Should IUDs and other contraceptive methods be free in states where abortion is banned?

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Absolutely. Make them free and promote them the same way we did with the COVID vaccines.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     No, but I support benefits such as paid parental leave and tax credits for parents as a means of encouraging responsible childrearing. The health of the family is fundamental to the health of society, and needs to be the focus of prosocial policy ideas surrounding the topic. Not aiding and abetting the Peter Pan Syndrome of the modern American.

[fhtagn]

No, because none of those are a need. If you don't want to become pregnant, it should not be the government's responsibility to help you pay for that, especially when free and low cost options already exist currently. 

The government should, however, do more to help families that will be created out of abortion bans, and encourage more people to have children in the future.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

     No, but I support benefits such as paid parental leave and tax credits for parents as a means of encouraging responsible childrearing. The health of the family is fundamental to the health of society, and needs to be the focus of prosocial policy ideas surrounding the topic. Not aiding and abetting the Peter Pan Syndrome of the modern American.

Believe it or not, not wanting children does not mean that you, in fact, have the mind of a child.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Yes, it's a matter of public health and public good warranting an immediate intervention. We can't have millions of unwanted children wandering around causing trouble. Well worth the cost. It pays for itself.

[Devout Centrist]

    No, but I support benefits such as paid parental leave and tax credits for parents as a means of encouraging responsible childrearing. The health of the family is fundamental to the health of society, and needs to be the focus of prosocial policy ideas surrounding the topic. Not aiding and abetting the Peter Pan Syndrome of the modern American.

Hm, interesting. Change begins at home, as they say.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

    No, but I support benefits such as paid parental leave and tax credits for parents as a means of encouraging responsible childrearing. The health of the family is fundamental to the health of society, and needs to be the focus of prosocial policy ideas surrounding the topic. Not aiding and abetting the Peter Pan Syndrome of the modern American.

Hm, interesting. Change begins at home, as they say.

Suddenly I'm interested in how the distinguished PiT believes my abstinence from sexual relationships or raising any type of family reflects on me either personally or mentally. But I do encourage total honesty. We're all adults here, after all. Except of course for those of us who are children for not fitting into that cookie-cutter mold.

[dead0man]

sure, if it's paid for by donations and not federal tax dollars.

[Associate Justice PiT]

    No, but I support benefits such as paid parental leave and tax credits for parents as a means of encouraging responsible childrearing. The health of the family is fundamental to the health of society, and needs to be the focus of prosocial policy ideas surrounding the topic. Not aiding and abetting the Peter Pan Syndrome of the modern American.

Hm, interesting. Change begins at home, as they say.

Suddenly I'm interested in how the distinguished PiT believes my abstinence from sexual relationships or raising any type of family reflects on me either personally or mentally. But I do encourage total honesty. We're all adults here, after all. Except of course for those of us who are children for not fitting into that cookie-cutter mold.

     I think it's commendable that you practice celibacy given that you don't want to raise a family, and in fact exactly the right choice for you to be making. Adhering to a religion where monasticism is practiced, I would be a hypocrite if I said not raising a family was an unacceptable choice. My problem is that the topic question implicitly classes abortion as a form of contraception and thereby is asking if people should be guaranteed easy access to contraceptives. I call it a Peter Pan Syndrome because it strikes me that people think there needs to be an easy out from the responsibilities that life seeks to put on their shoulders.

[Ferguson97]

Yes, and they should also be free in states where abortion is legal.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

    No, but I support benefits such as paid parental leave and tax credits for parents as a means of encouraging responsible childrearing. The health of the family is fundamental to the health of society, and needs to be the focus of prosocial policy ideas surrounding the topic. Not aiding and abetting the Peter Pan Syndrome of the modern American.

Hm, interesting. Change begins at home, as they say.

Suddenly I'm interested in how the distinguished PiT believes my abstinence from sexual relationships or raising any type of family reflects on me either personally or mentally. But I do encourage total honesty. We're all adults here, after all. Except of course for those of us who are children for not fitting into that cookie-cutter mold.

     I think it's commendable that you practice celibacy given that you don't want to raise a family, and in fact exactly the right choice for you to be making. Adhering to a religion where monasticism is practiced, I would be a hypocrite if I said not raising a family was an unacceptable choice. My problem is that the topic question implicitly classes abortion as a form of contraception and thereby is asking if people should be guaranteed easy access to contraceptives. I call it a Peter Pan Syndrome because it strikes me that people think there needs to be an easy out from the responsibilities that life seeks to put on their shoulders.

Alright, I do appreciate the clarification on that bit, but I want to emphasize that I have always separated abortion from birth control and contraceptives. I never held abortion as something not meaningfully different from the pill, including Plan B, or other conventional methods of birth control and family planning that exist as alternative to abortion.

