The House is about to socialize your medicine, and your life.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Honu

There are alot of ways to get high blood pressure , diabetes , and cut off your finger , but there is only ONE way to get pregnant and about 10 ways not to. If the government wants to do something to help people who dont want babies they should implant a chip in all baby boys born making them sterile and not take it out until they get married. Problem solved.

Ok, but of the many ways you can get high blood pressure, diabetes, or cut off your finger, should only the accidental, uncontrollable ones be covered by insurance plans? Two drivers in a car accident -- both go to the hospital, only the one who didn't cause the accident should have insurance cover it?

And why insurance coverage for pregnant women then? There is, after all, only one way to get pregnant. Their fault, let them pay for it.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Ok, but of the many ways you can get high blood pressure, diabetes, or cut off your finger, should only the accidental, uncontrollable ones be covered by insurance plans? Two drivers in a car accident -- both go to the hospital, only the one who didn't cause the accident should have insurance cover it?

And why insurance coverage for pregnant women then? There is, after all, only one way to get pregnant. Their fault, let them pay for it.

I think there happens to be a difference between planning (or not even planning) to have a baby and actually having the child and caring for the child than being reckless and having unprotected sex and then having taxpayers pay for your unborn to be vaccuumed out into a trash bag.

But hey, thats just my opinion.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I think there happens to be a difference between planning (or not even planning) to have a baby and actually having the child and caring for the child than being reckless and having unprotected sex and then having taxpayers pay for your unborn to be vaccuumed out into a trash bag.

But hey, thats just my opinion.

but if you only want to talk about the cost, it's far cheaper to pay for one abortion than prenatal care, child care, etc til he/she turns 18.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Danzig

but if you only want to talk about the cost, it's far cheaper to pay for one abortion than prenatal care, child care, etc til he/she turns 18.

true.. we should just end reproduction and man kind

[Honu]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Ok, but of the many ways you can get high blood pressure, diabetes, or cut off your finger, should only the accidental, uncontrollable ones be covered by insurance plans? Two drivers in a car accident -- both go to the hospital, only the one who didn't cause the accident should have insurance cover it?

And why insurance coverage for pregnant women then? There is, after all, only one way to get pregnant. Their fault, let them pay for it.

Driving a car and driving a penis are alot diffirent , wouldnt you say ?
Sometimes you lose control of your car thru no one's fault , can that be said about a penis?

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Honu

Driving a car and driving a penis are alot diffirent , wouldnt you say ?
Sometimes you lose control of your car thru no one's fault , can that be said about a penis?

I'm pretty sure the penis acts as the driver and the car. I'm sure its easy to lose control and have it be the penis' fault.

[Honu]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I'm pretty sure the penis acts as the driver and the car. I'm sure its easy to lose control and have it be the penis' fault.

Well then they need to put a "boot " on the penis so it cant be driven .

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I'm pretty sure the penis acts as the driver and the car. I'm sure its easy to lose control and have it be the penis' fault.

what do either of you know about a penis and what drives it? Its not like either of you ever wanted to be behind the wheel anyway.

I really don't know how I feel about the issue. I like the right to choose but the idea of whether it should be covered brings us into some very murky waters especially if it is a federally managed program.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Honu

Driving a car and driving a penis are alot diffirent , wouldnt you say ?
Sometimes you lose control of your car thru no one's fault , can that be said about a penis?

Ok, pregnant women. Get insurance to pay for their pre-natal care or no? I mean, they clearly drove a penis straight towards the only way to get pregnant.

How about not heeding a doctor's advice to try to avoid becoming diabetic? You either follow directions or you don't.

Insurance pays for that? Or no?

If I intentionally cut my finger off right now, I could go to the ER and get my insurance to pay for it. Much like intentionally driving a penis, so to speak.

[Honu]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Ok, pregnant women. Get insurance to pay for their pre-natal care or no? I mean, they clearly drove a penis straight towards the only way to get pregnant.

How about not heeding a doctor's advice to try to avoid becoming diabetic? You either follow directions or you don't.

Insurance pays for that? Or no?

If I intentionally cut my finger off right now, I could go to the ER and get my insurance to pay for it. Much like intentionally driving a penis, so to speak.

