If you get free birth control, I should get free beer

reply to post by mastahunta


I think that's the point.. Everyone.. Working, that is.

Doesnt include people getting to live for free.

Originally posted by beezzer
Sex as a recreational pursuit should not be subsidized by tax payers.

Sex is as natural as eating, is eating taxed?

here's a thought. how 'bout the pill gets put on the shelf next to the condoms at an affordable price? lets level the playing field.

the pill is not like condoms. it's not an "as needed" sort of thing. once you get on it you need to stay on it for it to be effective which means a bill of $30 - $150 a month (depending on the type that is right for you) whether you have sex with your husband once a day or once a year.

i think this argument is odd in this day and age. it seems made up and silly.

reply to post by sykonot


Thank you...

We may save the world from unwated children, but we will need to worry about thinning the population too damn much because everyone is given the greenlight to have guilt free sex... STD's included.

Smart people!

Wish the Government would stay the hell out of my wallet!

Originally posted by Biigs

Originally posted by beezzer
Sex as a recreational pursuit should not be subsidized by tax payers.

Sex is as natural as eating, is eating taxed?

If you don't have sex for a month, you don't die.

Try not eating for a month.

Sex is just a voluntary act between two people that utilizes genitals. It's like dancing. But without all the sweating.

reply to post by youdidntseeme


well I do get your point...

but it still needs to be pointed out that in general there are tons of women who actually need the pill for other issues....and for them to be denied it because of religious beliefs or whatever shows the ignorance of man (in general)

Originally posted by pasiphae
here's a thought. how 'bout the pill gets put on the shelf next to the condoms at an affordable price? lets level the playing field.

the pill is not like condoms. it's not an "as needed" sort of thing. once you get on it you need to stay on it for it to be effective which means a bill of $30 - $150 a month (depending on the type that is right for you) whether you have sex with your husband once a day or once a year.

i think this argument is odd in this day and age. it seems made up and silly.

The pill comes with health issues. Condoms don't. Besides with condoms I .... I mean a man can go all night.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Biigs

Originally posted by beezzer
Sex as a recreational pursuit should not be subsidized by tax payers.

Sex is as natural as eating, is eating taxed?

If you don't have sex for a month, you don't die.

Try not eating for a month.

Sex is just a voluntary act between two people that utilizes genitals. It's like dancing. But without all the sweating.

My point is somthing we do everyday is taxed heavily and your are saying that somthing that could solve alot of problems for alot of people at a tiny cost in comparason, even though not vital to keep you alive shouldnt be done?

Its spending on people who want to use it, not like apply for a sex permit to the FBI who come over and suit you up.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
Beer is never NEEDED.

Blasphemer.

ok ok well maybe alcoholics need it

reply to post by pasiphae


Please stop making sense, someones head might assplode.
Health insurance should cover birth control it has for years why the sudden "OMG my taxes!"?
Could it be your're all eating propaganda...again?

reply to post by beezzer


sex is biological. the reality is.... WE ALL HAVE SEX.

also, no one seems to have brought up the point that insurance agencies have been covering it for YEARS. no one complained before.

reply to post by Biigs
It is asking tax payers to subsidize an indulgance. A whim. Something recreational.

It's not akin to helping someone on insulin.

Sex is not manditory.

Originally posted by Starchild23
Ms. Fluke pretty much made herself out to be a whore, in my opinion.

Any woman who sleeps with someone just for the pleasure of it, and not as a manner of bonding...especially if she does it frequently...is a whore.

Free birth control? Why not just tell all of America to be promiscuous and sleep with whoever you like?

I thought prostitution was illegal, and rampant sex was frowned upon. A little integrity, please...

I am not speaking for myself but in general....

but who cares if adults want to have sex with others for just pleausre and not bonding. Who is ANYONE to tell consenting adults what they should or should not do.

I just dont understand people being so concerned about consenting adults they reduce to calling them names.

If you (in general) only want sex for bonding purposes - go for it. Some may not. That is THEIR perogative.

WHO made the rules on "sex" anyways??? Religion?

Okay hows this!!!!

Somone frustrated by lack of sex due to the fact they cant aford it (with their partner!!!!), might lead to crime or mental issues (like depression)

Sex makes people normal when they are in a relationship, gues what happens to ones that dont...... yeah they go else where.

Its a great idea and its not even going to be (in the sceme of things) very much money at all! 5 years later everyones admireing the lowered birth rate and HAPPY couples

Originally posted by pasiphae
reply to post by beezzer

 

sex is biological. the reality is.... WE ALL HAVE SEX.

also, no one seems to have brought up the point that insurance agencies have been covering it for YEARS. no one complained before.