But being responsible and accountable for another human life is one of the greatest challenges life can ever throw at you, regardless of circumstances, whether that involves one's offspring or another relative or a neighbor. You do, indeed, grow up. And present conditions make having a family practically impossible for young people. You can blame whoever you want for that being the case today, but the lack of confidence and the growing insecurity since the GFC will deter people from having families even if they feel ready to. Which is undoubtedly important to a child's formative years as those are easily the most important years of a person's life.

But multiple lawmakers have stated at least an openness to restricting access to contraceptives which, for all intents and purposes, make abortions less likely to be resorted to. IUDs can cost up to $1300 without insurance, assuming those aren't outlawed. And with the decision just out, women have every right to be concerned about whether those alternatives to abortion will remain available. This article, written by someone who supports overturning Roe and Casey, acknowledges that lawmakers hardly know what they're doing when they're putting exceptions in place. And that's just counting lawmakers who want to keep non-abortion contraceptives legal.

[Associate Justice PiT]

    No, but I support benefits such as paid parental leave and tax credits for parents as a means of encouraging responsible childrearing. The health of the family is fundamental to the health of society, and needs to be the focus of prosocial policy ideas surrounding the topic. Not aiding and abetting the Peter Pan Syndrome of the modern American.

Hm, interesting. Change begins at home, as they say.

Suddenly I'm interested in how the distinguished PiT believes my abstinence from sexual relationships or raising any type of family reflects on me either personally or mentally. But I do encourage total honesty. We're all adults here, after all. Except of course for those of us who are children for not fitting into that cookie-cutter mold.

     I think it's commendable that you practice celibacy given that you don't want to raise a family, and in fact exactly the right choice for you to be making. Adhering to a religion where monasticism is practiced, I would be a hypocrite if I said not raising a family was an unacceptable choice. My problem is that the topic question implicitly classes abortion as a form of contraception and thereby is asking if people should be guaranteed easy access to contraceptives. I call it a Peter Pan Syndrome because it strikes me that people think there needs to be an easy out from the responsibilities that life seeks to put on their shoulders.

Alright, I do appreciate the clarification on that bit, but I want to emphasize that I have always separated abortion from birth control and contraceptives. I never held abortion as something not meaningfully different from the pill, including Plan B, or other conventional methods of birth control and family planning that exist as alternative to abortion.

But being responsible and accountable for another human life is one of the greatest challenges life can ever throw at you, regardless of circumstances, whether that involves one's offspring or another relative or a neighbor. You do, indeed, grow up. And present conditions make having a family practically impossible for young people. You can blame whoever you want for that being the case today, but the lack of confidence and the growing insecurity since the GFC will deter people from having families even if they feel ready to. Which is undoubtedly important to a child's formative years as those are easily the most important years of a person's life.

But multiple lawmakers have stated at least an openness to restricting access to contraceptives which, for all intents and purposes, make abortions less likely to be resorted to. IUDs can cost up to $1300 without insurance, assuming those aren't outlawed. And with the decision just out, women have every right to be concerned about whether those alternatives to abortion will remain available. This article, written by someone who supports overturning Roe and Casey, acknowledges that lawmakers hardly know what they're doing when they're putting exceptions in place. And that's just counting lawmakers who want to keep non-abortion contraceptives legal.

     And likewise I appreciate you clarifying your thoughts. Asking you a question so I don't misunderstand you again, is your main interest in supporting this proposal to reduce demand for abortion?

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

     And likewise I appreciate you clarifying your thoughts. Asking you a question so I don't misunderstand you again, is your main interest in supporting this proposal to reduce demand for abortion?

Yes.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

No, because none of those are a need. If you don't want to become pregnant, it should not be the government's responsibility to help you pay for that, especially when free and low cost options already exist currently. 

The government should, however, do more to help families that will be created out of abortion bans, and encourage more people to have children in the future.

What about rape? Those women don't want to be pregnant. WTF.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     And likewise I appreciate you clarifying your thoughts. Asking you a question so I don't misunderstand you again, is your main interest in supporting this proposal to reduce demand for abortion?

Yes.

     My problem is that it would continue to support the development of a culture centered around a self-serving mentality of "freedom from children". While enabling that effect through contraception is certainly a lesser problem than doing it through abortion, I would rather look towards a greater good of a culture that does not actively foster the mentality that I describe.

[fhtagn]

No, because none of those are a need. If you don't want to become pregnant, it should not be the government's responsibility to help you pay for that, especially when free and low cost options already exist currently. 

The government should, however, do more to help families that will be created out of abortion bans, and encourage more people to have children in the future.

What about rape? Those women don't want to be pregnant. WTF.

How is offering a woman who is already pregnant from rape an IUD or birth control pills going to help her?

[Ferguson97]

No, because none of those are a need. If you don't want to become pregnant, it should not be the government's responsibility to help you pay for that, especially when free and low cost options already exist currently. 

The government should, however, do more to help families that will be created out of abortion bans, and encourage more people to have children in the future.

What about rape? Those women don't want to be pregnant. WTF.

