Jack Kemp

A significant part of this "woman's advocate's" argument of wanting the U.S. Govt. to pay for her personal birth control expenses appears to also be a desire for the government to act as her High Priest, to absolve her of all sin. This would make her recreational sex totally, multidimensionally free of costs, both financial and moral-guilt-shame related. Basically, this is a demand for taxpayer supported indulgences for her church or synagogue.

Jack
http://theresurgent.com/womens-advocate-pay-for-my-iud-so-i-can-have-sex/
Women’s advocate: Pay for my IUD so I can have sex
By Tim Thomas | July 5, 2017, 08:12pm | @AReasoningFaith

Emma Apkan is a self-professed reproductive rights advocate. In plain English, that means that she thinks US taxpayers should bear the economic burden for her birth control. The opening line from her recent column "The GOP health bill is an attack on our sexual rights” reads:
"When the American Health Care Act (AHCA), the bill to repeal the current health-care law, passed the U.S. House, my first thought was: [expletive deleted], would I have to stop having sex?”
Not "Will I have to pay for my own birth control?”
Not "Should I use some other form of birth control?”
Not even "Should I reevaluate my budget to see where that extra $30 will come from?”
No, it was "Would I have to stop having sex?”

Apparently Ms. Apkan doesn’t realize that the only logical conclusion to be reached from her statement is that she expects the US government to subsidize her desire to have sex. Either that, or she’s perfectly fine with a government entity – and by extension, US taxpayers – subsidizing her personal desire.

Read the rest!

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:33 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 281 words, total size 2 kb.