At 4/19/12 01:01 AM, Camarohusky wrote:
The thing is, we already pay for their mistakes. We pay a great deal for their mistakes. Why should we pay out our hind quarters for their mistakes when we can toss a penny here and then to prevent them? As a pure economic matter subsidizing abortion and contracpetion is a no brainer. The economic argument against it just falt out fails.
Subsidizing abortion is a no-brainer? Why? There is easy to access free to extreeemely cheap contraceptives. Shit, I can walk to the local store, and pick up enough change off the ground to BUY condoms, let alone go to a free health clinic that doesn't receive federal money that hands them out for free. There are people who's job it is is to hand out free condoms to people.
We already do!!!! Either way, who would we be punishing by not paying for these services? Not those who fucked up. Nope. We'd be punishing their innocent children.
How so? For a few of the first few years of my life I grew up poor, not starving poor, but poor. It is not that bad. The only problem comes when parents don't accept responsibility and end up on government assistance programs and they end up dead beats because they don't have to work, yet they still get money. They don't bother with contraceptives since they know they can get abortions for free or, at the very least, cheap.
I have a hard time believing that you're truly this selfish and have this little ability to understand society as a whole. Your luxury is NOT a benefit to society, whereas basic health services are, especially when these basic services can prevent the need for expensive services down the line. How the hell does your iPod example come anywhere close to this? Really? Come on.
Since when did basic health services ever equate to people being given access to free abortions or contraceptives being paid for by those who don't want to pay for it? Seriously. This isn't medication, this is people wanting to get their fuck on. It is a luxury. Nowhere does it say you have the right to have government issued condoms.
Oh, you got me! Seriously. Mammograms, paps, hygiene, contraception, and the occasional abortion are equivalent to iPods. I get it. Bitches don't deserve these things. Damn, every second they aren't making me my fucking pie in the kitchen whilst pregant, they're just sucking up air that us men could be using to listen to shitty music on some fucking fad of a system, right?
Odd, because this has been about abortions and contraceptives. If PP didn't provide for those, then fuck it, I'd be ok with it.
But guess what, that is not the case.
Who cares about health when it's only the equivalent of a piece of technology that most people live without, and even fewer use on a monthly basis?
ITT: Not wanting government funds to go to a company that is the biggest killer of black babies in the US=Not wanting health care.
Your iPod example is beautiful. You know why? It epitomizes the war on women. Women's health needs are as important as your minor luxury item.
Having sex is not a health need, the same way mentally stimulating your brain is not a health need.
Because they cannot afford that medical procedure somewhere else? Because they, and society, cannot afford to fork over the coin to raise the child properly?
Or, here's an idea: Spend 50c on a condom from those nifty little dispensers. Or, for the cheaper long term method, spend $7 for a months supply of the Pill at Target. We should not be responsible for your kid.
Here's a brand spanking new idea:
Maybe the parent should raise the child, and unless the kid is starving, why the fuck should they get monetary assistance? (Well, except for medical emergencies and shit)
When you know that other people will take care of your mistakes, you end up being more careless. It's a simple fact of life.
So money is fungible, let's cut off all of the good stuff they do just becuase we have a qualm with the one bad thing we don't like. A few more cases of cancer, and some infections, and some STDs are a small price to pay for ensuring that women have a harder time getting contraceptives and abortions, right?
Yeah, pretty much. Divert the funds to places that actually test for those things and not a company that gives you referrals to said places.
You have a sound system right there. massive consequences for the promiscuous and no ripple effects upon innocent people... None at all.
No. Paying for just you isn't a large enough sample to break even. Playing the odds requires a large number of people.
So basically: I'm ok with PP getting funds because other people will pay for it, but I will not spend the few bucks to prove I am willing to do the same.
Also, I advocate higher taxes for all. Still with the brackets, but we all fail to pay our share.
If you're trying to say let's drop the kiddos from Medicaid and get rid of child welfare, just say it. Otherwise you keep tiptoeing around the expensive elephants in the room.
You want to know something funny? Kids will be treated no matter what the circumstances. Insured or not, nobody will ever turn them down. That said, I am for their medical costs being partly covered, but I am not for child welfare because it grows to the rise of people who pop out babies for the extra money, the people who are horrible parents who only look for 3 jobs a week because that is the minimum.
Contraception is both as grave and as immediate as murder. You heard here first: Sex IS murder! How many times will you make these bad analogies and think you have won? Please, please please please, put at least ONE ounce of thought into these next response. It's quite annoying getting responses back that claim to be related but miss out on key points.
No, you think that biological impulse means everyone should pay for it. If you cannot think of a reason besides that, then you shouldn't be part of society because us resisting those impulses and thinking beyond the F's of nature is what made us rise.