First Official GOP President Announcement

IF THEY CAN AFFORD IT! Which is the whole *** point: Planned Parenthood provides contraception and other pregnancy-related services to people who can't independently afford them.

Whether it's my solution or not, doing exactly that has worked. Police analysts were predicting that the '90s would be a period of total criminal anarchy in the 1970s because of the way the crime rate kept increasing. A generation after Roe v. Wade and crime was at a historical low and has continued to plummet in the generation since.

Seriously, except a few people (Chanti, probably), no one here seems to grasp how dangerous urban living was when the Baby Boomers were starting their long road to destroying this country and this planet.

How the hell does that work? "Ok, Sally, we know you need $1,000 to survive month to month, so we're going to give you $200. You'll make do."

Funny thing, I have friends, relatives, and co-workers who either work for the state departments that administer welfare or who have themselves received assistance at some point. Every one of them has looked at me like I'm crazy when I start repeating the Tea Party myth of welfare kings and queens. Oh, I know some people do things they shouldn't do with their assistance and I've heard the occasional story of people getting caught cheating, but we're talking about an error rate that's less than the number of people making in excess of $100,000 who fudge their taxes.

But, yeah, seriously, how does taking someone who can't produce enough money on his/her own and forcing them to survive on even less HELP them?

So disclose how you assist people, then. I'm not going to ask for your tax return to see how much money you donated to registered charities, just tell me. Do you at least tithe to your church?

Because the problem here is that I don't believe for a second that you would contribute a meaningful amount to a stranger's well-being. A friend's house burned down recently and those of us who know him did a whip-round and collected $10,000 in two days to assist him. In that same time, that same group of people has yet to drum up $10,000 for the local AIDS resource center even though many of them benefit from that center and the assistance it provides. And you want me to believe that you willingly would assist a community of Somali refugees who are unfit and unable to work while seeking asylum here in the US?

Definitions may be relevant here.

I "work" all the time. I spend hours a week memorizing music and choreography for performances. I bike upwards of a couple hundred miles in a week in preparation for biking even longer distances. I invest my own time and money into these activities in order to achieve my desired goals and, whenever possible, to entertain, engage with, and break bread with my fellow man.

I "toil" to pay for the roof over my head, the food in my gullet, the clothes, the music, the bike parts, etc. I don't hate the job that I do, but I don't look forward to going to work, either.

The question I asked is why do you and your kind consider toil to be somehow inherently good, to the point that you permit toil to be as long, tedious, and unrewarding as possible? Why shouldn't life be easy? You yourself said that we're living in a technological wonderland, so why are Americans putting in more work-hours than our grandparents did and getting paid less?

Within our lifetime, robotics and other forms of computer-based automation are going to render a LOT of human toil completely unnecessary. We already have programs that can write other programs, so there will even be a limited market for the legions of code-monkeys who make the robots and computers work. We have 7 billion people on the planet, it was 6 billion back when I was in grade school. What do you suppose is going to happen when there's literally no work to be done and 10 billion people?

Or we could start handing out contraception for free and dispel the ridiculous myth that mindless toil is somehow a good thing. What alternative solution would you propose?

No, it doesn't. Something you're guilty of forgetting on numerous occasions. But not when it doesn't fit your narrative.

However, that statement also isn't at play here, because while correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation, correlation does still exist between cause and effect...

Unless you're just going to keep saying that it just so happens that crime proliferates in nearly all poor urban areas.

And I guess you'll also suggest that teenage pregnancy is at its highest in the most religious areas of the country that have the slackest amounts of sex education.

Are you kidding me? He wants to put them on a boat back to Somalia...

If you can't afford birth control you might want to reexamine your life choices !

See the great thing about America is you don't have to help anyone !

Charity/volunteering last I checked is a choice not an obligation.

