@CF - You can speak anecdotally, but a sample size of 1 (or even 108 months) is stitistically insignificant.

"You claimed my argument #1 (that boirth control isn't 100%) was invalid because of the shot and the pill. *You* claimed this. So *you* made the argument and now you are saying it isn't relavent? Di why did *you* make the argument to begin with."

The Shot and The Pill are birth control, I grant that they are not one hundred percent effective, and I still don't see how the fact that they are not one hundred percent effective puts them off the table.

"Individual responsibility never breaksdown."

Then if men are angels, why is government necessary?

"The individual maybe become irresponsible, but then they deal with the consequences *for themselves*!"

Even if those consequences are easily and cheaply avoided by way of a bit of government expenditure?

"I've covered the women get raped previously in that same message (you just selectively read it) and said I'd support any and all measuers financially to helping the woman whether she wants to keep the baby, give it up for adoption or about it in the first two trimesters. I already do in the victims of violent crime fund in my state."

So why not government-provided preventative birth control to save money for all that other stuff?

"And I neither disapprove or approve of their sexual activity. I don't give a fuck if the girl fucks the entire football team or the boy fucks the whole cheerleading squad. I just care that they take responsibility for their actions and, if they can't, that those who *are* responsible for their actions (parent's for teenagers) foot the bill for the after effect."

So you're okay with handling the cleanup, but not preventing the spill from happening in the first place. THAT'S what I don't get.

"Remeber, I'm only against third term abortions being a choice unless it is to protect the life of the mother."

And you're also against government assistance to prevent ANY abortions from being necessary in the first place.

"False. The third option is I'm against thrid trimester abortions and against paying for any abortion that isn't a result of rape, so I expect people to pay their own way."

I'm not even talking about state funding for abortions. I'm talking about preventing abortions from being necessary in the first place.

"I get that, realistically, I'm paying one way or another."

You're paying A LOT more one way than the other.

"But I expect people who are old enough to live on their own and fuckto be mature enought o pay their own way in *all* aspects of life and take responsibillity for their actions and I expect the parents to take financial responsibility for the actions of those living under their roofs."

Great expectations. Now how do you deal with reality?

I didn't sy it put them off the table. I said they don't invalidate the fact that birth control isn't 100% effective which was *my* argument. Geez! A measure that is not 100% effective cannot invalidate the argument that no measure is 100% effective. Reasoned and logicasl thinking applied.

"Then if men are angels, why is government necessary?"

Just because *individuals* do not act responsible, doesn't mean we don't hold them to the standard of individual responsibility. The ideal does not breakdown just because not everyone is up to the task. 1+1+1=3. But someone may make an error and come up with 4 or 2. Doesn't mean that 1+1+1 doesn't equal 3. 1+1+1=3 hasn't broken down, just the individual doing the math is incompetent. Same thing here. indidivuasl responsibility is a standard we hold. individuals actually being responsible in the real world may not happen, but the standard hasn't broken down. Murder is abbhorent. That is a standard we ste and hold to be true. People commiting murders doesn't mean that standard has broken down. It is only when the standard no longer applies (i.e. Indians are all savages, blacks can't think for themsleves, many other fallacies that were once considered standards but no more) that the standard/principal breaks down.

And yes, even if those consequences are aviodable. A momma bird could let her baby stay in the nest forever, but she pushes it out knowing it could be hurt or killed if it doesn'tfigure out how to fly. We as a society must push our fellow citizens along a sometimes painful path to teach them the value of responsibility else we will have a ntion of freeloaders and within another 10 egenrations, no one will do anything. I hate to use a kids movie as an example, but coddling everyone with free this and that leads to the kidn of society we saw on board the spaceliner in Wall-E.

Oh, and one more...

"I'm not even talking about state funding for abortions. I'm talking about preventing abortions from being necessary in the first place."

But without 100% effective control (and you have already admitted your two examples aren't 100% effective) there will still be abortions to contend with. and I return back to my arghument that I don't have a problem with a woman being allowed to choose a 1st or 2nd trimester abortion, just my paying for them directly.

"And my abhorence to paying for another's abortion or birthcontrol is a matter of adults taking responsibility for their own actions."

Once again, that's fine as a moral ideal, but the ball is GOING to get dropped. An ounce of government-funded prevention can minimize the harm. But you seem more interested in making the consequences of actions you don't like as painful as possible, and not just for those "responsible."

