More contraception, more pro-life

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Contraception is already so cheap and readily available that making it "free" is unlikely to have much impact on the number of abortions. People either are, or are not, too stupid to obtain/use contraception if they don't want kids. Abortions are declining because of (1) state restrictions on abortion, and (2) shifting public opinion on abortion.

As to the contraception = murder point, I suppose some might believe that, but there's a pretty significant difference between preventing conception or embryo implantation and killing a fetus that, if not viable, has actually developed into some semblance of a human being with a heart, brain, nerves, etc. The silver lining of morning-after pills being available OTC and at hospitals is that it further reduces any argument for the necessity of abortion.

There is a % of the population that is broke, dumb as eff and incredibly horny.  I'd love to prevent them from further reproducing.  And if we can by giving them free birth control pills that they wouldn't otherwise buy, do it yesterday.

But I am glad to see you are on board with the morning after pill.  Some psychos are against that

If they're that stupid, then they're too stupid to take the pills with the required regularity. Next solution?

[Kat Kid]

IUDs

[Asteriskhead]

so.... our argument is to forget about contraception because people don't want to/ won't use it. yea, that seems smart. 

[DQ12]

condoms have a pretty high failure rate.

Yeahhh, you pretty much lost it with that one.

I mean, seriously... pull out and toss it on her chest, or her face, or her toothbrush, or just go ahead and BE the toothbrush. It really is quite simple.

The pull-out method is more effective than condoms.  Too bad we can't teach people that in school.

That seems untrue.  Do you have a source?

Of every 100 women whose partners use withdrawal, 4 will become pregnant each year if they always do it correctly.
Of every 100 women whose partners use withdrawal, 27 will become pregnant each year if they don't always do it correctly.

Each year, 2 out of 100 women whose partners use condoms will become pregnant if they always use condoms correctly.
Each year, 18 out of 100 women whose partners use condoms will become pregnant if they don't always use condoms correctly.

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/birth-control/condom-10187.htm

[Dugout DickStone]

Contraception is already so cheap and readily available that making it "free" is unlikely to have much impact on the number of abortions. People either are, or are not, too stupid to obtain/use contraception if they don't want kids. Abortions are declining because of (1) state restrictions on abortion, and (2) shifting public opinion on abortion.

As to the contraception = murder point, I suppose some might believe that, but there's a pretty significant difference between preventing conception or embryo implantation and killing a fetus that, if not viable, has actually developed into some semblance of a human being with a heart, brain, nerves, etc. The silver lining of morning-after pills being available OTC and at hospitals is that it further reduces any argument for the necessity of abortion.

There is a % of the population that is broke, dumb as eff and incredibly horny.  I'd love to prevent them from further reproducing.  And if we can by giving them free birth control pills that they wouldn't otherwise buy, do it yesterday.

But I am glad to see you are on board with the morning after pill.  Some psychos are against that

If they're that stupid, then they're too stupid to take the pills with the required regularity. Next solution?

 

[Kat Kid]

condoms have a pretty high failure rate.

Yeahhh, you pretty much lost it with that one.

I mean, seriously... pull out and toss it on her chest, or her face, or her toothbrush, or just go ahead and BE the toothbrush. It really is quite simple.

The pull-out method is more effective than condoms.  Too bad we can't teach people that in school.

That seems untrue.  Do you have a source?

Of every 100 women whose partners use withdrawal, 4 will become pregnant each year if they always do it correctly.
Of every 100 women whose partners use withdrawal, 27 will become pregnant each year if they don't always do it correctly.

Each year, 2 out of 100 women whose partners use condoms will become pregnant if they always use condoms correctly.
Each year, 18 out of 100 women whose partners use condoms will become pregnant if they don't always use condoms correctly.

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/birth-control/condom-10187.htm

You're right.  I got my numbers wrong.  Should've said is about as effective as condoms with the obvious caveats about a) no protection from STDs b) correct use.

[Daddy Claxton]

There is a % of the population that is broke, dumb as eff and incredibly horny.  I'd love to prevent them from further reproducing.

This

Lebensunwertes Leben.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Here at goE its okay to say all poors are stupid and we should do everything we can to prevent them from procreating.

What a refreshing viewpoint.   


But yeah, mods keep slapping "racist piece of crap" on posters who disagree with your naive and perverted pov, rough ridin' hypocrites

[CNS]

Here at goE its okay to say all poors are stupid and we should do everything we can to prevent them from procreating.

What a refreshing viewpoint.   


But yeah, mods keep slapping "racist piece of crap" on posters who disagree with your naive and perverted pov, rough ridin' hypocrites

Can someone explain the difference btwn "All" and "a % of" to this guy?

[Dugout DickStone]

Here at goE its okay to say all poors are stupid and we should do everything we can to prevent them from procreating.

What a refreshing viewpoint.   


But yeah, mods keep slapping "racist piece of crap" on posters who disagree with your naive and perverted pov, rough ridin' hypocrites

Can someone explain the difference btwn "All" and "a % of" to this guy?

He wouldn't get it

[Daddy Claxton]

Would someone explain it to me, or at least explain why "a % of" instead of "all" makes it an
acceptable viewpoint?

For the record, I suspect limestone's comment was a bit tongue in cheek and the part I didn't quote makes it less offensive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CNS]

Would someone explain it to me, or at least explain why "a % of" instead of "all" makes it an
acceptable viewpoint?

