The Glade 4.0

"Turn the lights down, the party just got wilder."
It is currently Sat Nov 23, 2024 11:36 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 131 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:33 pm 
Offline
The King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:34 am
Posts: 3219
RangerDave wrote:
Vindicarre wrote:
Sorry, the fact that "the second place finisher" backed positions similar to what you decries, kinda belies the fact that it's a winning argument; he lost.

I didn't say it was a winning argument, just that there is a significant push for anti-birth control policies from a sizable contingent of the Republican party, and that makes the snark on that point reasonable. Imprecise, because it's humor not political analysis, but sufficiently on target to be effective parody.



The government shouldn't be using my taxes so Sandra Fluke can have more sex or so PP can kill more children. If they can't do those things via private funds on with money they make on their own, sucks to be them.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:37 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Nitefox wrote:
RangerDave wrote:
Vindicarre wrote:
Sorry, the fact that "the second place finisher" backed positions similar to what you decries, kinda belies the fact that it's a winning argument; he lost.

I didn't say it was a winning argument, just that there is a significant push for anti-birth control policies from a sizable contingent of the Republican party, and that makes the snark on that point reasonable. Imprecise, because it's humor not political analysis, but sufficiently on target to be effective parody.



The government shouldn't be using my taxes so Sandra Fluke can have more sex or so PP can kill more children. If they can't do those things via private funds on with money they make on their own, sucks to be them.


The government also shouldn't be using my money to get soldiers killed in Afghanistan.

But its give and take.

Also, BC isn't *only* used for contraception purposes and PP doesn't *only* do abortions.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:40 pm 
Offline
Near Ground
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:38 pm
Posts: 6782
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Of all the girls I've known who take birth control, only a very, very small percentage take it for teh sexxorz. Generally, condoms suffice for that. They take it for its myriad other uses as hormone regulation in order to do things like, say, function as a normal human being without being confined to a bed writhing in agony for three or more days, missing school and work because the pain is so great.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:42 pm 
Offline
The King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:34 am
Posts: 3219
Müs wrote:
Nitefox wrote:
RangerDave wrote:
Vindicarre wrote:
Sorry, the fact that "the second place finisher" backed positions similar to what you decries, kinda belies the fact that it's a winning argument; he lost.

I didn't say it was a winning argument, just that there is a significant push for anti-birth control policies from a sizable contingent of the Republican party, and that makes the snark on that point reasonable. Imprecise, because it's humor not political analysis, but sufficiently on target to be effective parody.



The government shouldn't be using my taxes so Sandra Fluke can have more sex or so PP can kill more children. If they can't do those things via private funds on with money they make on their own, sucks to be them.


The government also shouldn't be using my money to get soldiers killed in Afghanistan.

But its give and take.

Also, BC isn't *only* used for contraception purposes and PP doesn't *only* do abortions.


You may not agree with the conflicts but the constitution makes specific comments about military and the such. Not so much about some attention whore who can’t drive 2 miles and spend 9 bucks for birth control out of her own pocket. And if PP is so needed, it should be able to stand on it’s own without using my taxes.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:46 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
FarSky wrote:
Of all the girls I've known who take birth control, only a very, very small percentage take it for teh sexxorz. Generally, condoms suffice for that. They take it for its myriad other uses as hormone regulation in order to do things like, say, function as a normal human being without being confined to a bed writhing in agony for three or more days, missing school and work because the pain is so great.


What are you talking about? This sure doesn't look like agony:

Image

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:48 pm 
Offline
The Dancing Cat
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:21 pm
Posts: 9354
Location: Ohio
Vindicarre wrote:
Spoiler:
FarSky wrote:
Of all the girls I've known who take birth control, only a very, very small percentage take it for teh sexxorz. Generally, condoms suffice for that. They take it for its myriad other uses as hormone regulation in order to do things like, say, function as a normal human being without being confined to a bed writhing in agony for three or more days, missing school and work because the pain is so great.


