• 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!

Do MEN have a Right to CONTROL Women's Health Issues and Reproductive Systems?

Do Men Have the Right to Control Women's Health Issues and Reproductive Systems?


  • Total voters
    41
Yes, it's opinion, not science. This is what I've said for the last 3-4 posts.

Since we were talking about abortion, the assumption is that it's an unwanted pregnancy. We're not discussing wanted ones, so I wasn't applying it to that situation.
 
Harry, next time you go to the doctor and use you insurance to pay you bill...tell your doctor to call me first so that I can approve your treatment...after all I am a part of your health care plan that hedges your losses to your ill health issues.
 
Last edited:
The risk hedging business is almost as old as our favorite profession.

Harry, do you think for a second insurance companies rates would remain high if your loving government didn't protect their monopoly like practices?

Do you think I agree with the quasi monopoly?
That's not at all what I said.

I'm saying that, if medical insurance, operated like insurance, the premiums would be much lower.
 
Harry, next time you go to the doctor and use you insurance to pay you bill...tell your doctor to call me first so that I can approve your treatment...after all I am a part of your health care plan that hedges your losses to your ill health issues.

No problem. ;)
Edit: Never mind, you're not part of my insurance pool.

I think the point has gone over your head.
 
Last edited:
Since we were talking about abortion, the assumption is that it's an unwanted pregnancy. We're not discussing wanted ones, so I wasn't applying it to that situation.

The biology -- the science -- of it doesn't change based on whether or not the woman wants the pregnancy.
 
The health care we receive is actually a 1st world problem, it's not as important, then what people make it out to be.
The overwhelming vast majority of people, would get a long just fine, if medical insurance were as I described.

With the savings on that, we could finance a better government disability system.

Preventative medicine is actually a negative in terms of medical costs, long term.
The longer someone lives, to more money they will cost, especially if they make it to their elder years.
Where medical costs are the most for the average person.

8.3% of Americans have diabetes
11.8% of Americans have heart disease
19.3% of Americans are considered disabled
That's about 40% of America that would be bankrupt because of illness just with those three categories. So most Americans would be just fine huh?
 
And everyone would agree then that if the baby daddy refuses to publicly acknowledge his child (in the newspaper, via a designated public decree column), misses two support payments, fails to pay half of necessary medical care prior to 18), that he should be castrated? Can I get a show of hands?
 
Last edited:
8.3% of Americans have diabetes
11.8% of Americans have heart disease
19.3% of Americans are considered disabled
That's about 40% of America that would be bankrupt because of illness just with those three categories. So most Americans would be just fine huh?

That's a far flung assumption.
Are the incomes and medications, so expensive that they could not afford to pay them on a regular basis?
What about changes in lifestyle related to these conditions, based on the fact that 1 type of diabetes can be regulated, without medication at all?

I already said I was in favor of a better, government program for people with disabilities.
Then again, the disability system has many, not truly disabled people.
 
No problem. ;)

I think the point has gone over your head.

I'm sure your right. Way over my head...but not over the heads of actuaries and underwriters who make sure that when we go to them to hedge the risk of loss regarding our health, autos, homes, etc...they will make very sure by covering our losses...THEY WON'T LOSE!
 
The biology -- the science -- of it doesn't change based on whether or not the woman wants the pregnancy.

Nope. But since the biology is irrelevant and "attack" is not a biological word, I don't see what that has to do with anything.

All the biology does is give us information to factor in to the "how" and "why" of everything.

When I said it could be considered an attack, you said it couldn't because it is "natural." Then you moved the goal post to "normal, internal." Neither negates that it may be an attack. The biology of it is irrelevant.

Pregnancy, in some cases, is regarded in some sort of negative light (attack, a disadvantage, doomed, or any number of other things) by many different species all over nature, including humans. We're not unique in that way. Some animals can "abort" whereas others will simply kill their young. Regarding pregnancy and reproducing as a negative is just as natural as doing the opposite, though less common.
 
Last edited:
Do you think he'd disagree with that?
Not sure, He keeps saying how he is paying for women's health as if it's a one way street. That's why I was not accusatory but made a statement. Some people put words in others mouths without really reading context.
 
I'm sure your right. Way over my head...but not over the heads of actuaries and underwriters who make sure that when we go to them to hedge the risk of loss regarding our health, autos, homes, etc...they will make very sure by covering our losses...THEY WON'T LOSE!

You're cherry picking what I said.

I'm talking about medical insurance for one and I've already acknowledged that they price these uninsurable events into the premium, making the cost of insurance high.
 
I'm sure your right. Way over my head...but not over the heads of actuaries and underwriters who make sure that when we go to them to hedge the risk of loss regarding our health, autos, homes, etc...they will make very sure by covering our losses...THEY WON'T LOSE!

If they did lose, then they'd go out of business, and no one would have insurance.

It's probably time to put the removable mind back in.
 
this is true... and which is why we all get to put our 2 cents in the mix.
Oh on personal care. I don't want to pay for prostate exams for men because I think they go against god because a doctor has to stick his fingers... I don't think that would fly. But to say that about certain women's care does. Hmmm funny that.
 
why did you find that funny?

Because it is funny. I have seen little change in the cost of insulin even when a new company came on the market with the same types and created competition.
 
This entire topic is in-fecking-sane! Imma step right out here and tell the truth. I love women. My daughters are women, my wife is a women. Hell, even my own mother was a woman! God bless them all!

Let's get serious for a minute. Until men can become pregnant birthing is a woman's choice. God in heaven, can't you all get over it long enough to admit that women are often capable of making good decisions, equal to men. Imagine that?

Why not leave women the hell alone or let the women of America determine male reproductive rights and procedures? You guys ready for that? Maybe women decide men should have their nuts lopped off at 60, that's OK with you?
 
Last edited:
You're cherry picking what I said.

I'm talking about medical insurance for one and I've already acknowledged that they price these uninsurable events into the premium, making the cost of insurance high.

Harry, your insistence on using "uninsurable events" is useless to the argument because, if all the things you claim to be the culprits to our high cost of insurance - werent LEGALLY making insurance companies tons money...their lobbyists would make sure that Congress outlaw the need for companies to insure such uninsurable events.
 
This entire topic is in-fecking-sane! Imma step right out here and tell the truth. I love women. My daughters are women, my wife is a women. Hell, even my own mother was a woman! God bless them all!

Let's get serious for a minute. Until men can become pregnant birthing is a woman's choice. God in heaven, can't you all get over it long enough to admit that women are often capable of making good decisions. Why not leave women the hell alone or let the women of America determine male reproductive rights and procedures? You guys ready for that? Maybe women decide men shop have their nuts lopped off at 60, that's OK with you?

Well, I'm not saying that women should have their ovaries removed, boobs cut off or anything like that.
I'm saying that, in all fairness, you shouldn't expect me to help pay for something and then tell me to shut up about it.
 
Back
Top Bottom