Birthcontroll and Guns

[lovefreedom82]

Birth control should be mandatory for those on gov assistance, for obvious reasons.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

I agree, that will be a great idea, but I don't think that is going to happen. I can see people saying I'm allergic to birth control, to find excuses to breed.

 

[scrovak]

Birth control should be mandatory for those on gov assistance, for obvious reasons.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

I disagree. What if someone is on welfare, and a single, devout Christian? They don't believe in sex before marriage OR birth control? I don't think the government should have the right to forcefeed this person pills just because they're down on their luck.

I understand you're referring to the case of Lateesha Laquanda Jackson Lopez who's cranking out Irish twins on the regular for bonus welfare checks, but any law would apply to both situations.

I think if someone is on Welfare and has a child they can't afford, they should come off welfare, or put the child up for adoption/foster home, where the child can be cared for by someone other than the state.

 

[boule]

I agree, that will be a great idea, but I don't think that is going to happen. I can see people saying I'm allergic to birth control, to find excuses to breed.

Actually, hormonal birth control can have some serious side effects and forcing someone to take it is practically a no-go if it ever ends up in front of a judge.
If you go by a simple cost-benefit analysis, though, it is much cheaper to provide effective contraception to welfare recipients than feed a bunch of children.

Of course, what kind of consequences can you really offer? Forced abortion or adoption? That is not going to fly well with human rights. The only way you could actually influence behaviour is to stop paying for their kids - and once the press gets the first pictures of starving babies in the US, things will go downhill.

 

[lovefreedom82]

Yes, I will agree that ceasing or cutting back benefits amount may help people be more responsible.

 

[Winterborn]

I disagree. What if someone is on welfare, and a single, devout Christian? They don't believe in sex before marriage OR birth control? I don't think the government should have the right to forcefeed this person pills just because they're down on their luck.

I understand you're referring to the case of Lateesha Laquanda Jackson Lopez who's cranking out Irish twins on the regular for bonus welfare checks, but any law would apply to both situations.

I think if someone is on Welfare and has a child they can't afford, they should come off welfare, or put the child up for adoption/foster home, where the child can be cared for by someone other than the state.

So requiring birth control ifs bad because its against religious practices, but taking their kids ifs ok?

There has to be a line drawn in the sand somewhere. Certain people have no self respect and will drink until the troughs dry.

As for providing people condoms, free clinics already do that. They don't use then because there is no real incentive to.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

 

[Copper]

Our society needs to stop messing with natural selection, that should cut down on the unwanted pregnancies over time. Also quit the BS welfare for welfare dependent teen pregnant/mothers. No money= no food, no housing, no babies.

The government should provide me with ammo stamps. I'll stop bitching then.

 

[rseymorejr]

If someone is too financially limited to figure out how to pay for birth control, they probably should not be breeding.

.

They have a term for that; personal responsability.
The current administration has killing personal responsability as one of it's goals.

 

[Schwall]

Here's the thing.... Whether you want it or not, we're going to end up with government mandated health care one way or another. I don't mind having the costs of free birth control spread out among everyone. It's much cheaper than paying for prenatal care, labor & delivery, AND medical care for life for a new child. Say the pill costs $40/ month as one poster said above. Figure 30 years on the pill. That comes to $14,400. The average cost of an uncomplicated delivery is supposed to between $8-9000 (the birth of my first child cost waaaay more than that because if some complications my wife suffered right after delivery) Add in prenatal care and we're already pretty close to the cost of providing the pill. The costs of future medical care, public school, or any other everyday government provided/subsidized benefits everyone receives easily pushes the costs way above what we would pay for birth control.

I'm not even touching some of the ******** elitist and racist attitudes in here about welfare, but maybe those attitudes help contribute to the marginalization of 2A advocates and gun owners in general as ignorant, ultra right-wing, militia loving crazies. Just sayin'...

 

[UserIdNotValid]

I don't know why these 2 subjects are even in the same sentence. Or furthermore what the issue is with free birth control. Like its already been stated its cheaper than an unwanted pregnancy. But the real issue here is what is wrong with the government paying for health care "universal healthcare" like Canada. And before you try to make some stupid comment about how you don't want your tax dollars paying for someone else healthcare guess what they already do. So why not have your healthcare taken care of to and save $13,375 (which is the national average cost of a family plan) a year. Than you have the other side of the coin the cost. Now your going to tell me that they are going to tax you 50% for it. Well lets run those numbers. The national average household income is $60000. The tax on 60,000 plus SS state and fica is about 30% total that's brings your take home down to $42,000. Subtract the 13,000 in medical cost and now your around $29,000. Well there your 50% and that doesn't even include co-pays perscriptions and other out of pocket expences. So now tell me where the logic is in not wanting a universal healthcare system. As far as free guns I'm all for that. But that means more tax dollars going to crazy things like birth controls.

 

[EL1227]

Good idea ...

Since the government thinks its a right to free birthcontrol, where is my free government issued gun. After all due the 2a I do have a right to keep and bear arms no where in the constitution does it say the right to free birthcontrol.

Our society needs to stop messing with natural selection, that should cut down on the unwanted pregnancies over time. Also quit the BS welfare for welfare dependent teen pregnant/mothers. No money= no food, no housing, no babies.