What are you talking about? This sure doesn't look like agony:

Image

HEY! Give that back!

_________________
Quote:
In comic strips the person on the left always speaks first. - George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:49 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Nitefox wrote:
Müs wrote:
Nitefox wrote:
RangerDave wrote:
Vindicarre wrote:
Sorry, the fact that "the second place finisher" backed positions similar to what you decries, kinda belies the fact that it's a winning argument; he lost.

I didn't say it was a winning argument, just that there is a significant push for anti-birth control policies from a sizable contingent of the Republican party, and that makes the snark on that point reasonable. Imprecise, because it's humor not political analysis, but sufficiently on target to be effective parody.



The government shouldn't be using my taxes so Sandra Fluke can have more sex or so PP can kill more children. If they can't do those things via private funds on with money they make on their own, sucks to be them.


The government also shouldn't be using my money to get soldiers killed in Afghanistan.

But its give and take.

Also, BC isn't *only* used for contraception purposes and PP doesn't *only* do abortions.


You may not agree with the conflicts but the constitution makes specific comments about military and the such. Not so much about some attention whore who can’t drive 2 miles and spend 9 bucks for birth control out of her own pocket. And if PP is so needed, it should be able to stand on it’s own without using my taxes.


And *I'm* the intolerant one. I like that she's automatically an attention whore because she's taking BC. Which, incidentally didn't have anything to do with spending *your* tax dollars on BC, just that it should be included in PPACA as a federal mandate that *private* insurance plans would be required to cover it.

Also, BC is more than 9 bucks.

To speak to the other point, let's go ahead and vilify *all* of PP while we're at it. After all, where else are low income women going to go to get pap smears, breast exams, gynecological care, counseling, education and other such things? I mean, screw them! (metaphorically of course, if we're not giving them lifejackets, wouldn't want them to drown.)

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Last edited by Müs on Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:52 pm 
Offline
The Dancing Cat
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:21 pm
Posts: 9354
Location: Ohio
Müs wrote:
Also, BC is more than 9 bucks.

/tongue/cheek

Aspirin sure is expensive out there in California!

_________________
Quote:
In comic strips the person on the left always speaks first. - George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 9:12 pm
Posts: 2366
Location: Mook's Pimp Skittle Stable
Some posters here continually amaze me.

I think that Christian teachings involve compassion, helping those less fortunate, etc.

And then I see that while they probably do involve that, it's definitely not in (some peoples) every day focus.

And before someone bends it out of shape and things I'm over generalizing, this should obviously be read as a quite specific post.

_________________
Darksiege: You are not a god damned vulcan homie.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:56 pm 
Offline
The King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:34 am
Posts: 3219
Müs wrote:
Nitefox wrote:
Müs wrote:
Nitefox wrote:
RangerDave wrote:
Vindicarre wrote:
Sorry, the fact that "the second place finisher" backed positions similar to what you decries, kinda belies the fact that it's a winning argument; he lost.

I didn't say it was a winning argument, just that there is a significant push for anti-birth control policies from a sizable contingent of the Republican party, and that makes the snark on that point reasonable. Imprecise, because it's humor not political analysis, but sufficiently on target to be effective parody.



The government shouldn't be using my taxes so Sandra Fluke can have more sex or so PP can kill more children. If they can't do those things via private funds on with money they make on their own, sucks to be them.


The government also shouldn't be using my money to get soldiers killed in Afghanistan.

But its give and take.

Also, BC isn't *only* used for contraception purposes and PP doesn't *only* do abortions.


You may not agree with the conflicts but the constitution makes specific comments about military and the such. Not so much about some attention whore who can’t drive 2 miles and spend 9 bucks for birth control out of her own pocket. And if PP is so needed, it should be able to stand on it’s own without using my taxes.


And *I'm* the intolerant one. I like that she's automatically an attention whore because she's taking BC. Which, incidentally didn't have anything to do with spending *your* tax dollars on BC, just that it should be included in PPACA as a federal mandate that *private* insurance plans would be required to cover it.

