2012 Elections

[brvheart 1,768]

The Dept. of Health and Human Services ruled that religiously affiliated hospitals and universities are not exempt, that's what caused the current uproar. They ruled that only religious organizations that primarily employ co-religionists are exempt. In other words, since so many non-catholics go to the catholic school, they are not exempt.

The uproar isn't loud enough. Since it's obviously unconstitutional, when does this law make it to the supreme court? Cane? When's it on the docket?

[The Ocho 972]

What kind of school has an infirmary? So you think kids are going to go into the offices, walk past secretary's in their 40's and 50's to get to wherever the condoms are. Grab a handful and leave?I can tell you, except for a few guy's who would have thought it was funny, almost nobody I went to school with would have done this. They would have gone to Hamid or Achmed at the local liquor store and bought a box of trojans or some gold coins for $3.

[brvheart 1,768]

To the community.

Everybody?

I don't see how the community should be liable to provide contraceptives or any ongoing care in this situation at all. This should affect two people and two families maximum.

[DJ Vu 176]

What kind of school has an infirmary? So you think kids are going to go into the offices, walk past secretary's in their 40's and 50's to get to wherever the condoms are. Grab a handful and leave?I can tell you, except for a few guy's who would have thought it was funny, almost nobody I went to school with would have done this. They would have gone to Hamid or Achmed at the local liquor store and bought a box of trojans or some gold coins for $3.

It doesn't have to be there. Put them in restrooms or locker rooms or something.I actually think that if high schoolers have a choice between free and not-free, they'll go to certain lengths for the free.

[CaneBrain 97]

The uproar isn't loud enough. Since it's obviously unconstitutional, when does this law make it to the supreme court? Cane? When's it on the docket?

Obamacare is on the docket this year. If they found that part unconstitutional, they could just strike that part of the law.Ocho, my school had an infirmary. Most have a nurse's office. Put them outside that in a hallway where you don't have to walk by old people.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

What kind of school has an infirmary? So you think kids are going to go into the offices, walk past secretary's in their 40's and 50's to get to wherever the condoms are. Grab a handful and leave?I can tell you, except for a few guy's who would have thought it was funny, almost nobody I went to school with would have done this. They would have gone to Hamid or Achmed at the local liquor store and bought a box of trojans or some gold coins for $3.

So your argument is the following:"Schools should not pay the one-time cost of a basket full of condoms because kids will never take them."Is your point that the $30 worth of condoms a year that potentially (under your scenario) go unused is too expensive?

[brvheart 1,768]

Obamacare is on the docket this year. If they found that part unconstitutional, they could just strike that part of the law.

I don't know much about it, so I only really care about that unconstitutional part. That's nice that it will be struck down this year though.

[brvheart 1,768]

So your argument is the following:"Schools should not pay the one-time cost of a basket full of condoms because kids will never take them."Is your point that the $30 worth of condoms a year that potentially (under your scenario) go unused is too expensive?

If they did go unused (under Guapo's scenario) then it would switch to "it's none of the school's business".

[Balloon guy 158]

So your argument is the following:"Schools should not pay the one-time cost of a basket full of condoms because kids will never take them."Is your point that the $30 worth of condoms a year that potentially (under your scenario) go unused is too expensive?

According to Misssssss Fluke, the average woman is using $1,000 worth of condoms a year. Multiply that times the number of slutty students...that's like a million dollars at UofM

[The Ocho 972]

Ocho, my school had an infirmary. Most have a nurse's office. Put them outside that in a hallway where you don't have to walk by old people.

I don't know what sort of school you guys went to. But we had an administrative building (same as all the schools around me) and you had to walk past secretaries to get to counselors or the principals. We don't have school nurses offices out here. If your sick, you go to the secretary and ask to call a parent.

So your argument is the following:"Schools should not pay the one-time cost of a basket full of condoms because kids will never take them."Is your point that the $30 worth of condoms a year that potentially (under your scenario) go unused is too expensive?

Um no. The point is A: Agree with brv, it's none of the school's businessB: Why spend a lot of time and energy on something that is some what controversial at best, that won't have any impact.To DJ: You think if there was a bin of condoms in the boys locker room, that there would be any left after the first day? You'd have floating condom balloons all over the locker room and school. Somehow I think all of you are giving high school students way too much credit irt this stuff.

[DJ Vu 176]

To DJ: You think if there was a bin of condoms in the boys locker room, that there would be any left after the first day? You'd have floating condom balloons all over the locker room and school. Somehow I think all of you are giving high school students way too much credit irt this stuff.

[vbnautilus 49]

The uproar isn't loud enough. Since it's obviously unconstitutional, when does this law make it to the supreme court? Cane? When's it on the docket?

