Hey fundies- you don't want abortions? I don't want invitro included.

[Horse with no Name]

We want to live by God's will?
Well does it make sense to you that God thinks you will be a crappy parent so he didn't give you the capacity to have children.
You are a morally bankrupt piece of trash and God just thinks it would be better if you didn't procreate. He told me so himself when I saw him on my toast this morning.

[Mythsaje]

1. Hey... You're not at less than zero...

You must be doing something wrong.

:evilgrin:

[Horse with no Name]

2. Give it time

:rofl:

[HughMoran]

50. Cynicism was a little premature

:)

[redqueen]

62. WTF are you talking about?

[Mythsaje]

91. The sig line... n/t

[redqueen]

92. D'oh.

:blush:

[Howardx]

3. i have always found that curious

why do they take gods word on everything but refuse to accept his judgement on their parental fitness? not too mention the preborn that dont thrive during such a procedure.

[Mythsaje]

6. They don't take God's word on everything...

"Prayer... Your way of telling God that you think his plan sucks."

;)

[Howardx]

9. haha

good point!

[northernlights]

34. ...

:spray: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Bette Noir]

72. I'd like to kick and rec that one-liner.

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. They don't take his word on everything

they mix materials in clothes, don't sell daughters to slavery when in debt, play with a pig skin... could go on.

They take what they like and ignore the rest.

[Javaman]

39. Some animals are more equal than others. nt

[KamaAina]

4. Well, I for one don't want Viagra included.

If it's flopping over like a wet noodle, then clearly that's God's will. Sorry, Messrs. Sanford, Ensign, Pickering, et al.

That oughta get their attention... :P

[Horse with no Name]

7. I agree

It's part of God's will for old men to leave young women alone when they entered their second childhood.:hide:

[Tangerine LaBamba]

8. THANK YOU!

Why does Medicare cover that Blowjob-In-A-Box that I see advertised on late night TV?

http://www.postvac.com/medicare.html

[KamaAina]

10. Oh dear FSM, that sounds like an even bigger scam than "The Scooter Store"

all that did was make it harder (so to speak :P ) for people who really need mobility scooters to get them.

I've never seen that. I guess I just don't stay up late enough these days... :boring:

[Tangerine LaBamba]

12. I stay up really late,

with the TV on in the background, and it's astonishing what shows up then.

I just looked around to see what a Pos-T-Vac looks like. I found it. Very disturbing...........

http://www.rejoyn.com/postvac.html

[Horse with no Name]

13. I find that commercial with the homely guy in the elevator

that is holding that box of herbal viagra creepy to nth degree.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

15. OK -

that's a new one on me, but I ride an elevator every day, and now I'm creeped out ........................

[PatSeg]

78. It is very disturbing

Late night TV is like another plane of existence. I can't fast forward quick enough through that insane garbage. Extenze is another bizarre, freaky product, but it is "FUN"!

[Pool Hall Ace]

14. GAAAH! You weren't kidding!

:wtf:

[chatnoir]

74. "Vacuum Therapy"??

:wtf:

And covered by Medicare?? That's so wrong. Eww.

[Dappleganger]

25. Don't forget

Limpballs.

[smalll]

26. Exactly.

If some pasty-faced, sedentary, overscheduled, overpaid middle-aged husband can't put down his blackberry and get it up for his wife any more, there are many of us younger (or even middle-aged men) who still can, and stand at the ready to fill that breach. It's called spreading the wealth.

(A little in contradiction to my posts on the monogamy thread, but yet and still, it is a point.)

[DesertDiamond]

33. When Viagra came out, I immediately felt concern for all of my older female friends

who had breathed a sigh of relief when their husbands couldn't perform anymore. I believe that men who are prescribed Viagra should be required to take a course in how to please a woman.

[AlbertCat]

81. required to take a course in how to please a woman.

Why is that?

I use Viagra.... but I don't sleep with women.


Perhaps women should take a course in saying "no". I mean, what happened to "I have a headache"?

[lark]

99. Perhaps some men should learn

how to accept a NO, STOP and act accordingly.

[notadmblnd]

97. Really? I thought viagra was the greatest thing since sliced white bread

it always pissed me off when my husband finished before I did. I felt viagra evened things out for us.:shrug:

[etherealtruth]

5. Sadly, I think a lot of the religiously insane ...

... truly believe that about in vitro fertilization.

As far as I'm concerned it is fine not to believe in abortion, its your right to make basic moral decisions. If you believe abortion is wrong .... don't get one.

I don't believe the religiously insane believe all people deserve access to health care .... if God wanted you to have health care you'd have a job that provided it ... if you don't ... @ss-holes.

