NPR: Feds Order Insurers To Cover Birth Control Free Of Charge To Women

[Winehole23]

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/08/01/138893475/feds-order-insurers-to-cover-birth-control-free-of-charge-to-women

[TDMVPDPOY]

free of charge? fkn wasting taxpayers money again

[Wild Cobra]

If someone is in the position to have insurance, then why is this needed?

More micromanagement from the top?

[Drachen]

So the women don't have to pay to play?? Do men get reimbursement from their insurance companies for their condom purchases?

This will go into effect right around the time that my wife no longer needs her breast pump...:depressed

[Blake]

If someone is in the position to have insurance, then why is this needed?

More micromanagement from the top?

What if...

What if we changed the laws so that anyone getting pregnant that didn't have a proper financial future could be subject to legal recourse?

I'm thinking something along two basic ideas. First of all, those who depend on the state to raise their children, that they were irresponsible to have to begin with. Would it be too much to mandate both the man and women have their tubes snipped if they cannot attempt and make their own finances work? If they cannot support one child, why should society bear the cost of a second? Wouldn't two operations be cheaper than another child?

The second idea has to do with abortions. Same basic idea though. If the government is to pay for an abortion, why not tie the woman's tubes too? We can make the normal rape and incest exceptions, but legal papers must be signed, and if later proven wrong... Well perjury is a crime too!

[DarkReign]

What if...

What if we changed the laws so that anyone getting pregnant that didn't have a proper financial future could be subject to legal recourse?

I'm thinking something along two basic ideas. First of all, those who depend on the state to raise their children, that they were irresponsible to have to begin with. Would it be too much to mandate both the man and women have their tubes snipped if they cannot attempt and make their own finances work? If they cannot support one child, why should society bear the cost of a second? Wouldn't two operations be cheaper than another child?

The second idea has to do with abortions. Same basic idea though. If the government is to pay for an abortion, why not tie the woman's tubes too? We can make the normal rape and incest exceptions, but legal papers must be signed, and if later proven wrong... Well perjury is a crime too!

Tough to know whether youre serious or not, but assuming you are...

The birth rate in this country is buoyed almost solely by the poor. Any restriction aimed at reducing the birth rate of the lowest socio-economic bracket will ultimately negatively affect the nation's bottom line by having an overabundant senior class.

Basically, take all the folks who are 65+ today who are breaking the SS and Medicare systems as is, and increase it by (total guess) 50% should such a plan be instituted on a national scale in the next say, 10 years. It would take about 20-30 years to see its detrimental effects.

Just my opinion. You white folks need to start having babies, period. Until the middle class (and higher) increase their birth rates to match or exceed those of Latinos and African Americans, this will always be an unsolvable problem.

If it truly was an important topic (it isnt) and if it really meant something to the middle class (it doesnt), then all you have to do is trade in your entire material lifestyle (cars, TVs, motor toys, hobbies, sports, cable, phones, vacations and basically everything else cool) and have lots of babies.

Boom. Problem solved. Thats what the low income folks are doing to the middle and upper classes now. Theyre outbreeding you (us) and it will not stop. Immigration policy has nothing to do with the rapidly changing ratio of ethnic makeup in this country, its all in the loins.

[DarkReign]

BTW, I wanted to use the word "gentrification" in the above post as a reference to an aging population, only to find out that the term strictly applies to the improvement of poverty stricken neighborhoods.

Didnt know that. I knew it was used that way, just didnt know that there is no other use for the word. Then again, maybe its that the word so closely resembles "geriatric" to me, tough to tell.

/sidetrack

[clambake]

forced abortion should be based on race alone.

[ElNono]

Tough to know whether youre serious or not, but assuming you are...

He was merely repeating one of WC's less fortunate authoritarian 'solution' to the welfare problem.

[boutons_deux]

misogynist "Christians" want to make contraception illegal, which would mean more unwanted pregnancies, and more abortions.

[Oh, Gee!!]

buy stocks in birth control

[Proxy]

This is a step forward. Now we need to fix sex-ed in hs away from christian abstinence bs, and we can fix the shitty teen pregnancy rate we have here in the states.