So individuals can still have it.
Wonderful.

Just don't as me (a tax payer) or the catholic church (it's against their religion) to pay for it.

Originally posted by Biigs
Okay hows this!!!!

Somone frustrated by lack of sex due to the fact they cant aford it (with their partner!!!!), might lead to crime or mental issues (like depression)

Sex makes people normal when they are in a relationship, gues what happens to ones that dont...... yeah they go else where.

Its a great idea and its not even going to be (in the sceme of things) very much money at all! 5 years later everyones admireing the lowered birth rate and HAPPY couples

edit on 3-3-2012 by Biigs because: (no reason given)

Are you suggesting that the government provide females (or males) for sex just so people wil behave better in society?

Originally posted by mastahunta

Originally posted by theRhenn

Originally posted by Nephlim
reply to post by schuyler

 

weak argument..
less births equals less money the state has to pay to support poor single moms/ unwanted children. preventitive spending.

more alcohol equals more money the state has to pay for rehab, stopping drunk drivers. medical industry has to put higher premiums because alcohol related injuries (car) are the number one killer and maimer of people under 35.

saying birth control is recreation and not worth paying for is a valid argument, but you have to remember that its a preventive cost. and comparing it to free alcohol just does not work.

That's easy.. Mandate that BC MUST be used by all wellfare recipients.

Shiner for me please!

Only if you mandate it for all right wing couples.

political trolling, welfare recipients arent defined by party lines......

and if you are suggesting that they shoulduse birth control to cut down on the number of right wing people in the world then i find your response bigoted as well

it is however nice to finally see you openly state that you wish to silence anone elses opinion simply by making sure there arent any of them to voice it..... So much for "left wing" tolerance

Let me clarify a few things here. This has been moved to "Rant" I don;\'t really agree with that, but I can't do anything about it. I think it is political madness, myself.

First, I have no problem whatsoever with college students or anyone else having sexual relations, including outside of marriage. I do not agree with teh Rush Limbaugh "slut" approach to this. This is not a right wing rant. I just want free beer is all.

I also do not agree with the idea that, well, this will all even out because people won't get pregnant, so insurance won't have to pay for pregnancy care. Say what? So if you cannot get free birth control, therefore you are going to get pregnant? College students know how babies are made, right? They could use condoms. It's far cheaper. For the cost of birth control for a year you could buy 7,000 condoms. Sufficient, I would think.

Third, I will put my conspiracy hat on. I have a concern that a government that actively encourages sex is really trying to control the masses by encouraging what amounts to free sex parties. It reminds me of the Romans who controlled the populace, in part, by offering free access to the Colloseum and gladiator fights (and executions) along with many free holidays because it acted as a control mechanism and kept the populace interested in their parties rather than the corrupt political system. There is an element of that in this that should not be ignored. Encouraging hedonism means discouraging political scrutiny.

Free birth control is not about "women's health." Indeed, quite the opposite. Birth Control Pills are bad news long term. They change body chemisty and mess with natural hormones, sometimes permanently. They've been associated with all sorts of diseases, including cancer. If the issue really is "women's health," then the government should be giving out free condoms. It's far safer for women and puts responsibility on men.

The point is that there is no real distinction between free birth control and free beer. Next will be free needles for drug addicts. (Oops! we've been doing that for some time in the name of "health," haven't we?) Shouldn't we all have free iPhones, too? After all, someone without an iPhone is at a disadvantage and we all know we should all be equal. So, free iPhones ought to be oart of the deal (complete with a government installed kill switch.)

There's no end to what you can get the government to give you for free.

Originally posted by pasiphae
here's a thought. how 'bout the pill gets put on the shelf next to the condoms at an affordable price? lets level the playing field.

the pill is not like condoms. it's not an "as needed" sort of thing. once you get on it you need to stay on it for it to be effective which means a bill of $30 - $150 a month (depending on the type that is right for you) whether you have sex with your husband once a day or once a year.

i think this argument is odd in this day and age. it seems made up and silly.

I think this is the solution. After all the morning after pill is available OTC....
Im not a doctor nor in the health profession....but I do wonder why the pill is not available over the counter.
I do get there are health risks for taking the pill (couldn't pay me to be on it) BUT.........there are health risks for taking too much Tylenol too....

I know that my health insurance wont cover things like Advil, Motrin, Tylenol, cold meds, etc etc.....so maybe it is time for the pill to go on the counter next to all the other medicines...and condoms...