Pay attention. They have said so. Numerous times.
Anyway, I would now like to pull out my world’s smallest violin and play a beautiful song for Planned Parenthood, but I neither own a violin nor do I know how to play one.
It makes more sense to subsidize birth control than get stuck paying for all the prenatal, labor and delivery, food for baby, meds for baby, etc that low income families can’t cover on their own. Because, like it or not, we can’t just leave people high and dry.
(Excuse my rambling rant from last night. I really need to put a breathalyzer on my computer, lol.)
You really do give them way too much credit. Of COURSE they can just leave people high and dry! It’s the Republican Way.
And then when that kid gets arrested for robbing a convenience store in his late teens he goes to jail. And you know what that means?
Jobs! And you thought they didn’t have this thought out.
-Joe
It actually makes more sense for the individual to practice a manner of personal responsibility. I mean, if you can’t afford a $5 pack of condoms (sometimes, you can get them for even less!), then what the hell are you having sex for? That’s just gross irresponsibility.
That’s a nice thought.
It would also be nice if you could stand in front of a flood and command it to stop.
Funnily enough, that post doesn’t really address mine, nor does it attempt to answer my question.
In a perfect world, everyone would do the responsible thing. But we are in a very imperfect world where it makes infinitely more sense to put money into prevention so we don’t have to foot the bill for the cure.
And, as someone else mentioned, going to PP for contraception and STD testing IS the responsible thing to do. It’s low cost, but not free. So these irresponsible morons the GOP hates so much aren’t expecting FREE, they just want it to be accessible and affordable. And I don’t understand how anyone can be against that.
And what, people will just stop having sex because PP is not there?
Just say No.
That seems to be the right-wing position…they don’t really believe in such an entity as “society” (re Maggie Thatcher “there is no such thing as society”). They believe that nothing anyone does really affects anyone else, so that having 10s of millions of people in soul-sucking poverty doesn’t really affect THEM. It’s all on an individual and family level, and if the individual or family can’t make it on their own, toss 'em over the side, because since there’s no society, those individuals and families can’t possibly be a problem for the responsible people.
So society should subsidize people to do something they shouldn’t be doing in the first place because said people are going to do what they shouldn’t be doing anyway and end up on welfare, even if they probably won’t? Is that your argument? That makes no sense.
1.) Virtually any convenience store sells contraceptives. Hell, even Wal-Mart has a section of their store entitled “family planning”. They have many options worth less than $10. Again, if someone can’t afford contraceptives, they shouldn’t be having sex. It’s actually quite simple. To do so is irresponsible.
2.) Luckily for us all, Planned Parenthood doesn’t service a majority of women nor is it the only provider of ‘low-cost healthcare’ or whatever you want to call it.
3.) If Planned Parenthood cares so much they can stop offering abortions, or they can get their bleeding heart supporters to open up their wallets/purses and stop being cheap bastards.
So you think if you withhold support for low cost contraception, there will be no more expensive or socially dertimental consequences from people who do irresponsible things? Just Say No has always created more problems that it ever prevented.
The problem is that the removal of low-cost birth control and social support for low-income families is that it’s the children who suffer. It’s the children who don’t get fed, clothed, schooled or housed appropriately. It’s the children who get abandoned at hospitals, at fire stations, in dumpsters or left in toilets.
It always amazes me how people who want to stop subsidised birth control and social support with the catch cry of “personal responsibility” don’t seem to give two fucks about those who are unable to have personal responsibility because they are infants and children.
Obviously you’d rather the government pay neither, and that’s fine, but given a choice would you rather the government pay $50 to subsidize condoms/birth control or $50,000 in child welfare/medical care/public education/etc. from a child who results from two broke people having an accident?
:rolleyes:
Let them eat latex?
If nothing else, our esteemed OMGtard has demonstrated that no matter their skin color, conservatives are just reality-blind.
-Joe
Despite what you seem to believe, there aren’t many other health clinics and doctors offices in these communities. Planned Parenthood IS the only source of affordable reproductive health services in a lot of low income areas. And it amazes me that anyone can be so against people having access to healthcare that they can afford.
Abortion is still legal in this country, like it or not. And it’s unconstitutional to tell a healthcare provider they can no longer take Medicaid because they use OTHER FUNDING for their abortion services. I don’t know how many more times it has to be explained that taxpayer money does not go towards abortions. And it’s the rabid right who is going to have to come to terms with that. Their efforts have already been thwarted here in Indiana, and I’m going to take a wild guess and say this is going to happen to other states that try to pull the same shit. Thankfully, there seem to be a few people at the federal level who can see what a mistake it would be to let the GOP get away with this crazy shit.
Honestly, I don’t think it would matter what poor people do, or how hard they work, or how many try to do the responsible thing with regard to their health…they’re always going to be seen as leeches on society in the eyes of the right. If they go to PP for contraception (cheaper for them, yes, but not free), that’s not responsible enough. If they want to make their own choices about their unplanned pregnancies, that’s wrong.
You actually think convenience store condoms can take the place of Planned Parenthood, and when more “precious lives” happen as a result of this ill conceived plan, you call them irresponsible and resent having to provide services for them.
In what kind of twisted reality can you justify this backwards logic?
I’ve always found it interesting that they’re considered “precious lives” until they’re actually born…then we get to hear about all of these irresponsible women (it’s always the woman’s fault, isn’t it?) and their children living off the tax dollars of hard-working Americans.
Well if all those babies would just take some personal responsibility and get a fucking job, they wouldn’t have to rely on the government to keep them in Pampers.
That’s because in conservative parlance, life begins at conception, and ends at birth.