Are you being deliberately obtuse? The objection is that some of his taxes, which are necessarily collected at gunpoint (sort of -- our tax system actually operates on the honor code and the IRS is too under-staffed to catch most miscreants), are being directed towards assisting people in ways that some people find objectionable.

Nausi, Kingnobody, and a few others object to tax money being used for abortion. Many Republican politicians take it a step further and object to any form of contraception, including teaching the use of contraception.* I personally find it troubling that religiously-affiliated charities receive some of my tax dollars.

It may not be my direct time and energy spent, but I'm contributing to charitable aid and welfare every minute that I'm working. The debate, which has probably been lost, was about how the sweat of my brow is being used and, in a more general sense, how much say I personally have in that matter.

* Regarding contraception, I'm actually amazed I ever learned how to use a condom. I was educated in Catholic schools and though we covered how reproduction works, we had no sex education. I wouldn't have known what puberty was (besides hell on earth) if I didn't grow up surrounded by medical textbooks. Actually, I'm pretty sure the only reason I learned how to use a condom before I became sexually active is because of the awareness campaigns within the gay community. Teaching people about the many, many methods of preventing pregnancy is far less costly than paying for some 17-year-old's little snot-bucket for the next 18+ years, but somehow we keep ignoring that simple fact.

I believe he is, yes.

Here is a PERFECT Explanation About the Difference Between Democrats and Republicans

Can't tell if satire...

Hmmm. Box of condoms or something that costs 3 dollars..

http://www.usherald.com/maine-welfare-recipients-must-work-for-their-benefits/

Because our Grandparents didn't have to pay for 90 million people on welfare, snap, medicaid, and foot the bill for the growing number of people that are required to be subsidized by the ACA.

Every single WIC office does this and has for years, please stop spreading misinformation to back up your backwards thinking.

So are we. See, hope does exist!

Not surprising.

Altima-like typing detected.

No, they go after the ones who can get the most money back.

However, IRS generally doesn't collect that much from audits. (There's a study about the average amount of money collected on an audit vs. the average amount of money spent by the government on an audit, but it's not available without a subscription to Thompson Reuters. It's not that high though, only $1,388 collected per audit on average)

Unless you mean that most miscreants are those who abuse certain credits available to lower-income taxpayers, which I wholeheartedly agree with you. But we all know that's not what you meant.

No, that's not why they are against Planned Parenthood....

Awareness and education is the charitable service, and that's what their mission statement is. What they are doing is going beyond that and providing services that the federal government made illegal to receive federal funds from.

But if you want to gripe about some churches receiving federal money and indirectly using it to promote their religion, then I will agree with you and say that those churches should not receive that money. Will you agree with me that Planned Parenthood should not receive federal money to indirectly pay for abortions? Or is it ok for one group of people to do something with federal money, but not another group, because you don't like what that other group does?

See, I'm not a hypocrite. If anybody were to receive federal money that would indirectly pay for a service that is not intended or illegal for federal money to be used on, then I will say that they should either not receive any more or even get charged for governmental fraud. I don't care if they are doing it for things I like, it is still wrong.

Why is it only some churches are indirectly promoting religion but PP getting federal funding means they are indirectly funding abortions?

If your concerns are only about indirect funding than any faith based organization that receives public funds is indirectly able to promote religion which is against the Constitution and illegal.

Using your reasoning all public funding to any faith based organization should be stopped, as well as, funding to PP or any hospital or health organization that receives public money and does provide abortions.

Umm that is kind of the core philosophy of progressives. Things that they like are called "good", things they don't like are "bad", there is no other justification. In fact if you question them in any way, you are branded a heretic and persecuted. Need to look no further then their arguments, which are all based on emotional feelings vs actual reality and pragmatism.

Aside from the fact that it's about 5 bucks for a pack of condoms, abstinence is free and it's the most effective form there is. But please continue to insult people by suggesting they cannot afford 5 bucks for birth control. This is just a time honored liberal talking point which attempts to portray sex as something that has no consequences. We (the people in this forum) all know that there are consequences to sex, and we all know what they are.