I think you have misunderstood the constitution. Religion does not guarantee anybody an exception to the law.

What kind of school has an infirmary?

Mine had one. You had no school nurse? Who checked for lice?

So you think kids are going to go into the offices, walk past secretary's in their 40's and 50's to get to wherever the condoms are. Grab a handful and leave?I can tell you, except for a few guy's who would have thought it was funny, almost nobody I went to school with would have done this. They would have gone to Hamid or Achmed at the local liquor store and bought a box of trojans or some gold coins for $3.

Seriously, the details of distribution is a small issue that has a multitude of easy solutions. It's weird that you are fixating on that.

I don't see how the community should be liable to provide contraceptives or any ongoing care in this situation at all. This should affect two people and two families maximum.

Leave it to the christian to be selfish. A community should not do something that benefits the collective well-being of the citizens?

[Roll the Bones 74]

Damn vb, I'm with you. I feel like I just stepped into bizzaro world where no one understands a thing about this issue.The law is a good law, in fact a very good law. According to the CBO it saves 3.74 for every 1.00 spent. We have millions of women without access to birth control or unable to afford it so by reducing the co-pay to zero, along with the other menu of items we have better health care for less money. The argument that certain organizations shouldn't have to pay for it is idiotic on so many levels. First, they will ultimately pay for along with the rest of us in higher insurance and debt burden. Which, btw, is simply another thing Obama is trying to do towards the debt and budget that Republicans seem to be against.Also, as mentioned, churches are exempt, but large employers who majority are not of that faith are not exempt. Government has no responsibility to accomodate reigous beliefs, but a good politician will often try. Obama did just this by saying "fine, you don't have to pay for it" but they still have to provide the coverage and the government along with the insurance will pick up the tab. Smart move by Obama actually.The argument that government is forcing beliefs on religon is erroneous as well. People have the freedom of choice to take birth control or not. The Church is trying to limit those freedoms. And I might add that 98% of all Catholic women who were eligible to take birth control DO. None of their own followers agree with their dogma to begin with, it is only a fringe element trying to dictate to others. Would you be okay if a school didn't offer blood transfusions because Jehovah's witnesses are against it? Or how about forbidding cars becauset it upsets the Amish? As vb says, they have to folloow the law.And really, this has simply become a bigger part of the Republican/Religous war on women. The Republican party has become the Faith Party and the last few years we have seen an unprecedented number of laws introduced and passed aimed directly at women's rights. How many states are trying to rape pregnant women and prosletize at them to dissuade them from abortions? It is part of the Iron Age moral values of Christians where men are He-Men, women are subservient, and they all beat the kids and brainwash them into submission, and preach to them that sex is evil.Personally, I hate that the argument gets framed in the context that we have to even defend it for reasons that it is used for medical purposes other than birth control, because using it for birth control is perfectly okay. Women are allowed to have sex and enjoy it. Men get viagra payed for through insurance and no Catholic Bishops are in an uproar over that? Are they telling men to keep a pill between their legs? It's a double standard that feminists have been fighting for years, and Limbaugh has railed against for years, (Feminazis) and society has finally gone past him. I'm 50 and grew up in the birth control era and apparently so has his listeners. He's paying for being out of touch and it makes me proud to see America stand up to him, the Komen fiasco and other recent issues.

[brvheart 1,768]

Certainly that seems contradictory, but it's absolutely true. With just taking one, people don't know your intentions. With making condom balloons, people are very aware that you are screwing around.

I think you have misunderstood the constitution. Religion does not guarantee anybody an exception to the law.

Damn vb, I'm with you. I feel like I just stepped into bizzaro world where no one understands a thing about this issue.The law is a good law, in fact a very good law.

The constitution is there to protect our freedoms from an abusive president and congress making laws that go against our liberty.Of course, who is right will be easy determined as soon as the Supreme Court hears this case. I'll make sure to bump this thread when the ruling is finalized.

[brvheart 1,768]

Leave it to the christian to be selfish.

This has nothing to do with me being a Christian, so I don't understand your comment.

A community should not do something that benefits the collective well-being of the citizens?

If a community wants that, then they should hold a vote to give all people in town free condoms available at city hall. If you do that, then I would not only be fine with it, I would applaud it.

[vbnautilus 49]

The constitution is there to protect our freedoms from an abusive president and congress making laws that go against our liberty.Of course, who is right will be easy determined as soon as the Supreme Court hears this case. I'll make sure to bump this thread when the ruling is finalized.

