The reality is that it is still frighteningly easy for men to walk away from reproductive repercussions -- not at all easy for women (80 percent of single parent households are headed up by moms and one in four children are being raised without a father).
I wonder why some women assume this is because of deadbeat dads rather than women divorcing men and not allowing dual-custody or visitation rights, but still getting child support and alimony.
Hey, there will probably come a time where a 10-year-old can get a gun more easily than a grown woman can get a birth control pill -- and that time may even be now.
If it was about the video, he shouldn't have replied to a post directly quoting and responding to the article. But I forgot most of the folks here are illiterate. Keep up with my balls in your face.
Because it perpetuates the bullshit story that woman can't get birth control because old men in the Supreme Court won't allow them. If women weren't allow to buy birth control, I would march, but they can buy it, but THEY have to BUY it, it's not given to them. If she wanted to be edgy, she'd do a skit where black leaders were complaining about cops killing blacks then showing them going back to their offices and getting the stats from their staffers showing how many blacks killed blacks in their towns that year and them using the report to line a bird cage. Ok, bad sketch, but you get the point.
The supreme court ruling said that businesses could choose healthcare plans that specifically do not include birth control because of their religious views. The issue was never 'free birth control.' Covered =/= Free.
EDIT: Do you also believe that employers should be able to choose plans that do not cover vaccinations due to their religious beliefs?
BTW your sketch idea is HILARIOUS. You should gun for Metzger's job.
yes. I don't want businesses forced to pay for something like that, UNLESS, someone is forced to work for that employer and they don't have the choice to work somewhere else. That would be a different argument.
Uh, the business doesn't pay for it. Do you think the healthcare companies are giving them a break on their healthcare costs because of a single drug exemption?
And I suppose we should go back to the era of not covering pre-existing conditions, etc? Dark ages mentality.
Not really. Do you think that the healthcare providers are going to charge them less in unsubsidized costs because they chose to remove coverage for birth control? I highly doubt it.
Just like a Republican to turn tail and run when confronted by facts and logic. This why it will be a loooong time before your side sees the White House again.
What facts? You want the government forcing businesses to pay for things. I believe in birth control, but also religious freedoms. People who label others republicans and want bigger government won't be swayed so it's a waste of time.
Because it's fake edgy. It's easy and boring and played out, like attacking Sarah Palin (who obviously does deserve ridicule) it's designed to get approving nods from the cultural elite.
Birth-control is SOOOO expensive you guise! Condoms cost 2 dollars and generic morning-after pills cost 40 bucks, how can you expect these empowered womins to collect 40 bucks? It'll be back-alley abortions I tell ya!
Can you entitled libertariantards please explain to me what's wrong with this commentary? The supreme court (in a 5-4 decision, 5 catholic men) literally decided that your employer has more choice than the woman does in her contraception.
How the fuck are you taking a different position? That's EXACTLY what happened? Are you denying it?
It's called choice and respect for beliefs you fucking idiot cunt.
The woman at all times retains the choice to use whatever contraception she wishes. Nothing changed. She does not have the right to compel other private individuals to pay for her mini-abortions when those individuals consider those abortions murder.
That's how fucking liberty is supposed to operate. She can make her own choices, purchase her own treatments; and at all times retain the choice to seek alternate employment opportunities more amenable to her principles and lifestyle should jockeying a cash-register at Hobby Lobby prove too burdensome for her sensibilities. And perfectly simultaneous to that - other individuals retain their choice to not actively fund something they categorically are opposed to. Everyone gets their free-choice.
But that basic system of personal freedoms is not good enough for you or cabbage-patch face apparently, you demand to force your wants and preferences down the throats of others, to deny choice or personal liberties, that's cos you're a fucking illiberal reactionary bigot. Now go fuck yourself, and take Schumer with you.
Are you fucking kidding me?! How the hell are contraceptives mini-abortions? Is this the 21st century or what that this kind of idea should be protected by religious freedom? A woman fucking just for sex? what if a jewish boss was opposed to a procedure of a jewish man receiving an organ donation from a non-jewish donor? would that be protected under his primitive views? religious freedom should definitely exist but not when it's a blatant contradiction to a normal modern way of life.
