Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-09-2011, 02:37 PM
 
Location: SW Missouri
15,852 posts, read 35,135,091 times
Reputation: 22695

Advertisements

I'm sure that you mean well with your idea. But somehow having pregnancy insurance instills the idea that it is somehow "ok" to have a child that you cannot afford to raise.

Despite the fact all of the "shame" associated with getting pregnant out of wedlock seems to have evaporated from society, we certainly should not be ENCOURAGING this kind of behavior.

I would propose instead the compulsory incarceration of any unmarried woman who gets pregnant. After the child is born, and taken to an adoption agency by force, the woman would serve no less than one year of hard labor and be given a mandatory birth control injection (or appliance or whatever) preventing her from getting pregnant for five years.

I would venture to say that the birth rate for illegitimate children would fall dramatically, as would the abortion rate.

Realizing of course that my solution is impossible, I can still dream can't I?

20yrsinBranson
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-09-2011, 02:41 PM
 
Location: California
37,135 posts, read 42,214,810 times
Reputation: 35013
Since practically every adult is sexually active we would need universal pregnancy insurance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2011, 02:48 PM
 
Location: Houston, Texas
1,084 posts, read 1,547,686 times
Reputation: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by 20yrsinBranson View Post
I'm sure that you mean well with your idea. But somehow having pregnancy insurance instills the idea that it is somehow "ok" to have a child that you cannot afford to raise.
I'm not following. It mitigates the cost so women who are poor can afford to raise the child.

Quote:
Despite the fact all of the "shame" associated with getting pregnant out of wedlock seems to have evaporated from society, we certainly should not be ENCOURAGING this kind of behavior.
I suppose that's true. Actually I quite agree with you. But contraceptives have the same effect. And they actually cause a problem because the amount of sex they encourage isn't adequately offset by the efficacy levels. This pregnancy insurance idea is a compromise. Certainly isn't it better to instill this idea than to instill the idea that it's "ok" to have over 1,000,000 abortions each year.

Quote:
I would propose instead the compulsory incarceration of any unmarried woman who gets pregnant.
Now you're going too far.
Quote:
After the child is born, and taken to an adoption agency by force, the woman would serve no less than one year of hard labor and be given a mandatory birth control injection (or appliance or whatever) preventing her from getting pregnant for five years.
Are you trying to antagonize me? I'm offering a real solution that involves choice. Taking away choice and free will is hardly moral and it will never sell.

Quote:
I would venture to say that the birth rate for illegitimate children would fall dramatically, as would the abortion rate.

Realizing of course that my solution is impossible, I can still dream can't I?
And my dream of society actually stopping their wanton sexual behaviors is less impossible, and more gentle. Probably neither one of us will have what we want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2011, 02:51 PM
 
Location: Houston, Texas
1,084 posts, read 1,547,686 times
Reputation: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceece View Post
Since practically every adult is sexually active we would need universal pregnancy insurance.
Well, give Obama a call. LOL

Seriously, some women do want to get pregnant, or don't care if they do at this point in their lives. Some women do not have sex. Some women are sterile. Some women are post-menopausal.

Check out this website for the statistics.
Facts on Contraceptive Use in the United States

Quote:
There are 62 million U.S. women in their childbearing years (15–44).

Almost one-third (31%) of these 62 million women do not need a method because they are infertile; are pregnant, postpartum or trying to become pregnant; have never had intercourse; or are not sexually active.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2011, 03:30 PM
 
4,267 posts, read 6,183,374 times
Reputation: 3579
smartalx, are you a man? Just wondering if you would be willing to subject your body to a hormonal form of birth control. It's very unfair for women to carry this burden. I know many women who have experienced side effects from hormonal methods and I know that those women would not be interested in something like implanon. I am a parent and there is no way I would put my daughter on that, nor would I purchase "pregnancy insurance". No way!

Last edited by Dorthy; 01-09-2011 at 03:46 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2011, 04:00 PM
 
5,365 posts, read 6,337,762 times
Reputation: 3360
Pregnancy insurance isn't needed. Modern contraceptives work just fine. Any woman who says she got pregnant while the man was using a condom........seriously take that with a grain of salt. Have you ever tried to break a condom? Take one and stretch it sometime. They aren't easy to break. They need to be punctured to tear, and I have never seen a man's penis that is capable of doing that. Chances are the girl wasn't using a condom, but wants to blame it on faulty contraceptives so she doesn't seem like the irresponsible idiot.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2011, 04:17 PM
 
Location: Houston, Texas
1,084 posts, read 1,547,686 times
Reputation: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorthy View Post
smartalx, are you a man? Just wondering if you would be willing to subject your body to a hormonal form of birth control. It's very unfair for women to carry this burden. I know many women who have experienced side effects from hormonal methods and I know that those women would not be interested in something like implanon. I am a parent and there is no way I would put my daughter on that, nor would I purchase "pregnancy insurance". No way!
Yes I am a man but remember I am advocating putting men on hormonal forms of contraceptives too, when they become available. The entire feasibility is dependent on men using these contraceptives actually. I'm sure they'll have similar side effects. I will probably use the contraceptives when I start to have sex with my wife, if they are available by then.

You should keep in mind that hormonal methods are still the number one method of contraceptive used by women. I'm not asking them to do anything they don't already do, except get an implant instead of take a pill or put on a patch. I'm removing the burden of that constant reminder to take the pill. Sure, I'm adding the burden of that implant but it lasts 3 years and I'm sure the benefits would completely overshadow the negatives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2011, 04:18 PM
 
Location: Houston, Texas
1,084 posts, read 1,547,686 times
Reputation: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneTraveler View Post
Pregnancy insurance isn't needed. Modern contraceptives work just fine. Any woman who says she got pregnant while the man was using a condom........seriously take that with a grain of salt. Have you ever tried to break a condom? Take one and stretch it sometime. They aren't easy to break. They need to be punctured to tear, and I have never seen a man's penis that is capable of doing that. Chances are the girl wasn't using a condom, but wants to blame it on faulty contraceptives so she doesn't seem like the irresponsible idiot.
You aren't being realistic. 89% of women use a contraceptive and still 2.5 million of them get pregnant each year in the US alone. No contraceptive is 100%, EVEN with perfect use! No, not even sterilization!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2011, 04:19 PM
 
21,026 posts, read 22,150,071 times
Reputation: 5941
I've never understood women who were sickly obsessed with pregnancy....but a man who is???....Beyond explanation.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2011, 04:26 PM
 
Location: Houston, Texas
1,084 posts, read 1,547,686 times
Reputation: 499
I thought of another problem. For me to make this a reality, I need to sell it to insurance companies. My aim is to eliminate abortions for women who have this insurance. But if I get health insurance companies on board, they aren't likely to have the same feelings as I do about abortion. For them it's all about the dollars. And a one time $1000 abortion procedure is a heck of a lot less than $250,000. Even if less money was put into a trust, that would still be more costly than an abortion. So insurance companies would advocate abortions for the few women who do get pregnant. Being evil multinational corporations, they may even pressure the women to abort. And they are also likely to offer cheaper abortion-only insurance plans. And more women will sign up for THOSE plans.

Hmmm.... Now that I think about it... The difference in cost between 18 year care and abortion per policy holder is only a couple of dimes. A large part of the $20 per month is profit. So in order for insurance companies to encourage women to adopt the abortion only plans, they'll have to dip into their profits pretty significantly. So now I'm less worried about abortion-only policies. They would be cost-prohibitive.

I am still concerned though about strong arm tactics to get women to decide to abort.

Obviously the insurance company would have to have a pro-life stance if we hope to minimize abortions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:52 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top