[elehhhhna]

90. if God wanted you to have health care you'd have been born in EUROPE

[GoCubsGo]

11. THANK YOU!!!

These are same idiots who claim that homosexuality is "not natural", yet who are first in line to get in vitro. Talk about "unnatural"!!!

[ourbluenation]

18. and they're pro life and pro war. strange combo, no?

[kath]

19. And pro-death penalty.

[Maru Kitteh]

16. I want both included. Both are reproductive healthcare issues.

Both should be private decisions and none of ANYBODY'S damn business.

[iamjoy]

70. That's Not The Point

At least not to me. I know the religious extremists just want any excuse to push their view on every one else, but to me it comes down to what should be paid for by the government. I am not sure the government should be paying for procedures and drugs that are not medically necessary. That would include elective abortions, in vitro fertilization and drugs to treat erectile dysfunction.

I'm very strongly pro-Choice. When people talk about taxpayer dollars not funding abortions because it is immoral, I get defensive because maybe I don't think taxpayer dollars should be used for immoral acts like war and executions. Thinking of it in terms of medical necessity is a different debate. After all, you wouldn't expect the government to pick up the tab for a woman's breast enlargement, would you? I mean, it's her body so why do you care what she does with it, right?

[Chemisse]

94. An abortion is considerably cheaper than childbirth

Maybe an abortion is not medically necessary in and of itself, but that fetus has to come out somehow, sometime, so refusing to fund abortions will not save us money.

[iamjoy]

98. We Will Lose That Debate

If we try to make the argument that abortion is cheaper than childbirth, we will surely lose. As it is those who oppose government run healthcare are spreading lies about rationing as if the government would allow people not considered worthy to die rather than to pay for their treatment. It makes no sense to me because right now people without health insurance are dying because they can't afford care.

It's not about saving money, it's about trying to adhere to consistent principles - that which is medically necessary. It's a reasonable compromise that avoids the sticky moral issues. Of course, once you start putting abortions on par with Viagra and In-Vitro you know folks are going to howl.

Good.

[The Doctor.]

17. You put Phish Food ice cream on your toast too?!?!

You so rock!

[Joe Fields]

20. And while we're at it, no Viagra for you limp dicked repukes.

[Myrina]

71. THANK YOU!

:applause:

[mamaleah]

21. Many fundies are very ANTI- in vitro

Because of the leftover fertilized eggs.

Roman Catholicism completely rejects it officially, but many Protestants reject it for the same reason, though their overseeing bodies may not make an official statement.

[spanone]

23. he told me the same thing on the golf course yesterday.

[Withywindle]

24. I agree.

How can anyone think having an abortion must be "against" God's will, while spending tens of thousands of dollars to have egg-and-sperm omelets cooked up in a very high-tech kitchen isn't?

I'm not even a Christian, but I rather think Jesus might be more concerned with finding good loving families for all the millions of homeless children who are already here. Sort of the same argument as to why puppy-mills are wrong and adopting from a shelter is better. "Designer dogs" bad? I agree. Designer babies are worse. is it about love or is it about the ego-worship of your own DNA?

[BlancheSplanchnik]

64. Right On sistah!!!!!

Very well said!!!!!!! + 10000

[AlbertCat]

82. ego-worship of your own DNA?

I agree wholeheartedly.

If you're "anti-choice"...then you should be required to adopt 5 unwanted children before you are allowed to harass women going into clinics.


As far as DNA goes....

I recommend Richard Dawkins' "The Selfish Gene" where he hypothesizes ours (and every living thing's) bodies (or whatever form) are merely vessels to keep our genes going so they may do what they do.... that is replicate. On the genetic level, this is the only goal. Your behavior too is geared toward that goal. Monogamy is merely a device to ensure you are not spending time nurturing someone else's genes (which are half of any offspring's genetic makeup). But also you want to get as much of your genetic material out and about (especially males) so cheating is also common. This is why family gets preferential treatment...even cousins have some of your same genes.
Then why sex? Why not just clone? Well, the environment is ever changing and sex provides an good way of adapting to change....especially in complex "vessels".

It's all very interesting whether one agrees or not. A great book! (1st published in 1975. This ain't new.)

[NoSheep]

27. Oh what an excellent post. My favorite. Hypocrisy trumped.

;)

[cbdo2007]

28. Most health insurance currently doesn't pay for IVF

And the Evangelicals don't agree with IVF cause of the wasted embryos(sp?)

So what's the point of this post exactly?

