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

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

All those women who plan their yearly abortions in advance will surely be grateful for this clarification.

Well they could always add euthanasia into the bill for dumb broads who don't take the rider option. That would cut down on the need to protect dumb fuc.ks in the future.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Well they could always add euthanasia into the bill for dumb broads who don't take the rider option. That would cut down on the need to protect dumb fuc.ks in the future.

Well that's what happens in things like this -- people wind up helping subsidize procedures for other people.

And abortion is a legal medical procedure, and as long as it is, it shouldn't take a separate rider. I'm not particularly keen on having my tax dollars go to plans that would support Michelle Duggar as she continues to use her uterus as a clown car, but it's part of the bargain, as long as it's legal.

[Antitrust32]

it would be pitiful for our tax dollars to support abortion no matter how pro choice anyone is. only for a rape victim or similar circumstance should it be okay for tax dollars to pay for it.

women who are too stupid to use protection should either pay an arm and a leg for an abortion.. get their "baby daddy" to shell out the $.. or go the adoption rout. Its 2009, there shouldnt be unwanted pregnancies. some people are too irresponsible and then want someone else to take care of the problem.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

it would be pitiful for our tax dollars to support abortion no matter how pro choice anyone is. only for a rape victim or similar circumstance should it be okay for tax dollars to pay for it.

women who are too stupid to use protection should either pay an arm and a leg for an abortion.. get their "baby daddy" to shell out the $.. or go the adoption rout. Its 2009, there shouldnt be unwanted pregnancies. some people are too irresponsible and then want someone else to take care of the problem.

Ok, well if you get warned that you're at risk for diabetes and don't change your habits to lose weight, exercise more and reduce your sugar and refined carb intake, I don't want my dollars to go towards helping you once you get sick. I think you should be sick all the time if you can't afford it because you're too irresponsible to do your part.

If you cut your finger off with a saw while doing work to improve your home, I also don't want to help pay for that, since you should have been more careful and not greedy to want your home to be nicer. You should just be responsible and not want your insurance to help pay for your hosptial care because you did it to yourself.

And for that matter, why pay for pregnant women and their care from insurance money either? It was their choice, and if they didn't want to accept full financial responsibility, why should I help pay for the care that they brought on themselves?

Point being, it's bulls*hit to try to deny legal medical procedures to someone else while enjoying different ones for yourself.

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Ok, well if you get warned that you're at risk for diabetes and don't change your habits to lose weight, exercise more and reduce your sugar and refined carb intake, I don't want my dollars to go towards helping you once you get sick. I think you should be sick all the time if you can't afford it because you're too irresponsible to do your part.

If you cut your finger off with a saw while doing work to improve your home, I also don't want to help pay for that, since you should have been more careful and not greedy to want your home to be nicer. You should just be responsible and not want your insurance to help pay for your hosptial care because you did it to yourself.

And for that matter, why pay for pregnant women and their care from insurance money either? It was their choice, and if they didn't want to accept full financial responsibility, why should I help pay for the care that they brought on themselves?

Point being, it's bulls*hit to try to deny legal medical procedures to someone else while enjoying different ones for yourself.

I agree with all of that. Let them pay out of pocket or take out private insurance to cover those expenses.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

I agree with all of that. Let them pay out of pocket or take out private insurance to cover those expenses.

And as a "socialist" (!!!!) supporter of national health care, I think it comes with the territory, that you don't get to pick and choose what you think should be allowed even if it's entirely legal, while enjoying legal medical care for yourself that others may find objectionable or totally your own fault for doing it to yourself.

Private insurance companies should have the freedom to decide what they will offer.

Maybe then the masses will realize that it isn't the evil insurance companies who sent them a $15,000 bill for a simple outpatient surgery. And maybe, just maybe, they'll realize the real enemies are the attorneys who have crippled the doctor's and hospitals with yellow tape and fears of literal anal rape in a courtroom.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

And as a "socialist" (!!!!) supporter of national health care, I think it comes with the territory, that you don't get to pick and choose what you think should be allowed even if it's entirely legal, while enjoying legal medical care for yourself that others may find objectionable or totally your own fault for doing it to yourself.

I really dont think you will be a supporter of socialist medicine if it actually happened. crappiest care around. Try living in a country with socialzed medicine and you will see.

oh yeah, and expect 40-50% of your paycheck going to the feds if you want socialized care.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Ok, well if you get warned that you're at risk for diabetes and don't change your habits to lose weight, exercise more and reduce your sugar and refined carb intake, I don't want my dollars to go towards helping you once you get sick. I think you should be sick all the time if you can't afford it because you're too irresponsible to do your part.

If you cut your finger off with a saw while doing work to improve your home, I also don't want to help pay for that, since you should have been more careful and not greedy to want your home to be nicer. You should just be responsible and not want your insurance to help pay for your hosptial care because you did it to yourself.

And for that matter, why pay for pregnant women and their care from insurance money either? It was their choice, and if they didn't want to accept full financial responsibility, why should I help pay for the care that they brought on themselves?

Point being, it's bulls*hit to try to deny legal medical procedures to someone else while enjoying different ones for yourself.

[Honu]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Ok, well if you get warned that you're at risk for diabetes and don't change your habits to lose weight, exercise more and reduce your sugar and refined carb intake, I don't want my dollars to go towards helping you once you get sick. I think you should be sick all the time if you can't afford it because you're too irresponsible to do your part.

If you cut your finger off with a saw while doing work to improve your home, I also don't want to help pay for that, since you should have been more careful and not greedy to want your home to be nicer. You should just be responsible and not want your insurance to help pay for your hosptial care because you did it to yourself.

And for that matter, why pay for pregnant women and their care from insurance money either? It was their choice, and if they didn't want to accept full financial responsibility, why should I help pay for the care that they brought on themselves?

Point being, it's bulls*hit to try to deny legal medical procedures to someone else while enjoying different ones for yourself.

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.

[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.

[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?