[Wild Cobra]

What if...

What if we changed the laws so that anyone getting pregnant that didn't have a proper financial future could be subject to legal recourse?

I'm thinking something along two basic ideas. First of all, those who depend on the state to raise their children, that they were irresponsible to have to begin with. Would it be too much to mandate both the man and women have their tubes snipped if they cannot attempt and make their own finances work? If they cannot support one child, why should society bear the cost of a second? Wouldn't two operations be cheaper than another child?

The second idea has to do with abortions. Same basic idea though. If the government is to pay for an abortion, why not tie the woman's tubes too? We can make the normal rape and incest exceptions, but legal papers must be signed, and if later proven wrong... Well perjury is a crime too!
LOL...

Really now. You are equating the two? It still ends up as responsibility. Birth control if not 100% reliable, and few people use it properly to have the stated percentages of prevention. It still factors out that a person is irresponsible to have sex if they cannot afford to raise a child.

[Wild Cobra]

Tough to know whether youre serious or not, but assuming you are...

He either paraphrased or quoted something I said in a different thread.


Just my opinion. You white folks need to start having babies, period. Until the middle class (and higher) increase their birth rates to match or exceed those of Latinos and African Americans, this will always be an unsolvable problem.

Responsible people aren't breeders like the poor, of all racial groups. they have money because they are responsible, for the most part. There are exceptions, but in general, poor people are poor by their own fault and this lack of responsibility for ones future also is a lack of responsibility in having children.


If it truly was an important topic (it isnt) and if it really meant something to the middle class (it doesnt), then all you have to do is trade in your entire material lifestyle (cars, TVs, motor toys, hobbies, sports, cable, phones, vacations and basically everything else cool) and have lots of babies.

Isn't the 2 child average appropriate?


Boom. Problem solved. Thats what the low income folks are doing to the middle and upper classes now. Theyre outbreeding you (us) and it will not stop. Immigration policy has nothing to do with the rapidly changing ratio of ethnic makeup in this country, its all in the loins.

Now that's the Ponzi scheme that was counted on in the day when it was normal to raise an average of maybe 5 children. We cannot continue that today with limited land and resources. Us responsible people know that. Apparently the breeders do not.

[Wild Cobra]

forced abortion should be based on race alone.
Does this make you a racist?

[Wild Cobra]

This is a step forward. Now we need to fix sex-ed in hs away from christian abstinence bs, and we can fix the shitty teen pregnancy rate we have here in the states.
No, abstinence still needs taught, and I think there is less than 1% of the schools that teach abstinence only.

[DarkReign]

Isn't the 2 child average appropriate?

Now that's the Ponzi scheme that was counted on in the day when it was normal to raise an average of maybe 5 children. We cannot continue that today with limited land and resources. Us responsible people know that. Apparently the breeders do not.

If every family had only 2 children, you'd have far too many senior citizens.

I dont what the sweet spot is, but if I had to guess, it'd be 3-4. You have to account for deaths.

Not every child born makes it to productive adult life. Also, a stagnant population is a stagnant nation.

Its pretty simple, middle class and higher people need to have more children.

Since that wont happen, there is nothing you can do about it unless you endorse authoritarian methods that run contrary to basic human rights enshrined in our Constitution.

...but since the Constitution means about dick-all to big companies profit margins with the current SCOTUS makeup, maybe those partisan hacks can craft some ruling on the sterilization of minorities, too.

[Wild Cobra]

If every family had only 2 children, you'd have far too many senior citizens.

I dont what the sweet spot is, but if I had to guess, it'd be 3-4. You have to account for deaths.

Not every child born makes it to productive adult life. Also, a stagnant population is a stagnant nation.

Yes, you are right. We would still probably keep population growth low with our normal immigration numbers.


Its pretty simple, middle class and higher people need to have more children.

Well, I disagree. Our social security should not be counting on an ever growing population to support it.


Since that wont happen, there is nothing you can do about it unless you endorse authoritarian methods that run contrary to basic human rights enshrined in our Constitution.

The system will fail at some future time, because no one is willing to make the tough decisions.


