# Stupid Republican idea of the day **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 26, 2009, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897 "2009-03-26T18:48:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1763
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2017, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35242 "2017-10-09T22:09:17Z")
> [@jsc1953](#): > > Second: if your religion has a problem with birth control or homosexuality, fine – don’t use birth control, don’t be gay. But I seriously doubt your religion considers it a sin to provide insurance or bake cakes for sinners. You’re not being principled…you’re just being an asshole. They believe those people are going to burn in torment forever, remember? If you’re not spending every interaction trying to steer them towards God and doing everything you can to stop them from sinning, you’re supporting and condoning their decisions, and maybe going to hell with them. Doesn’t sound fun, does it? ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2017, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35243 "2017-10-09T22:30:02Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > Yet ANOTHER reason why health insurance shouldn’t be tied to employers. Car insurance isn’t. Homeowner’s insurance isn’t. The logic is faultless. But logic is no match for the hundreds of millions spent by the health insurance industry, in order to purchase legislators. (You’d think that a pro-business party would like to see the yoke of health-insurance-provision be lifted off the backs of American businesses. But: no.) ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2017, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35244 "2017-10-09T23:23:50Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > The logic is faultless. But logic is no match for the hundreds of millions spent by the health insurance industry, in order to purchase legislators. > > (You’d think that a pro-business party would like to see the yoke of health-insurance-provision be lifted off the backs of American businesses. But: no.) Detaching it from businesses (specifically, businesses paying for it) would reveal to millions of people exactly how much their insurance is actually costing them for what little coverage it reluctantly provides. The removal of this layer of obfuscation would cause a sharp drop in support for privatized health insurance in general, which the pro-business mob can’t afford. ---
**Author:** ![Tread](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/53a042/32.png) [@Tread](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tread)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35245 "2017-10-10T00:06:52Z")
> [@Chimera](#): > > One of my longstanding points on this. Nowhere in the Constitution is the government granted the power to force you to wear clothing. Yet laws requiring this pre-date the Constitution and have been in effect the entire time without ever being struck down by any court. Likewise, the Constitution does not grant the government the right to force children to attend school. Yet no court has ever struck down laws requiring children to attend school. Yes the US Constitution does grant the Government the power to force you to wear clothing Albeit not the Fed Gov., but it clearly gives that power to the states, and local Gov. which is where public nudity laws exist I believe.- ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35246 "2017-10-10T00:35:29Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Detaching it from businesses (specifically, businesses paying for it) would reveal to millions of people exactly how much their insurance is actually costing them for what little coverage it reluctantly provides. The removal of this layer of obfuscation would cause a sharp drop in support for privatized health insurance in general, which the pro-business mob can’t afford. Yeah. You’re right. ☹ (THE MIDDLEMAN MUST BE PAID!!!) ---
**Author:** ![vivalostwages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d07c76/32.png) [@vivalostwages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vivalostwages)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35247 "2017-10-10T03:15:45Z")
> [@jsc1953](#): > > This is an off-topic rant but I can’t control myself. First, corporations don’t have religious principles…people do, maybe, but not corporations. Second: if your religion has a problem with birth control or homosexuality, fine – don’t use birth control, don’t be gay. But I seriously doubt your religion considers it a sin to provide insurance or bake cakes for sinners. You’re not being principled…you’re just being an asshole. > > end of rant [http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article177832426.html](http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article177832426.html) Satanist wants religious freedom too. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35248 "2017-10-10T03:25:06Z")
Then there is the case of [Cidney Fisk](http://www.denverpost.com/2017/09/26/atheist-former-delta-student-suing-school/), who claims that the Delta school district persecuted her for being an atheist, allegedly going so far as to shit on the 4.1-gpa-student’s chances for the National Honor Society and more than one college scholarship. ---
