sex and abortion

[JuliefromOhio]

The best way to decrease the number of abortions is for women (and men) to use effective means of contraception. If we agree on that, why has the Republican party fought so hard against the PPACA’s mandate to offer no co-pay contraceptives?

I think it’s because, over and above rightwingers’ objection to abortion, they simply can’t abide the thought of women and men enjoying consequence-free sex.

what say you?

 

[Deleted member 21794]

I say I want government to quit meddling into people's sex lives. A person who needs government intervention to manage their sex life is a complete loser.

 

[PhilFish]

The best way to decrease the number of abortions is for women (and men) to use effective means of contraception. If we agree on that, why has the Republican party fought so hard against the PPACA’s mandate to offer no co-pay contraceptives?

I think it’s because, over and above rightwingers’ objection to abortion, they simply can’t abide the thought of women and men enjoying consequence-free sex.

what say you?

people are free to enjoy whatever form of sex they wish. why does the government (we) have to fund contraception?

 

[as seen on tv]

The best way to decrease the number of abortions is for women (and men) to use effective means of contraception. If we agree on that, why has the Republican party fought so hard against the PPACA’s mandate to offer no co-pay contraceptives?

I think it’s because, over and above rightwingers’ objection to abortion, they simply can’t abide the thought of women and men enjoying consequence-free sex.

what say you?

its really a stretch to claim that a $2 or $5 copay on birth control bills is whats driving America's outlandish abortion rate.

sorry you were taken in by this ridiculous claim. think harder, next time, maybe?

 

[PhilFish]

The best way to decrease the number of abortions is for women (and men) to use effective means of contraception. If we agree on that, why has the Republican party fought so hard against the PPACA’s mandate to offer no co-pay contraceptives?

I think it’s because, over and above rightwingers’ objection to abortion, they simply can’t abide the thought of women and men enjoying consequence-free sex.

what say you?

the more I think about this posting of yours the more confusing it seems.


By what measure is the government, or one political party or another, responsible for the effective use of contraception, or what men and women enjoy in the context of consequence free sex?

Those choises, and their consequences are the purview of two thinking, rational adults, no one else.

 

[connieb]

The best way to decrease the number of abortions is for women (and men) to use effective means of contraception. If we agree on that, why has the Republican party fought so hard against the PPACA’s mandate to offer no co-pay contraceptives?

I think it’s because, over and above rightwingers’ objection to abortion, they simply can’t abide the thought of women and men enjoying consequence-free sex.

what say you?

First of all - there can never be "consequence free sex". And, peddling such nonsense is exactly why we have young teens in PP's office asking for BC behind their parents backs.

There are consequences to sex - like any decision or action we take every day. There is an opportunity cost with sex - just like there is with any other choice. Peddling any other claptrap about it - is grossly misleading. I have a close friend in her 50's, who got an STD from her philandering husband. At her age, past menopause, married for 30 years, both she and her husband in excellent health - sex should have absolutely been "consequence free", yet even then it was not. It is not only naive to assume that something which not only could create a life but also puts bodily fluids into contact with another person's bodily fluids can ever be "consequence free", it is also dangerous.

However, the opposition to forcing employers to fund BC - has nothing to do with sex, who has it and who enjoys it. It has do do with personal responsibility. Quite frankly, if you are old enough and mature enough to be having sex - you are old and mature enough - to make sure you have your contraception covered yourself.

Expecting anyone to provide you with anything - makes you a loser. I have no desire to enable losers to have consequence free anything. Being a freeloading waste of space and air... isn't something we should be enabling.

connie

 

[Cerulean Mutt]

You'll never get the so called pro lifers to agree to that, because they believe to the very core of their being that the best way to decrease the number of abortions is to limit sexual activity to solely procreational.

With birth control and abortion, those prolifers miss the opportunity to shame those sluts who have sex for fun.

 

[Dawg]

The best way to decrease the number of abortions is for women (and men) to use effective means of contraception. If we agree on that, why has the Republican party fought so hard against the PPACA’s mandate to offer no co-pay contraceptives?

I think it’s because, over and above rightwingers’ objection to abortion, they simply can’t abide the thought of women and men enjoying consequence-free sex.

what say you?

There's a simple solution to avoid abortions, just don't FORK! Liberalism you prove is FREE SEX and responsibility of someone other than the FORKERS, just do it, right. Why do liberals want government controlling their lives?

 

[Dawg]

You'll never get the so called pro lifers to agree to that, because they believe to the very core of their being that the best way to decrease the number of abortions is to limit sexual activity to solely procreational.

With birth control and abortion, those prolifers miss the opportunity to shame those sluts who have sex for fun.

So you call them "sluts"......................so liberal of you.

 

[JuliefromOhio]

its really a stretch to claim that a $2 or $5 copay on birth control bills is whats driving America's outlandish abortion rate.

sorry you were taken in by this ridiculous claim. think harder, next time, maybe?

