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)
 
Old 04-03-2012, 03:30 PM
 
23,852 posts, read 17,786,985 times
Reputation: 9359

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by subsound View Post
LoL, the OP is against birth control, abortion and paying for health care of mothers who get knocked up.

Why not just wrap poor people in Chastity belts till they make enough money for the OP to consider them ready to have sex?
Against birth control? I'm not against birth control...in fact I advocate for the use of birth control. That's part of the personal responsibility theory! How could you NOT get that?

Your failure to accurately understand my position on social issues pretty much renders your opinion on this thread moot and irrelevant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-03-2012, 03:30 PM
 
20,979 posts, read 14,378,347 times
Reputation: 10270
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Provider class, LOL.

Anyway, your worshipping aside, y'all speak of personal responsibility. What if it isn't there? What should happen? Risk the child?
There you go....thinking with emotions.

Yes.

After all, they are THEIR children!

How dare I pass on the opportunity to take responsibility for YOUR family!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2012, 03:31 PM
 
Location: Bay Area, CA
25,523 posts, read 40,587,160 times
Reputation: 13376
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
I am anti-abortion. Please don't assert that my solution to your problem is abortion. You couldn't be further from the truth.

My assertion is not that a person doesn't "deserve" to have children.....my position is that people shouldn't get pregnant with a child they can't afford in the first place....and then compel taxpayers to pay for their bad decisions and irresponsible actions!

See the difference? It sure doesn't sound like it considering your unapologetic use of taxpayer funded entitlements.
This is basically a duplicate of your WIC complaint thread, and will result in the same circular arguments... you say "people should have a sense of personal responsibility," we'll reply that it's impossible to enforce or even encourage such a thing, and you'll give the same response again. Does this line of reasoning and debate actually lead to any solutions, or are we wasting our "breath" here?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2012, 03:32 PM
 
31,794 posts, read 17,918,655 times
Reputation: 8274
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
First, let's review the role and purpose of Medicaid:



Keywords: LOW INCOME; POVERTY; LIMITED INCOME

Now, lets review the evidence:




Now, the opinion:

Fully 40% of births are covered by Medicaid! Why in the world are so many American's having children they cannot afford? Whatever happened to family planning, to include ensuring access to funds and/or insurance that will help to cover maternity costs?!

When can we expect the citizens of the United States of America to reinstitute Personal Responsibility into their lives?

If you can't afford to have children, then you SHOULDN'T have children!

This is the height of personal irresponsibility in America, and it's disgusting!

I haven't read the book, but it claims to have some relevant insights:

Amazon.com: Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women Put Motherhood Before Marriage (9780520241138): Kathryn Edin, Maria Kefalas: Books
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2012, 03:33 PM
 
20,979 posts, read 14,378,347 times
Reputation: 10270
Quote:
Originally Posted by vicket View Post
I would think that your opinion of women as "sluts" doesn't earn you many chances to need those contraceptives...therefore you can afford it.

Regardless- I thought we were having a civilized debate. I am no longer interested in continuing, but I wish you well.
Women who have multiple abortions or multiple children (which they expect someone else to provide for) or expect others to provide their contraceptives for them are sluts.

Sorry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2012, 03:34 PM
 
Location: Bay Area, CA
25,523 posts, read 40,587,160 times
Reputation: 13376
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
Look, Alpha.......we have another one! Can you believe how such shallow thinking prevails on the left? (Don't answer that! )
Sooooo... how's that "not attacking the Democrats" going?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2012, 03:35 PM
 
Location: Bay Area, CA
25,523 posts, read 40,587,160 times
Reputation: 13376
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
Women who have multiple abortions or multiple children (which they expect someone else to provide for) or expect others to provide their contraceptives for them are sluts.

Sorry.
You might have a point on those first two, but how does a woman wanting birth control coverage make her a ****? What if that birth control is to be used with her husband?? And shouldn't you be applauding her desire to prevent pregnancy, instead of whining about the $0.000005 that might cost you? Sure is cheaper than supporting her baby, so pick a side already!! And no, forcing people to abstain for life if they're not well-off doesn't qualify as a side.

P.S. Why does it only censor the singular version of that word? Weird.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2012, 03:38 PM
 
31,384 posts, read 29,081,590 times
Reputation: 14816
And guess what... if the Supreme Court strikes down the AHA the fed will be paying a lot more in the future.

Be careful what you wish for.

- MSN Money

CBO: Health law repeal adds $230 billion to deficit - Sarah Kliff - POLITICO.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2012, 03:39 PM
 
20,979 posts, read 14,378,347 times
Reputation: 10270
Quote:
Originally Posted by subsound View Post
LoL, the OP is against birth control, abortion and paying for health care of mothers who get knocked up.

Why not just wrap poor people in Chastity belts till they make enough money for the OP to consider them ready to have sex?
Now THAT'S an idea that I could get behind!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2012, 03:40 PM
 
Location: Vermont
9,594 posts, read 9,532,767 times
Reputation: 11751
I haven't read the entire thread, but I do have a couple of observations:

1. Does anyone else think it's kind of strange to be drawing conclulsions about the nature of Medicaid based on data from 2000?

2. Would anyone be at all surprised to learn that the states with higher prevalence for Medicaid-funded delivery are those with more restrictive abortion, contraception, and sex education policies?

3. Aside from complaining about people whose choices you disapprove of, does anyone who has attacked the people bearing these children have a serious proposal to encourage people living in poverty to stay in school, obtain employment, and delay childbearing until they can support themselves?
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.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top