dmarc117 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 The House Democrats' bill includes $335 million for sexually transmitted disease education and prevention programs at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Oh yeah, we really need to borrow money for that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 While it might be inappropriate for a stimulus package, there is investment value in getting people to protect themselves and prevent the spread of disease, yeah? No, Jeebus will take care of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted January 28, 2009 Author Share Posted January 28, 2009 While it might be inappropriate for a stimulus package, there is investment value in getting people to protect themselves and prevent the spread of disease, yeah? is it that difficult for people to understand? unprotected sex equals risk. pay me 300 million now!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 (edited) For perspective purposes, this equals the cost of keeping Iraqis on our welfare doles for one day. Edited January 28, 2009 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 This is awesome fiscal responsibility! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 is it that difficult for people to understand? unprotected sex equals risk. pay me 300 million now!!! Ask the Palin family about how successful this education is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Or lack thereof? Didn't she slash the budget? Or was that what you were implying? Either way, good point. you're ruining good sarcasm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted January 28, 2009 Author Share Posted January 28, 2009 Ask the Palin family about how successful this education is. the money is earmarked for std education, not pregnancy. but nice try. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 you're ruining good sarcasm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 the money is earmarked for std education, not pregnancy. but nice try. I wasn't responding to the legislation. I was responding to this: is it that difficult for people to understand? unprotected sex equals risk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted January 29, 2009 Author Share Posted January 29, 2009 I wasn't responding to the legislation. I was responding to this: an unwanted pregnancy isnt a risk, its a pain in the ass. my obsession on your willy are a risk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brewer Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 States spend 14.7 billion per year treating STDs. If you can reduce annual cases of STDs by 2.5%, you get your money back in one year. Probably not a bad investment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 an unwanted pregnancy isnt a risk, its a pain in the ass. my obsession on your willy are a risk. I think unwanted pregnancy and your obsession on my willy are both serious risks, frankly. I think the latter is more disturbing though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 an unwanted pregnancy isnt a risk, its a pain in the ass. my obsession on your willy are a risk. OK, for obvious reasons, I'm going to ignore your rather bizarre obsession with CEO's member and just address your apparent disconnect between sex education and it's affects on both stds and unwanted pregnancy. First off, you do realize that basically all the things one does to avoid stds just happen to also avoid pregnancy? The only one I can think of that prevents stds but not pregnancy is monogamous sex with a healthy partner. Surely you're not one of those idiots who thinks sex ed should consist of nothing more than, "Don't have sex 'til your married. Have a nice day." Mind you, I'm not saying by a long shot that it is stupid to think one should not engage in sex before marriage. Rather, that you'd have to be an abject moran to think you can just simply tell teenagers not to screw and be done with it. Depending on your religious views, human inclination to screw either preceded religion by 1000s of years or that the religious right's first attempt at abstinence only sex ed failed when Adam and Eve did the nasty right after god told them not to. None the less, I think all of us have seen, just linked here at the Tailgate, enough stories of totally unfit parents and the horrific consequences of that to realize that unwanted pregnancies are far worse than simply, "a pain in the ass". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Cid Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 an unwanted pregnancy isnt a risk, its a pain in the ass. No, if it was a pain in the ass, it wouldn't have been an unwanted pregnancy to begin with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.