"the reality is I'm going to pay one way or another for irresponsible assholes. But I have a right to bitch about it and at least have TPTB declare them irresponsible assholes even if unofficially than paying for everyone to get a free ride."

So you'd rather live in a state of moral indignation than fix the cause of your bitching and indignation? How is this a sensible way to make decisions?

"Maybe some of the freeloaders in the 'pay for borth control' scenario will earn responsibility and get some fucking pride that they would learn/gain if everything is handed to them for free. you grow up wuick when major changes to your life occur and you suddenly take on the responsibility fo/to another person, be it marriage or child birth."

Or you don't, and then we all pay dearly for it, which you seem fine with.

@AWB - So your a socialist and I'm not. I don't believe in bog government. Government is only there for the needs the individuals can't cover and to protect those who can't protect themselves. Socialized medicine is not something I agree with or support. Free healthcare for the needy? Yes. "Free" healthcare for all? Fuck no! (Free isn't really free when my tac dollars pay for it).

"I didn't sy it put them off the table. I said they don't invalidate the fact that birth control isn't 100% effective which was *my* argument. Geez! A measure that is not 100% effective cannot invalidate the argument that no measure is 100% effective. Reasoned and logicasl thinking applied."

And I never disagreed with you, so it seems that birth control not being 100% effective is a wash. It makes no difference. Can we drop it yet?

"Just because *individuals* do not act responsible, doesn't mean we don't hold them to the standard of individual responsibility. The ideal does not breakdown just because not everyone is up to the task. 1+1+1=3. But someone may make an error and come up with 4 or 2. Doesn't mean that 1+1+1 doesn't equal 3. 1+1+1=3 hasn't broken down, just the individual doing the math is incompetent. Same thing here. indidivuasl responsibility is a standard we hold. individuals actually being responsible in the real world may not happen, but the standard hasn't broken down."

This still doesn't address why the harms of individual indiscretion can't be minimized by public action. It's seeming more and more like you just want to make activities you don't approve of as painful as possible for everyone as a morality tale about why they shouldn't be engaged in as opposed to, y'know, actually dealing with the problem.

"Murder is abbhorent. That is a standard we ste and hold to be true. People commiting murders doesn't mean that standard has broken down. It is only when the standard no longer applies (i.e. Indians are all savages, blacks can't think for themsleves, many other fallacies that were once considered standards but no more) that the standard/principal breaks down."

So this means... what, exactly? That preventing murder is not a legitimate government expenditure but punishing it is?

"And yes, even if those consequences are aviodable. A momma bird could let her baby stay in the nest forever, but she pushes it out knowing it could be hurt or killed if it doesn'tfigure out how to fly. We as a society must push our fellow citizens along a sometimes painful path to teach them the value of responsibility else we will have a ntion of freeloaders and within another 10 egenrations, no one will do anything. I hate to use a kids movie as an example, but coddling everyone with free this and that leads to the kidn of society we saw on board the spaceliner in Wall-E."

Gotta love that slippery slope fallacy. How does this even remotely apply to free birth control? How does giving women the opportunity to prevent harm equate to an opioid-like "free ride," especially when there's an even bigger free ride through social services and prisons right around the corner if the preventive measure isn't taken?

"But without 100% effective control (and you have already admitted your two examples aren't 100% effective) there will still be abortions to contend with. and I return back to my arghument that I don't have a problem with a woman being allowed to choose a 1st or 2nd trimester abortion, just my paying for them directly."

And I'm not asking you to pay for any abortions. And so what if the methods aren't one hundred percent effective? Isn't reducing the number of necessary abortions by preventive measures a worthy goal?

But you haven't answered why I, a non-believer in socialism, should have to pay for others healthcare at all if they are perfectly capable adults? you don't seem to get that I'm a greedy bastard and don't believe society has a responsibility to support everyone, but that each person has the responsibility to support themsleves if possible and to support those who *can't* (not won't, but can't) through society. If you refuse to take care of things and you go bankrupt in court, starve! I don't give a fuck if you die and decrease the surplus population. I'm not Ebeneezer Scrooge who is gonna be visited by some ghosts and change my mind either. Scrooge at the beginning is me. Scrooge at the end is a fucking socialist.

"So your a socialist and I'm not."

I'm nowhere near a socialist. I'm a conservative. In fact, I'd say that the fact that I deal with human nature as it exists instead of relying on dogma and ideology to change it makes me MORE of a conservative than you. You're just a right-wing radical.

"I don't believe in bog government. Government is only there for the needs the individuals can't cover and to protect those who can't protect themselves."

