Would these preventive measures help us save money on welfare payouts?
2007-10-02 06:44:07 · 32 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
No, there is more profit in war, and the result is the same.
Fewer people.
2007-10-02 06:46:47 · answer #1 · answered by Darth Vader 6 · 7⤊ 3⤋
Were that to happen,you can bet the moral majority would say it condones sex without the benefit of marriage. It isn't the welfare payouts, it is the way welfare is set up that's the problem.
2007-10-02 06:51:28 · answer #2 · answered by gone 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Eh, maybe discounted price or something like that, which already exists.. I don't know about "free." That's an awful lot of money that could be spent on something else, like actual health care.
You would think that those who advocate against abortion would support this measure, but somehow I think it gets in the way of "family values," not to mention being under the dreaded category of "social medicine."
2007-10-02 06:51:47 · answer #3 · answered by Frank 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
It would save our already overburdened health care system and save us from additional welfare payments to be doled out in the future. They should have clinics at every junior high school and high school as well that dispense them with a doctor's slip. It's a good idea. It's been proven to lower the number of abortions as well so it's a good idea all the way around.
2007-10-02 06:57:23 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
yes.
sex is a biological need. condoms will cut down on pregnancy and stds. not only welfare but people whom use free clinics and places that the gov funds (that provide treatment for little to no cost) would have two less things they need treatment for
not to the mention the non-monetary reasons why this is a good idea
2007-10-02 12:21:39 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hey, John, I think that's already being done (for over 20 years). Heard of Planned Parenthood?
I do not support Planned Parenthood, incidentally. And personally, I believe the real abortion debate lies in who should pay for abortions.
2007-10-02 07:05:31 · answer #6 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If it will reduce the number of abortions, why not? I would rather the money be spent on condoms than war.
2007-10-02 06:53:05 · answer #7 · answered by slykitty62 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Still wouldnt work. I think there should be a mandate that all girls once they have started their periods, have the option to have a free IUD that way the likehood of them becoming pregnant as a teenager is very slight. we need a way to stop teenage pregnancies, I am so tired of seeing children suffer because the parents were too irresponsible to take care of themselves properly!
2007-10-02 06:51:30 · answer #8 · answered by ask me again 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Of course, anything that would help is good but the cons are anti anything that helps people unless it is they who are being helped than it is okay. Maybe putting it as you have in terms of saving money on welfare will convince them to let the government do SOMETHING for people.
2007-10-02 06:47:53 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 3⤋
They already are. So, yes. Clinics provide FREE condoms and birth control. I have PPO with my job, so I don't go to free clinics. I don't want to take away from other people who really need these services.
2007-10-02 06:48:42 · answer #10 · answered by Liberal City 6 · 8⤊ 1⤋
Sure and Prozac too. Maybe even put it in the water supply, maybe it'll settle everyone down.
2007-10-03 03:07:17 · answer #11 · answered by Princess of the Realm 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