How many of you who don't want to pay for birth control are also willing to support the child on welfare for 18 years?
How about let's do neither.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
How many of you who don't want to pay for birth control are also willing to support the child on welfare for 18 years?
Even though it dramatically reduces abortions, which you claim to be against. Amazing!I fail to see, in any of that, why birth control should be publicly funded.
Even though it dramatically reduces abortions, which you claim to be against. Amazing!
Even though it dramatically reduces abortions, which you claim to be against. Amazing!
:laugh:
Yup. People paying their own way has become unfathomable to you.
Why must birth control be free? You have s3x, you don't want a baby, do what any person SHOULD do and prevent it yourself. Yes, that's called responsibility and it comes with the privilege of s3x. WalMart has birth control pills for $4 a month. Condoms are cheap as well. A diaphram is $80 and is good for a year. Spermicides and sponges are inexpensive over the counter. Why must the nation pay for someone to have s3x? I don't expect anyone else to pay for MY care - I pay for it myself. Let's teach that concept to everyone - personal responsibility. It's a very cool thing!
Again, the point is missed entirely. This is not hard.
If spending money to get anti abortion candidates elected is well spent, wouldn't supplying some segment of the population with contraceptives if it reduces the number of abortions also be well spent money? Not everyone is responsible, but nearly everyone has sex.
Again, the point is missed entirely. This is not hard.
If spending money to get anti abortion candidates elected is well spent, wouldn't supplying some segment of the population with contraceptives if it reduces the number of abortions also be well spent money? Not everyone is responsible, but nearly everyone has sex.
Again, the point is missed entirely. This is not hard.
If spending money to get anti abortion candidates elected is well spent, wouldn't supplying some segment of the population with contraceptives if it reduces the number of abortions also be well spent money? Not everyone is responsible, but nearly everyone has sex.
Why can't people spend their own money? Contraceptives are not expensive. Beer is more expensive and many seem to have no problem acquiring that.
But if they can't or won't, what price do you put on life in the womb? So the antiabortion movement is really about money and not the sanctity of life?
But if they can't or won't, what price do you put on life in the womb? So the antiabortion movement is really about money and not the sanctity of life?
Lets make abortion- illegal - and prosecute medical personnel who so do
Despite best efforts by Christians to give their children a moral education from the Bible, teen pregnancy rates are skyrocketing in the Bible Belt. In the below CDC graphic, the dark green shows there are the key indicates the number of births for every 1,000 women between the ages of 15 and 19 in a state. For example, in dark green states, there are 50 or more pregnancies for every 1,000 women between the ages of 15 and 19. The graphic shows a strong correlation between religion and pregnancy–as found by a 2009 study finding the same.
http://www.goddiscussion.com/95556/teen-pregnancy-rates-are-down-but-not-in-the-bible-belt/