• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should the country pay for women's contraceptives?

Should the country (taxes) pay for women's contraception?

  • Yes

    Votes: 41 41.8%
  • No

    Votes: 57 58.2%

  • Total voters
    98
So it is fair to make hundreds of thousands of children suffer because their parents made a bad (or multiple) decisions? The children are the real people who pay the price, and it is not fair, they had no say in the matter, they did not force their mother to do anything yet they will be the ones that are most effected.

No, we just stop these worthless "parents" from having the kids before they have them. They get one shot. If they screw it up so horribly that they prove to society they are not fit to breed, we take the kid, put them with a family that can raise them properly, then we permanently sterilize the "parents" to stop them from ever loosing their faulty genes on society again. We should not, as a society, have to pay for people who are so utterly irresponsible that they kick out a unit every 9 months so they get more welfare money.
 
Over 60 percent of the women who have an abortion are mothers with at least one child.

I think it would heart wrenching for a mother to see her born child /children going hungry because she did not have enough money to feed her child/children.
I can understand if she found out she was expecting again why she might choose an abortion since she could not bear to think about another mouth feed as another child would be taking away even more food from the child/children she already has.
 
No, we just stop these worthless "parents" from having the kids before they have them. They get one shot. If they screw it up so horribly that they prove to society they are not fit to breed, we take the kid, put them with a family that can raise them properly, then we permanently sterilize the "parents" to stop them from ever loosing their faulty genes on society again. We should not, as a society, have to pay for people who are so utterly irresponsible that they kick out a unit every 9 months so they get more welfare money.

That is absolutely barbaric. How can any reasonable person believe that the government has the right to make that big of a choice for a person. It is not your choice it is not Washington's choice, it is the choice of the woman. Such an idea is overly invasive and extremely primitive, not everything revolves around you. Now, i do belief that welfare needs to be reformed, but nothing as drastic and unthinkably unconstitutional as this.
 
“I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”
--Benjamin Franklin
 
That is absolutely barbaric. How can any reasonable person believe that the government has the right to make that big of a choice for a person. It is not your choice it is not Washington's choice, it is the choice of the woman. Such an idea is overly invasive and extremely primitive, not everything revolves around you. Now, i do belief that welfare needs to be reformed, but nothing as drastic and unthinkably unconstitutional as this.

The government is the legislative arm of society, it is put in place by the people and given the ability to enforce social dictates. Anyone who is unable or unwilling to care for their offspring has no business having any. Enough with your absurd emotional whining, this is about responsibility and the utter lack of any by many welfare recipients.

Spitting out a unit every 9 months is not some imaginary-friend-in-the-sky-given right.
 
The government is the legislative arm of society, it is put in place by the people and given the ability to enforce social dictates. Anyone who is unable or unwilling to care for their offspring has no business having any. Enough with your absurd emotional whining, this is about responsibility and the utter lack of any by many welfare recipients.

Spitting out a unit every 9 months is not some imaginary-friend-in-the-sky-given right.

So it is the government's right to go against the wishes of women and terminate their ability to give birth? I am being 100% honest when I say this, this sounds like a punishment that the Taliban would use for women who were unruly, or gave birth to a child that was of no need to the cause. The idea of having a baby goes both ways, would you also be in support of "cleansing" any male who fathered a baby then left the mother and child out to dry. There are males who go around and continue to shoot out offspring then bounce to the next female they can take advantage of.
 
So it is the government's right to go against the wishes of women and terminate their ability to give birth? I am being 100% honest when I say this, this sounds like a punishment that the Taliban would use for women who were unruly, or gave birth to a child that was of no need to the cause. The idea of having a baby goes both ways, would you also be in support of "cleansing" any male who fathered a baby then left the mother and child out to dry. There are males who go around and continue to shoot out offspring then bounce to the next female they can take advantage of.

I already said to fix both parents, didn't I? And yes, if the mother cannot afford to care for the offspring, she has no business having it, or producing more, until she can demonstrate some manner of responsibility for it. Don't want it to be permanent? Fine. Temporary is fine with me too, until these people are working, making a living and able to care for their children.
 
So it is fair to make hundreds of thousands of children suffer because their parents made a bad (or multiple) decisions? The children are the real people who pay the price, and it is not fair, they had no say in the matter, they did not force their mother to do anything yet they will be the ones that are most effected.