[Horse with no Name]

107. You sure about that?

http://www.ncsl.org/IssuesResearch/Health/InsuranceCoverageforInfertilityLaws/tabid/14391/Default.aspx
>>>snip
Approximately 12 percent of U.S. women of childbearing age, about 1 in 8 couples, have received assistance for infertility. Usually, infertility is defined as the absence of conception after at least one year of regular, unprotected intercourse. More than 27,000 babies were born in the United States in 2005 as a result of non-donor assisted reproductive technology (ART) procedures. Common methods of infertility treatment include various insemination techniques and hormone therapy to stimulate egg production. Assisted reproductive techniques are procedures in which pregnancy is attempted through the use of external means; for example, eggs are fertilized outside the womb and then placed into a woman's uterus through in vitro fertilization (IVF).

Although advances in infertility treatment have helped thousands of couples become parents, the procedures are not without controversy. Such procedures can be quite expensive--on average each cycle of IVF costs, $8,158 plus an average of $4,000 for medications--and debate exists about whether insurance plans should be required to cover them. Cost estimates for insurance coverage of infertility treatments range from an additional $0.20 to $2.00 per member per month. Recently, studies have shown that assisted reproductive technologies have contributed to an increase in multiple births, which have a higher rate of prematurity than single births. In 2004, 8.1 percent of all newborns were low birthweight (less than 5.5 pounds), the highest percentage since the early 1970s. Preterm births cost society at least $26 billion per year.

Since the 1980s, 14 states, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas, and West Virginia, have passed laws that require insurers to either cover or offer coverage for infertility diagnosis and treatment. Twelve states have laws that require insurance companies to cover infertility treatment. Two states, California and Texas, have laws that require insurance companies to offer coverage for infertility treatment. While most states with laws requiring insurance companies to offer or provide coverage for infertility treatment include coverage for in vitro fertilization, California and New York have laws that specifically exclude coverage for the procedure.

[pnwmom]

29. Since most fundies are also against in-vitro, I'm not sure what your point is. n/t

[mamaleah]

30. Yeah I was wondering the same thing. *shrug*

[Vickers]

32. Are you fucking KIDDING me?

I know of at least 7 fundie whacko families that used IVF (successfully and otherwise) over the last few years, including my IMMEDIATE family.

If it works..."God's will is done!!!!"

If it doesn't..."God's will is done!!!"

:eyes:

Anecdotal, but hey, seen it with my own eyes.

[jberryhill]

38. Some individual families do... but as a group...

They are against it, because it often involves "left over" fertilized ova, or selective abortion in the case of too many that implant in the uterus.

Your particular fundie family may not be well informed on the position that fundies generally take on this.

http://www.kevinstilley.com/in-vitro-fertilization-a-christian-perspective/comment-page-1/

" Many Christians have gone through in vitro without understanding the destruction of life that usually accompanies it."

[Vickers]

48. Well, in the cases I've *personally* known about, they tended

to cherry-pick their morality stance.

[jberryhill]

57. And that's the point....

Evangelicals or fundies who do IVF are either misinformed or simply deciding to disagree with the position generally taken by those groups.

[pnwmom]

79. Then you should ask them how they can justify it since embryos are usually

destroyed in the process.

[Alcibiades]

41. That's exactly right

The OP begins from a false premise. If you google "pro-life" and "in-vitro," you'll find that most pro-lifers are indeed opposed to in-vitro fertilization:

"How does in vitro fertilization cause the death of human embryos?

The Jones Institute, one of the pioneers of in vitro fertilization, reports that only 10 to 20% of the human embryos produced by in vitro fertilization ever result in a normal pregnancy. The Centers for Disease Control estimated that in 1998, 28,000 babies were born through in vitro fertilization in the United States. This means that 140,000 - 280,000 human embryos are missing from the equation for that year alone.

What happens to the rest of the embryos?

* Many embryos die in the transfer process since they are fragile.
* Some embryos are unwanted and eliminated because they are considered genetically inadequate.
* Some embryos are stored alive in freezers.
* Some embryos are simply killed as they are washed down the sink."
"What about infertile couples who desperately want a child?

No one has the right to a child. Even for the most loving of couples, there is no right to a child through either normal conjugal relations or reproductive technologies.

In vitro fertilization turns children into commodities. When a couple undergoes in vitro fertilization, they are saying, "We want a child no matter what," and the child becomes an object. This evolves into a selective mentality, whereby couples choose the kind of child they want.

Above all, a child is a gift. Cooperating with God's plan for human procreation ensures that all children are accepted as gifts."

"What is the fundamental principle?

Any reproductive technique that replaces the conjugal act undermines the meaning of conjugal union and is an affront human dignity."

