Religious and Reproductive Rights

This doesn't need to turn into a crucifixation of forum posters; whether that's Loki, CC or GG. I'm just glad there is a lot of posters that are all saying what's happening is not right. That we can talk to eachother without attacks, especially if the entire post is just an attack. It is hard to change people we all have to realize that, and have patience. CC is not going to stop his built up habits he's made for himself immediately, he's still going to read anything GGT says and think "joos", and GG may have to realize that bankers/Wall Street are not always cheating the masses that they do serve a valuable purpose, and we should acknowledge that when the situation merits it as well. Even if on the aggragate she has a valid position.

You'd be taken more seriously if you jumped on your high horse when ever it was Lewk being attacked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CitizenCain

...I just assumed you weren't looking to add lying jackassery to your bag of tricks. My apologies if I was mistaken in that assumption.

---

Look, the particulars of your private life are completely irrelevant, I didn't say those things to show up your hypocrisy or to touch your creamy center. It makes absolutely no difference if you in fact loathe your poor ol' mum and wish her a lifetime of hallucinations and clumsiness, or if you have never butted heads with bullies or whatever. These details are irrelevant in the discussion of how we should ideally behave towards one another. The goal isn't to minimise hypocrisy, if that were the goal then we'd be fine just consistently being assholes. I realise you don't appreciate lying jackassery, but, if you think about it, that's just one of several kinds of jackassery that no-one really likes. Another kind of jackassery is the kind you engage in every single time you reply to anything GGT says. Okay, she provoked you greatly. Then you're both engaging in jackassery. For god's sake just stop already. GGT is incredibly frustrating, I get it. She sets my teeth on edge. She makes me tear my hair out in large clumps (disclaimer: this is actually a lie as I have no hair to tear out). But you're a bully towards her, and you need to acknowledge that and just stop so that you can go back to making your sensible posts about why Christians should love buttsex. It's the simplest thing in the world and it would increase the aggregate happiness of this forum, guaranteed.

I apologise for offhandedly making up things about your life; your private life and your issues are your business and no-one else's, and it's not right to just make things up about someone, even on the internet. That sort of callous behaviour betrays a lack of respect for a person as a person. It's like I didn't even care that you might object to the nonsense I was pulling out of my ass, because, like who are you to me besides being an aggravating feature of my favourite internet playground? That's how I behaved, and it's not okay. I'm a little sorry. Now please stop being a jerk towards GGT, who is, after all, someone's poor ol' mum. If you must then think of her as the crazy muttering old bum who always yells after you on your way to work. Crazy bums don't have reliable access to primary care, there's no need to rub it in their faces unless you're the kind of guy who actually enjoys being able to hurt an unimportant person by loudly mocking them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

You'd be taken more seriously if you jumped on your high horse when ever it was Lewk being attacked.

---

If that's the secret to being taken seriously on this forum while riding then I'm gonna do it and I encourage all of you to do the same because it's incredibly easy.

Now we can get back on topic, and actually discuss female reproductive health policy and religious rights?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

The goal isn't to minimise hypocrisy, if that were the goal then we'd be fine just consistently being assholes.

---

How charmingly conceited of you to unilaterally decide what my goals are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

I realise you don't appreciate lying jackassery, but, if you think about it, that's just one of several kinds of jackassery that no-one really likes. Another kind of jackassery is the kind you engage in every single time you reply to anything GGT says. Okay, she provoked you greatly. Then you're both engaging in jackassery. For god's sake just stop already. GGT is incredibly frustrating, I get it. She sets my teeth on edge. She makes me tear my hair out in large clumps (disclaimer: this is actually a lie as I have no hair to tear out). But you're a bully towards her, and you need to acknowledge that and just stop so that you can go back to making your sensible posts about why Christians should love buttsex. It's the simplest thing in the world and it would increase the aggregate happiness of this forum, guaranteed.

---

In other words, you'd like me to ignore the crazy jackass you do like and go beat on the crazy jackass you don't like? Let me know how well that works out for you.

And, yeah, I'm derisive and scornful towards stupidity. I can't control the distribution of stupid comments and inane rants made by others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

I apologise for offhandedly making up things about your life;

---

You can save the apology, as I really don't care. My primary interest was in not letting those statements stand, as before you know it, people assume them to be true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

It's like I didn't even care that you might object to the nonsense I was pulling out of my ass, because, like who are you to me besides being an aggravating feature of my favourite internet playground? That's how I behaved, and it's not okay. I'm a little sorry. Now please stop being a jerk towards GGT, who is, after all, someone's poor ol' mum.