In this case, it doesn't so much matter what you think, it's about what the people that were being forced to buy the foetus terminating pharmaceuticals thought.
And so for the Supreme Court, that was kinda the beginning, middle and end of it.
But if you want to get technical, they found that religious expression should only be “substantially burdened in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest,” and then only by “the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.”
So, HHS mandates for vaccinations and transfusions were considered disease-preventative and life-saving treatments, and would not be precluded. Some types of contraception which specifically operated to terminate foetuses was not considered sufficient to override Congressional and Constitutional protections for religious expression.
You can't force people to buy you stuff you want, against their will, just cos you want it.
from what I understood they weren't forced to buy them but have it as an option for already a mandatory healthcare "package".honestly I don't know enough details about this issue I just know I like peckas.
You have the right to do whatever you want. Dye your hair, kill a foetus, drink piss, go snowboarding. Free choice. Help yourself.
You don't have any fucking "right" to force, to compel, someone else to subsidize and support it. Where the fuck would someone even begin to get such a fucking preposterous notion from?
That's how a child thinks. Time for you to put such infantile notions behind you. It's called being a proper fucking grown-up.
And take those cunting boxing gloves off before you dare to attempt to mistype another reply at me.
Oh except when it comes to subsidizing your churches, beliefs, and making them trump other beliefs right? Weird how you don't seem to have a problem with that but those whores choosing certain contraception fuck that.
It's amazing how you don't see this hole the supreme court is taking us in that says a corporation can use its "beliefs" to cut costs.
Not 'my' churches. I don't believe in any fucking religion.
So now what, stupid?
Here's where you got confused: Unlike you, I do believe in people having the liberty to exercise their own worldview free from violent coercion from the state or from selfish bigots like you.
It's their fucking private business. You want to hand out Plan B, you start your own fucking business. Run it how you like, you can do what you want. Be my fucking guest.
But do you see the difference - One way, we have all parties free to choose. The other way, your way, only offers violent compulsion and violation of personal belief.
I told you once already to fucking grow up. Act like an adult. Take personal responsibility for your choices, and stop trying to ram your narrow dogmatic beliefs onto others. Hobby Lobby never said you couldn't kill babies. They said they weren't willing to pay for it. What way do I need to re-phrase that otherwise simple statement for it to finally sink into that skull of yours?
Just leave people alone, you bothersome cunt. People are sick of bitter shitstains like you ordering people around.
No choice was taken away from anyone, so fuck that noise.
Instead of the money coming out of her salary before she got paid, it would come out afterwards. If she desperately wanted to kill a baby, she still could, every choice that existed previously still exists. So shut the fuck up. Nothing fucking changed except the invoicing.
Like I said, a fucking child's view of liberty, and also now it seems a fucking child's view of wage economics. You're a caricature.
Right you're not taking her choice away, just her insurance that pays for the thing she wants. But because she's not rich, it's her fault! Work harder and be rich! Just like Anthony says! Woo libertarianism!
Health plans cover lots of treatments, and do not cover lots of other treatments. The remuneration and benefits package on offer is part of the decision making process when any individual sells their labour.
If an employee's plan doesn't include orthodontics, no-one has had their "right" to straight teeth revoked.
You fucking idiot.
The money that didn't go towards a fuller insurance plan, would appear in wages or other benefits, to maintain that companies viability in the employment marketplace. Supply/demand, 101.
The health insurance offered was comprehensive, but did not meet a government mandated proscription to include foetus killing contraceptives. That and that alone is what the Supreme Court considered, and they threw your fucking retarded argument in the shitter. You lose, go fuck yourself.
Read your opening post here, scroll back, straight-away calling people retards, indulging in sectarianism and tediously casual sexist bigotry.
You revoked your right to be offended by being called a cunt.
And you are a cunt. An obnoxious, intolerant, cunt.
Either way it doesn't matter. What matters here is that you had fuck all left to come back with after you ran out of your MSNBC freeze-dried talking points in this argument, so now had to start pretending to play the fucking victim.
Again, you're toughness just floors me. You seem like the guy who subscribes to Anthony's babble-fest and other corporatist (conservative) talk shows. Yet you have this idea that less regulation means it will be better for you and not the corporations. I know you think you're smart and everyone is wrong except you, but you're very short sighted.
