Liberals on what is and is not a choice

othershoe1030 wrote:

stormwatch89 wrote:The stereotyping of Republicans being pro-life is oversimplification, in my opinion.

Yes, I like many, vote Republican for numerous reasons, but pro-life issues is certainly not one of them.

Many of us believe in allowing people the right to choose what is correct for them without government intervention of any sort.

Even more of us believe that we all have a duty to do the best we can which includes attempting to support ourselves without relying on the government.

That's where too many liberals FAIL.

I'm glad to hear you are not a single issue voter. I was just saying that the issue is used by the GOP to get a certain part of their base to the polls and they don't want to lose that leverage.

I doubt many people, liberals included for sure, would argue against the advantages of being self supporting. It is a stereotype of the liberal mindset on the part of many "conservatives" that we encourage people to rely on government programs for their livelihood. This is not the case. We do support programs such as food stamps that help people in tough situations survive. That's one thing we expect from the government. What is the alternative when there are no good paying jobs available? Private sources are not enough to help all those in need.

PACEDOG#1 wrote:Liberals love to attack the weak and defenseless.

PACEDOG#1 wrote:Still none you liberals have answered the question posted by the initial post...why can't people choose their own insurance?

PACEDOG#1 wrote:I mean the decision to buy insurance is surely less important than killing homo sapiens, right?

Markle wrote:

othershoe1030 wrote:

Markle wrote:

othershoe1030 wrote:Markle and PD you are both total hypocrites of the highest order when you claim such BS as liberals not wanting to protect the weak.

You know perfectly well that it is your right wing wish that programs to help the disadvantaged poor, weak people be cut, cut, cut and cut again. You'd like to cut spending on education, food stamps, subsidized housing etc.

You are NOT PRO-LIFE, you are only pro-birth. After that little guy, you are on your own, good luck and don't let the door hit you on your way out.

Birth control is available to anyone who wants it for free.  

Yes, all those things need to be cut and can be done by putting more people to work.  As you well know, that is the opposite of what are the policies of the Progressives and President Barack Hussein Obama.

Wasn't it President William Jefferson Clinton who signed the Welfare Reform Act of 1996?  That was the law which allowed millions of people to move from the welfare rolls and tax recipients to the pay rolls and being tax payers.  That also restored their self esteem, pride and very soul.

As you also know, President Barack Hussein Obama negated that law when he signed his failed Stimulus Plan.  That encouraged states to put more people on welfare.

It would be so very refreshing if, at least occasionally, you could stick to the topic being discussed.

As to your comment on the availability of birth control I'm not at all sure that is the case, that it is there for free. Do you have any documentation along those lines? I hear complaints from companies who don't want to include birth control pills as part of their employees health coverage so there must be a cost involved. Just wondering. Also, and just as important, a person has to learn about birth control in order to take advantage of it. It is not enough for it to just be out there; it has to be used.

It is not the cost, some companies have a moral objection to paying for birth control devices.

Here's a novel idea, the PARENTS teach THEIR children about birth control and NOT that having babies will increase their welfare payments.

Call your local Planned Parenthood and tell them you're unemployed, living on welfare and how much would birth control pills cost.  Planned Parenthood isn't fond of the whole birth control issue since they make far more money doing abortions.

PACEDOG#1 wrote:So do any liberals know why we can choose to kill children but cannot choose our health ins?

Markle wrote:

othershoe1030 wrote:

Markle wrote:

othershoe1030 wrote:Markle and PD you are both total hypocrites of the highest order when you claim such BS as liberals not wanting to protect the weak.

You know perfectly well that it is your right wing wish that programs to help the disadvantaged poor, weak people be cut, cut, cut and cut again. You'd like to cut spending on education, food stamps, subsidized housing etc.

You are NOT PRO-LIFE, you are only pro-birth. After that little guy, you are on your own, good luck and don't let the door hit you on your way out.

Birth control is available to anyone who wants it for free.  

Yes, all those things need to be cut and can be done by putting more people to work.  As you well know, that is the opposite of what are the policies of the Progressives and President Barack Hussein Obama.

Wasn't it President William Jefferson Clinton who signed the Welfare Reform Act of 1996?  That was the law which allowed millions of people to move from the welfare rolls and tax recipients to the pay rolls and being tax payers.  That also restored their self esteem, pride and very soul.

As you also know, President Barack Hussein Obama negated that law when he signed his failed Stimulus Plan.  That encouraged states to put more people on welfare.



