Why do conservatives always think liberals should be tolerant of their beliefs but are never tolerant themselves? (wage, enemies)
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.
I think most Americans believe that helping women avoid getting pregnant is a good thing if the woman doesn't want to have a child. Condoms and birth control pills are a very cheap way of handling this. If we can spend a trillion in Iraq, we can afford condoms and birth control pills for women in the United States.
It does not become my responsibility to buy her pills, or condoms. People should be responsible for their own actions. Just because someone wants to be irresponsible with their life choices, does not men I must open my wallet and buy them a birth control pill or pay for their abortion.
If I choose to something risky in my life, like going rock climbing at night, barefoot, then I would not expect you to pay for my injuries and doctor visits, and I certainly would not lobby the federal government to create a new program to force you pay for my reckless behavior.
It does not become my responsibility to buy her pills, or condoms. People should be responsible for their own actions. Just because someone wants to be irresponsible with their life choices, does not men I must open my wallet and buy them a birth control pill or pay for their abortion.
If I choose to something risky in my life, like going rock climbing at night, barefoot, then I would not expect you to pay for my injuries and doctor visits, and I certainly would not lobby the federal government to create a new program to force you pay for my reckless behavior.
Ideally, I don't feel the federal government should pay for it either. But state governments most definitely should. Hand out contraceptives like candy.
What you fail to realize is that it will SAVE taxpayers' money in the long run.
Last edited by afoigrokerkok; 05-10-2009 at 10:35 AM..
So if I don't label myself a total liberal or a total conservative, my opinion isn't worth listening to? I couldn't disagree with you more.
You inferred that I said your opinion does not matter. I was not saying that you must label yourself as a liberal, or conservative in order to have an opinion, its the nature of policies themselves that are liberal or conservative that i am looking at.
I think your point is that being 100% liberal or conservative all the time is about impossible for anyone to be. For example, I think there should be public funding to take care of people in dire circumstances. If a woman has been raped, goes to the police, and then the hospital, everything should be done to follow her wishes, if she wants to eliminate any possibility of a pregnancy or the contraction of a disease, at taxpayer expense. I just do not want the federal government involved in any way.
If you think a woman should be able to come up with any reason at all, to decide she wants an abortion, fine, that is a conservative viewpoint. But once you say that the US federal government needs to get involved and demand, thru force of law, that I should have to pay for her decision to have an abortion, that is liberal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale
I'm a thinking person who considers himself to be mostly liberal, but I'm also able to see lots of good points made by people who call themselves conservatives, and I often agree with them. Listening to them and considering their views has forced me to change some of my own. If all you do is follow the official party line and bash the other side, you learn nothing, and you just end up in a shouting match, as you've so well demonstrated.
If being mostly liberal means the federal government needs to always get involved, then I'll always disagree with that ideology. Sadly, that is the 0bama, Frank, Reid and Pelosi mindset, because they want the power to control everything. I am not a member of any political party, and toe the line for no one.
I wouldn't suggest the federal government paying for it either, but state governments, absolutely.
Hand out contraceptives like candy.
What you fail to realize is that it will SAVE taxpayers' money in the long run.
So if a state wants to do that, fine, but liberals agree with Pelosi, when she wants hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to pay for a federal program to do it.
Liberals also think Americans should pay for contraception and abortions in foreign countries too. When does it ever end? When is a liberal program seen as spending too much money for things the federal government was never intended to do? We went from birth control for all Americans, and some liberal politician said "Why not international birth control?," who thought up that idea, and why do "liberals" like 0bama and Pelosi applaud it?
National health care - why not tax Americans for international health care? Its the next step.
So if a state wants to do that, fine, but liberals agree with Pelosi, when she wants hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to pay for a federal program to do it.
Liberals also think Americans should pay for contraception and abortions in foreign countries too. When does it ever end? When is a liberal program seen as spending too much money for things the federal government was never intended to do? We went from birth control for all Americans, and some liberal politician said "Why not international birth control?," who thought up that idea, and why do "liberals" like 0bama and Pelosi applaud it?
National health care - why not tax Americans for international health care? Its the next step.
I'm against national health care and against the federal government providing any funding for health care/contraception/abortions outside the US.
However, if the federal government is going to continue providing welfare, paying for contraceptives is a sound fiscal policy that would SAVE money over time.
I personally believe that welfare should be handled solely on the state level and, if this were ever to become the case, contraceptives should be provided by state governments. It's not about condoning "irresponsible behavior" as you suggested earlier, but rather about minimizing the damage associated with that irresponsible behavior.
Last edited by afoigrokerkok; 05-10-2009 at 10:42 AM..
I agree... Just as a man is responsible for providing for the children he helped bring into the world, I strongly feel that men should have some say as to whether their child gets aborted or not. Women, you can't have it both ways.
Yes they can. And they do now. WOMEN decide to have an abortion not men.
Yes they can. And they do now. WOMEN decide to have an abortion not men.
Men dont like it? Tough ****.
Do you not understand how this is sexist?
John gets Jane pregnant. Jane has the right to terminate the pregnancy at any time (until the 24th week or so, at least), while John does not. However, John is legally required to support the child upon birth just as much as Jane is.
John's only time where he had a "choice" was when he pulled down his pants. Jane *did* have a choice at that same time, yet she also had months and months of choices later on.
John has no right to absolve himself from the responsibility, yet Jane somehow has the right to absolve herself.
Last edited by afoigrokerkok; 05-10-2009 at 11:09 AM..
I'm against national health care and against the federal government providing any funding for health care/contraception/abortions outside the US.
However, if the federal government is going to continue providing welfare, paying for contraceptives is a sound fiscal policy that would SAVE money over time.
I personally believe that welfare should be handled solely on the state level and, if this were ever to become the case, contraceptives should be provided by state governments. It's not about condoning "irresponsible behavior" as you suggested earlier, but rather about minimizing the damage associated with that irresponsible behavior.
I always thought it was already handles at state level. For example, I live in MI and I often see people abusing the Michigan Bridge Card. That is the welfare card of ours. That is funded federally?
Well, I just got up and have to go to work now so I can support these welfare people. Talk to you crazies tonight.
I always thought it was already handles at state level. For example, I live in MI and I often see people abusing the Michigan Bridge Card. That is the welfare card of ours. That is funded federally?
Well, I just got up and have to go to work now so I can support these welfare people. Talk to you crazies tonight.
Many welfare programs are funded at the federal level, but managed at the state level. It's a complicated system.
I see people abusing their Lone Star Cards (our version of the Bridge Card) frequently and I find it very frustrating.
Last edited by afoigrokerkok; 05-10-2009 at 11:13 AM..
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.