Also, BC is more than 9 bucks.

To speak to the other point, let's go ahead and vilify *all* of PP while we're at it. After all, where else are low income women going to go to get pap smears, breast exams, gynecological care, counseling, education and other such things? I mean, screw them! (metaphorically of course, if we're not giving them lifejackets, wouldn't want them to drown.)



That California smog getting to your brain? Who said anything about tolerance? Who’s being intolerant? And yes, she is an attention whore in my opinion. Isn’t whore an acceptable part of your vocabulary?


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-shepp ... th-control

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:57 pm 
Offline
The King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:34 am
Posts: 3219
NephyrS wrote:
Some posters here continually amaze me.

I think that Christian teachings involve compassion, helping those less fortunate, etc.

And then I see that while they probably do involve that, it's definitely not the every day focus.



Dont' be shy, say what you want to say to me.

Thing is, you don't know anything about me or what I do to help people. So unless you have that insight, I suggest you keep your personal amazment to a minimal level there chief.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:59 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
Müs wrote:
Also, BC is more than 9 bucks.


Ummm
Walmart wrote:
More medicines covering more categories – Important prescription medicines have been added to the $4 program covering glaucoma, attention deficit disorder/attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADD/ADHD), fungal infections and acne. Fertility and prescription birth control will also be included at $9, compared to national average prices ranging from $24 to $30 per month and saving women an estimated $15 to $21 per month – $180 to $250 annually.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:01 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Vindicarre wrote:
Müs wrote:
Also, BC is more than 9 bucks.


Ummm
Walmart wrote:
More medicines covering more categories – Important prescription medicines have been added to the $4 program covering glaucoma, attention deficit disorder/attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADD/ADHD), fungal infections and acne. Fertility and prescription birth control will also be included at $9, compared to national average prices ranging from $24 to $30 per month and saving women an estimated $15 to $21 per month – $180 to $250 annually.


Fair enough. Be interesting to see what forms are covered by that price, but I'll concede that.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 9:12 pm
Posts: 2366
Location: Mook's Pimp Skittle Stable
I guess it depends, but we pay *way* more than that for birth control a month.

And no, our insurance doesn't cover it. My wife's OB, however, is often quite nice about giving a few months worth of samples each year.

And given issues with unemployment, limited resources, and general overpopulation, I'm quite happy for some of my tax dollars to go towards helping people *not* contribute to the problem.

_________________
Darksiege: You are not a god damned vulcan homie.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:02 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
NephyrS wrote:
Some posters here continually amaze me.

I think that Christian teachings involve compassion, helping those less fortunate, etc.

And then I see that while they probably do involve that, it's definitely not in (some peoples) every day focus.

And before someone bends it out of shape and things I'm over generalizing, this should obviously be read as a quite specific post.


Yes, Christian teaching involves compassion et al, the Gov't forcibly taking money from people and using it for whatever purpose the Gov't choose is pretty far removed from those teachings.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:03 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Nitefox wrote:
That California smog getting to your brain? Who said anything about tolerance? Who’s being intolerant? And yes, she is an attention whore in my opinion. Isn’t whore an acceptable part of your vocabulary?


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-shepp ... th-control


That would be you that's intolerant. But that's ok, I know that Jesus teaches that in all of his gos... wait... He doesn't?

Oh. ****.

Yeah.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:03 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Vindicarre wrote:
NephyrS wrote:
Some posters here continually amaze me.

I think that Christian teachings involve compassion, helping those less fortunate, etc.

And then I see that while they probably do involve that, it's definitely not in (some peoples) every day focus.

And before someone bends it out of shape and things I'm over generalizing, this should obviously be read as a quite specific post.


Yes, Christian teaching involves compassion et al, the Gov't forcibly taking money from people and using it for whatever purpose the Gov't choose is pretty far removed from those teachings.


Except the government is non denominational. They steal from *everyone*.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:05 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
NephyrS wrote:
I guess it depends, but we pay *way* more than that for birth control a month.