...but since the Constitution means about dick-all to big companies profit margins with the current SCOTUS makeup, maybe those partisan hacks can craft some ruling on the sterilization of minorities, too.

Why are you targeting minorities?

[clambake]

forced abortion should be based on race alone.


Does this make you a racist?

its a racist statement.

and smart people wouldn't trust an abortion from a black surgeon.

[DarkReign]

Well, I disagree. Our social security should not be counting on an ever growing population to support it.

Do you mean the SS program?

Or literally "...our social security"?

Caucasians being the minority to a collective majority soon doesnt strike me as a risk of position in so much that it reflects Caucasians affluence relative to other ethnicities.

Bottom line, white people are being outpaced in the breeding race simply because an average white person has more money, more education and material wants that rank above the production of children.

I dont think that makes them better, I just think its a priority difference.

All of this is said under the normal, assumed mantra of "There are exceptions to every rule".

Now, if you didnt mean anything about ethnicity or social makeup, I dont know what youre referring to at all.

In order to support the financial balance sheets of the American government, the productive population must increase forever and ever. Whether thats through increased education of young, existing citizens, the immigration of skilled talent or something(s) I havent stated, the population must increase.


The system will fail at some future time, because no one is willing to make the tough decisions.

Thats going to happen regardless of people's inability to support their children. I dont think breeding rights are the place to start when addressing a balance sheet problem. Matter of fact, I dont think breeding rights even enters the conversation's universe of spending in this country.


Why are you targeting minorities?

Theyre easy targets that get easier with every bump in total population percentage figures.

[CuckingFunt]

There are exceptions, but in general, poor people are poor by their own fault

That's one hell of a generalization.

Based on your previous responses, I assume that it is fueled by what you have seen, personally, in the "Capital of the North-Left Coast," but if you have anything more substantial to back up your idea that poor people are generally the agents of their own demise, I'd sure love to see it.

[DarkReign]

As an aside to that, there is a downside to the American belief of superiority. IMO, the social conscience cannot accept an idle economy, an idle government or an idle population.

From CEO, to President, to Hillbilly Joe, we as Americans must grow, grow, grow!

To us, if youre not growing, youre dying. I dont know if its sad or just reality, but in a capitalist environment, its very true.

[Blake]

There are exceptions, but in general, poor people are poor by their own fault

is this generalization reserved for Americans only or is it a worldwide generalization?

[ElNono]

Responsible people aren't breeders like the poor, of all racial groups. they have money because they are responsible, for the most part. There are exceptions, but in general, poor people are poor by their own fault and this lack of responsibility for ones future also is a lack of responsibility in having children.

Wow, just wow. :lol

[Wild Cobra]

Do you mean the SS program?

Or literally "...our social security"?

Caucasians being the minority to a collective majority soon doesnt strike me as a risk of position in so much that it reflects Caucasians affluence relative to other ethnicities.

Why can't people be colorblind? Why are you and others always making things a race issue?


Bottom line, white people are being outpaced in the breeding race simply because an average white person has more money, more education and material wants that rank above the production of children.

Statistically, correct. Funny how in general, planning of children is better.


I dont think that makes them better, I just think its a priority difference.

I agree.


All of this is said under the normal, assumed mantra of "There are exceptions to every rule".

Now, if you didnt mean anything about ethnicity or social makeup, I dont know what youre referring to at all.

Social makeup, yes. Ethnicity, no.


In order to support the financial balance sheets of the American government, the productive population must increase forever and ever. Whether thats through increased education of young, existing citizens, the immigration of skilled talent or something(s) I havent stated, the population must increase.

That's not sustainable.


Thats going to happen regardless of people's inability to support their children. I dont think breeding rights are the place to start when addressing a balance sheet problem. Matter of fact, I dont think breeding rights even enters the conversation's universe of spending in this country.

Not normally, but maybe it should since we are pushing the limits of social welfare programs. We cannot let them grow at the rates they have. Something must be done to reduce the need for government assistance.

[DarkReign]

Why can't people be colorblind? Why are you and others always making things a race issue?

Dont lump me in. I dont give a shit about black surgeon memes or the like.


That's not sustainable.