--

You're crediting a drop in crime to the fact that we've aborted the unborn? Crime rates have continuously fallen over the last 50 years, despite the fact that there are literally millions more poor people today than in the 60s-70s. Statistics aren't in your favor, I suppose you could argue that if we had an extra 20 (not sure of the exact number) million people in poverty on top of the number today, we'd be in trouble, but I could just argue that if abortion hadn't been so readily available:

A) we might not have actually had 20 million as abortion would not have been able to have been used as a form of birth control
B) we might not have had the same immigration policy bringing us to the current number of people living here

Either way, correlation does not equal causation. Abortion does not lower crime.

--

How do birds learn to fly? Their mother puts them in a position where it is necessary to fly. If the mother never made it necessary to fly the birds wouldn't learn to fly. That's slightly oversimplified, but the overall point is valid and relevant. If you make life easy for people by making it so they can eat and sleep without having to lift a finger, then people will eat and sleep without lifting a finger. furthermore if you say if you do lift a finger then your eating and sleeping money goes bye-bye, well now they have to choose between working hard to eat and sleep or doing nothing to eat and sleep. They will take the easy road over the hard road 4/5 (or more) times.

--

I am not obligated to tell you how I help people. But it's so classic that you break it down to some proportional scale X dollars = X help. 'If you don't give dollars then you're not helping anyone'.

Give a man a fish, he eats for a day.
Teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime.

--

I am truly sorry that you have to "toil" at whatever it is you do. Have you considered getting a different job? Thinking that life will ever be otherwise is one of those things we all dream about, but at some point we all have to do things we don't particularly enjoy.

The problem with what you're arguing is that in order for you to not toil, someone else has to toil for you, or toil to build a machine that toils for you. Either way, you just want to have value without actually earning it, so your solution is to forcibly take value from others who have earned it.

I didn't name any names or even imply any. But there are people who deliberately cheat on their taxes. I mean, if you need names, Wesley Snipes comes instantaneously to mind.

But right now the IRS has had its own budget slashed and it literally doesn't have the manpower to audit, regardless of whether they recover funds from auditing or not.

Never been in a WIC office, so I was completely unaware of this. Good to know, but clearly it should be more widespread. I haven't paid for a condom in years because I get them for free from the gay community center, but where do straight men get them? After all, as you point out, they're incredibly cheap.

Also, $3 for a pack of condoms isn't a lot to someone who is financially secure. I've been in a situation where I have $4 in my pocket and have a choice between using that to grab the bus or feed myself for the day. You can say, "Well, then you shouldn't be ***," but that's a debate you can lose in another time and place.

Funny, I've been pointing out all the pragmatic reasons why we should be killing fetuses and your camp keeps arguing against me. It's almost like you're a hypocrite.

Do conservatives just not have a sex drive? I mean, your lot spends a fair bit of time pointing out how conservatives get laid more often and enjoy it more within the context of their "traditional" marriage. Are you planning to tell an impoverished married couple that they need to stop ***? That'll go down great among the red-voting bloc, I'm sure.

Regarding condoms, they have a significant failure rate. They work well in laboratory conditions, but they break with shocking ease in real life. And there are other reasons why hormone-based birth control should be available to women. You're a male (and so am I, being fair), so you've never experienced the fun of severe cramps, bleeding, and hormonal hell happening for several days every month. But I'll bet you've been on the receiving end of a woman's misdirected anger at the situation. Both parties are happier when the problem is minimized via a contraceptive drug.

I'm crediting the drop in the crime rate to the fact that fewer people are burdened with children whom they cannot afford and whom they cannot raise properly. We may have more impoverished people today (many of them believed the lies that they were middle class, though, until the 2008 crash showed how they live hand-to-mouth just like any unskilled laborer), but within that population there is better access to social welfare for parents and children alike. Kids don't have to be raised in the lap of luxury, but being dirt-poor in the 60s and 70s when there were too damned many people being born (we call these *** the Baby Boomers for a reason) was much more of a death sentence.