You are literally trying to create China in America. Take away all regulations, let the corporations do whatever they want, then say the real problem is the poor. All while creating only 2 classes, super poor and super rich. And I'll take a shot in the dark and say that you're not super rich but you think you will be one day so just in case, let's push everything the Koch brothers want.
Doesn't know the difference between corporatism and its diametric opposite classical liberalism. You're fucking hopeless.
Says corporations and even does a fucking Koch reference. In 2015. You're a fucking walking cliche. A joke.
Knows fuck all about enlightenment principles. Clings instead to reactionary romanticist collectivism. Intolerantly denies the sovereignty of the individual, of free choice. Instead clamours for more violent, corrupt, state control.
You'd rather shit your pants in public than question any of your lazy, safe, received conventional wisdoms. There's not an opinion in your skull that didn't come directly from mainstream TV. The self-serving political establishment winds you up and sends you out to regurgitate weak facile infantile shite. You are a clown, and this is why you are mocked.
We get it, you are terrified of responsibility. If you can't have your parents release you from responsibility and choice, you want a government to do it. "It takes a village to raise a child", you actually still believe you are a fucking child. Those aren't proscriptions of liberty, they're 'regulations' to better serve and protect.
Throw out community and choice and society and responsibility, cut it all down for the state, hand over your existence to any collection of governmental three-letter acronyms. You fucking miserable bed wetting cunt.
Just because you can't handle free choice, you don't get to trample on the free-choice of others. It is that fucking basic. Do you fucking understand?
Now, get off your knees you timid obsequious fuck. Stand up like a proper fucking adult for once in your snivelling fucking existence.
Koch .... Koch brothers, for fuck sake you really are shit at this. Pathetic.
Says corporations and even does a fucking Koch reference.
Oh you mean the guys who have pledged to contribute 1 billion dollars to the republican candidate? Why would anyone find that suspicious.
You seem to confuse this idea of "free choice" with "giving the richest people what they want and hoping for the best". And I'm not an asshole, I realize your side is winning. But it pisses me off because I see the apocalypse coming with people like you justifying it every step of the way.
"Apocalypse coming", the religious zeal of the terminally self-loathing.
You can't wait for it to be over. You have nothing but a demonstrated contempt for humanity. You despise humanity, it's disparate free choices and individual aspirations.
Like all miserable totalitarians, you want them to do exactly what you want, and how you want it done, and when they refuse, you want it to be over.
If you were born in another time or another place, you'd be gleefully arranging the showtrials, or signing the warrants for the disappearances, guarding the camps. But by a crude twist of geography you were unlucky to be born where and when free choice still carried a little weight. Hence your bitter childish frustrations.
And you had the fucking temerity to have a go at the religious, when you are just the same as them. Paternalistic social control, chasing ghosts and dark forces that must be responsible for your ideologies failure, and topped with the usual petty narrow authoritarianism.
The exact same pattern and pathology. They're scared of being alone in a cold empty universe, having to be responsible for themselves, and so are you. And you're an intolerant, reactionary, illiberal cunt too.
The apocalypse is reverting to the caste system of old. Royaly, nobles, shit. That's all your system is gonna have and you love it. You support children working in sweat shops, you support the dismantling of worker regulations. Where do you think that's heading?
But of course, you're a truck driver or a janitor and you think you're gonna hit it big one day so what do you care
And yet more incorrect presumption and useless stereotyping.
Why ... because you are a lazy stupid intolerant bigot. That's what bigots do, thrash around with stupid generalizations to support their clueless prejudgements for fear of having to think for yourself.
Those collectivist caste systems that you feign concern over were first defeated, only ever defeated, by the principles you chose to crassly describe here earlier as "libertariantards". Free speech, free trade, free association, free choice - Enlightenment principles defeated church, and monarchy and empire and state and nationalism and tribalism. Emancipation of the sovereign human individual from the tyranny of all those previously inescapable brutal collectivisms.
You represent the pampered self-loathing 19th century reaction to those ideals. It is disgusting that anyone, sitting this side of the 20th century, after what we witnessed, after we saw how all those reactionary anti-enlightenment ideologies behaved, could even attempt to defend such vile violent intolerance.
You take the benefits of Enlightenment freedoms, and use that freedom to attempt to deny free choice to others. You are a fucking disgrace.