So let's means-test the gov-provided birth control. Give those poor women some breathing room to get on their feet financially without a Baby of Damocles hanging over their head.

"Socialized medicine is not something I agree with or support. Free healthcare for the needy? Yes. "Free" healthcare for all? Fuck no! (Free isn't really free when my tac dollars pay for it)."

But it still costs less than the prisons you're going to be paying for if you don't provide it. Inmates don't finance themselves.

"So this means... what, exactly? That preventing murder is not a legitimate government expenditure but punishing it is?"

Finally you get it! government is there to punish those who break the norms, to care for those truly incapable of caring for themsleves, and to provide for the common services and infrastructure like electricity and security from enemies foreign and domestic.

"But you haven't answered why I, a non-believer in socialism, should have to pay for others healthcare at all if they are perfectly capable adults?"

Because you REALLY don't want to pay for their kids' food stamps, schools, and prisons. As much as you'd like to compartmentalize the consequences of actions you don't like, they're going to spill over. You don't have to be a socialist to understand this. And by that logic, why should a pacifist have to pay for the military?

"you don't seem to get that I'm a greedy bastard and don't believe society has a responsibility to support everyone, but that each person has the responsibility to support themsleves if possible and to support those who *can't* (not won't, but can't) through society."

Then means-test the birth control.

"If you refuse to take care of things and you go bankrupt in court, starve! I don't give a fuck if you die and decrease the surplus population. I'm not Ebeneezer Scrooge who is gonna be visited by some ghosts and change my mind either. Scrooge at the beginning is me. Scrooge at the end is a fucking socialist."

How's about money for birth control to prevent the surplus population from coming into existence in the first place? Regardless of what you think about human nature and individual and social responsibility, I trust that you can at least do some basic math.

I'm a right wing radical? I though right wing radicals were against abortion and believed that women could choose not toconceive when raped. I have no qualms with abortion before it is a life. I've said this countless times. I'm a *capitalist*. I earn my money and pay my way. I don't believe in supporting freeloaders. I said it earlie rin this or another thread. I'm a fiscal conservative. Buit I'm not a right winger. Goivernment should be small and stay the fuck out of people's lives. Which means they should stay the fuck out of my pocket book. People are responsible for themselves and their loved ones, and in cases of real need, the less fortunate. But not freeloaders.

Me: "So this means... what, exactly? That preventing murder is not a legitimate government expenditure but punishing it is?"

Draug: "Finally you get it! government is there to punish those who break the norms, to care for those truly incapable of caring for themsleves, and to provide for the common services and infrastructure like electricity and security from enemies foreign and domestic."

And not to prevent murder, apparently.

"why should a pacifist have to pay for the military?" - Maybe because that military protects them. What does a freeloading member of society give me? Nothing at all.

And why won't I support the government paying for all this? In part because the government is a bloated and wasteful organization that pays hundreds for hammers and manages to get 5 cents on the dollar to it's intended use. It's the same reason I don't suport United Way, but do give to the Salvation Army. UW rips through the money and gets part of it to the organizations it supports (including SA). By giving directly, I know what money I do choose to share woith the less fortuinate goes more directly to them.

Let the govdernment tac me for providing condoms and the pill and they'll then find something else to spend it on and come back to the fountain for more. they are fucking wasteful and don't know what the fuck a budget is.

"I'm a right wing radical? I though right wing radicals were against abortion and believed that women could choose not toconceive when raped."

You're not a conservative because you don't make decisions like a conservative. You're right-wing because of your dogmatic belief in the doctrine of "individual responsibility," and you're a radical because you're not willing to compromise in the short term to mitigate the long-term consequences of failures of individual responsibility.

"I have no qualms with abortion before it is a life. I've said this countless times. I'm a *capitalist*. I earn my money and pay my way. I don't believe in supporting freeloaders."

Then break off some birth control so that there will be fewer freeloaders to support. It's not like these women will be able to pay their rent with their birth control, or eat it instead of food.

"I said it earlie rin this or another thread. I'm a fiscal conservative."

I seriously doubt that. You're fine with more money for prisons, social services, and everything else that will come from unwanted pregnancies, and you're not willing to put up a small initial investment that will prevent those future expenditures from becoming necessary. There's nothing fiscally conservative about that position.

"Buit I'm not a right winger. Goivernment should be small and stay the fuck out of people's lives."

I'm just going to leave that there.

"Which means they should stay the fuck out of my pocket book. People are responsible for themselves and their loved ones, and in cases of real need, the less fortunate. But not freeloaders."