Things like diabetes and heart disease and such can be passed on thru gene's but getting knocked up is passed thru the zipper and no I dont think the federal government should pay for it , You who agree should donate your money to the next kill a baby for no good reason except that Im a fu cking selffish nimrod and I have no self control.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Honu

Things like diabetes and heart disease and such can be passed on thru gene's but getting knocked up is passed thru the zipper and no I dont think the federal government should pay for it , You who agree should donate your money to the next kill a baby for no good reason except that Im a fu cking selffish nimrod and I have no self control.

Can you rephrase that in English?

And you seem awfully selective about what sorts of self-induced things should be covered by insurance. Sure some diabetic people are genetically at risk...and some aren't. I'd submit that you'd need to make that distinction if you don't want to cover perfectly legal elective abortions in this health plan while covering all sorts of other situations people put themselves into.

But again, what you won't answer is whether or not you think that pregnant women's prenatal care should be covered by insurance, but not abortion....you get to the same spot the same way, so what gives?

[Honu]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Can you rephrase that in English?

And you seem awfully selective about what sorts of self-induced things should be covered by insurance. Sure some diabetic people are genetically at risk...and some aren't. I'd submit that you'd need to make that distinction if you don't want to cover perfectly legal elective abortions in this health plan while covering all sorts of other situations people put themselves into.

But again, what you won't answer is whether or not you think that pregnant women's prenatal care should be covered by insurance, but not abortion....you get to the same spot the same way, so what gives?

This isnt about prenatal care , so no I wont answer your question. This is about the federal government paying for an abortion , you want them to and I dont.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Honu

This isnt about prenatal care , so no I wont answer your question. This is about the federal government paying for an abortion , you want them to and I dont.

It's about restricing an insurance plan's ability to cover an abortion, which they currently already do.

So you have a problem with legal medical procedures being covered because you just don't like them?

And prenatal care is perfectly relevant to the point, and the reason why you're pretending the two are not related is because it blows a hole open in what you're saying and proves the obvious logic problem presented by your argument, because the same action creates the same situation, but depending on the next choice, you change your mind about what insurance companies should be able to offer. Then again, anti-choicers aren't particularly well-known for being consistent or logical.

That being -- you're incredibly concerned about people having sex and getting pregnant and insurance companies being able to pay for it, because it was their fault they went and had sex and got pregnant and don't want the baby. But you're not concerned one bit about people having sex and getting pregnant and insurance companies being able to pay for it because it was their fault they went and had sex and got pregnant and do want the baby?

I appreciate your incredible transparency.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Honu

This isnt about prenatal care , so no I wont answer your question. This is about the federal government paying for an abortion , you want them to and I dont.

But Honu..they are LEGAL

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Honu

This isnt about prenatal care , so no I wont answer your question. This is about the federal government paying for an abortion , you want them to and I dont.

you know I'm on the right but a few hundred bucks up front rather than have an 'unwanted baby' who takes 18 yrs to mature at a minimum makes sense to abort IMO. $500 now or $50,000 over 18yrs. Maybe some abortion clinic Dr's can even volunteer some for the lazy and needy and call the clinic 'The Alley'. get a reality TV show and the process pays for itself. Illegals get a free abortion, w/one fake implant for (identification purposes)

[SOREHOOF]

Originally Posted by Honu

Driving a car and driving a penis are alot diffirent , wouldnt you say ?
Sometimes you lose control of your car thru no one's fault , can that be said about a penis?

Ever hear of alcohol? ( talking about a penis not a car)

[SOREHOOF]

Seriously, where in the Constitution does it give the Federal Govt. the right to force someone to buy something? How can they force someone who doesn't want, or can't afford, health insurance to buy it?

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF

Seriously, where in the Constitution does it give the Federal Govt. the right to force someone to buy something? How can they force someone who doesn't want, or can't afford, health insurance to buy it?

Because they have to look busy or else the public will realize they are the reason why all of the manufacturing jobs are gone.

Add that to the fact that most of these people settled for a drastic pay cut and refused to change their spending habits. ex. Save for emergencies or keep cable. Well I can't go without muh Oprah channel and Lifetime movie of the week! I'll just say f.uck saving money.

[SOREHOOF]

The country is going bankrupt so they spend more money. If you find yourself in a hole you are supposed to stop digging, not call in a backhoe.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF

Seriously, where in the Constitution does it give the Federal Govt. the right to force someone to buy something? How can they force someone who doesn't want, or can't afford, health insurance to buy it?

you can't force them, which is a problem. because then when the yahoo decides too many other things are more necessary than insurance, and they have to go to the doctor, suddenly it becomes our problem. they want what they decided they couldn't pay for, but someone has to pay for it.