America has a higher abortion rate than other western countries because Republicans are prudes who don't want women and men to have easy access to effective, long-term contraceptives, which happen to be expensive. to wit, enjoying that consequence-free sex.

 

[JuliefromOhio]

First of all - there can never be "consequence free sex". And, peddling such nonsense is exactly why we have young teens in PP's office asking for BC behind their parents backs.

There are consequences to sex - like any decision or action we take every day. There is an opportunity cost with sex - just like there is with any other choice. Peddling any other claptrap about it - is grossly misleading. I have a close friend in her 50's, who got an STD from her philandering husband. At her age, past menopause, married for 30 years, both she and her husband in excellent health - sex should have absolutely been "consequence free", yet even then it was not. It is not only naive to assume that something which not only could create a life but also puts bodily fluids into contact with another person's bodily fluids can ever be "consequence free", it is also dangerous.

However, the opposition to forcing employers to fund BC - has nothing to do with sex, who has it and who enjoys it. It has do do with personal responsibility. Quite frankly, if you are old enough and mature enough to be having sex - you are old and mature enough - to make sure you have your contraception covered yourself.

Expecting anyone to provide you with anything - makes you a loser. I have no desire to enable losers to have consequence free anything. Being a freeloading waste of space and air... isn't something we should be enabling.

connie

my post is about consequence-free sex as regards pregnancy.
I'm not talking about STDs. start a thread on that topic, if you wish.

 

[JuliefromOhio]

You'll never get the so called pro lifers to agree to that, because they believe to the very core of their being that the best way to decrease the number of abortions is to limit sexual activity to solely procreational.

With birth control and abortion, those prolifers miss the opportunity to shame those sluts who have sex for fun.

every one should be able to have consequence-free sex for fun.
it's God's will.

 

[Caroljo]

You'll never get the so called pro lifers to agree to that, because they believe to the very core of their being that the best way to decrease the number of abortions is to limit sexual activity to solely procreational.

With birth control and abortion, those prolifers miss the opportunity to shame those sluts who have sex for fun.

This has nothing to do with pro-life, and you know it. The discussion is about liberals wanting us taxpayers to pay for their contraceptives of choice. Liberals have a big problem taking personal responsiblity for themselves. They need the government to babysit them and give them whatever they want. I really don't understand how ANYONE can think like they do.

Those so called 'sluts' you talk about do a good enough job shaming themselves.

 

[connieb]

my post is about consequence-free sex as regards pregnancy.
I'm not talking about STDs. start a thread on that topic, if you wish.

Yet if someone thinks they are protected against pregnancy and therefore forgoes a condom they are opening themselves up to STD"s. So they go hand in and to make nothing about sex "consequence free". Moreover, BC addidents happen. Close friends of mine have a baby - who came AFTER the mother had had a tubal ligation.

Really - if you can't trust a Tubal for permanent, effective long term BC to be "consequence free" what exactly can you trust then?

connie

 

[PhilFish]

America has a higher abortion rate than other western countries because Republicans are prudes who don't want women and men to have easy access to effective, long-term contraceptives, which happen to be expensive. to wit, enjoying that consequence-free sex.

sooo, it's not because so many have devalued life such that it is little more than some tissue to be scraped away?

further, it seems to me that contraceptives are readily available,,, most pharmacies have significant portions of entire aisles dedicated to the display of contraceptives for purchase...

 

[JuliefromOhio]

people are free to enjoy whatever form of sex they wish. why does the government (we) have to fund contraception?

the top post is about decreasing the number of abortions. the most effective way to do that is for adult and teen women and men to use effective contraceptives. do you disagree?

 

[PhilFish]

the top post is about decreasing the number of abortions. the most effective way to do that is for adult and teen women and men to use effective contraceptives. do you disagree?

i dont disagree, in the slightest. all are free to purchase what they need.

 

[JuliefromOhio]

Yet if someone thinks they are protected against pregnancy and therefore forgoes a condom they are opening themselves up to STD"s. So they go hand in and to make nothing about sex "consequence free". Moreover, BC addidents happen. Close friends of mine have a baby - who came AFTER the mother had had a tubal ligation.

Really - if you can't trust a Tubal for permanent, effective long term BC to be "consequence free" what exactly can you trust then?

connie

so you want everyone to use condoms in addition to other effective contraceptives?
if so, you're no fun, connie, no fun at all.

 

[Caroljo]

i dont disagree, in the slightest. all are free to purchase what they need.

But see, Julie...like most liberal women, think these things should be taken care of for them. She complains that some are 'expensive'....If you're low income you can get this free, or almost free. I don't mind helping someone like that. But why should I foot the bill for someone that CAN afford her own but just doesn't want to?

 

[JuliefromOhio]

There's a simple solution to avoid abortions, just don't FORK! Liberalism you prove is FREE SEX and responsibility of someone other than the FORKERS, just do it, right. Why do liberals want government controlling their lives?

f*cking is godly.