Thread: Should Employers be Forced to Pay for Porn?

Suddenly it is a civil right for the government to force employers, including religious employers, to provide birth control to their employees. Democrats are making the argument that birth control is prohibitively priced and that women cannot have protected sex unless someone else buys their birth control for them. Kathleen Sebelius has suggested that the mandate for employers to buy their employee's birth control will pay for itself because we won't have as many of those pesky babies to pay for.

So here is the question, if paying so that women can satisfy their sexual desires without consequences is a civil rights issue, what about men's sexual desires? Shouldn't the government make employers buy porn for their male employees? Unlike female employees who may need intimacy and relationship to satisfy them, most men are visually stimulated and can "handle" it themselves. So what do you think? If society should pay for safe, baby free sexual satisfaction for women, shouldn't society pay for it for men too?

is this supposed to be funny?

Interesting take.

Contraception among unmarried couples definitely leads to a dissociated, unorganic society.

So does porn.

A lot of feminists would actually support this because porn empowers women. It also lets women dismiss unimpressive men by sticking them behind a computer.

A real conservative wouldn't support either. A real conservative would demand social assimilation such as mandatory school dances so children learn about companionship.

With all the streaming sites out there, who pays for porn?

Sorry bub, but quite a few guys have already been fired for using company computers to browse porn on the job. I imagine the same would happen if women did that also, though I'm not aware of that happening much.

The Op is misinformed. No employer is being forced to pay for contraception. Insurance companies are being forced to cover the costs of such, which can be quite high.

I don't see anyone bitching that they already cover the cost of ED treatments.

Originally Posted by Pinkie

The Op is misinformed. No employer is being forced to pay for contraception. Insurance companies are being forced to cover the costs of such, which can be quite high.

I don't see anyone bitching that they already cover the cost of ED treatments.

The government doesn't force all insurance companies to provide ED treatments

Originally Posted by Lachean

With all the streaming sites out there, who pays for porn?

I think you are about as likely to get a virus from free porn than you are from free sex.

Originally Posted by friday;1060254280[B

]Suddenly it is a civil right for the government to force employers, including religious employers, to provide birth control to their employees.[/B] Democrats are making the argument that birth control is prohibitively priced and that women cannot have protected sex unless someone else buys their birth control for them. Kathleen Sebelius has suggested that the mandate for employers to buy their employee's birth control will pay for itself because we won't have as many of those pesky babies to pay for.

So here is the question, if paying so that women can satisfy their sexual desires without consequences is a civil rights issue, what about men's sexual desires? Shouldn't the government make employers buy porn for their male employees? Unlike female employees who may need intimacy and relationship to satisfy them, most men are visually stimulated and can "handle" it themselves. So what do you think? If society should pay for safe, baby free sexual satisfaction for women, shouldn't society pay for it for men too?

I stopped reading at the bolded part since this isnt happening.

I didn't read the OP because I afraid I am going to read it an find out that my suspicions that he is comparing porn to birth control are correct. And if that is correct...