You know life isn't fair. When you're a kid and your parents make a bad decision it could very well cause you troubles going forward.
 
No, we just stop these worthless "parents" from having the kids before they have them. They get one shot. If they screw it up so horribly that they prove to society they are not fit to breed, we take the kid, put them with a family that can raise them properly, then we permanently sterilize the "parents" to stop them from ever loosing their faulty genes on society again. We should not, as a society, have to pay for people who are so utterly irresponsible that they kick out a unit every 9 months so they get more welfare money.


You seem to forget our CPS is already overburdened and cannot find enough good homes for the children already in system.

Free contraceptives to prevent couples not ready to become parents or unfit for parenthood from being parents will cost far less plus it is the much more humane approach.



Give them free birth control.
 
Last edited:
No, we just stop these worthless "parents" from having the kids before they have them. ...

I repeat:

Lets stop them before they have kids.

FRee Birth control will help stop unwanted pregnancies and/or unwanted children.
 
I repeat:

Lets stop them before they have kids.

FRee Birth control will help stop unwanted pregnancies and/or unwanted children.

I repeat:

We shouldn't have to pay to stop them because they can stop themselves.
 
I repeat:

We shouldn't have to pay to stop them because they can stop themselves.

I think You are being unrealistic.

Couples are not going to stop having sex and most of the inexpensive birth control products are very unreliable.

Poor couples need acess to long term effective birth control products so they do NOT become parents before they are ready to afford them.
 
Last edited:
I repeat:

Lets stop them before they have kids.

FRee Birth control will help stop unwanted pregnancies and/or unwanted children.

No, it won't because most of the women who are having these kids are not using birth control and wouldn't, free or otherwise! What, you want us to go around and forcibly put it in as well?
 
I think You are being unrealistic.

Couples are not going to stop having sex and most of the inexpensive birth control products are very unreliable.

Poor couples need acess to long term effective birth control products so they do NOT become parents before they are ready to afford them.

They can have all the sex they want. THEY have to be responsible for the outcomes though, not me.
 
Why does this poll make me think of schools handing out condoms to 12 year old girls?
 
No, it won't because most of the women who are having these kids are not using birth control and wouldn't, free or otherwise! What, you want us to go around and forcibly put it in as well?

Then why are you complaining? If they don't use it, then we, the taxpayers, aren't out any money, but if they do use it, then we still win because then they aren't having children they can't afford. Sounds win/win to me.
 
Then why are you complaining? If they don't use it, then we, the taxpayers, aren't out any money, but if they do use it, then we still win because then they aren't having children they can't afford. Sounds win/win to me.

Oh, people are using them, just not the people who are doing us any good. You're just paying for people who can afford to buy it themselves.
 
for all you uninformed men out there. As a father of three girls (now women) it was made clear to me that birth control for adolescent women was a lot more than simple pervention of conception.

Hormonal balance is a very important reason for prescribing various birth control pharmeceuticals, beyond simply conception negation.

And speaking as a father, I WANT MY ADULT SINGLE DAUGHTERS TO HAVE BIRTH CONTROL AVAILABLE AT NO COST.

BTW, fortunately I live in Canada and they get that.
 
Oh, people are using them, just not the people who are doing us any good. You're just paying for people who can afford to buy it themselves.

I beg to differ. After my second was born, we were still waitin for hubby to go active duty, so I went on birth control, paid by medicaid. I know many girls who have done this. Paying for anyones birth control will help.

But unless you have a child, many women cant get on medicaid. Isnt it best to pay for it before that first or second kid, rather than catching them after?
 
I beg to differ. After my second was born, we were still waitin for hubby to go active duty, so I went on birth control, paid by medicaid. I know many girls who have done this. Paying for anyones birth control will help.

But unless you have a child, many women cant get on medicaid. Isnt it best to pay for it before that first or second kid, rather than catching them after?

Of course, they could just have some self-control and not have sex if they cannot afford or do not want a child. Nobody has to pay for that.
 
Oh, people are using them, just not the people who are doing us any good. You're just paying for people who can afford to buy it themselves.

Well to be fair the only women who get free birth control right now are the ones who already have health insurance polocies.

The poor uninsured have to wait until the full Obamacare law kicks in, January 2014.
 
Back
Top Bottom