventive care benefits for adults - but I have yet to hear an argument against aspirin or vaccinations being offered and birth control is a relatively cheap thing to offer.

The Pill is, as of this time, the most reliable method of pregnancy prevention. Yes...abstinence itself works, but isn't realistic as few people stick with it and, frankly, why should they if the pill can offer a more reliable option if they don't want to be abstinent? There is a direct correlation between preventing unwanted pregnancies, particularly teens, and the availability of reliable contraception.
Are really this fucking delusional?
Are you really incapable of a coherent reply?

Try again. Why such opposition to free birth control?
Probably because it isn't free at all. There are no wild birth control berry bushes where anyone could run out and gather pills and condoms.

Free, in this case, means someone else has to pay. Pay for your own birth control like you pay for your own lube.

Yet I have to pay for your children's vaccinations and education.
 
No one is against them having birth control. but I see no reason society should be paying for it any more than we should be paying for Viagra

Well I guess you're not going to be in charge of someone else's healthcare just as you wouldn't want them in yours. You also pay for someone else's birth control in any other insurance plan.
Always want someone else to pay for irresponsibility - AKA, the perfect liberal.
 
Seriously...I just don't get it.

What's wrong with letting women have it?

The argument that they shouldn't have it free doesn't fly. ACA includes a bunch of different free items: Preventive care benefits for adults - but I have yet to hear an argument against aspirin or vaccinations being offered and birth control is a relatively cheap thing to offer.

The Pill is, as of this time, the most reliable method of pregnancy prevention. Yes...abstinence itself works, but isn't realistic as few people stick with it and, frankly, why should they if the pill can offer a more reliable option if they don't want to be abstinent? There is a direct correlation between preventing unwanted pregnancies, particularly teens, and the availability of reliable contraception.
Are really this fucking delusional?
Are you really incapable of a coherent reply?

Try again. Why such opposition to free birth control?
Probably because it isn't free at all. There are no wild birth control berry bushes where anyone could run out and gather pills and condoms.

Free, in this case, means someone else has to pay. Pay for your own birth control like you pay for your own lube.

Yet I have to pay for your children's vaccinations and education.
Show me your receipt where you paid for anything.
 
No one is against them having birth control. but I see no reason society should be paying for it any more than we should be paying for Viagra

When I think of things society should pay for - it's things that effect the public and public health. Birth control, vaccinations, education for example.

There are forces who would like to work on that as well, but they have to begin somewhere, that's why the very notions of community and a national unity are always under attack with fomented wedge rivalries. The masses must be dispersed and be kept squabling amongst themselves.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #76
Seriously...I just don't get it.

What's wrong with letting women have it?

The argument that they shouldn't have it free doesn't fly. ACA includes a bunch of different free items: Preventive care benefits for adults - but I have yet to hear an argument against aspirin or vaccinations being offered and birth control is a relatively cheap thing to offer.

The Pill is, as of this time, the most reliable method of pregnancy prevention. Yes...abstinence itself works, but isn't realistic as few people stick with it and, frankly, why should they if the pill can offer a more reliable option if they don't want to be abstinent? There is a direct correlation between preventing unwanted pregnancies, particularly teens, and the availability of reliable contraception.
Are really this fucking delusional?
Are you really incapable of a coherent reply?

Try again. Why such opposition to free birth control?
My jab was better then yours and more accurate. There aint no fight against birth control There is only a fight to stop the unneeded murder of unborn children by soulless liberals like you.

And if that were truly your fight, you ought to be promoting free birth control. Lower rates of abortion and teen pregnancies in countries where that is offered.
I gave up promoting anything years ago, except clear thinking. Taking Birth control pharmaceuticals requires that you see a doctor. It's for the safety of the person taking it. You have to pay the doctor and for the pills because the people working to make them and working for the doctor, as well as the doctor have bills to pay, Bernie. You see, liberals always have simple minded and short sighted answers, which is why we have the mess we are in now, and skank hoes like Sandra Fluke.

So Sandra Fluke is a "skank" now because she spoke up in favor of birth control being offered for free?

The cost of having a baby is much higher then the cost of preventing a baby.
 
Seriously...I just don't get it.

What's wrong with letting women have it?

The argument that they shouldn't have it free doesn't fly. ACA includes a bunch of different free items: Preventive care benefits for adults - but I have yet to hear an argument against aspirin or vaccinations being offered and birth control is a relatively cheap thing to offer.

The Pill is, as of this time, the most reliable method of pregnancy prevention. Yes...abstinence itself works, but isn't realistic as few people stick with it and, frankly, why should they if the pill can offer a more reliable option if they don't want to be abstinent? There is a direct correlation between preventing unwanted pregnancies, particularly teens, and the availability of reliable contraception.
Are really this fucking delusional?
Are you really incapable of a coherent reply?

Try again. Why such opposition to free birth control?
Probably because it isn't free at all. There are no wild birth control berry bushes where anyone could run out and gather pills and condoms.

Free, in this case, means someone else has to pay. Pay for your own birth control like you pay for your own lube.

Yet I have to pay for your children's vaccinations and education.
Show me your receipt where you paid for anything.

No one much expects you to touch base with reality. Show your reciepts for someone else's birth control.
 
Seriously...I just don't get it.

What's wrong with letting women have it?

The argument that they shouldn't have it free doesn't fly. ACA includes a bunch of different free items: Preventive care benefits for adults - but I have yet to hear an argument against aspirin or vaccinations being offered and birth control is a relatively cheap thing to offer.

The Pill is, as of this time, the most reliable method of pregnancy prevention. Yes...abstinence itself works, but isn't realistic as few people stick with it and, frankly, why should they if the pill can offer a more reliable option if they don't want to be abstinent? There is a direct correlation between preventing unwanted pregnancies, particularly teens, and the availability of reliable contraception.
Are really this fucking delusional?
Are you really incapable of a coherent reply?

Try again. Why such opposition to free birth control?
Probably because it isn't free at all. There are no wild birth control berry bushes where anyone could run out and gather pills and condoms.

Free, in this case, means someone else has to pay. Pay for your own birth control like you pay for your own lube.

Yet I have to pay for your children's vaccinations and education.

Not ours....
 
Are really this fucking delusional?
Are you really incapable of a coherent reply?

Try again. Why such opposition to free birth control?
My jab was better then yours and more accurate. There aint no fight against birth control There is only a fight to stop the unneeded murder of unborn children by soulless liberals like you.

And if that were truly your fight, you ought to be promoting free birth control. Lower rates of abortion and teen pregnancies in countries where that is offered.
I gave up promoting anything years ago, except clear thinking. Taking Birth control pharmaceuticals requires that you see a doctor. It's for the safety of the person taking it. You have to pay the doctor and for the pills because the people working to make them and working for the doctor, as well as the doctor have bills to pay, Bernie. You see, liberals always have simple minded and short sighted answers, which is why we have the mess we are in now, and skank hoes like Sandra Fluke.

So Sandra Fluke is a "skank" now because she spoke up in favor of birth control being offered for free?

The cost of having a baby is much higher then the cost of preventing a baby.

Any who question must be demonized, especially if she's a woman. See Rush, that's the pathology.
 

Forum List

Back
Top