Plus, it's scientific, and we know how they feel about science.

[valerief]

46. Fundies are the big in vitro users, aren't they? Babies, babies, babies! Reason for living. nt

[jberryhill]

60. They Oppose IVF

Some RW Christian couples do it on the sly, because they want to have children of their own.

In the main, IVF is condemned because it results in "leftover" embryos and selective reduction in the event that too many implant.

The OP makes about zero sense on two counts, since IVF is an elective procedure not covered by insurance, and fundies are rabid in their opposition to it.

[AlbertCat]

84. Then why do these women who have "litters" of 4, 5, or 6 babies ALWAYS thank god?

If it were up to god, they'd be childless. Thank Dupont instead!

[valerief]

89. Yayuh! nt

[pipi_k]

105. No kidding! That always makes me grit my teeth

Thank you God!!!

Yeah. God created them so they couldn't have babies without a little help from Medical Science...the same Medical Science they rail against and claim is worthless and evil when it goes against whatever THEY don't want.

assholes

[libodem]

31. No invetro

and no keepin' the 3-4 month pre-term neonates alive either. Plus what about the persistive vegetative state cases on vents and feeding tubes? Ya know when it comes down to it what about all the grievously wounded vets that Bush left us? I know I'm just being argumentative but what about the Dr and the pt making the decision about what is the right treatment? Abortion should be a right. No child should be born unwanted to a selfish brat of a mother, who is too, immature to consider adoption. Why should she be punished by having the child ripped from her arms, because nobody told her that when the guys says he's pulling out at the last second he already injected her with sperm-laden pre-cum. Fuck the Republicans.

[northernlights]

35. ...

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Thank you for the great start to my day :D

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

36. For Tweety: I ain't payin' for no malaria medicine!

Tweets got his abortion feathers ruffled over this issue.

[graywarrior]

37. Do freepers get vasectomies?

[Hepburn]

40. Only on the blood vessels that go to the brain. eom

[fascisthunter]

42. ouch

:thumbsup:

[Hepburn]

43. ....

:evilgrin:

[11 Bravo]

54. Well, they are dickheads.

:thumbsup:

[Lance_Boyle]

44. would IVF be covered by a public option?

This is hardly something that is "medically necessary." If that's the standard being applied to abortion services in the public option, then it should be applied to all services. IVF is a vanity procedure. I would not have it covered, just like I wouldn't cover facelifts and tummy tucks.

[Hepburn]

47. Hey.....if they want a baby that badly....

...they can adopt, right?

[Lance_Boyle]

49. yes, or they can live without a baby

No way should vanity procedures like IVF be performed with taxpayer money.

[Hepburn]

52. Yep....

...IMO, it works both ways: Want a baby and cannot have one ~~ do without; don't want a baby and are pregnant, have it.

:hi:

[waiting for hope]

69. They would never think of that ...

The whole RW slant is "ME ME ME ME ME ME ME" and "I WANT I WANT I WANT I WANT I WANT I WANT" ... I still want them to show me what they have done to help disadvantaged children and those kids that are screaming for a family. And I'm adopted so I can relate.

[PatSeg]

77. Oh, they do that too

They often are a part of a system that takes advantage of young unwed mothers, who are frequently lied to and taken advantage of so a more proper Christian couple can have a baby that they can mold to their own image. Then they put on a badge of sainthood, as if they rescued a poor baby from a morally suspect young woman. It's the Christian thing to do, you know. If the confused mother has 2nd thoughts, she is threatened with legal action and then cast off as nothing more than a breeder for their god given convenience.

[jberryhill]

58. It's Not Covered By Insurance, And RW Christians Are Against It

So, it is difficult to figure out what the point of the OP is here.

[valerief]

45. LOL! I saw Jeebus in my danish this morning!!!

:rofl:

[FLyellowdog]

55. Crap! Just ate my Danish without looking for Jeebus!

Now what?:shrug:

[valerief]

59. Gotta scoop him on the other end!!!!

:rofl:

[FLyellowdog]

67. I was afraid of that.

:puke:

[Iris]

51. damn straight! I always wonder why no one brings this up.

[marshall]

53. There are WAY too many people in the world, thank you very much God

It's God's plan for population growth.

And there's always adoption.

[WoodyD]

56. Got cancer?

Suck it up. It's god's will.

Everything that happens is god's will. So you can't do anything about anything because anything you do is against god's will. Unless it's god's will for you to do something.

I don't know how fundies live with all the contradictions without their brains exploding. I guess it's the same way the "family values" repugs live with their own various infidelities.