And no, our insurance doesn't cover it. My wife's OB, however, is often quite nice about giving a few months worth of samples each year.


Hmmm, wonder why it costs so much.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:05 pm 
Offline
The King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:34 am
Posts: 3219
Müs wrote:
Nitefox wrote:
That California smog getting to your brain? Who said anything about tolerance? Who’s being intolerant? And yes, she is an attention whore in my opinion. Isn’t whore an acceptable part of your vocabulary?


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-shepp ... th-control


That would be you that's intolerant. But that's ok, I know that Jesus teaches that in all of his gos... wait... He doesn't?

Oh. ****.

Yeah.



What exactly am I being intolerant about there big boy? Have you become such a puss that if someone disagrees with you they intolerent? Please enlighten this bitter clinger.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 9:12 pm
Posts: 2366
Location: Mook's Pimp Skittle Stable
I was more referring to tone of statements and manner, but I do get your point.

However, the same individuals usually seem OK with the Gov't taking money from other individuals, and using it for other things that the Gov't chooses (Wars, war on drugs).

And heck, even supporting taking *more* money from some people, just because they don't agree with their lifestyle (tax break for married heterosexuals vs homosexuals, for instance).

_________________
Darksiege: You are not a god damned vulcan homie.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:07 pm 
Offline
The King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:34 am
Posts: 3219
Vindicarre wrote:
NephyrS wrote:
I guess it depends, but we pay *way* more than that for birth control a month.

And no, our insurance doesn't cover it. My wife's OB, however, is often quite nice about giving a few months worth of samples each year.


Hmmm, wonder why it costs so much.



It's a mystery!

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:08 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
NephyrS wrote:
I was more referring to tone of statements and manner, but I do get the point.

However, the same individuals usually seem OK with the Gov't taking money from other individuals, and using it for other things that the Gov't chooses (Wars, war on drugs).

And heck, even supporting taking *more* money from some people, just because they don't agree with their lifestyle (tax break for married heterosexuals vs homosexuals, for instance).


Mostly this.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:10 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Nitefox wrote:
Vindicarre wrote:
NephyrS wrote:
I guess it depends, but we pay *way* more than that for birth control a month.

And no, our insurance doesn't cover it. My wife's OB, however, is often quite nice about giving a few months worth of samples each year.


Hmmm, wonder why it costs so much.



It's a mystery!


Nah, not really. Its big pharma and their patents on drugs.

Hell, I have an inhaler that I use to control my asthma that's almost $400. For one inhaler. But, its the only thing that's really ever worked as a long acting inhaler for me. /shrug

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:10 pm 
Offline
The King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:34 am
Posts: 3219
NephyrS wrote:
I was more referring to tone of statements and manner, but I do get the point.

However, the same individuals usually seem OK with the Gov't taking money from other individuals, and using it for other things that the Gov't chooses (Wars, war on drugs).

And heck, even supporting taking *more* money from some people, just because they don't agree with their lifestyle (tax break for married heterosexuals vs homosexuals, for instance).



Military conflicts are covered. Even then it doesn't mean I agree with every one we get into.

Your issue with lifestyle choices is also a swing and a miss. I'm all for the government getting out of that as well.(and for the billionth time, homsexuals are not discriminated against when it comes to marriage). You should be up in arms about all the single people. They are the ones getting screwed.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:12 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
NephyrS wrote:
I was more referring to tone of statements and manner, but I do get your point.

However, the same individuals usually seem OK with the Gov't taking money from other individuals, and using it for other things that the Gov't chooses (Wars, war on drugs).

And heck, even supporting taking *more* money from some people, just because they don't agree with their lifestyle (tax break for married heterosexuals vs homosexuals, for instance).


Those individuals would be just as wrong as people saying that it's "compassionate" for the Gov't to take people's money and give it to those who "need" it or "deserve" it for reasons they agree with.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 131 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 182 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group