I'd like to hear what your argument is. You don't want to follow the law because it conflicts with your religion? What if it's against my religion to pay taxes, am I exempt? Where does it end? You yourself said that that if it was illegal, religion wouldn't get you out of it. Now that you understand that it is a law, you are changing your tune again. It's pretty confusing.

This has nothing to do with me being a Christian, so I don't understand your comment.

I don't believe you.

If a community wants that, then they should hold a vote to give all people in town free condoms available at city hall. If you do that, then I would not only be fine with it, I would applaud it.

That's.... pretty much what happened my friend. Our representatives passed the law. But again, this has nothing to do with free anything, I don't know why you reverted to that.

[The Ocho 972]

Certainly that seems contradictory, but it's absolutely true. With just taking one, people don't know your intentions. With making condom balloons, people are very aware that you are screwing around.

Yup. This is exactly what I meant.

[DJ Vu 176]

Yup. This is exactly what I meant.

Is your point that the $30 worth of condoms a year that potentially (under your scenario) go unused is too expensive?

Seriously, the details of distribution is a small issue that has a multitude of easy solutions. It's weird that you are fixating on that.

And anyway, why are we still discussing this like it's never been done before? Aren't there schools that are doing this? Can't we find out what happened? The internet is still a thing, right?

[DJ Vu 176]

And anyway, why are we still discussing this like it's never been done before? Aren't there schools that are doing this? Can't we find out what happened? The internet is still a thing, right?

Here's one."Packets were available in baskets placed in four classrooms and outside of the nurse's office; some of these sites were accessible at times when students could obtain condoms unnoticed by others.""There was no significant change over time in the percentage of males or females who had ever had vaginal intercourse or who had had vaginal intercourse during the year prior to the survey. The percentage of males who reported using condoms every time they engaged in vaginal intercourse during the past year increased significantly, from 37% to 50%, and the percentage of males who reported condom use at recently initiated first vaginal intercourse increased from 65% to 80%. On the other hand, female respondents showed no significant change in their condom use."

[ShakeZuma 586]

fuckin' skanks

[brvheart 1,768]

I'd like to hear what your argument is. You don't want to follow the law because it conflicts with your religion? What if it's against my religion to pay taxes, am I exempt? Where does it end? You yourself said that that if it was illegal, religion wouldn't get you out of it. Now that you understand that it is a law, you are changing your tune again. It's pretty confusing.

I don't want to follow the law because it's a clear violation of my 1st amendment rights. Don't take my word for it, just listen to what the Supreme Court says later this year.It ends when a law doesn't violate the constitution.

I don't believe you.

OK. I have no idea what there is to believe or not believe, but whatever. Please explain how this has anything to do with me being a Christian.

That's.... pretty much what happened my friend. Our representatives passed the law. But again, this has nothing to do with free anything, I don't know why you reverted to that.

Our representatives passed laws saying slavery was cool also, but those weren't constitutional and got overturned. Just like this law will in a few months.

[hblask 1]

But do we not all agree that society is better off when people who seek birth control have access to it? I mean this both socially and economically.

I think it depends who provides it. I think if they get it themselves or friends and family provide it, it's a big benefit. If the city has a program, it's still probably beneficial. At the federal level I think there is too much waste, pork, and general disincentives to responsible behavior that it is very likely it is a net negative.I could be easily convinced on this the other way, though, by solid data.

[vbnautilus 49]

I don't want to follow the law because it's a clear violation of my 1st amendment rights. Don't take my word for it, just listen to what the Supreme Court says later this year.It ends when a law doesn't violate the constitution.

You still haven't explained why you think the law violates the 1st amendment. Is it because it requires someone to do something that is against their religion?

OK. I have no idea what there is to believe or not believe, but whatever. Please explain how this has anything to do with me being a Christian.

I said "leave it to the Christian guy to be the selfish one". I don't think that joke requires explanation.

Our representatives passed laws saying slavery was cool also, but those weren't constitutional and got overturned. Just like this law will in a few months.

Willing to bet?

[BaseJester 1]

The argument that government is forcing beliefs on religon is erroneous as well. People have the freedom of choice to take birth control or not. The Church is trying to limit those freedoms.

The government is compelling the Church's behavior. The church isn't compelling their employees' behavior.

And I might add that 98% of all Catholic women who were eligible to take birth control DO. None of their own followers agree with their dogma to begin with, it is only a fringe element trying to dictate to others. Would you be okay if a school didn't offer blood transfusions because Jehovah's witnesses are against it?

Yes. For the same reason it's OK for a Jehovah's Witness plumber not to offer blood transfusions.

[CaneBrain 97]

I think being ok with a school not providing medical treatment to someone with massive blood loss is ridiculous.