**Author:** ![Guest-starring\_Id](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guest-starring_id/32/21736_2.png) [@Guest-starring\_Id](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guest-starring_Id)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35249 "2017-10-10T03:28:55Z")
A couple days ago Judy Woodruff made Rep. Senator James Lankford squirm a little in this exchange: > [@](#): > > JUDY WOODRUFF: What would be the use of a bump-stock? What would be the rational reason to need that for a gun, for a semiautomatic? > > SEN. JAMES LANKFORD: It’s not necessarily a need that for a gun. It is a — a lot in our own culture and in Oklahoma and in multiple other states, people just enjoy shooting sports. > > They enjoy going to the range and being able to fire different types of weapons of different calibers. It’s a sport as much as it is anything. So there is always the question of, why do you need that for hunting? Not everything is actually done for hunting. > > Just like everyone who has golf clubs doesn’t necessarily play golf all the time, sometimes, they just putt around in the yard. And that’s what they enjoy doing. Yeah especially those newfangled bumpstocked putters for rapid-fire multi-putting freedom. At least McConnell, Ryan, Grassley, Thune, et al aren’t trying weasel out of this whole issue with their assurances that bump stocks need to be fully understood and studied before they come to any rash decisions about banning them, as underscored in this exchange: > [@](#): > > JUDY WOODRUFF: So, based on what you know right now, do you think it’s possible you could support banning these so-called bump-stocks? > > SEN. JAMES LANKFORD: You know what? I don’t know enough on it, to tell you the truth, to be able to answer that question or to be able to know how it would have affected this environment. No, not weaselling at all. The Party of Pantload Responsibility ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35250 "2017-10-10T03:37:38Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > Then there is the case of [Cidney Fisk](http://www.denverpost.com/2017/09/26/atheist-former-delta-student-suing-school/), who claims that the Delta school district persecuted her for being an atheist, allegedly going so far as to shit on the 4.1-gpa-student’s chances for the National Honor Society and more than one college scholarship. :eek: What a bunch of jackasses (if true)! ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35251 "2017-10-10T17:15:22Z")
**Trump administration questions birth control’s health benefits** > [@](#): > > It was largely assumed that Donald Trump and his team would make the argument about principle: the White House would say this change is about protecting “religious liberty” and the moral choices of conservative employers. But as it turns out, they also went after birth control on the merits. > > Indeed, as Bloomberg Politics reported the other day, administration officials actually questioned “the links between contraception and preventing unplanned pregnancies.” > \*In the rule released Friday, officials attacked a 2011 report that recommended mandatory birth-control coverage to help women avoid unintended pregnancies. That report, requested by the Department of Health and Human Services, was done by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine – then the Institute of Medicine – an expert group that serves as the nation’s scientific adviser. > > “The rates of, and reasons for, unintended pregnancy are notoriously difficult to measure,” according to the Trump administration’s interim final rule. “In particular, association and causality can be hard to disentangle.” > > The Trump administration’s document fleshing out its new rule went on to say that covering birth control as a core benefit available to American women could “affect risky sexual behavior in a negative way.” > > - > > Just so we’re clear, **Trump administration officials are now on record, in writing, making the case that contraception may not reduce unwanted pregnancies** and may increase “risky sexual behavior” – despite the fact that real-world evidence points in the opposite direction on both counts. > **[Trump administration questions birth control's health benefits](https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trump-administration-questions-birth-controls-health-benefits-msna1027776)** > > The Trump administration didn't just roll back the clock on contraception access; it also questioned the value of birth control itself. Bolding mine. Completely unbelievable. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35252 "2017-10-10T17:17:41Z")
Any excuse to keep on slut-shaming. Contraception prevents abortion, doofuses. ---
**Author:** ![Ukulele\_Ike](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/df788c/32.png) [@Ukulele\_Ike](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ukulele_Ike)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35253 "2017-10-10T17:40:24Z")
“Using soap MAY NOT prevent unwanted dirt.” ---
**Author:** ![Anny\_Middon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/bc79bd/32.png) [@Anny\_Middon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anny_Middon)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35254 "2017-10-10T17:42:36Z")
> [@Folacin](#): > > I want some Christian Science or Jehovah’s Witness closely held corporation to refuse to allow their insurance policies to pay for blood transfusions. They’ve had that sincerely held religious belief a lot longer than Protestants have been against birth control, so it should be a slam dunk, right? > > And for Christian Scientists, possibly to insist that no medical care should be covered? I’m completely unaware of the extent of their beliefs around doctors and surgery and such. My fantasy is that some religious group decides that reverence for our planet includes adherence to Zero Population Growth. Therefore, a company whose CEO is a member of that religion decides that their family insurance plan will cover the employee, spouse and up to 2 children. Should the family have 2 children and the wife gets pregnant, the insurance plan will not cover any pregnancy- or delivery-related expenses. Of course, no coverage for the child. I suspect that if an employer guarantees that family coverage won’t include more than 2 children per employee, the rates charged for such coverage would be lower than that which could include many children. So it’s a cost-saving measure, too. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35255 "2017-10-10T18:31:42Z")