The government should provide me with ammo stamps. I'll stop bitching then.

And while we're at it throw in 14A (equal protection) ...

Afterall, if it's a right to get 'free birth control' to protect yourself from an unwanted pregnancy, why not free 'guns and ammo' to protect yourself from harm.

This, as in other actions by the Fed and MD state, are prime examples of a "gov'mnt gone wild".

WAKE UP AMERICA !!!

 

[K31]

By your argument .gov would owe you free body armor if they were shooting at you.

They are giving you a free screwing, hence the birth control.

 

[EL1227]

By your argument .gov would owe you free body armor if they were shooting at you.

They are giving you a free screwing, hence the birth control.

I stand corrected ... and screwed with my pants on ... standing up.

 

[28Shooter]

Regarding free birth control, it's not a right and if you can't afford it, abstain until you can. Firearms are however a right guaranteed in the Bill of Rights and should not be open to question.

You guys with daughters, excuse me, we who have daughters, put your shotguns away unless you're getting out two shells. Our daughters bear as much responsibility, if not more, when it comes to dating. They can say "No" and anything after that is called rape. You have wives and I'll bet more than a few of you have heard "No" before.

 

[UserIdNotValid]

Yea birth control is not a right. Foods not a right either so I guess if you can't afford it starve

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk

 

[honeybadger]

The whole antigoverment thing should not enter in here. Just because of goverment funding doesn't make this kneejerk "I don't want this"
you say planned parenthood in some circles you have to listen to "abortion center killing babies" etc.... These are the clinics that offer the birthcontrol so while they sit out front and protest and harraess the patients they don't go and then it is too late we now have an 18 year bill to pay.
You scream "abstaine" ummm we all got here somehow? humans hump it is something we do and it is fun by the way so forget that option
Teach proper sex education (NO the kids will hump) well I went to all catholic school and had no sex education (Thanks HBO) and all I want to do was hump and did
(a bunch of girls at the local catholic schools had to go "on vacation for 6 months")
I don't think women want their bodies ruined and carrying a baby they didn't plan on are having a big party either (if they are popping them out for welfare money this is a learned behavior and needs to stop by giving them the tools to stop it a safe clinic without 70-80 years old men (who will never have to have an abortion) out front screaming rehtoric at them.
How guns are involved in this debate I am not sure?? I guess for people control when all these "saved" children that are poorly educated, not cared for or wanted by their parents decide to sneak into our windows.

 

[G O B]

Until the ACLU got stupid, anyone who had the 2nd child on public assistance got sterilized. Please bring BACK this common sense rule! Also - we need to include birth control in ALL foreign food aid. How STUPID are we to feed the starving just so they can breed more starving kids? There are 7 BILLION a##holes on this planet - if we keep going like this there will be no room and no food left.

 

[28Shooter]

Yea birth control is not a right. Foods not a right either so I guess if you can't afford it starve

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk

Ok, let's get real. If some woman is currently on public assistance and "her man" wants to have intercourse, she can say NO, until he finds a way to pay for the necessary means to prevent a pregnancy. I don't see any reason why I should have to pay for his fun and her lack of responsibility - remember the "NO" thing. As far as your food analogy, that's a strawman argument, as food is necessary for survival and I don't recall anything in my survival training that said sex was a requirement.

 

[PJDiesel]

It's not free, my (and your) tax dollars are paying for the handouts.

Which costs more. Contraception or a LIFE long expense of raising someone's unwanted little criminal?

I say it should be fed into the public water like flouride. Then, WHEN you can afford to pro create you THEN buy a pill to counteract the sterility.

(and) free abortions while we are at it, but, not taxpayer funded, PRIVATELY funded. I'll send my check in, cheaper than having these little fuks rummage through you vehicles looking for dope money while you sleep.

 

[UserIdNotValid]

Ok, let's get real. If some woman is currently on public assistance and "her man" wants to have intercourse, she can say NO, until he finds a way to pay for the necessary means to prevent a pregnancy. I don't see any reason why I should have to pay for his fun and her lack of responsibility - remember the "NO" thing. As far as your food analogy, that's a strawman argument, as food is necessary for survival and I don't recall anything in my survival training that said sex was a requirement.

The comment made was that birth control is not a right but guns are. Well last time I checked food is not in the bill of rights either. But what do food and sex have in common. There both human nature and the way sex is works in the brain most people would give up food for sex. But if you have a daughter or when you do you will realize that she's going to have sex as a teenager no matter how much you try stop it. So its a good thing to help prevent a pregnancy so your daughter doesn't end up on teen mom 3. And as far as your survival training you should know that the body can safelly go 2-3 weeks without food and 2 days with out water and the only side effects are your tired and drained. But try going with out sex for 3 weeks and your side effects are depression, anger, your on edge. But to each his own. I like the fact that the government is covering my wife's and daughters birth control that's 1200 a year I'm saving. And I like my 3 meals a day and my sex 5-7 times a week

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk

 

[Sharpster]

Birth control should be mandatory for those on gov assistance, for obvious reasons.

Couldn't agree with this more.