Column describes how Texas legislators want to limit family planning and contraceptives (Post: costs, vs.)

[Lucidus]

Originally Posted by jtur88

It would also be cheaper to let the parents teach the kids to read and write, too, and get the government out of the school business entirely. We can be absolutely sure (according to you) that leaving things up to the parents works out perfectly for everyone.

I never said anything would work out perfectly for everyone, that won't happen no matter what the government does or doesn't do. There are just some things the government shouldn't do and family planning is one of them.

As for education, getting the government out of that too would almost certainly be an improvement, but in Texas public education is mandated by the constitution so we are pretty much stuck with it.

[Lucidus]

Originally Posted by mezman

Sure there is, if it's not done at home the government should be a backstop otherwise it's up to you and me the taxpayer to foot the bill.

So basically you are saying that we should foot the bill or we have to foot the bill. Allrighty then.

[Cathy4017]

There are just some things the government shouldn't do and family planning is one of them.

Exactly. But by the same token, government shouldn't ENABLE it, either. Pregnant teens/welfare recipients go running for that government aid, and they get more aid with each baby.

This needs to stop, but I don't know what the answer is, other than education, but you know the old saying about horses and water.

[jtur88]

There is another element to this that is not being taken into account.

Our society insists and demands that the only "natural" form of sexual expression is the missionary position between a male and a female. Which also just happens to be the only way that pregnancy can result. Kids are brainwashed into thinking that any form of sexual expression in a manner that cannot result in pregnancy, is somehow particularly disgusting and shameful.

There are a number of ways that young people can express themselves sexually, that do not and cannot result in pregnancy, including but not limited to homosexuality, and oral and anal sex. But our society has constructed such an imposing bulwark of shame and dishonor associated with those avenues of gratification, that we are practically forcing our experimentally-inclined adolescents to engage in activities that have a high risk of pregnancy.

[Cowboys fan in Houston]

Teens are going to have sex. Period. Teaching abstinance is like is pointless because it wont ever work. I honestly do not know one person in my life that waited until they were married to have sex. Teaching abstinace isnt going to stop people that arent married having sex, its just a waste of money and intellegence.

[Dopo]

Teaching abstinence is the same thing as teaching "junk food abstinence" and thinking that that's all that people need to lose weight, just to be told that eating junk food will make them fat.

[getmeoutofhere]

Originally Posted by jtur88

Our society insists and demands that the only "natural" form of sexual expression is the missionary position between a male and a female. Which also just happens to be the only way that pregnancy can result.

Wait, what? Are you serious?

And people are questioning the need for sex ed.

[cBach]

Originally Posted by Lucidus

So basically you are saying that we should foot the bill or we have to foot the bill. Allrighty then.

What is being said is being proactive saves taxpayers much more money than being reactive.

Paying for a $.75 condom is cheaper than paying for the birth, vaccination shots, clothing, schooling, general welfare of a child.

It's $.75 versus $1000's of dollars.

[cBach]

Originally Posted by getmeoutofhere

Wait, what? Are you serious?

And people are questioning the need for sex ed.

I can just hear the teenage girl at the hospital "But I didn't know doggie style could get me pregnant doctor!"

[Lucidus]

Originally Posted by cBach

What is being said is being proactive saves taxpayers much more money than being reactive.

Paying for a $.75 condom is cheaper than paying for the birth, vaccination shots, clothing, schooling, general welfare of a child.

It's $.75 versus $1000's of dollars.

Ideally maybe, but in reality you will just end up paying for condoms, the bureaucracy needed to run the program, plus all those other expenses you mentioned when the condom fails or it is not used anyway. You end up spending $1000 of dollars for nothing.

But that is beside the point, even if these programs work exactly the way they are intended too it is still not the job of government!