I was watching a news story about how the government is spending all this money on different social programs to help out single women with children. One of my co-workers brought up this idea and I lilke it. Offer free birth to all women who want it starting at a particular date in time to all women/girls who have their menstral cycle. All women would be told about this and would have to sign something saying they turn it down if they choose not to recieve the birth control. Then anyone who gets pregnant after that (who didn't choose to recieve the birth control) won't be elgible for government aid because they had the chance to turn it down and the only ones who would be elgible would be the ones who were on birth control and got pregnant anyway. Of course this is all hypothetically speaking. Do you agree? Disagree? Do you think the government should give hard earned tax dollars to those who choose to have children knowing full well that they can't support those children?
2007-07-17 06:51:42 · 17 answers · asked by Liesel 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
At the very least offer free birth control to all women who want it simply because birth control is cheaper than welfare, WIC, food stamps or any of the other programs.
2007-07-17 06:52:37 · update #1
To those who say that the government shouldn't be involved in reproduction: Do you think the government should support those women who choose to have sex knowing full well they can get pregnant without birth control? Should my tax dollars pay for them failing to use their head?
2007-07-17 07:03:53 · update #2
Jbtascam: Unfortunately some people make just enough that they don't qualify for free birth control. Before I joined the military, I was faced with that dilemma. I barely made too much, that difference was much lower than the cost of birth control, but I decided to fork over the cash anyway. People need to be more responsible. Condoms break, a lot.
2007-07-17 07:06:55 · update #3
Lethander: I like that idea!
2007-07-17 07:07:53 · update #4
Pfo: So instead let the women get STD's a pregnant? Smart.
2007-07-17 07:08:33 · update #5
...that last part is supposed to read "and get pregnant?"
2007-07-17 07:09:12 · update #6
yes they should,it gets into a lot of politics and some say it condones teensex-premarital sex
but people are going to have it regardles
an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure
2007-07-17 11:12:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
For the government to regulate birth control would be a violation of consitutional rights and the Supreme Court has already set precedent on this in Buck vs. Bell and Roe vs. Wade.
Planned Parenthood does already offer birth control that is low cost or free (on a sliding scale depending on income) and free condoms.
One thing that might help to curb the problem is to have manditory family living classes in schools beginning in Junior High that teach kids skills they will actually need later on in life, like budgeting, paying bills, the cost of living, child care and child development, including the section with the life like baby dolls that they have to take with them everywhere they go like a real baby.
Welfare has been revamped in the past few years and still need more, but there is now more of a focus that this is a temporary assistance and try to get the mothers of children over the age of 3 into job training and the kids into subsidized daycare.
The downside to this is that the ones that don't want to work are now claiming all sorts of mental disabilities and trying to Social Security Disability instead.
2007-07-17 07:10:57 · answer #2 · answered by bottleblondemama 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Free counseling is available through Planned Parenthood.
Free Condoms are available at our High Schools.
Planned Parenthood already offers free birth control to low-income mothers in some areas of the country.
So...I'm trying to figure out why you think this should be something the government pays for?
Also, the benefits paid to parents of dependent children by the government are for the CHILDREN, not their parents. You can't punish the kids for what their parents do (or fail to do). The Constitution says so, that's who.
2007-07-17 06:59:07 · answer #3 · answered by jbtascam 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
If the woman wants birth control, I think that it would be a good service to offer without cost. That is the only part I agree with on this particular hypothetical situation.
2007-07-17 07:00:04 · answer #4 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree that is an awesome idea! That'll stop women from living off of our system!! At least like you said just offering people free birth control will extremely cut down on unwanted pregnancys.
2007-07-17 06:56:15 · answer #5 · answered by Amber 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Definitely agree with it, especially if it coincides with the removal of Roe Vs. Wade (with qualifications for health problems).
I'd call it the Personal Responsibility Law!
(And I'm actually a liberal, so when you flame me don't call me a Con. I might have to report you for that kind of slander.)
Also, to those above, how is government getting involved in a person's sex-life here. It is an offer, not an order. I see no unwanted involvement.
2007-07-17 06:56:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
it somewhat is an exceptionally stable question. in the event that they'd provide delivery administration then i think of an excellent variety of youthful little ones would take it and have an more desirable danger at not having infant's that they the two do not prefer or can help them selves. yet there is not something incorrect with being a single be certain.
2016-09-30 04:57:46 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No way, by the government doing this they are essentially endorsing sexuality for everyone. Birth control doesn't prevent STDs, this is a line the government shouldn't cross. If you can't afford birth control, don't have sex, much less kids.
2007-07-17 07:03:26 · answer #8 · answered by Pfo 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The government is ill prepared to give out aid after emergencies I wouldnt like to see nor would I accept any "free" birth control from the government
2007-07-17 06:59:03 · answer #9 · answered by Bye-Partisan 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I think that is a great idea. I know at least 2 people who have 4+ kids and they keep having kids to get more money from the government. GRRRRR.
2007-07-17 07:00:04 · answer #10 · answered by Mystickjen 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
i agree - it could help cut the unexpected pregnancies down - also those who dont have insurance to cover b/c can get it! its not really the government interferring - hell they are interferring w/woman whose babies have terrible developmental disorders (like spinal cord incomplete or skull not closing) that are basically death sentences upon birth by not allowing them to abort after 20wks! so it would be by choice that you take free birth control, not the law!!
2007-07-17 06:58:27 · answer #11 · answered by d b 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