I wonder if you're misattributing statistics, though. We may have more poor people in absolute numbers, but crippling poverty on a per capita basis is lower than it used to be exactly because we've worked to kill off unwanted fertility.

So do you spend 16 hours a day in back-breaking labor scratching at the dirt and feeding animals the way my ancestors did? Making a world in which people are guaranteed minimal shelter and resources is not going to turn us into the population of the spaceship in Wall-E, contrary to the ridiculous claims made by Hollywood liberals and DC conservatives. If we did actually happen to approach that point, our fertility would drop like a stone, anyhow.

Seriously, though, I'm going to assume you work a typical 40-hour week (which these days is usually a 48-hour week, but whatever). Do you vegetate in front of the television or a computer screen for the remainder of your free time? I'm genuinely interested because it reveals your bias. I've already revealed my bias: I'm an amateur singer and an avid cyclist, as well as a practitioner of yoga and taiji, so if I never had to toil again in my life and know that I'd securely have a modest home and food to sustain me, I'd keep busy. I might finally find time to sit down and write the novels I've got on the back burner, actually.

Translation: I don't do ***.

Why do people ask this question?



Maybe it has something to do with the job market being ***? This is one point on which I will loudly argue with our President, because, no, the job market has not remotely rebounded in the past 6 years.

Then have your partner pick up the condoms or if she happens to have made the same horrible life choices as you and only has enough money for the bus or food, perhaps you should both consider aborting yourselves.

I say this only because programs like welfare and snap are made for people like you. "people down and out" If you don't have the sense to actually take help when it is offered and would rather *** and whine about your problems instead of actively making your life better you don't deserve to draw breath.


Only if you're an imbecile.


Do people like you just refuse reality? Condoms are free "if you actually look around" and cheap "in stores" get it through your head. Your continual harping on the subject only shows the inability to think for yourself.

Then you should maybe forgo sex until you get that extra dollar (who is *** your broke *** at that point anyways?). I mean, try managing your money better, getting another job to toil at so you can afford condoms. It's not the responsibility of everyone else to make sex an act without consequences for you.

Everything has a significant failure rate, even the hormonal medication. If you forget one day that makes the pill less effective too.

So you're in favor of social welfare, albeit with some presumed "short-time, emergency basis," which is indeed how it ought to work.

What are you arguing with me for? I mean, besides the fact that you're Altimaomega evading your ban and automatically arguing with me because of the massive chip on your shoulder. Because, at this point, you've either agreed with me or pointed out something that I didn't know that is still largely in line with what I'm saying.

Spoken like someone who has no clue what poverty looks like. When you've got no money, free entertainment is the best kind to take.

K. Did you miss the point I made about how the pill has other desirable effects? I could point out a few more, if you'd like: I have a friend who suffers from a not-uncommon condition that makes her period much, much worse than it is for normal people. In order to not be rendered bed-bound for a week out of every month, she needs to suppress her menstrual cycle with the pill.

Let's consider someone who has this problem. Until she figures out why she's in debilitating agony and that it's not normal, her ability to work a normal job is hugely compromised. What employer would accept an employee who only works 3 weeks out of the month? Part-time is one thing, but that's a whole different extreme. As a result, this hypothetical woman ends up in dire financial straits. Whether she's sexually active or not, she needs contraception.

Now, here's the problem: in several states there is legislation in place or soon will be that restricts women's access to free or subsidized contraception. On top of that, there's the continual efforts to destroy Planned Parenthood. Condoms at WIC (I don't even know where a WIC office is, come to think of it, but I've never needed to find one, anyhow) is helpful for contraception and disease prevention (another reason we should be giving out condoms for free -- the US is seeing yet another resurgence of syphilis as we debate), but it's only part of the whole.