IOKIIGW. It's okay if it's god's will. God's will being defined as "whatver I want to do anyway."

[redqueen]

61. Thank you! I'm calling about this issue today.

I hadn't even thought of that... that'd be a huge savings!

:D

[Lasher]

63. I don't want any tax money going to religious hospitals.

If fundies get a line item veto on abortion, I want the same authority to use as I see fit.

[izzybeans]

65. okay.

[kestrel91316]

66. How do I rig DU so I can rec about 100 times?

[waiting for hope]

68. Ha!

Horse, that is one fantastic rant. K&R. :)

BTW, can you pass the toast?

[azmouse]

73. Why is it ok to mock the infertile?

I wasn't able to have children. Am I shit to you?

[AlbertCat]

85. Why is it ok to mock the infertile?

I thought we were mocking hypocritical Fundies.

[azmouse]

88. By taking pot shots at those who are unable to have children?

DUers are better than that.

[Chemisse]

96. Infertility can be heartbreaking

I think IVF should be covered to some degree. Why should only the rich people be able to have children when they have fertility problems? But it should be a limit of 2 kids perhaps, and mandatory culling of multiple pregancies. If you say no at the last minute, once you've seen those 8 little embryos in there, then insurances says no to the bill.

[Horse with no Name]

108. Do you actively seek to deny other people their reproductive rights?

The "mocking" wasn't at you unless you fall in that hypocritical category.

[Ex Lurker]

75. most fundies would be okay with this

they don't like medical intervention in the reproductive process in general.

[Kadie]

76. Why pick on the infertile?

If you want to go after those who claim things shouldn't be tampered with because of God's will, then expand that thought. Everything from eyeglasses, to going to the dentist, to taking antibiotics could all be considered going against God's will.

Saying(even in jest) that God thinks someone would be a crappy parent therefore He took away their ability to conceive is offensive to me and I am sure many others that have gone through infertility.

On a side note. Health insurance usually does not pay for IVF, or if it does, it will only cover a small fraction of the costs. Maybe the bloods tests and other minor portions.

Also, one of the main reasons I am pro-choice is because I think a woman has a right to choose whether or not to have a child. That may mean abortion for some, or infertility treatment for others.

[azmouse]

80. Thank you Kadie.

:hug:

I don't understand the insensitivity here to people such as myself who were unable to have a child.
I think my husband and I would have made great parents. Sadly, we weren't given the ability.

[AlbertCat]

86. I think my husband and I would have made great parents.

And you could have been, unless there was some reason you couldn't adopt.

You can't now?

[azmouse]

87. We chose not to adopt.

No, you may not be critical of our personal choice.
There is nothing wrong with adoption. It's a beautiful thing but it isn't the way my husband and I wanted to build a family.

[emmadoggy]

95. Well-said, Kadie.

Thank you.:)

[customerserviceguy]

83. Abortions and in-vitro

are only two of a long list of things that are excluded by some insurances, and will be under discussion before we have some sort of national healthcare. That's inevitable.

There WILL be exclusions, guaranteed. What gets excluded is going to be the subject of horse trading. I predict that in order to have bipartisan support, President Obama and the Democratic leadership will be sorely tempted to put in at least a few exclusions. Congress is used to that kind of horse trading.

[notadmblnd]

93. what does it say in the bible about barren women?

I'm pretty sure it doesn't say "Thou must get turkey baster out".

[felinetta]

100. Thanks, you made me laugh. I'm jealous that you got god toast!

[Divine Discontent]

101. ooh.. ouch, that's a pretty good retort to their judgment! God bless... eom

[Swede Atlanta]

102. This should be even-handed....

I am opposed to abortion as a means of family planning. But I am for a woman's right to choose with respect to whether or not to carry a fetus to term.

Couples should not rely on abortion as a free pass to engage in pro-creatively risky sex. They need to be held to account. Women need to be educated on the need to use precautions whether that is the pill, a diaphram, etc. Men need to be educated to wrap their whopper. Coitus interruptus is not likely to work because men are unlikely to want to withdraw at the moment of climax.

But on the other hand if these freepers want to have my tax dollars fund them and their perverted friends getting a boner to poke whoever they see fit, including their mistresses, I draw the line.

Either you are for funding treatments associated with human sexuality whether getting an erection or providing for a woman to choose whether to carry a child to term, it must be the same.

[crikkett]

103. That was Ms. Mary on your toast, pal. n/t

[LisaM]

104. Oh, good point! Good point!

Can I steal it?

[Quantess]

106. This is the zingiest OP I have seen in a while.

K & R