Free contraception does not create sluts, according to one study

[MillCreek]

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-contraceptives-sex-promiscuity-20140306,0,1545160.story#axzz2vHTAQa2c

At least, not for women in St. Louis.

[brimic]

Fail. There is no such thing as 'free' birth control, unless you are speaking of abstinence.

[Ron]

Somebody is paying for it.

How about calling it Taxpayer provided birth control?

[MillCreek]

I like to call it taxpayer-provided prevention of more welfare children with a corresponding decrease on social services, healthcare, and schooling that I would otherwise be paying for.  So from that standpoint, the numbers pencil out.

[roo_ster]

"Free" contraception no more creates sluts than "free" food or "free" plastic spoons create gluttons.  But they surely do enable those already so inclined as they no longer need to pay for their own consumables.

Of course, this is a novel use of the word "free."

I like to call it taxpayer-provided prevention of more welfare children with a corresponding decrease on social services, healthcare, and schooling that I would otherwise be paying for.  So from that standpoint, the numbers pencil out.

Those who are most likely to to suck on the gov't teat and create more of same are not likely to make the effort to get even free birth control.  Were talking some folks for whom cause & effect is akin to magic. 

There needs to be:
1. Permanent/semi-permanent and reliable birth control solution.
2. Incentives for folks to partake.

I would place a bounty on vas deferens and fallopian tubes of, say, $2000 in gift cards.  "Get cut, get cards."  Maybe a $500 bounty on Norplant or similar long-term implanted birth control.  "Get stuck, get stuff."

[brimic]

I like to call it taxpayer-provided prevention of more welfare children with a corresponding decrease on social services, healthcare, and schooling that I would otherwise be paying for.  So from that standpoint, the numbers pencil out.

Until I see some hard savings numbers- not obamacare-esque projections, I like to call it "more armed robery by .gov."
Liberal programs always sound good on paper, yet few to none of them are willing to pledge their own personal paycheck to sponsor birth control for a few individuals on their own...

This program is just another government 'fix' to another problem caused by government.
Free *expletive deleted*it is eventually going to run out. If you really want to help the needy, start weaning able-bodied people off the free *expletive deleted*it.

[Tallpine]

I like to call it taxpayer-provided prevention of more welfare children with a corresponding decrease on social services, healthcare, and schooling that I would otherwise be paying for.  So from that standpoint, the numbers pencil out.

But it's not the final solution.

[KD5NRH]

But it's not the final solution.

Execution seems a bit excessive.

[makattak]

Ummm... interesting way of framing the results. From the article:

New research has found that women are on average no more likely to have multiple sexual partners in a single month after they are provided no-cost access to birth control methods than they were before. And while women reported a slight uptick in their reported monthly sexual encounters a year after getting free contraceptives, the new study says the resulting frequency of sexual activity fell within expected boundaries for women of childbearing age.

Hmmm... so, people respond to incentives and cost. Even with sex and birth control. Shocking.
 
(And, given that birth control is so inexpensive in the first place, I'm not surprised that lowering it from $30 to 0 doesn't greatly alter incentives.)

[Jamisjockey]

Not sure how or why I give two shits how often someone else has sex.  Generally, I only care how much sex I have. 



IMHO, if you take from uncle sam, you should have to play by his rules.  Mandatory BC via invasive methods if you're on welfare.  I have no problem taking someone else's freedom who is taking my money from me by the force of a gun.

[makattak]

Not sure how or why I give two shits how often someone else has sex.  Generally, I only care how much sex I have. 

I don't care, either. Unfortunately, when I have to pay for it, it becomes my business. I don't want it to be my business, stop (the Government) from making me pay for it and it will no longer be my business.

("I WANT THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF MY BEDROOM! SO PAY FOR MY BIRTH CONTROL!"- Not ascribing it to you, but just cataloging the insanity. )

[MillCreek]

I don't care, either. Unfortunately, when I have to pay for it, it becomes my business. I don't want it to be my business, stop (the Government) from making me pay for it and it will no longer be my business.

("I WANT THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF MY BEDROOM! SO PAY FOR MY BIRTH CONTROL!"- Not ascribing it to you, but just cataloging the insanity. )

So from that standpoint, you should be in favor of any measures that reduce the total cost of Government support; i.e.: making more welfare babies, correct?  If a small amount of Government expenditure reduces the total financial burden, I would think that is a concept that everyone should support.

[Jamisjockey]

I don't care, either. Unfortunately, when I have to pay for it, it becomes my business. I don't want it to be my business, stop (the Government) from making me pay for it and it will no longer be my business.

