I'd rather pay for her birth control than support her and her kids because she can't work and afford to put them in daycare. It's a "pay me now or pay me later" issue. So she sleeps around for 4 years while in college. Eventually she will end up married. The burden shifts away from the public then. If she has no birth control, and sleeps around, that burden lasts at least 18 years. Her morals are not, or should not be in question. No one was going to tell me, or convince me not to have sex in my teens and 20s. It is the financial aspect of it that is the issue. Who should pay?

I feel the same about the fact that condoms are locked up at the local drug store. To me, if there is ANY item you WANT to be shoplifted, that would be it. Steal all you want because I don't want my taxes paying for your bad choices and your kids.

Isn't that what women go to college for?:lol:




Ahhh I see. It is a specific demographic that gets to pocket them for free. I get it...and whole-heartedly agree with the concept.

No, I pointed out that you say eventually you would like to have permanent contraception.

This will come at the expense of your insurance company.

She does not have the same ability. She is fighting for the same benefits you now have.

You missed the point.

First of all, 98% of Catholic women in America have used some means of contraception so you just basically labeled all of them sinners. This while there isn't any reference to contraception in the bible.

The church is run by men. There are no women in the ranks making health care choices for women, its all done by men. The same men who decided on their own that contraception is a sin. A position the MAJORITY of Catholics disagree with. The entire religion is sexist to the point that if it were a business it would be sued out of existence.

The Catholic Church, like all others in this country, is subsidized by the US Government with tax exemptions. So I'll tell you how we can agree. Just repeal all tax exemptions on religious institutions, and end government programs that provide assistance or money to those institutions. Then at that point they can do what ever they want. Until then, they have to play by the same rules as every other institution on the government tit.

The entire point is being missed.

She is being denied the benefit because she goes to a Catholic School.

The school is not going to, and should not be forced to, violate the ethics and biblical grounds of its faith to appease her lack of ability to abide with the terms of that faith.

It isn't the religious school's job to help students violate the rules of the religion. Georgetown is the oldest Catholic school in the US. It's not like she didn't know this when she signed up.

It's not like there aren't thousands of public universities that she could go to that offer the coverage. Georgetown may receive government money for granted research projects or students might get federally backed loans, but the university is a private school.

I'm good with this idea! :seasix:

I didn't label them as sinners, the Catholic Church did. Those are their rules. Have been for about 2000 years.

Yes, the church is run by men. Christ was a man, the Apostles were men, the popes, bishops and cardinals have always been men. And yet millions of women remain Catholics. They have the freedom of choice in religion - let them leave the Church. Or at least not go to a University that is the oldest Catholic school in the country.

Disagreeing with facts doesn't make them untrue.

And no - the government doesn't tell churches how to run their business and vice versa. Tax exemptions exist for that reason - not as a type of government entitlement. It is so that there is a clear and distinct difference between the two as the Founding Fathers intended.

First off...if you call a statement of mine ignorant once more, you won't have to ask to be sent on vacation. I didn't insult what you had to say, and you will not do it to me, understood?

My assertion is that this type of behavior happens a lot more often than conservatives care to admit. You are the one who put the word "every" into what I said...not me.

"Personal responsibility" is a nice, feel good catchphrase. In the real world, there ain't none. Most guys idea of "manning up" is taking off for parts unknown. If it wasn't a problem, we wouldn't see nearly as many unwed mothers and grandparents raising kids.

I don't condemn people who don't believe in abortion. What I do have a problem with is people who are not directly connected with the quandry of raising a child foisting their preferences on others. And yes...it happens.

And yes...I say so because I've seen things go the other way too. Many times. So my "say so" is no more or less valid than yours.

It's not "my excuse"...it happens to be the platform of the Republican party...and it simply is. And no, in my own little Utopian society, I shouldn't have to foot the bill. Unfortunately when I wake up and gas is $4.00 a gallon and Brian Williams delivers the evening news, that isn't the case.

And spare me the whole "show me where it says" bullshit. I'm not going to go around gathering data for you. You can accept it or reject it and I really don't care. Nor am I going to bust apart paragraphs to show where you're logic is, in my opinion, lacking. Additionally, I have something you haven't got: One child in high school and one in college. Fortunately, they talk to me, and their friends talk to me. And they've told me things that would curl your hair. This is info you can't get from civic or religious leaders or right wing publications. But you damn well better listen to them because the price to pay if you don't is pretty steep.

I just do not understand how you could rationalize Georgetown offering insurance to its employees that does offer contraception services, while denying that for the program the students have to pay for.

They can not fall back on "ethics". If it is the position of the church that people who use contraception are sinners, then why would that same school hire these people that use it to teach the students going to the institution? That would mean they only believe in the "ethics" when its convenient. Which frankly from my experience is actually the truth, but that is not a justifiable "moral" position to hold.

To hold the "moral high ground" they would have to be all out with regards to contraception. No one gets it, student or faculty. Georgetown by offering contraception to its faculty thus has no ethics or righteous indignation to fall back on.

Believe me...Bucky can never label anyone a sinner. :rofl:

:leaving:

Clearly, Catholic Co-eds should stick to blow jobs. Problem solved :D

They did when I was in school.:seasix:

Therein lies the rub. You can't take money from one hand and think no strings attached. Sorry, private is private. SEPARATION of church and state and all that jazz.

Or anal. Don't forget anal. :cert:

Ah, the voice of reason. :lol:

Good point