Correct, which means the USA is unsustainable.


Not normally, but maybe it should since we are pushing the limits of social welfare programs. We cannot let them grow at the rates they have. Something must be done to reduce the need for government assistance.

You have wandered into a recurring theme I get from you a lot.

Authoritarian when wanted, Democratic when needed.

Its one or the other, no in between. Youre either China or youre the USA.

[DarkReign]

Social makeup, yes. Ethnicity, no.

I am going to have to ask that you explain to me what difference youre making here without me giving my thoughts on the only two choices I see.

[Wild Cobra]

I am going to have to ask that you explain to me what difference youre making here without me giving my thoughts on the only two choices I see.
Color or ethnicity is not the factors I see. I do see statistical correlations like far more blacks committing violent crimes and living poor, however, it isn't limited to race and I don't believe race is the factor. The roles could have been reversed if whites historically were slaves. It's how people are raised. Family influence, peer pressure, locations they were raised in, etc. The sins of the past are hard to shake. However, it is the fault of those staying stuck in the past, that they do not better themselves.

[DarkReign]

Color or ethnicity is not the factors I see. I do see statistical correlations like far more blacks committing violent crimes and living poor, however, it isn't limited to race and I don't believe race is the factor. The roles could have been reversed if whites historically were slaves. It's how people are raised. Family influence, peer pressure, locations they were raised in, etc. The sins of the past are hard to shake. However, it is the fault of those staying stuck in the past, that they do not better themselves.

Ok, but how does that observation relate to the "social makeup" line you used earlier?

Poor choice of words/phrase, maybe?

[TDMVPDPOY]

surprise tampons wasnt on the list...

[Wild Cobra]

Ok, but how does that observation relate to the "social makeup" line you used earlier?

Poor choice of words/phrase, maybe?
Maybe we consider social makeup differently. I see it as a small unit of the community one is in.

[George Gervin's Afro]

LOL...

Really now. You are equating the two? It still ends up as responsibility. Birth control if not 100% reliable, and few people use it properly to have the stated percentages of prevention. It still factors out that a person is irresponsible to have sex if they cannot afford to raise a child.

So no more irresponsible sex... so are in favor of passing out birth control mechanisms to poor mothers?

[Blake]

So no more irresponsible sex... so are in favor of passing out birth control mechanisms to poor mothers?

micromanaging is ok for the people that choose to be poor.......which aside from a few exceptions, is generally all poor people.

[boutons_deux]

Vicious misogynist weighs in on maternal baby care:

O’Reilly Blames Women’s Health Care ‘Breast Feeding Stuff’ For High Unemployment

O’REILLY: Now the federal government is ordering the health insurance companies to pay for all breast feeding stuff, all female birth control stuff, all preventative measures for doctors for ladies that go in. What do you think that’s gonna do? That’s going to inhibit hiring even more!

KUCINICH: Frankly, we ought to be very concerned about women’s health care.

O’REILLY: I am concerned, but they’re not going to expand and hire if they have to pay higher health care premiums for workers! Businesses aren’t going to do it…You can’t have both. You can’t have a welfare state and a robust capitalist system.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/08/03/286616/oreilly-blames-womens-health-care-breast-feeding-stuff-for-high-unemployment/

=========

Unemployment is caused by tit sucking, not by vampire-squid wealth sucking.

[Winehole23]

micromanaging is ok for the people that choose to be poor.......which aside from a few exceptions, is generally all poor people.That's the genius. The truly needy are "probabilistically" defined as unworthy of public assistance, and for this reason, are most liable to the ministrations of the theraputic/managerial state, as concocted in this instance by WC.

Those who are deserving, per contra, do not require public assistance. Indeed, that is the very condition of their "respectibility."

[boutons_deux]

Here's this red-state bubba asshole again:

Watch Steve King rant against insurance coverage for birth control, claiming we will become a "dying civilization."

http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/643929/steve_king_strikes_again%2C_says_birth_control_cov erage_will_end_civilization/

===========

I agree that The American Imperial Planetary Empire is on a downward slope, very probably irreversible decline, due the VRWC/Repug policies pushed by assholes like King, not because of birth control.