Is the left engaging in salami tactics? And what should we do about it?

[Adam Jensen]

If you are worried that you might have sex every day, then you might have other problems.

Alright, lets assume women DO want to have sex. It's perfectly natural after all, it's part of our instinctual drive.

What would you rather have, welfare pay for unwanted babies (a few hundred thousand a year) or welfare to pay for contraceptives (a few thousand, if that, a year.)?

Of course, the cheapest way is to not have sex at all, but humans are humans and it's been proven to be more economically sound to plan for the worst than to hope for the best. Right now, we do the former, pay for welfare babies. But imagine if more poor women had better access to birth control. Now we don't have to pay for as many wanted babies. Contraceptives are cheaper. Contraceptives are fiscally conservative.

Yes, you are right, women should not have sex (and neither should men) if they are not financially secure or careful to not become pregnant (or to impregnate in the case of men). But we do not live in a perfect world, we should plan for such contingencies. It is better for society, for everyone involved, to avoid unwanted pregnancies and contraceptives are one of those steps.

[Deadvolcanoes]

Really? Why would a single woman sleep with someone she just met (or at the very least, just started going out with) today?

Because sex is awesome?

[Giants41]

I don't think she does. Just every time she's on Fox and I hear about it's some the most hateful, spiteful rhetoric I've seen.

I know of a group of college students had arranged for her to come to a big Catholic University in the Bronx (NYC borough) that my sister goes to and the school had to send out a letter saying they didn't agree with any thing she said and that they wish she wasn't coming. Ultimately she ended up not going because the student body nor the schools leaders wanted her coming so the group of students didn't want to look bad.

[Underverse]

haha liberal media. You mean centrist media, right? Damn, we're so skewed in the states that we don't even know where we are on the world scale

[Nakura Chambers]

Alright, lets assume women DO want to have sex. It's perfectly natural after all, it's part of our instinctual drive.

What would you rather have, welfare pay for unwanted babies (a few hundred thousand a year) or welfare to pay for contraceptives (a few thousand, if that, a year.)?

Of course, the cheapest way is to not have sex at all, but humans are humans and it's been proven to be more economically sound to plan for the worst than to hope for the best. Right now, we do the former, pay for welfare babies. But imagine if more poor women had better access to birth control. Now we don't have to pay for as many wanted babies. Contraceptives are cheaper. Contraceptives are fiscally conservative.

Yes, you are right, women should not have sex (and neither should men) if they are not financially secure or careful to not become pregnant (or to impregnate in the case of men). But we do not live in a perfect world, we should plan for such contingencies. It is better for society, for everyone involved, to avoid unwanted pregnancies and contraceptives are one of those steps.

Welfare to pay for neither, but if I had to choose, I'd pick babies. I do not believe we should encourage a lack of personal responsibility. You and I agree that people who aren't financial secure and/or secure shouldn't become pregnant.

If a state government wanted to pay for contraceptives, then that's the right of the state to do that. But keep the federal government out of it.

[Giants41]

Swazi - I just want to point something else out here with the birth control thing.

I'm married, for 15 years. In our early years of marriage, we weren't ready for children. But, like most married couples, we enjoyed having sex with each other. In order to best protect ourselves, and still enjoy sex to its fullest, my wife chose to take birth control, which she took every day.

Are you suggesting my wife is a slut? That we're sex freaks? Because that's where your logic(and Rush's) goes. And that's precisely why Rush got what he deserved when he made those comments. Because of normal people like my wife and myself, who know what the fuck birth control is, and how it works.

The only logical conclusion is that you and your wife must be burned at the stake!!

[ranku]

I voted for liberalther due to the fact that i think the GOP needs to get it's head out of it's ass if it wants to survive. guns DO need to be regulated more, birth control IS medicine, and healthcare is a GOOD thing. but the main point i want to stress is

COMPROMISE IS A GOOD THING!!!!!!
compromise is what MADE this country and all of those in congress (dems, repubs, conservs, libs, doesn't matter) need to step up and do their jobs rather than focusing on how to make sure they get the same job next term. if it wasn't for compromise these people wouldn't even have these jobs in the first place (great compromise anyone?) and what people like to see more than anything is results rather than bickering like a bunch of kinder gardeners over a toy at recess until the last minute, this is what got me about the fiscal cliff fiasco. it was obvious that they had a solution for a while due to the fact that we found out about 2 hours before the new year that it was solved, so rather than just tell us in the first place they kept fighting even though they had a solution already so they can say "look how hard i fought for you".

[Nakura Chambers]

Swazi - I just want to point something else out here with the birth control thing.

I'm married, for 15 years. In our early years of marriage, we weren't ready for children. But, like most married couples, we enjoyed having sex with each other. In order to best protect ourselves, and still enjoy sex to its fullest, my wife chose to take birth control, which she took every day.

Are you suggesting my wife is a slut? That we're sex freaks? Because that's where your logic(and Rush's) goes. And that's precisely why Rush got what he deserved when he made those comments. Because of normal people like my wife and myself, who know what the fuck birth control is, and how it works.

No. I don't think you or your wife are sluts. By all means, your free to make your own decisions and there is nothing wrong with having sex. I just don't think the government should pay for you (or anyone else) to have sex.

