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.
As a somewhat libertarian conservative, I actually favor subsidized birth control (condoms mainly) and feel that high school councilors should be provided with them to distribute to students upon request.
IMHO, it's worth the trade-off.
The problem with this argument is that it assumes that cost is actually the reason some people don't use a condom, and that as long as people can buy condoms they won't do something stupid. But as I pointed out in my original post this makes no sense and a much more likely explanation is that some people are just too stupid to have responsible sex. If that's the case then paying for people's birth control won't make any difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo
Try this reasoning then:
Birth control is a whole lot less expensive than welfare.
Your move.
Subsidizing birth control won't accomplish much in terms of preventing unwanted babies. And even if it did, why reward stupidity with welfare? If people can't afford to raise their kids because their too dumb then CP should step in.
The problem with this argument is that it assumes that cost is actually the reason some people don't use a condom, and that as long as people can buy condoms they won't do something stupid. But as I pointed out in my original post this makes no sense and a much more likely explanation is that some people are just too stupid to have responsible sex. If that's the case then paying for people's birth control won't make any difference.
Subsidizing birth control won't accomplish much in terms of preventing unwanted babies. And even if it did, why reward stupidity with welfare? If people can't afford to raise their kids because their too dumb then CP should step in.
Yes because its just SOOOO much cheaper if CP steps in, and we have to raise these kids
I have heard claims going around by some people from the left that birth control should be subsidized so that people on lower incomes can get them to avoid unplanned pregnancy.
As a low-income earner myself, I find this to be utterly laughable.
Condoms are not that expensive. If a person is single, then their most likely method to get laid is by meeting women at clubs or bars, or in some other way have fun during the night. This will probably involve alcohol. Alcohol isn't exactly cheap, so if somebody can afford drinking then buying a condom is a trivial expense. But let's say they are in a relationship. Assuming they have sex 2-3 times a week, a decent sized box of condoms will last 2-3 weeks. So here the expense of condoms gets higher, but not to a point of being crazy expensive. Not to mention that now we have 2 people sharing the cost making it even less of a problem.
I'm sorry, but I just find the idea that poor people can't afford condoms to be utter nonsense. How can they afford booze but not condoms?
I'm sorry but I don't buy into your reasoning.
Your post is one giant mess of assumptions.
And while condoms might be the cheapest form of birth control, they are not the most effective.
Yes because its just SOOOO much cheaper if CP steps in, and we have to raise these kids
A $1 condom can save us hundreds of thousands
You are not listening to what I am saying. Stupid people that won't spend a couple of bucks on condoms are not going to use them responsibly regardless of if the state pays for them or not. The cause of unintended children in a modern society is not lack of money, it's stupidity. In Iceland STD's are problem among many young people even in spite of all the sex education. A part of the reason is that many women would rather just use the pill instead of the condom.
But even if this wasn't the case, you know what? Even if this came with extra cost it would still be worth it if it got the message across to people that they can't hide behind their children if they behave like idiots.
And besides, if somebody is so irresponsible to a point that they aren't willing to dish out a few bucks for condoms then what makes you think giving them child benefits will even help the child? How do you know the parent won't just **** it away?
As a somewhat libertarian conservative, I actually favor subsidized birth control (condoms mainly) and feel that high school councilors should be provided with them to distribute to students upon request.
IMHO, it's worth the trade-off.
I agree. And it's not just the reduced cost. It's fostering a teen culture that says - want sex? use birth control.
You are not listening to what I am saying. Stupid people that won't spend a couple of bucks on condoms are not going to use them responsibly regardless of if the state pays for them or not. The cause of unintended children in a modern society is not lack of money, it's stupidity. In Iceland STD's are problem among many young people even in spite of all the sex education. A part of the reason is that many women would rather just use the pill instead of the condom.
But even if this wasn't the case, you know what? Even if this came with extra cost it would still be worth it if it got the message across to people that they can't hide behind their children if they behave like idiots.
And besides, if somebody is so irresponsible to a point that they aren't willing to dish out a few bucks for condoms then what makes you think giving them child benefits will even help the child? How do you know the parent won't just **** it away?
You make an assumption. and then run with it.
FACT-free birth control reduces unwanted pregnancies. You can argue whatever nonsense you believe, but it doesn't change the facts.
OMG I wish I never clicked on this thread.
People are stupid. Birth control has been available for free for years and years.
Besides that, condoms are not expensive at all. You can't afford condoms but you can afford 2 packs of smokes everyday. The only excuse is stupidity. Stupidity. Yes you are stupid and a moron. Accidents happen once and you learn your lesson. Accidents don't happen 3, 4, 5 or more times unless you are a complete and total idiot.
That's part one.
Part 2 is the entrepreneurship. The more babies you bang out, the more money and vouchers and free **** you get. If you play your cards right you'll never work a day in your life and live the American Dream plus! Free housing, free food, free health care. Don't get married, the baby daddy can work and claim the kids as dependents and get that fat tax return check. Great loop hole. Then we have the anchor baby thing. The benefits are endless.
Much like the sun doesn't revolve around the earth, other peoples reasons, needs, and abilities don't revolve around hakkarin.
When will people quit making idiotic comments about their own personal experience. . .and assume that their own personal experience is valid for EVERYONE.
Free birth control equal lower unwanted babies and abortions. Who the f' cares about the alternatives if this is a cheap and effective way to lower unwanted children and abortions. There is no reason to worry about the alternatives or how much beer they are drinking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hakkarin
I have heard claims going around by some people from the left that birth control should be subsidized so that people on lower incomes can get them to avoid unplanned pregnancy.
As a low-income earner myself, I find this to be utterly laughable.
Condoms are not that expensive. If a person is single, then their most likely method to get laid is by meeting women at clubs or bars, or in some other way have fun during the night. This will probably involve alcohol. Alcohol isn't exactly cheap, so if somebody can afford drinking then buying a condom is a trivial expense. But let's say they are in a relationship. Assuming they have sex 2-3 times a week, a decent sized box of condoms will last 2-3 weeks. So here the expense of condoms gets higher, but not to a point of being crazy expensive. Not to mention that now we have 2 people sharing the cost making it even less of a problem.
I'm sorry, but I just find the idea that poor people can't afford condoms to be utter nonsense. How can they afford booze but not condoms?
Part 2 is the entrepreneurship. The more babies you bang out, the more money and vouchers and free **** you get. If you play your cards right you'll never work a day in your life and live the American Dream plus! Free housing, free food, free health care. Don't get married, the baby daddy can work and claim the kids as dependents and get that fat tax return check. Great loop hole. Then we have the anchor baby thing. The benefits are endless.
Nice - that old trope that has been disproven three days to sunday. next you will be telling me that no, i'm wrong, and that the Sun DOES revolve around the earth 'cause you got proof you watched it RISE!
Obamacare gave everyone insurance (remember?) and contraceptives are covered 100%.
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.