As to your comment on the availability of birth control I'm not at all sure that is the case, that it is there for free. Do you have any documentation along those lines? I hear complaints from companies who don't want to include birth control pills as part of their employees health coverage so there must be a cost involved. Just wondering. Also, and just as important, a person has to learn about birth control in order to take advantage of it. It is not enough for it to just be out there; it has to be used.

I stick to the topic being discussed.  I was responding and backing up my point with FACTS.  Here is what was posted:

"othershoe1030 wrote:Markle and PD you are both total hypocrites of the highest order when you claim such BS as liberals not wanting to protect the weak.

You know perfectly well that it is your right wing wish that programs to help the disadvantaged poor, weak people be cut, cut, cut and cut again. You'd like to cut spending on education, food stamps, subsidized housing etc.

You are NOT PRO-LIFE, you are only pro-birth. After that little guy, you are on your own, good luck and don't let the door hit you on your way out."  
###
In order to effectively CUT SPENDING we have to put more people to work.  Something I used factual charts to vividly demonstrate that President Barack Hussein Obama has refused to do and has added more and more people to our labor force which are not working.  Thus...not paying taxes.

I'm sure the president has worked tirelessly to make sure as few Americans can find good paying jobs as possible. I mean, that would really increase the success of his administration wouldn't it. You really say the most absurd things. You act as if there is no congress, no GOP, no special interest groups, no existing financial structure, no court system etc. You talk as if the president has a magic wand and can accomplish whatever he wants. Many would argue that the stimulus package was not large enough to accomplish a robust recovery. Here's a rundown on all the things it included, a lot more than you suggest in your simplistic way of looking at things.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009

othershoe1030 wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:So do any liberals know why we can choose to kill children but cannot choose our health ins?

That would be a question for the Supreme Court, which as I recall has dealt with that issue already.

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

othershoe1030 wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:So do any liberals know why we can choose to kill children but cannot choose our health ins?

That would be a question for the Supreme Court, which as I recall has dealt with that issue already.

....and a DODGE....

othershoe1030 wrote:

Markle wrote:

othershoe1030 wrote:

Markle wrote:

othershoe1030 wrote:Markle and PD you are both total hypocrites of the highest order when you claim such BS as liberals not wanting to protect the weak.

You know perfectly well that it is your right wing wish that programs to help the disadvantaged poor, weak people be cut, cut, cut and cut again. You'd like to cut spending on education, food stamps, subsidized housing etc.

You are NOT PRO-LIFE, you are only pro-birth. After that little guy, you are on your own, good luck and don't let the door hit you on your way out.

Birth control is available to anyone who wants it for free.  

Yes, all those things need to be cut and can be done by putting more people to work.  As you well know, that is the opposite of what are the policies of the Progressives and President Barack Hussein Obama.

Wasn't it President William Jefferson Clinton who signed the Welfare Reform Act of 1996?  That was the law which allowed millions of people to move from the welfare rolls and tax recipients to the pay rolls and being tax payers.  That also restored their self esteem, pride and very soul.

As you also know, President Barack Hussein Obama negated that law when he signed his failed Stimulus Plan.  That encouraged states to put more people on welfare.

It would be so very refreshing if, at least occasionally, you could stick to the topic being discussed.

As to your comment on the availability of birth control I'm not at all sure that is the case, that it is there for free. Do you have any documentation along those lines? I hear complaints from companies who don't want to include birth control pills as part of their employees health coverage so there must be a cost involved. Just wondering. Also, and just as important, a person has to learn about birth control in order to take advantage of it. It is not enough for it to just be out there; it has to be used.

It is not the cost, some companies have a moral objection to paying for birth control devices.

Here's a novel idea, the PARENTS teach THEIR children about birth control and NOT that having babies will increase their welfare payments.

Call your local Planned Parenthood and tell them you're unemployed, living on welfare and how much would birth control pills cost.  Planned Parenthood isn't fond of the whole birth control issue since they make far more money doing abortions.

Once again I am asking for documentation to your statements. You keep throwing out all these comments as if we should all just swallow them whole because you posted them.
Are birth control pills or other means of birth control available for free just for the asking?
Does Planned Parenthood make money by providing abortions?

As for your novel idea about parents teaching their children birth control. It is no more than a novel idea in most cases. You are trying to solve the problem of unwanted pregnancies by means of magical thinking not reality. Come on and document your claims or as you would say, please share with us...

othershoe1030 wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:So do any liberals know why we can choose to kill children but cannot choose our health ins?

That would be a question for the Supreme Court, which as I recall has dealt with that issue already.