How is offering a woman who is already pregnant from rape an IUD or birth control pills going to help her?

It won't help them, which is exactly his point. It's why the idea that contraceptives can just completely replace abortion is nonsensical.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

All medical interventions and devices should be free at the point of use, so yes.

[Person Man]

No, because none of those are a need. If you don't want to become pregnant, it should not be the government's responsibility to help you pay for that, especially when free and low cost options already exist currently. 

The government should, however, do more to help families that will be created out of abortion bans, and encourage more people to have children in the future.

What about rape? Those women don't want to be pregnant. WTF.

How is offering a woman who is already pregnant from rape an IUD or birth control pills going to help her?

It won't help them, which is exactly his point. It's why the idea that contraceptives can just completely replace abortion is nonsensical.

But if you are on contraceptives, it alleviates the need for abortion if you are raped while you are on them.

[Ferguson97]

No, because none of those are a need. If you don't want to become pregnant, it should not be the government's responsibility to help you pay for that, especially when free and low cost options already exist currently. 

The government should, however, do more to help families that will be created out of abortion bans, and encourage more people to have children in the future.

What about rape? Those women don't want to be pregnant. WTF.

How is offering a woman who is already pregnant from rape an IUD or birth control pills going to help her?

It won't help them, which is exactly his point. It's why the idea that contraceptives can just completely replace abortion is nonsensical.

But if you are on contraceptives, it alleviates the need for abortion if you are raped while you are on them.

The pill is not 100% effective. And someone should not be forced to carry a pregnancy even if they just forget to take the pill.

[DaleCooper]

The goal has not and never has been to end abortion, the goal has been to criminalize it. So these questions are pointless. You know exactly what the answer is going to be before anyone responds.

[fhtagn]

No, because none of those are a need. If you don't want to become pregnant, it should not be the government's responsibility to help you pay for that, especially when free and low cost options already exist currently. 

The government should, however, do more to help families that will be created out of abortion bans, and encourage more people to have children in the future.

What about rape? Those women don't want to be pregnant. WTF.

How is offering a woman who is already pregnant from rape an IUD or birth control pills going to help her?

It won't help them, which is exactly his point. It's why the idea that contraceptives can just completely replace abortion is nonsensical.

But if you are on contraceptives, it alleviates the need for abortion if you are raped while you are on them.

The pill is not 100% effective. And someone should not be forced to carry a pregnancy even if they just forget to take the pill.

How many unwanted pregnancies are the result of a person on birth control who forgot to take the pill and was raped?

[Indy Texas]

    No, but I support benefits such as paid parental leave and tax credits for parents as a means of encouraging responsible childrearing. The health of the family is fundamental to the health of society, and needs to be the focus of prosocial policy ideas surrounding the topic. Not aiding and abetting the Peter Pan Syndrome of the modern American.

Hm, interesting. Change begins at home, as they say.

Suddenly I'm interested in how the distinguished PiT believes my abstinence from sexual relationships or raising any type of family reflects on me either personally or mentally. But I do encourage total honesty. We're all adults here, after all. Except of course for those of us who are children for not fitting into that cookie-cutter mold.

     I think it's commendable that you practice celibacy given that you don't want to raise a family, and in fact exactly the right choice for you to be making. Adhering to a religion where monasticism is practiced, I would be a hypocrite if I said not raising a family was an unacceptable choice. My problem is that the topic question implicitly classes abortion as a form of contraception and thereby is asking if people should be guaranteed easy access to contraceptives. I call it a Peter Pan Syndrome because it strikes me that people think there needs to be an easy out from the responsibilities that life seeks to put on their shoulders.

Can you please stop with this fiction that people have abortions to keep from ever becoming parents when most women who have abortions already have children, and among those who don't, most go on to have children later on?

Are a husband and a wife not allowed to say two children is enough for them? Three children? Do you really expect two 30 year olds to remain celibate until the wife reaches menopause? Do you think that's going to result in a healthy, functional relationship?

[Person Man]

No, because none of those are a need. If you don't want to become pregnant, it should not be the government's responsibility to help you pay for that, especially when free and low cost options already exist currently. 

The government should, however, do more to help families that will be created out of abortion bans, and encourage more people to have children in the future.

What about rape? Those women don't want to be pregnant. WTF.

How is offering a woman who is already pregnant from rape an IUD or birth control pills going to help her?

It won't help them, which is exactly his point. It's why the idea that contraceptives can just completely replace abortion is nonsensical.

But if you are on contraceptives, it alleviates the need for abortion if you are raped while you are on them.

The pill is not 100% effective. And someone should not be forced to carry a pregnancy even if they just forget to take the pill.

How many unwanted pregnancies are the result of a person on birth control who forgot to take the pill and was raped?

This would objectively reduce the number of abortions. Nothing in such scenarios will be perfect.

[Former President tack50]

No. I mean sure, I would not oppose such a policy at all, but I don't think the must be free either; abortion legal or illegal.