So MEANS-TEST FOR BIRTH CONTROL. The women who can't afford it are the ones who need it most, and it's in your pocketbook's best interests to give it to them.

"why should a pacifist have to pay for the military?" - Maybe because that military protects them. What does a freeloading member of society give me? Nothing at all.

They'll give you more freeloaders if you don't give them birth control.

"And why won't I support the government paying for all this? In part because the government is a bloated and wasteful organization that pays hundreds for hammers and manages to get 5 cents on the dollar to it's intended use. It's the same reason I don't suport United Way, but do give to the Salvation Army. UW rips through the money and gets part of it to the organizations it supports (including SA). By giving directly, I know what money I do choose to share woith the less fortuinate goes more directly to them."

Once again: means-test.

"Let the govdernment tac me for providing condoms and the pill and they'll then find something else to spend it on and come back to the fountain for more. they are fucking wasteful and don't know what the fuck a budget is."

There's that slippery slope fallacy again.

The only time they are there to prevent murder is in the form of the police force and even that should be restricted so as not to infringe upon the rights of the individual (yes, even the would be murderer) in the name of "protection" comrade.

A slipper slope fallacy requires taking it to an extreme. This is no such leap of logic. Quite the opposite, this is a realistic prediction of what history has proven time and again. You do know that federal income tax was supposed to be a temporary measure don't you? But the government never bothered to rescidn it. Kind of like the Chancellor becoming emperor in Star Wars was supposed to be temporary, but power corrupts.

"So MEANS-TEST FOR BIRTH CONTROL. The women who can't afford it are the ones who need it most, and it's in your pocketbook's best interests to give it to them. "

so now you're changing your tune from the socialist "free birth control for all!" to those in true need? I can do that. I believe in caring for those who can't. It's those who *can* but *won't* I take issue with.

"The only time they are there to prevent murder is in the form of the police force and even that should be restricted so as not to infringe upon the rights of the individual (yes, even the would be murderer) in the name of "protection" comrade."

So we should halt the War on Terror, then?

"A slipper slope fallacy requires taking it to an extreme."

How is "if I pay for birth control today, I'll be paying for EVERYTHING tomorrow" not "taking it to an extreme?"

"This is no such leap of logic. Quite the opposite, this is a realistic prediction of what history has proven time and again. You do know that federal income tax was supposed to be a temporary measure don't you? But the government never bothered to rescidn it. Kind of like the Chancellor becoming emperor in Star Wars was supposed to be temporary, but power corrupts."

And what future corruption will gov-funded birth control lead to? I only see savings.

Just let me point out that you changed your tune from free for everyone to limiting it. I only ever complained about free to the freeloaders. I said nothing about providing it to the needy.

"so now you're changing your tune from the socialist "free birth control for all!" to those in true need? I can do that. I believe in caring for those who can't. It's those who *can* but *won't* I take issue with."

No, I'm just tailoring my proposal to something you'll find palatable. It's called "compromise," and it's quite necessary in politics.

"Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them."

--Barry Goddamn Goldwater

The War on Terror? First, that is a foreign enemy (remember protect the country from enemies foreign and domestic I quoted above?) That isn't police action. that is protecting the entire populace form a foreign enemy. But yes, I think the war on terror is done and we should get the fuck out of Iraq and Afghanistan.

PAs far as what I actually said re: the supposed slippery slope. I said they'd keep coming back to the fountain. I didn't say I'd be paying for everything. You twist words to that interpretation cause it suits your needs but it isn't what I said. Epic. Fucking. Fail. Learn to fucking *read* what I write and not interpret and twist to suit your needs. I said they would find *something* else to spend it on and come back for more. I didn't say "everything" nor imply "everything" once in that statement. Fuckingschools don't teach reading comprehension anymore.

@AWB - If you think you were referring to me, I'm not a Christian. I'm a deist, but Jesus was a man (unless Joseph was actually his father and they were hiding it, he was a bastard child) with some good ideas and some crappy Socialist ideas too and Paul was a seriously flawed individual and the God of the OT is one mean son of a bitch.

And I was only arguing against the condoms/pills for all proposal. I said I had no problem with supporting the truly needy.It required no compormise on my part because you came around to what I was supporting all along. Help those in true need and tell the freeloaders to buy their own condoms. Hell, put a tax on every abortion and on every childbirth outside of a marriage/civil union. Tax the father of the child too. Make the only out for that tax be that they enter into a civil union of some sort.