("I WANT THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF MY BEDROOM! SO PAY FOR MY BIRTH CONTROL!"- Not ascribing it to you, but just cataloging the insanity. )

The only thing about it is that if having taxpayer funded birth control makes someone sexually promiscuous, it isn't any skin off my teeth.  I'm already getting *expletive deleted*ed, so to speak, by them taking "free" BC from me to begin with.  It is better than them popping out welfare babies.  
Ultimately, I'm of the 0 welfare camp.  There should not be a single red *expletive deleted*ing dime going into "entitlement".  I literally only support federal spending on defense.  Everything else is clearly negotiable and could be done better/cheaper/faster by state governments or private entities.  

[White Horseradish]

I would place a bounty on vas deferens and fallopian tubes of, say, $2000 in gift cards.  "Get cut, get cards."  Maybe a $500 bounty on Norplant or similar long-term implanted birth control.  "Get stuck, get stuff."

In India they had a program where a vasectomy would get you a gun license.

Also:http://www.projectprevention.org

[KD5NRH]

In India they had a program where a vasectomy would get you a gun license.

Did they have Sean Connery in a red diaper with a WFAR to promote it?

[Gowen]

There needs to be:
1. Permanent/semi-permanent and reliable birth control solution.
2. Incentives for folks to partake.

I would place a bounty on vas deferens and fallopian tubes of, say, $2000 in gift cards.  "Get cut, get cards."  Maybe a $500 bounty on Norplant or similar long-term implanted birth control.  "Get stuck, get stuff."

The only problem with this is the STD aspect, they catch something and there they are down at the clinic getting a shot or if it's bad enough, years of medical treatments.  We still get to pay and pay and pay.

[roo_ster]

The only problem with this is the STD aspect, they catch something and there they are down at the clinic getting a shot or if it's bad enough, years of medical treatments.  We still get to pay and pay and pay.

I do not believe in any program that solves all problems or covers 100% of the angles.  Such is the stuff of totalitarianism.

Also, I would be happy if the CURRENT welfare generation were the LAST welfare generation, even if they were poxed.

[MillCreek]

I do not believe in any program that solves all problems or covers 100% of the angles. 

I like to recall Voltaire's quote: the perfect is the enemy of the good.  Insisting on perfection usually means that things are never even started.  I will take what gains I can.

[RevDisk]

I like to call it taxpayer-provided prevention of more welfare children with a corresponding decrease on social services, healthcare, and schooling that I would otherwise be paying for.  So from that standpoint, the numbers pencil out.

This is my POV. I'd rather pay for taxpayer-funded contraceptives than all the programs mentioned. Is it a perfect solution? Nope.


Roo_ster's solution would probably bring up eugenics arguments. Personally, if it was voluntary, I wouldn't see any ethical problems with it. I plan on getting snipped in the near future myself.

[roo_ster]

This is my POV. I'd rather pay for taxpayer-funded contraceptives than all the programs mentioned. Is it a perfect solution? Nope.


Roo_ster's solution would probably bring up eugenics arguments. Personally, if it was voluntary, I wouldn't see any ethical problems with it. I plan on getting snipped in the near future myself.

The intent is not *-genic, but taxpayer relief.  Also, I think it might help those truly working to get out of poverty. 

[Tallpine]

Why not require everyone to use birth control and get a permit to have a kid?   

I'm sure the Supreme Court would go along ... call it a tax or something.

[RevDisk]

Why not require everyone to use birth control and get a permit to have a kid?   

I'm sure the Supreme Court would go along ... call it a tax or something.

Problem is, governments would be handing out the permits. So there would be corruption, bribery, favor trading, gerrymandering, red lining, unions, and other bad things in short order.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

I reject the false choice fallacy that says we must either provide free birth control or else pay higher welfare costs.

So from that standpoint, you should be in favor of any measures that reduce the total cost of Government support; i.e.: making more welfare babies, correct?  If a small amount of Government expenditure reduces the total financial burden, I would think that is a concept that everyone should support.

If the goal is to reduce cost of supporting welfare babies, just do it directly.  It's an arbitrary choice how much we pay for welfare babies, so let's just pay less for them.  No need to mess about with free birth control.

This is my POV. I'd rather pay for taxpayer-funded contraceptives than all the programs mentioned. Is it a perfect solution? Nope.

I'd rather pay neither.  

[MillCreek]

HTG, while you are busy rejecting the false choice fallacies and preferring not to pay either for birth control or welfare babies, what is your proposal instead to deal with the real world problem?  Or do you not get bogged down in details?

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Personal accountability and properly aligned incentives would go a long way towards solving these problems.  Private charities can handle what's left.