The greatest force of liberation for humanity, the greatest engine of prosperity that has ever fucking occurred on this planet at any time in its existence - and you choose here to seek to deny others; the poorest, the weakest, the most in need of liberation, the self same set of opportunity and liberty that you freely exercise - because you are too emotionally immature to deal with the basic consequences of liberty and free-choice, namely that people might end up holding divergent opinions from what you think they should.
A totalitarian bigot that demands lock-step conformity.
You'd send humanity to the gas-chambers just because it didn't agree with how you think they should act. You have zero fucking moral authority here. You are transparent in your motivation. You are a fucking cunt.
And yet more incorrect presumption and useless stereotyping.
Why ... because you are a lazy stupid intolerant bigot. That's what bigots do, thrash around with stupid generalizations to support their clueless prejudgements for fear of having to think for yourself.
Those collectivist caste systems that you feign concern over were first defeated, only ever defeated, by the principles you chose to crassly describe here earlier as "libertariantards". Free speech, free trade, free association, free choice - Enlightenment principles defeated church, and monarchy and empire and state and nationalism and tribalism. Emancipation of the sovereign human individual from the tyranny of all those previously inescapable brutal collectivisms.
You represent the pampered self-loathing 19th century reaction to those ideals. It is disgusting that anyone, sitting this side of the 20th century, after what we witnessed, after we saw how all those reactionary anti-enlightenment ideologies behaved, could even attempt to defend such vile violent intolerance.
You take the benefits of Enlightenment freedoms, and use that freedom to attempt to deny free choice to others. You are a fucking disgrace.
The greatest force of liberation for humanity, the greatest engine of prosperity that has ever fucking occurred on this planet at any time in its existence - and you choose here to seek to deny others; the poorest, the weakest, the most in need of liberation, the self same set of opportunity and liberty that you freely exercise - because you are too emotionally immature to deal with the basic consequences of liberty and free-choice, namely that people might end up holding divergent opinions from what you think they should.
A totalitarian bigot that demands lock-step conformity.
You'd send humanity to the gas-chambers just because it didn't agree with how you think they should act. You have zero fucking moral authority here. You are transparent in your motivation. You are a fucking cunt.
56 comments
17 TriangleDimes 2015-05-04
Video is funny, article is bullshit.
I wonder why some women assume this is because of deadbeat dads rather than women divorcing men and not allowing dual-custody or visitation rights, but still getting child support and alimony.
11 KennethFresno 2015-05-04
No.
4 kevin_k 2015-05-04
It's comedy. It often uses hyperbole. For example, you can't actually blindfold people of asian descent with dental floss.
6 KennethFresno 2015-05-04
It was a hyperbole until it ended with "and that time may even be now". Whether that part was tongue in cheek or not, it's retarded regardless.
3 kevin_k 2015-05-04
I watched it four times listening for "and that time may even be now" before I realized it was in the article about the video and not in the video.
I agree, it's a stupid line.
-1 NateRiley12411 2015-05-04
No one said that the article was hyperbole, just the video. Keep up.
2 KennethFresno 2015-05-04
If it was about the video, he shouldn't have replied to a post directly quoting and responding to the article. But I forgot most of the folks here are illiterate. Keep up with my balls in your face.
3 BigGreenYamo 2015-05-04
You give up too easily.
6 K1bbler 2015-05-04
Put them behind the wheel and they turn into Ray Charles.
3 Phantas_Magorical 2015-05-04
OH!
5 wifflebb 2015-05-04
The premise is actually hilarious. What is 'off the reservation' about this?
5 kevin121312 2015-05-04
Because it perpetuates the bullshit story that woman can't get birth control because old men in the Supreme Court won't allow them. If women weren't allow to buy birth control, I would march, but they can buy it, but THEY have to BUY it, it's not given to them. If she wanted to be edgy, she'd do a skit where black leaders were complaining about cops killing blacks then showing them going back to their offices and getting the stats from their staffers showing how many blacks killed blacks in their towns that year and them using the report to line a bird cage. Ok, bad sketch, but you get the point.
2 wifflebb 2015-05-04
The supreme court ruling said that businesses could choose healthcare plans that specifically do not include birth control because of their religious views. The issue was never 'free birth control.' Covered =/= Free.