[Underverse]

No. I don't think you or your wife are sluts. By all means, your free to make your own decisions and there is nothing wrong with having sex. I just don't think the government should pay for you (or anyone else) to have sex.

They aren't. If anything, they'd be paying for people not to have babies.

[Adam Jensen]

Welfare to pay for neither, but if I had to choose, I'd pick babies. I do not believe we should encourage a lack of personal responsibility. You and I agree that people who aren't financial secure and/or secure shouldn't become pregnant.

If a state government wanted to pay for contraceptives, then that's the right of the state to do that. But keep the federal government out of it.

Then admit you aren't a fiscal conservative. Because clearly you value personal responsibility over fiscal conservatism. Babies are faaaaaaar more expensive than the pill.

[starlord]

Welfare to pay for neither, but if I had to choose, I'd pick babies. I do not believe we should encourage a lack of personal responsibility. You and I agree that people who aren't financial secure and/or secure shouldn't become pregnant.

If a state government wanted to pay for contraceptives, then that's the right of the state to do that. But keep the federal government out of it.

birth control is taking responsibility. kinda like buckling your seatbelt.

[obdigore]

http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/...vsoxo1_250.gif

I've read through most of the thread and honestly Swazi, you don't understand what the constitution was when it was made, what the framers intended, the world in which they lived, nor SC decisions since then.

You also appear to not understand various things about people in general, and that different people often want different things and all of us hate being forced to do something we dislike, but that is part of being in a democratic republic. If you don't like it, you can either run for office in a bid to change it, or you can leave to a country more of your choosing.

[Lilfrier]

I chose the last option on your list (Liberal, other) because I don't think just getting rid of pro-life crowd is enough. Also, the option to kick out all factions seems nonsensical to me, if there are no factions left how do you have a party?

In my opinion, the republican party needs to drop the following factions/stances:
1) Pro-life /anti-choice
2) Anti gay
3) Anti science (evolution, climate, big bang, earth age)

Basically, drop the social conservative stuff and focus your party on issues which concern economics, welfare, foreign policy, regulations, etc.

Basically, become a fiscally-conservative liberal party. I don't disagree that it would increase popularity, but it is basically selling out any and all morals of the right and just becoming a Democratic party that doesn't spend money like the left. I'm sure becoming morally bankrupt would do the right wonders--it's worked for the left.

[Nakura Chambers]

guns DO need to be regulated more

Wrong. There is zero evidence to support this claim. If anything, gun control laws are too strict.

You can go ahead and believe in single-payer healthcare or anything else you want, but leave our freedoms alone. I don't think that's too much to ask.

[obdigore]

Basically, become a fiscally-conservative liberal party. I don't disagree that it would increase popularity, but it is basically selling out any and all morals of the right and just becoming a Democratic party that doesn't spend money like the left. I'm sure becoming morally bankrupt would do the right wonders--it's worked for the left.

Sorry, the right is morally bankrupt. Morals aren't forcing you will upon other people and doing everything you can to turn the country into a caste system.

[Kraenen]

Welfare to pay for neither, but if I had to choose, I'd pick babies. I do not believe we should encourage a lack of personal responsibility. You and I agree that people who aren't financial secure and/or secure shouldn't become pregnant.

If a state government wanted to pay for contraceptives, then that's the right of the state to do that. But keep the federal government out of it.

Why keep the federal gov. out of it?

[Deleted]

Basically, become a fiscally-conservative liberal party. I don't disagree that it would increase popularity, but it is basically selling out any and all morals of the right and just becoming a Democratic party that doesn't spend money like the left.

It's called democracy and in your two-party system it's the best outcome possible.

[ranku]

If you are worried that you might have sex every day, then you might have other problems.

if you miss one day out of the entire month then the rest of those pills mean nothing, even on the days after the one pill you forgot, even if you take pills after this you can still get pregnant simply due to missing one day out of the month.

it must be taken regularly or it doesn't work.

also many women (especially teens) take birth control every day and have no plans to have sex any time in the next five years. birth control pills actually serve for more than that, they are a hormonal stabilizer as well and help a lot of women feel more emotionally stable

[Adam Jensen]

Basically, become a fiscally-conservative liberal party. I don't disagree that it would increase popularity, but it is basically selling out any and all morals of the right and just becoming a Democratic party that doesn't spend money like the left. I'm sure becoming morally bankrupt would do the right wonders--it's worked for the left.

Alright, I'm admittedly on the fence for #1, but again, what's so immoral about points 2 and 3? There's got to be more to it than "gays are icky."

As for spending . . . who got us into two wars in the middle east and didn't budget said war? Don't act like the right isn't guilty of as much spending as the left in this country. One side spends on war, the other on welfare. Fiscally conservative my ass, the last Republican presidents we've had for the last 30 years increased the debt.

[starlord]

Wrong. There is zero evidence to support this claim. If anything, gun control laws are too strict.

You can go ahead and believe in single-payer healthcare or anything else you want, but leave our freedoms alone. I don't think that's too much to ask.

actually theres a lot. wont bother posting any since you will ignore it though.