Free birth control cuts abortion rate dramatically, study finds (legal, Obama, violent crime)
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.
Too bad your preference matters not to anyone aside from you and your family. And what it has to do with the subject of this thread is of even less consequence. Thanks for sharing though.
You prefer that women get pregnant unintentionally, over preventing that pregnancy in the first place? Weird choice, but whatever floats your boat! Don't worry, though, there are still plenty of children in this world for you to adopt... how many have you adopted so far?
how much is a packet of condoms these days anyway?
why do they need to be free?
They don't HAVE to be free, but it sure does increase the number of people who will use them! Especially helpful in the case of randy teenagers, who often lack the foresight to get over their embarrassment (of buying condoms at a store) - or lack their own money, and don't wanna ask mom/dad to pay for them instead.
I'm not speaking from a religious perspective, only from a taxpayer's.
Your tax money already goes to families on Welfare.
Would you rather pay $.0002 to subsidize birth control or would you rather pay $100,000 in your tax money to support a child on welfare for 18 years (and maybe longer, if he/she goes on welfare as an adult)
They don't HAVE to be free, but it sure does increase the number of people who will use them! Especially helpful in the case of randy teenagers, who often lack the foresight to get over their embarrassment (of buying condoms at a store) - or lack their own money, and don't wanna ask mom/dad to pay for them instead.
Yup! Make it ALL free!
The more contraceptives available, the better!
I actually think that free is an "incentive" - that a lot of people who might otherwise not use birth control, even if they can afford it, will be more likely to use it if it's free.
Free, after all, is a very good price.
You see, I am pro-choice, NOT pro-abortion. While I support a woman's right to choose, I would much rather have women (and men) have access to free contraceptives if it means reducing the number of abortions.
Your tax money already goes to families on Welfare.
Would you rather pay $.0002 to subsidize birth control or would you rather pay $100,000 in your tax money to support a child on welfare for 18 years (and maybe longer, if he/she goes on welfare as an adult)
They never respond to logic. They are usually the same people who think dinosaurs and their bible are totally compatible. But reps for you for your valiant effort to debate your point.
Too bad your preference matters not to anyone aside from you and your family. And what it has to do with the subject of this thread is of even less consequence. Thanks for sharing though.
A direct question was posed to me, so I replied. Please try to keep up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gizmo980
You prefer that women get pregnant unintentionally, over preventing that pregnancy in the first place? Weird choice, but whatever floats your boat! Don't worry, though, there are still plenty of children in this world for you to adopt... how many have you adopted so far?
No, I prefer women and their partners accept responsibility for their actions. If they want to play, they should pay for their own birth control. What's next? Should we pay for a bottle of wine for them to party with too, to set the mood? I don't see why taxpayers should subsidize their abortions. There is a demand for babies. Unfortunately, there isn't as high a demand for older children.
How many I have adopted is really irrelevant, but I'll reply anyway. None. No biological children, either. Just because people can have children/adopt, does not mean everyone should have children.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arus
Your tax money already goes to families on Welfare.
Would you rather pay $.0002 to subsidize birth control or would you rather pay $100,000 in your tax money to support a child on welfare for 18 years (and maybe longer, if he/she goes on welfare as an adult)
I already replied to this question. I prefer adoption as the alternative to paying for other's choices.
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.
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.