EDIT: Do you also believe that employers should be able to choose plans that do not cover vaccinations due to their religious beliefs?
BTW your sketch idea is HILARIOUS. You should gun for Metzger's job.
5 kevin121312 2015-05-04
yes. I don't want businesses forced to pay for something like that, UNLESS, someone is forced to work for that employer and they don't have the choice to work somewhere else. That would be a different argument.
-1 wifflebb 2015-05-04
Uh, the business doesn't pay for it. Do you think the healthcare companies are giving them a break on their healthcare costs because of a single drug exemption?
And I suppose we should go back to the era of not covering pre-existing conditions, etc? Dark ages mentality.
2 kevin121312 2015-05-04
The business doesn't pay for it? Who does? I see you're an Obama fan. We're not gonna make any headway,so let's just end this convo now.
1 wifflebb 2015-05-04
Not really. Do you think that the healthcare providers are going to charge them less in unsubsidized costs because they chose to remove coverage for birth control? I highly doubt it.
1 kevin121312 2015-05-04
They don't want to pay for something that they don't believe in. Employees can work some place where the employer does pay for it.
-1 AvanteGardeAClue 2015-05-04
Just like a Republican to turn tail and run when confronted by facts and logic. This why it will be a loooong time before your side sees the White House again.
1 kevin121312 2015-05-04
What facts? You want the government forcing businesses to pay for things. I believe in birth control, but also religious freedoms. People who label others republicans and want bigger government won't be swayed so it's a waste of time.
4 hautebird 2015-05-04
Because it's fake edgy. It's easy and boring and played out, like attacking Sarah Palin (who obviously does deserve ridicule) it's designed to get approving nods from the cultural elite.
1 [deleted] 2015-05-04
[deleted]
4 Ott_Paper 2015-05-04
Birth-control is SOOOO expensive you guise! Condoms cost 2 dollars and generic morning-after pills cost 40 bucks, how can you expect these empowered womins to collect 40 bucks? It'll be back-alley abortions I tell ya!
2 NickCarpinelli 2015-05-04
I skipped the article but the commercial was pretty funny and well done
1 iris201 2015-05-04
Did Amy Schumer used to not be a cunt or am I suffering from Mandela Effect? Or are feminazis embellishing her SJW tendencies?
5 photonblaster9000 2015-05-04
She was always like this. She just hasn't always had her own TV show.
Her family member, Chuck Schumer, is one of the biggest liberal assholes in this country.
0 thecrazing 2015-05-04
Is that not a bit of a stretch?
1 photonblaster9000 2015-05-04
how?
1 thecrazing 2015-05-04
It's not like she's his niece. They're second cousins or whatever.
1 photonblaster9000 2015-05-04
ITS IN THEIR BLOOD
-9 Chipwhatsthat 2015-05-04
Can you entitled libertariantards please explain to me what's wrong with this commentary? The supreme court (in a 5-4 decision, 5 catholic men) literally decided that your employer has more choice than the woman does in her contraception.
How the fuck are you taking a different position? That's EXACTLY what happened? Are you denying it?
2 photonblaster9000 2015-05-04
that time of the month?
1 TheDarkFezRises 2015-05-04
You can't really be this stupid. Do you actually believe that the employer has more choice tan the women?
1 RupertRooksby 2015-05-04
It's called choice and respect for beliefs you fucking idiot cunt.
The woman at all times retains the choice to use whatever contraception she wishes. Nothing changed. She does not have the right to compel other private individuals to pay for her mini-abortions when those individuals consider those abortions murder.
That's how fucking liberty is supposed to operate. She can make her own choices, purchase her own treatments; and at all times retain the choice to seek alternate employment opportunities more amenable to her principles and lifestyle should jockeying a cash-register at Hobby Lobby prove too burdensome for her sensibilities. And perfectly simultaneous to that - other individuals retain their choice to not actively fund something they categorically are opposed to. Everyone gets their free-choice.
But that basic system of personal freedoms is not good enough for you or cabbage-patch face apparently, you demand to force your wants and preferences down the throats of others, to deny choice or personal liberties, that's cos you're a fucking illiberal reactionary bigot. Now go fuck yourself, and take Schumer with you.
