CHALK ONE UP FOR THE GOOD GUYS....

[TexTushHog]

Are the County Health Services going to provide birth control services? Other reproductive services such as abortions (non-profit, of course)?

[Doove]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

I am for a smaller Federal Government; if the good folks of North Carolina want to fund healthcare at the state level, so be it.

It is called state's rights; Constitutional Conservativism. You ought to give it a try, you might like it.

And if all 57 states funded health care, you'd be aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaall for it.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

Nah, WTF is a big time proponent of eugenics. He is in favor of reducing the world's population as much as possible in any way possible.
It is the over-crowding of the planet that is all the world's ills.

The founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was a big fan of eugenics and was a socialist. She wanted to limit the number of minority births. This was her main purpose in founding Planned Parenthood. Sanger would be pleased to know that most African-American pregancies now end in abortion; in New York City, it's sixty percent.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...jonah-goldberg

[CuteOldGuy]

Actually, Doofie, at least if each state administered and funded its own health care system, it may not be good, but it would at least be Constitutional. States are allowed to do that for themselves. Regardless of what SCOTUS thinks.

[CuteOldGuy]

Oops, sorry. I forgot.

[Doove]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Actually, Doofie, at least if each state administered and funded its own health care system, it may not be good, but it would at least be Constitutional. States are allowed to do that for themselves. Regardless of what SCOTUS thinks.

Yeah, and then it wouldn't be a tax, it'd be a mandate.

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

Are the County Health Services going to provide birth control services? Other reproductive services such as abortions (non-profit, of course)?

<The sound of crickets!!> I take it that's a no? They're going to provide only health services that the Bible thumpers approve of and not all the health services women need?? I think that's the Taliban women's health plan, too, no?

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

<The sound of crickets!!> I take it that's a no? They're going to provide only health services that the Bible thumpers approve of and not all the health services women need?? I think that's the Taliban women's health plan, too, no?

Here's a thought, why not have people buy their own birth control. Why is it the government's responsibility to do everything. What next, toilet paper, diapers, toothpaste? If you want to have sex, and not get pregnant, go buy some condoms. They're really cheap. Generic birth control is also cheap; it's several dollars a month, less than these people spend on cable TV, beer, and junk food.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

Here's a thought, why not have people buy their own birth control. Why is it the government's responsibility to do everything. What next, toilet paper, diapers, toothpaste? If you want to have sex, and not get pregnant, go buy some condoms. They're really cheap. Generic birth control is also cheap; it's several dollars a month, less than these people spend on cable TV, beer, and junk food.

speaking of cheaper

compared to providing birth control how much more would it cost to pay for a kiddo for 18 years?

[nwarounder]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

Here's a thought, why not have people buy their own birth control. Why is it the government's responsibility to do everything. What next, toilet paper, diapers, toothpaste? If you want to have sex, and not get pregnant, go buy some condoms. They're really cheap. Generic birth control is also cheap; it's several dollars a month, less than these people spend on cable TV, beer, and junk food.

Buy their own birth control (?), surely you jest. It's not fair for people with .50 cents to be allowed to fuck with protection, when those without would have to act with personal responsibly.

[nwarounder]

Originally Posted by CJ7

speaking of cheaper

compared to providing birth control how much more would it cost to pay for a kiddo for 18 years?

Or simply not allow them to breed if they can't afford to raise a child without mooching off the rest of us...

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by nwarounder

Or simply not allow them to breed if they can't afford to raise a child without mooching off the rest of us...

well that wont happen on either count

bitching about cheap bc opposed to paying 1000$ a month for 18 years doesnt really make any sense for all the so called fiscal conservatives that yammer about spending all the time ..


icip said it all ...

[nwarounder]

Originally Posted by CJ7

well that wont happen on either count

bitching about cheap bc opposed to paying 1000$ a month for 18 years doesnt really make any sense for all the so called fiscal conservatives that yammer about spending all the time ..


icip said it all ...

Not sure what you missed. I'm opposed to paying .50 cents for someone elses condom, or $1000's a month for 18 years. I'm for personal responsibility of one's self and their offspring. I know, I know, it's a difficult concept for most.

[cptjohnstone]

I think it is 26 years now?

[IIFFOFRDB]

Originally Posted by CJ7

well that wont happen on either count

bitching about cheap bc opposed to paying 1000$ a month for 18 years doesnt really make any sense for all the so called fiscal conservatives that yammer about spending all the time ..


icip said it all ...

You are right. Let's have airplanes dropping 10's of thousands of condoms over inner cities everyday. There would not be a demoncrat left in 25 years...LOL