A Wal-Mart pharmacist recently decided to enact some idiot conscience clause and refused to give a prescribed abortifacent to a woman. Here's the problem: she wasn't trying to abort, she had miscarried and had a choice between surgical abortion or an abortifacent to remove the dead tissue before it started to decay. That kind of short-sighted, self-aggrandizing, "my feels and my faiths" garbage is not acceptable.

But you do raise an interesting point:

Why not? You two keep repeating that condoms are cheap. I keep repeating that babies are very expensive. Many new parents, particularly the ones in the 16-22 age range, lack the financial capacity to fully provide for a child because, if they're lucky, they've got barely better than a minimum wage job. So the result is that they're going to start needing government assistance. And, let's be honest, the average sub-22-year-old is rarely conceiving a child intentionally.

So if I have a choice between letting my tax dollars pay for rubbers, the pill, and maybe an occasional dead fetus, or paying considerably more to feed, clothe, house, and educate a gaggle of unwanted children, what's the logic of doing the latter? It's literally in my best interests to fund Planned Parenthood (and, for that matter, most faith-based charities -- for all the noise I make, the Lutheran and Catholic social services do a lot of good in my area) than "teach someone about consequences" while I'm stuck footing the bill.

The logic of the latter is that a lot of people feel(there's that word) unborn children need defending. Until they're born, anyway. Then they better hope mom and/or pops are small-business job creators, or they're up ***creek and there weren't any paddles to begin with.

Most Conservative Republicans are. But then people like you say ***like this.
Then expect every person in America to be given free ***because someone was dealt a bad hand in life and hey we have to be fair right! Since she gets free contraception due to her condition why shouldn't everyone else? Same as. Since someone was born with "some random problem and gets free stuff" why shouldn't everyone.. Do you not see the problem with the way your thinking?

Guess what. Your friend could easy hold a job AND buy that magic pill to control her problem with the check she gets from doing her JOB. It is rough taking responsibility for ones short comings but to just say screw it, someone else will pay for it is beyond wrong.



I don't think you know what you're actually saying. It's like you want to be on the proverbial fence. However, you prefer to argue from the liberal standpoint until you are proven wrong then quickly jump Conservative and hope nobody notices or something.

Did you stop reading at that sentence or...?

The large majority of benefits go towards children or single-parent households. Source (Warning: tables out the ***). So yeah, they're fragile angels in the womb, but *** 'em once they pop out. That'll teach those undesirables to keep their legs shut! Abstinence is 100% effective ^^

***I'll start a gofundme for those of you that can't afford condoms or birth control !

There was a woman that did a gofundme for an abortion but it was taken down. So it isn't too far fetched for help I can't afford birth control gofundme accounts...

The most important thing is that people are punished for doing something someone else decides is immoral. Those *** should've been carrying an aspirin between their legs, then they wouldn't be in this mess.

You mean the part where his friend all the sudden becomes a "someone" then turns into a "hypothetical woman" all to make a pathetic attempt at dragging out some feels. When all this friend or "someone" or "hypothetical woman" has to do is go to the damn WIC office "which are all over the entire country" until she finds another job.

He has yet to say straight out he is against people riding the system and cuts need to be made in those areas. He is just pandering to peoples feels and advocating for more free stuff in the guise of hypothetical discussion "that really isn't hypothetical".

Pandering to feels...sounds like Hillary's 2016 campaign slogan !

Pointing out that contraception can be used for more than preventing pregnancy isn't basing anything on feelings. It goes to show that the topic is a bit more complex than "Put a rubber on it". For being so against sentimental arguments, you're doing a great job at ignoring the practicality of making all types of birth control widely available at little to no cost even though it's conducive to the idea of getting more people off the system.

As far as people "riding the system", no bureaucracy will be completely error free. As long as abuse isn't rampant (it's not), then dismantling or reducing benefits only hurts the people in genuine need.

Why stop at free birth control ! I think we need free college free food and most importantly free Willy !