1 ImaBottom 2015-05-04
Are you fucking kidding me?! How the hell are contraceptives mini-abortions? Is this the 21st century or what that this kind of idea should be protected by religious freedom? A woman fucking just for sex? what if a jewish boss was opposed to a procedure of a jewish man receiving an organ donation from a non-jewish donor? would that be protected under his primitive views? religious freedom should definitely exist but not when it's a blatant contradiction to a normal modern way of life.
1 RupertRooksby 2015-05-04
In this case, it doesn't so much matter what you think, it's about what the people that were being forced to buy the foetus terminating pharmaceuticals thought.
And so for the Supreme Court, that was kinda the beginning, middle and end of it.
But if you want to get technical, they found that religious expression should only be “substantially burdened in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest,” and then only by “the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.”
So, HHS mandates for vaccinations and transfusions were considered disease-preventative and life-saving treatments, and would not be precluded. Some types of contraception which specifically operated to terminate foetuses was not considered sufficient to override Congressional and Constitutional protections for religious expression.
You can't force people to buy you stuff you want, against their will, just cos you want it.
1 ImaBottom 2015-05-04
from what I understood they weren't forced to buy them but have it as an option for already a mandatory healthcare "package".honestly I don't know enough details about this issue I just know I like peckas.
0 Chipwhatsthat 2015-05-04
Your magical beliefs trump the rights i have with my body. ReaLly great world you guys are pushing
6 RupertRooksby 2015-05-04
You have the right to do whatever you want. Dye your hair, kill a foetus, drink piss, go snowboarding. Free choice. Help yourself.
You don't have any fucking "right" to force, to compel, someone else to subsidize and support it. Where the fuck would someone even begin to get such a fucking preposterous notion from?
That's how a child thinks. Time for you to put such infantile notions behind you. It's called being a proper fucking grown-up.
And take those cunting boxing gloves off before you dare to attempt to mistype another reply at me.
-2 Chipwhatsthat 2015-05-04
Oh except when it comes to subsidizing your churches, beliefs, and making them trump other beliefs right? Weird how you don't seem to have a problem with that but those whores choosing certain contraception fuck that.
It's amazing how you don't see this hole the supreme court is taking us in that says a corporation can use its "beliefs" to cut costs.
6 RupertRooksby 2015-05-04
Not 'my' churches. I don't believe in any fucking religion.
So now what, stupid?
Here's where you got confused: Unlike you, I do believe in people having the liberty to exercise their own worldview free from violent coercion from the state or from selfish bigots like you.
It's their fucking private business. You want to hand out Plan B, you start your own fucking business. Run it how you like, you can do what you want. Be my fucking guest.
But do you see the difference - One way, we have all parties free to choose. The other way, your way, only offers violent compulsion and violation of personal belief.
I told you once already to fucking grow up. Act like an adult. Take personal responsibility for your choices, and stop trying to ram your narrow dogmatic beliefs onto others. Hobby Lobby never said you couldn't kill babies. They said they weren't willing to pay for it. What way do I need to re-phrase that otherwise simple statement for it to finally sink into that skull of yours?
Just leave people alone, you bothersome cunt. People are sick of bitter shitstains like you ordering people around.
-1 Chipwhatsthat 2015-05-04
the guy taking healthcare choices away from people is saying this. amazing how blind you are. I think the word might be "entitled".
4 RupertRooksby 2015-05-04
She still has the fucking choice you idiot.
No choice was taken away from anyone, so fuck that noise.
Instead of the money coming out of her salary before she got paid, it would come out afterwards. If she desperately wanted to kill a baby, she still could, every choice that existed previously still exists. So shut the fuck up. Nothing fucking changed except the invoicing.
Like I said, a fucking child's view of liberty, and also now it seems a fucking child's view of wage economics. You're a caricature.
-2 Chipwhatsthat 2015-05-04
Right you're not taking her choice away, just her insurance that pays for the thing she wants. But because she's not rich, it's her fault! Work harder and be rich! Just like Anthony says! Woo libertarianism!
5 RupertRooksby 2015-05-04
No-one lost health insurance. Clueless cunt.
Health plans cover lots of treatments, and do not cover lots of other treatments. The remuneration and benefits package on offer is part of the decision making process when any individual sells their labour.