---

Yet you have no problem with being a jerk towards Lewk, because, again, you empathize with GGT, and dislike Lewk. As for me, I dislike stupidity and inane ramblings... whether they're about the j00press0rs of the k0mm0n man and free immortality being a basic human right, or shit that's not actually in the Bible about God hating fags and killing people over a tube of toothpaste. I also dislike hypocritical shit, which is another reason I don't see me accommodating your rather hypocritical request here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Now we can get back on topic, and actually discuss female reproductive health policy and religious rights?

---

If you want to keep your vagina private, stop demanding other people pay for work done on it. Pay for it yourself and that's how you keep it a private matter between you and your doctor. On the other hand, if you want someone else to pay for it, stop bitching that they want information about where their money's going.

Religion is a right, it is protected by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and by the United Nations.

Reproduction is not a right, it is something that is a body function. Face facts abortion pre-natal or post-natal is basically birth control. Birth control is the avoidance of responsibility for one's actions. Other than rape or incest, consensual sex without protection or birth control is almost always a stupid thing. I don't believe the $3000 a year in birth control costs debate. Not when birth control pills are in generic form for $4/month, condoms are given out for free, and contraceptive devices are sold cheap in drug stores for sponges and IUDs. If a woman is spending $3000 a year in birth control, she is not a slut as Rush Limbaugh says, she just isn't doing cost effective birth control. Most smart women avoid sex while in college, especially Harvard Law School students. But the woman paying $3000 a year in birth control is a special sort of stupid that should not have qualified for Harvard. I am not calling her stupid, just saying I don't believe her statement that it costs $3000 a year. She is smart enough to know how to save money on generic birth control pills, take free condoms from the student center, and use IUDs and sponges on the cheap from drug stores. I believe myself that she is making it up to exaggerate the costs so that it becomes a health care benefit for birth control devices and condoms as well as funding abortions.

Now look many places pay for abortions and birth control, these are non profit orgs, the government should not be involved. We need to cut expenses not increase them. People already say to the masses, watch what you eat, control your weight, don't eat snack foods and fast foods, exercise, and all that to save on health care expenses. Yet they don't tell women who pay $3000 a year on birth control to just avoid sex and save the money for college. Nope that is wrong, because birth control should be a social program, it should include abortion costs and it should be paid for by the government, they say. Eh sorry, human beings learn from their mistakes and should make better choices to avoid the same mistakes in the future. My wife went to college and avoided sex and dating, I avoided sex and dating when I was in college. I had to save my money for tuition, books, room and board and all that. My wife and I did it the smart way.

Now some can debate that reproduction is a right, maybe yes maybe no, is driving a car a right as well? If a person gets into too many car accidents should they still have the right to drive? Do they issue drivers tests for cars and driver's licenses? What is car insurance and how does it pay for accidents? Do we need reproductive insurance to pay for birth control and abortions, and then have a reproductive license to apply for and take a reproductive test? Doesn't that sound silly? In the same way $3000 a year for birth control sounds silly to me. I want to see an itemized list, I want proof that it costs that much. I don't want to take someone's word for it, I want to see receipts, I want to see what they bought that costs $3000 a year because I find it very hard to believe.

She ain't a slut, Rush, she is a shill, she is a plant, she is a faker, she is a political pawn in this political game of reproductive rights chess.

If for some reason you are taking a name brand birth control pill, 30 day supplies are about $100 (maybe more) if your prescription insurance does not cover it. So while $3000 may seem excessive, without generics and insurance, it could feasibly cost $1200 a year. It would be nice if there was medication to control hormone and regulate periods without being called birth control, so maybe there would be a loophole for those of us that need the medication to function. If my insurance were to decide birth control was morally wrong, I'd be screwed. Many happily married women are on this medication to control our menstruation issues. I guess religious institutions feel like those women don't need to be stable enough to function out of the home.

This all goes back to the real issue that insurance has too much power over our health. If it was affordable to pay out of pocket for a gynecologist visit, then find a cheap prescription, all without insurance, then this could be a non-issue. As I am getting older I am increasingly irritated by how the insurance industry (and the medical industry to some degree) has everyone in shackles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catgrrl

As I am getting older I am increasingly irritated by how the insurance industry (and the medical industry to some degree) has everyone in shackles.

