Shhh! Don’t Tell Republicans That Women Vote!

TheDaliLama's Avatar
I'm all for tax funded castrations of Liberals.
I'm all for tax funded castrations of Liberals. Originally Posted by TheDaliLama
Hell I was going to say I would help pay for their rubbers. I like your ideal better.
MC's Avatar
  • MC
  • 02-19-2012, 08:33 PM
I'm all for tax funded castrations of Liberals. Originally Posted by TheDaliLama
The sad thing is he's probably for it in real life.
CuteOldGuy's Avatar
Nobody is denying women access to those meds. They're just saying that they will not pay for them.

There is nothing whatsoever stopping the Liberals from pulling out their checkbooks and setting up a charitable foundation to pay for contraceptives for those women whose health insurance refuses to pay for them, except for their oft-demonstrated extreme aversion to using Their Own Money to do anything.

(Yes, I'm being a little bit nasty nasty. It's been an unpleasant last few weeks.) Originally Posted by Sidewinder
+1
TheDaliLama's Avatar
Nobody is denying women access to those meds. They're just saying that they will not pay for them. Originally Posted by Sidewinder
Isn't it already free at Planned Parenthood?
Doove's Avatar
  • Doove
  • 02-19-2012, 09:54 PM
If the Bishops had any intellectual honesty, they'd be more vocal about the 80% or so of their flock - both the men and the women - whom are seemingly going to rot in hell for relying on contraceptives in their relationships.

But then, doing that would likely take passing the plate and rendering it an exercise in futility.
CuteOldGuy's Avatar
Doove? Demanding intellectual honesty? Now THAT's Funny!



That makes this whole thread worth it!!

Isn't it already free at Planned Parenthood? Originally Posted by TheDaliLama
Apparently not, since Obama and Karen Sebelius apparently feel that it is critically necessary to force the employer's insurance plans to provide it.

If the need is already fully covered, why does it need to be multiply-covered?
JD Barleycorn's Avatar
so youre in favor of religion ruling the government ?

so much for church and state eh? Originally Posted by CJ7
You make quite a leap of logic there. I think you fell far short of the other side. See you at the bottom.
BigLouie's Avatar


Contraceptive use among American women who have had sex (2006-2008). Note: Excludes natural family planning.

One Simple Chart That Explains Why Conservatives Will Lose The Birth Control Debate
JD Barleycorn's Avatar
Another cut and paste Louie... boring and irrelevant.


Have you accepted the fact that all these rights were voted into law by the GOP and not democrats?
Randy4Candy's Avatar
Doove? Demanding intellectual honesty? Now THAT's Funny!



That makes this whole thread worth it!!

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
And your answer to his question was........................... .
Doove's Avatar
  • Doove
  • 02-20-2012, 07:39 AM
Apparently not, since Obama and Karen Sebelius apparently feel that it is critically necessary to force the employer's insurance plans to provide it.

If the need is already fully covered, why does it need to be multiply-covered? Originally Posted by Sidewinder
Dunno. Perhaps we can ask the 28 states that have the same regulation.

My best guess, however, is that if every woman who used contraception relied on planned parenthood for it, then it wouldn't, in fact, be fully covered. Just a hunch.
JD Barleycorn's Avatar
I'm not too sure about that 28 state thing. The other night Rachel Maddow was hyping it and then Lawrence O'Donnell come on afterwards and said it all bunk. That's MSNBC, they contradict themselves on the same night so they can say they covered it, whatever it was.
Doove's Avatar
  • Doove
  • 02-20-2012, 01:37 PM
I'm not too sure about that 28 state thing. The other night Rachel Maddow was hyping it and then Lawrence O'Donnell come on afterwards and said it all bunk. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn
Oh, ok. Because you say that Lawrence O'Donnell said it's bunk, then i guess it's bunk.