If an employee's plan doesn't include orthodontics, no-one has had their "right" to straight teeth revoked.
You fucking idiot.
The money that didn't go towards a fuller insurance plan, would appear in wages or other benefits, to maintain that companies viability in the employment marketplace. Supply/demand, 101.
The health insurance offered was comprehensive, but did not meet a government mandated proscription to include foetus killing contraceptives. That and that alone is what the Supreme Court considered, and they threw your fucking retarded argument in the shitter. You lose, go fuck yourself.
-1 Chipwhatsthat 2015-05-04
wow really makes me take you seriously and realize how tough you are.
oh man, I just can't believe how superior you are to me
2 RupertRooksby 2015-05-04
Read your opening post here, scroll back, straight-away calling people retards, indulging in sectarianism and tediously casual sexist bigotry.
You revoked your right to be offended by being called a cunt.
And you are a cunt. An obnoxious, intolerant, cunt.
Either way it doesn't matter. What matters here is that you had fuck all left to come back with after you ran out of your MSNBC freeze-dried talking points in this argument, so now had to start pretending to play the fucking victim.
Just exactly like a fucking idiot cunt would.
-1 Chipwhatsthat 2015-05-04
Again, you're toughness just floors me. You seem like the guy who subscribes to Anthony's babble-fest and other corporatist (conservative) talk shows. Yet you have this idea that less regulation means it will be better for you and not the corporations. I know you think you're smart and everyone is wrong except you, but you're very short sighted.
You are literally trying to create China in America. Take away all regulations, let the corporations do whatever they want, then say the real problem is the poor. All while creating only 2 classes, super poor and super rich. And I'll take a shot in the dark and say that you're not super rich but you think you will be one day so just in case, let's push everything the Koch brothers want.
3 LiberalPussy 2015-05-04
Silence yourself, you uppity peasant.
-1 Chipwhatsthat 2015-05-04
good one
2 RupertRooksby 2015-05-04
Doesn't know the difference between corporatism and its diametric opposite classical liberalism. You're fucking hopeless.
Says corporations and even does a fucking Koch reference. In 2015. You're a fucking walking cliche. A joke.
Knows fuck all about enlightenment principles. Clings instead to reactionary romanticist collectivism. Intolerantly denies the sovereignty of the individual, of free choice. Instead clamours for more violent, corrupt, state control.
You'd rather shit your pants in public than question any of your lazy, safe, received conventional wisdoms. There's not an opinion in your skull that didn't come directly from mainstream TV. The self-serving political establishment winds you up and sends you out to regurgitate weak facile infantile shite. You are a clown, and this is why you are mocked.
We get it, you are terrified of responsibility. If you can't have your parents release you from responsibility and choice, you want a government to do it. "It takes a village to raise a child", you actually still believe you are a fucking child. Those aren't proscriptions of liberty, they're 'regulations' to better serve and protect.
Throw out community and choice and society and responsibility, cut it all down for the state, hand over your existence to any collection of governmental three-letter acronyms. You fucking miserable bed wetting cunt.
Just because you can't handle free choice, you don't get to trample on the free-choice of others. It is that fucking basic. Do you fucking understand?
Now, get off your knees you timid obsequious fuck. Stand up like a proper fucking adult for once in your snivelling fucking existence.
Koch .... Koch brothers, for fuck sake you really are shit at this. Pathetic.
0 Chipwhatsthat 2015-05-04
Oh you mean the guys who have pledged to contribute 1 billion dollars to the republican candidate? Why would anyone find that suspicious.
You seem to confuse this idea of "free choice" with "giving the richest people what they want and hoping for the best". And I'm not an asshole, I realize your side is winning. But it pisses me off because I see the apocalypse coming with people like you justifying it every step of the way.
2 RupertRooksby 2015-05-04
And there it is, the full set.
"Apocalypse coming", the religious zeal of the terminally self-loathing.
You can't wait for it to be over. You have nothing but a demonstrated contempt for humanity. You despise humanity, it's disparate free choices and individual aspirations.
Like all miserable totalitarians, you want them to do exactly what you want, and how you want it done, and when they refuse, you want it to be over.