---

And of course, since we got into this mess by demanding the government regulate the crap out of the healthcare industry, demanding more legislative action to reverse the course is a lot like curing a GSW with more gunshots.

The other issue, of course, being that healthcare is expensive. Your alternative is low quality healthcare and/or death. Welcome to life. It's short, and then you die. Enjoy.

What are you talking about... I probably like Lewk more than I like GGT, and while I don't know enough about him to empathise with him I imagine all sorts of saddening things about his life. Lewk is often wrong and a bit of a troll (by his own admission) but he's usually pretty clear and generally polite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catgrrl

If for some reason you are taking a name brand birth control pill, 30 day supplies are about $100 (maybe more) if your prescription insurance does not cover it. So while $3000 may seem excessive, without generics and insurance, it could feasibly cost $1200 a year. It would be nice if there was medication to control hormone and regulate periods without being called birth control, so maybe there would be a loophole for those of us that need the medication to function. If my insurance were to decide birth control was morally wrong, I'd be screwed. Many happily married women are on this medication to control our menstruation issues. I guess religious institutions feel like those women don't need to be stable enough to function out of the home.

---

And it would make the debate clearer, if "reproductive health" hadn't been been boiled down to "birth control". Like you said, there are plenty of reasons for using prescription-only hormonal meds (and everyone calling it The Pill), including women who aren't sexually active. Not sure where the $3,000/yr number came from, but if it's the cash equivalent for gynecologist visits + blood tests + PAP smears + cytology + medications....that sounds about right, especially in the northeast.

Quote:

---

This all goes back to the real issue that insurance has too much power over our health. If it was affordable to pay out of pocket for a gynecologist visit, then find a cheap prescription, all without insurance, then this could be a non-issue. As I am getting older I am increasingly irritated by how the insurance industry (and the medical industry to some degree) has everyone in shackles.

---

:up: Not to mention that affordable and comprehensive health insurance has been tethered to employment. I can't remember when that policy began, but iirc it was something even Republicans thought was a good idea at the time. Probably related to insurance industry lobbying legislators, and "the private markets" would control costs/quality. :bulb:

The ACA proposal, suggested by the NIH and other healthcare advisors, was to remove the co-pays and deductibles, and bundle those costs into overall premiums. That would theoretically encourage women to get the preventative care they need, and in the long-term be more cost-effective.

Framing it as just FREE birth control, or calling Plan B an abortifacient, is how the religious and social conservatives tried to politicize the whole thing. Limbaugh seems to think women need to take more BCP the more sex they have, and that's why it costs so much. :rolleyes: Gingrich throws in words like "infanticide" :down: and Santorum...well, he'd like to return to the 50's. :sour:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Orion Blastar

<snip> Most smart women avoid sex while in college, especially Harvard Law School students.

But the woman paying $3000 a year in birth control is a special sort of stupid that should not have qualified for Harvard. I am not calling her stupid, just saying I don't believe her statement that it costs $3000 a year. She is smart enough to know how to save money on generic birth control pills, take free condoms from the student center, and use IUDs and sponges on the cheap from drug stores. I believe myself that she is making it up to exaggerate the costs so that it becomes a health care benefit for birth control devices and condoms as well as funding abortions.

Now look many places pay for abortions and birth control, these are non profit orgs, the government should not be involved. We need to cut expenses not increase them. People already say to the masses, watch what you eat, control your weight, don't eat snack foods and fast foods, exercise, and all that to save on health care expenses. Yet they don't tell women who pay $3000 a year on birth control to just avoid sex and save the money for college. Nope that is wrong, because birth control should be a social program, it should include abortion costs and it should be paid for by the government, they say. Eh sorry, human beings learn from their mistakes and should make better choices to avoid the same mistakes in the future.

My wife went to college and avoided sex and dating, I avoided sex and dating when I was in college. I had to save my money for tuition, books, room and board and all that. My wife and I did it the smart way.

snip snip snip

---

You have a vaguely familiar posting style and narrative. Were you posting under another name at Atari forums that we'd recognize?

He posts in a million forums. Google his name.

That's...Creepy.

I find it a bit creepier to think that if this guy found us, how soon it could be before kath makes his way back to us.

Great, we're back to forum gossip instead of the topic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Great, we're back to forum gossip instead of the topic?

---

:rolleyes:

J00S R INVADING HOUR VAGAINAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

Better or worse? :rolleyes:

Still off topic, and you're still a troll.