> [@Anny\_Middon](#): > > My fantasy is that some religious group decides that reverence for our planet includes adherence to Zero Population Growth. Therefore, a company whose CEO is a member of that religion decides that their family insurance plan will cover the employee, spouse and up to 2 children. Should the family have 2 children and the wife gets pregnant, the insurance plan will not cover any pregnancy- or delivery-related expenses. Of course, no coverage for the child. > > I suspect that if an employer guarantees that family coverage won’t include more than 2 children per employee, the rates charged for such coverage would be lower than that which could include many children. So it’s a cost-saving measure, too. Why 2 children? Why not just 1, or even none? You could offer to cover contraception, or even permanent birth control measures for the couple. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35256 "2017-10-10T18:36:24Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > **Trump administration questions birth control’s health benefits** > > The Trump administration’s document fleshing out its new rule went on to say that covering birth control as a core benefit available to American women could “affect risky sexual behavior in a negative way.” Because Republicans hate Hate HATE the government telling you how to run your own life. What’s the over-under on how long before he appoints Bristol Palin as Secretary of Abstinence? ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35257 "2017-10-10T20:14:41Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Why 2 children? Why not just 1, or even none? > > You could offer to cover contraception, or even permanent birth control measures for the couple. Two is a maximum under this plan, which is more consistent with ZPG than one or none. The objective of ZPG should not be to surrender the rearing of the next generation to the Quiverfull types, but to normalize breeding strictly at replacement rate. So we have two children, _and so will you._ (Granted, two should be an average not a maximum if you’re shooting for Zero Population Growth and not Negative Population Growth. But in the present fisheries crisis, I think “maximum two” is a justifiable situational policy.) ---
**Author:** ![Anny\_Middon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/bc79bd/32.png) [@Anny\_Middon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anny_Middon)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35258 "2017-10-10T20:55:48Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Why 2 children? Why not just 1, or even none? > > You could offer to cover contraception, or even permanent birth control measures for the couple. I figured if the company did not allow any children on their employer-subsidize plan, they’d be labeled Anti-Family, which would probably be detrimental to the business. And yes, their health insurance would cover all forms of birth control. It would also of course cover abortions. ---
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Girl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7bcc69/32.png) [@Mighty\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Girl)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35259 "2017-10-10T21:02:16Z")
Has anyone told the Trump administration that hormonal birth control is not just for stopping sluts from having kids? I am on HBC, and the birth control part of it is just a freebie in my case (I need it to prevent my uterus from killing me). ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35260 "2017-10-10T21:07:31Z")
This one asshole may or may not be a Republican – it seems that there were ads he appeared in for a Democrat a few years back – but he has called himself a (3x)ultra-conservative. And he gets a lot of air time. > [@"\[bonehead ex-coach](#): > > ([Mike Ditka: No oppression that I know of in last 100 years | theScore.com](https://www.thescore.com/nfl/news/1395155))"]All of a sudden, it’s become a big deal now, about oppression. There has been no oppression in the last 100 years that I know of. Now maybe I’m not watching it as carefully as other people. > … > Go to another country and play football. If you had to go somewhere else to try to play the sport, you wouldn’t have a job. So that would be my take. If you can’t respect the flag and the country, then you don’t respect what this is all about. So I would say, adios. Fuck his ass. Fuck him sideways with a hedgehog into next month (and make him apologize to the hedgehog). And shove his sorry lameness out of our faces. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2017, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/35261 "2017-10-10T21:15:19Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > Two is a maximum under this plan, which is more consistent with ZPG than one or none. The objective of ZPG should not be to surrender the rearing of the next generation to the Quiverfull types, but to normalize breeding strictly at replacement rate. So we have two children, _and so will you._ > > (Granted, two should be an average not a maximum if you’re shooting for Zero Population Growth and not Negative Population Growth. But in the present fisheries crisis, I think “maximum two” is a justifiable situational policy.) Fair enough, you have your fantasy religion to mess with the govt, I have my own. 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897.md?page=1762) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897.md?page=1764)