If you were born in another time or another place, you'd be gleefully arranging the showtrials, or signing the warrants for the disappearances, guarding the camps. But by a crude twist of geography you were unlucky to be born where and when free choice still carried a little weight. Hence your bitter childish frustrations.
And you had the fucking temerity to have a go at the religious, when you are just the same as them. Paternalistic social control, chasing ghosts and dark forces that must be responsible for your ideologies failure, and topped with the usual petty narrow authoritarianism.
The exact same pattern and pathology. They're scared of being alone in a cold empty universe, having to be responsible for themselves, and so are you. And you're an intolerant, reactionary, illiberal cunt too.
0 Chipwhatsthat 2015-05-04
The apocalypse is reverting to the caste system of old. Royaly, nobles, shit. That's all your system is gonna have and you love it. You support children working in sweat shops, you support the dismantling of worker regulations. Where do you think that's heading?
But of course, you're a truck driver or a janitor and you think you're gonna hit it big one day so what do you care
2 RupertRooksby 2015-05-04
And yet more incorrect presumption and useless stereotyping.
Why ... because you are a lazy stupid intolerant bigot. That's what bigots do, thrash around with stupid generalizations to support their clueless prejudgements for fear of having to think for yourself.
Those collectivist caste systems that you feign concern over were first defeated, only ever defeated, by the principles you chose to crassly describe here earlier as "libertariantards". Free speech, free trade, free association, free choice - Enlightenment principles defeated church, and monarchy and empire and state and nationalism and tribalism. Emancipation of the sovereign human individual from the tyranny of all those previously inescapable brutal collectivisms.
You represent the pampered self-loathing 19th century reaction to those ideals. It is disgusting that anyone, sitting this side of the 20th century, after what we witnessed, after we saw how all those reactionary anti-enlightenment ideologies behaved, could even attempt to defend such vile violent intolerance.
You take the benefits of Enlightenment freedoms, and use that freedom to attempt to deny free choice to others. You are a fucking disgrace.
The greatest force of liberation for humanity, the greatest engine of prosperity that has ever fucking occurred on this planet at any time in its existence - and you choose here to seek to deny others; the poorest, the weakest, the most in need of liberation, the self same set of opportunity and liberty that you freely exercise - because you are too emotionally immature to deal with the basic consequences of liberty and free-choice, namely that people might end up holding divergent opinions from what you think they should.
A totalitarian bigot that demands lock-step conformity.
You'd send humanity to the gas-chambers just because it didn't agree with how you think they should act. You have zero fucking moral authority here. You are transparent in your motivation. You are a fucking cunt.
0 Unc_PaulHarrgis1-5YO 2015-05-04
I agree with your point but fucking ew on the execution. Stop whining
2 RupertRooksby 2015-05-04
And yet more incorrect presumption and useless stereotyping.
Why ... because you are a lazy stupid intolerant bigot. That's what bigots do, thrash around with stupid generalizations to support their clueless prejudgements for fear of having to think for yourself.
Those collectivist caste systems that you feign concern over were first defeated, only ever defeated, by the principles you chose to crassly describe here earlier as "libertariantards". Free speech, free trade, free association, free choice - Enlightenment principles defeated church, and monarchy and empire and state and nationalism and tribalism. Emancipation of the sovereign human individual from the tyranny of all those previously inescapable brutal collectivisms.
You represent the pampered self-loathing 19th century reaction to those ideals. It is disgusting that anyone, sitting this side of the 20th century, after what we witnessed, after we saw how all those reactionary anti-enlightenment ideologies behaved, could even attempt to defend such vile violent intolerance.
You take the benefits of Enlightenment freedoms, and use that freedom to attempt to deny free choice to others. You are a fucking disgrace.
The greatest force of liberation for humanity, the greatest engine of prosperity that has ever fucking occurred on this planet at any time in its existence - and you choose here to seek to deny others; the poorest, the weakest, the most in need of liberation, the self same set of opportunity and liberty that you freely exercise - because you are too emotionally immature to deal with the basic consequences of liberty and free-choice, namely that people might end up holding divergent opinions from what you think they should.
A totalitarian bigot that demands lock-step conformity.
You'd send humanity to the gas-chambers just because it didn't agree with how you think they should act. You have zero fucking moral authority here. You are transparent in your motivation. You are a fucking cunt.