For the record, I suspect limestone's comment was a bit tongue in cheek and the part I didn't quote makes it less offensive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I personally know a few ppl that fit the description exactly.  They by themselves equate to "a % of" because math, and I am making a radical assumption that they aren't alone.

Racist POS me if that is wrong.

[Dugout DickStone]

Would someone explain it to me, or at least explain why "a % of" instead of "all" makes it an
acceptable viewpoint?

For the record, I suspect limestone's comment was a bit tongue in cheek and the part I didn't quote makes it less offensive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My point was illegitimate kids are not always a positive for those people in the lower income groups.  And they won't buy birth control so they should have access to it for free.

Or at least the morning after pill

[Daddy Claxton]

Would someone explain it to me, or at least explain why "a % of" instead of "all" makes it an
acceptable viewpoint?

For the record, I suspect limestone's comment was a bit tongue in cheek and the part I didn't quote makes it less offensive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I personally know a few ppl that fit the description exactly.  They by themselves equate to "a % of" because math, and I am making a radical assumption that they aren't alone.

Racist POS me if that is wrong.

Nice. I would love to see this board's reaction if FSD had said that.
Lebensunwertes Leben.

[Dugout DickStone]

Would someone explain it to me, or at least explain why "a % of" instead of "all" makes it an
acceptable viewpoint?

For the record, I suspect limestone's comment was a bit tongue in cheek and the part I didn't quote makes it less offensive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I personally know a few ppl that fit the description exactly.  They by themselves equate to "a % of" because math, and I am making a radical assumption that they aren't alone.

Racist POS me if that is wrong.

Nice. I would love to see this board's reaction if FSD had said that.
Lebensunwertes Leben.

Yeah, trying to provide those with lower income free medical care is a real controversial position

[Daddy Claxton]

Would someone explain it to me, or at least explain why "a % of" instead of "all" makes it an
acceptable viewpoint?

For the record, I suspect limestone's comment was a bit tongue in cheek and the part I didn't quote makes it less offensive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My point was illegitimate kids are not always a positive for those people in the lower income groups.  And they won't buy birth control so they should have access to it for free.

Or at least the morning after pill

That's different than "I want to stop people from procreating if I think they are stupid and poor" which is different than "poor people should get free healthcare". I suspected your point was as you re-stated. I was more surprised by the folks that agreed with your original statement.

[CNS]

DC, taking the statement as needing to keep poor ppl from having kids is lazy.

[Dugout DickStone]

Would someone explain it to me, or at least explain why "a % of" instead of "all" makes it an
acceptable viewpoint?

For the record, I suspect limestone's comment was a bit tongue in cheek and the part I didn't quote makes it less offensive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My point was illegitimate kids are not always a positive for those people in the lower income groups.  And they won't buy birth control so they should have access to it for free.

Or at least the morning after pill

That's different than "I want to stop people from procreating if I think they are stupid and poor" which is different than "poor people should get free healthcare". I suspected your point was as you re-stated. I was more surprised by the folks that agreed with your original statement.

If I wanted that, I would advocate some type of temporary sterilization for those who receive gov aid. 

I just want widely available BC

[slobber]

condoms have a pretty high failure rate.

Yeahhh, you pretty much lost it with that one.

I mean, seriously... pull out and toss it on her chest, or her face, or her toothbrush, or just go ahead and BE the toothbrush. It really is quite simple.

The pull-out method is more effective than condoms.  Too bad we can't teach people that in school.

That seems untrue.  Do you have a source?

Of every 100 women whose partners use withdrawal, 4 will become pregnant each year if they always do it correctly.
Of every 100 women whose partners use withdrawal, 27 will become pregnant each year if they don't always do it correctly.

Each year, 2 out of 100 women whose partners use condoms will become pregnant if they always use condoms correctly.
Each year, 18 out of 100 women whose partners use condoms will become pregnant if they don't always use condoms correctly.

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/birth-control/condom-10187.htm

You're right.  I got my numbers wrong.  Should've said is about HALF as effective as condoms with the obvious caveats about a) no protection from STDs b) correct use.

FYP

[Daddy Claxton]

DC, taking the statement as needing to keep poor ppl from having kids is lazy.

I'd say too literal more than lazy. But you endorsed the statement before limestone clarified, so what did you interpret the following statement to mean?:

"I'd love to prevent [a percentage of the population that is broke, dumb as eff, and incredibly horny] from further procreating"

[CNS]

I don't need him to define such a statement to me.  I understand the discussion is about availability rather than mandatory.   Anyone following this issue should be able to put aside reactionary talking points and realise that.

[star seed 7]

I don't need him to define such a statement to me.  I understand the discussion is about availability rather than mandatory.   Anyone following this issue should be able to put aside reactionary talking points and realise that.

There will always be a % of the population that are dumbasses pretending to be intellectuals.

[CNS]

I don't need him to define such a statement to me.  I understand the discussion is about availability rather than mandatory.   Anyone following this issue should be able to put aside reactionary talking points and realise that.

There will always be a % of the population that are dumbasses pretending to be intellectuals.

Nuh uh, you are.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

A lot of really horrible people being outed in this thread.  The equivalent of the I hate n#gg#rs but am okay with black people is alive and well with so-called "poors"

Congrats, bigots 

[CNS]

Sometimes I think the need to keep posts short so that you don't get DNR'ed keeps others from understanding what is being posted.