You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-24   25-49   50-74   75-99   100-124   125-149   150-174   175-199   200-224 
 203-227   228-252   253-277   278-302   303-327   328-352   353-377   378-402   403-427 
 428-452   453-477   478-502   503-526       
 
Author Message
25 new of 526 responses total.
happyboy
response 228 of 526: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 20:23 UTC 2006

liberal rabid attacks.  right nate.

fallwell
roberston 
rove
o'reilley
hannity
drudge
savage
coulter
the cato institute
the birch society
operation rescue (randall terry supports terrorists)
ralph *gamblin money* reed
jack *indians are troglodytes* abramoff
dick *shotgun halliburton 5 deferments* cheney
gw *awol nepotism* bush
alan *i hate my gay hedonist daughter* keyes
arnold *i'll call them girlymen and hope that they don't realize 
that i went awol from the austrian military* schwartzenegger

bunch of liberal rabid attack dogs, eh?

here's an old nazi trick for you...accuse the otherside 
(liberals) of doing the things of which YOU are guilty.


nice try.
tod
response 229 of 526: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 20:43 UTC 2006

re #228
Nepotism = http://arborwiki.org
nharmon
response 230 of 526: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 21:06 UTC 2006

Ok, I don't see how listing a bunch of rightwing nutjobs has any 
relevance to how people on gun-control forums treat visitors who have 
opposing viewpoints. I contrasted how liberals treated such visitors 
with how conservatives treated other visitors. This was intended to 
show my reluctance to believe pro-choice liberals would be accepting of 
people with opposing viewpoints. 

But, if you take that as "mindless hate", then be my guest. By the way, 
you people have done a fantastic job at proving me wrong too. Calling 
me a nazi, hypocritical, and whatever else, without even arguing the 
points being made (or in some cases, even reading the entire post).
happyboy
response 231 of 526: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 21:44 UTC 2006

did i call YOU a nazi nathan?


as for the list of rightwing nutjobs...well, learn to love them
kemosabe, they are your spokespersons.  :)

tod, yep.  or substitute cronyism if you like.
edina
response 232 of 526: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 21:45 UTC 2006

I don't and I disagree with you on stuff.  I enjoy your contribution.  But
if youwant me to call you a hypocritical nazi, well, you'll have to ask
*really* nicely.
marcvh
response 233 of 526: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 21:48 UTC 2006

I would expect that there are some communities of liberals who are inclined
to toleration and others who are inclined to confrontation, and the same
would apply to conservatives.  It's possible that liberals are more
likely to be combative, or that conservatives are, but trying to
extrapolate from a sample size of 1 isn't sufficient data to show much
of anything.
twenex
response 234 of 526: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 22:04 UTC 2006

...Which just shows what an idiot you are (Nathan).
nharmon
response 235 of 526: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 22:13 UTC 2006

Yeah, Marc, it might not be all that objective, but when 1 is the only 
sample size available...you make do with what you got ;)

> did i call YOU a nazi nathan?

First you cited a old "nazi trick", and then said "nice try". What 
WERE you implying?
nharmon
response 236 of 526: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 22:28 UTC 2006

Thats funny Jeff, I have yet to see your insightfull opinion on the 
matter. No, all you do is make silly jokes about conservatives and 
republicans, call people names, and then when they call you on it you 
can't be found.

At least I have some respect for happyboy's sarcasm because he backs 
it up. You just come into an item, drop your stink, and then leave.
twenex
response 237 of 526: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 22:36 UTC 2006

I find the idea of "emergency conctraceptive pills" rather odd.

Happy now?
happyboy
response 238 of 526: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 22:41 UTC 2006

hey! i guess i WAS implying that you are a nazi, nate!

oops!
nharmon
response 239 of 526: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 23:04 UTC 2006

Re 238: ROFL
slynne
response 240 of 526: Mark Unseen   Mar 1 01:50 UTC 2006

resp:216 The reason I see whole Viagra/Pill thing as relevant is that I
think it illustrates our culture's different views on male and female
sexuality. Male sexual freedom is to be encouraged while female sexual
freedom is not. I might be able to buy the idea the ED is a disease but
pregnancy is not point except that hormonal birth control pills are
often used to treat medical conditions and are not only used to prevent
pregnancy. While it is true that poor women can get BCP for free, that
is mostly a result of the work of feminists who have gone to great
effort to make it so because reproductive freedom makes a huge
difference in women's lives. That and because medicaid covers it in a
lot of states which makes since since medicaid has a pretty big
incentive to cover it. 

Now, if it is really true that insurance companies are really dropping
coverage for Viagra, that is a stong point in favor of the idea that the
Viagra/BPC comparison might not be as meaningful as some people see it.
 Even so, it is telling that so many right to life groups are against
birth control methods but no one seems to worry too much about drugs
like viagra.  
keesan
response 241 of 526: Mark Unseen   Mar 1 03:12 UTC 2006

$30/month is a lot less than the $300/month the U of M Hospital was charging
a few years ago for its health insurance plan.  And it is the price of about
six packages of cigarettes.  I don't think most people would find the cost
onerous.
marcvh
response 242 of 526: Mark Unseen   Mar 1 04:12 UTC 2006

Well, you got me curious, so I checked the policy offered by my own
company.  It covers all forms of non-OTC contraception (the pill, IUD,
Norplant, vasectomy, tubal ligation) but sexual dysfunction is
specifically not covered.  No coverage for Viagra or the like.
Psychotherapy is covered for pretty much any reason except for sexual
problems; likewise with seeing your physician or a specialist (a
urologist or whatever.)  This is a policy which is ostensiby
gender-neutral, applying equally to men with ED and women with
"Inhibited Sexual Desire" (ISD) although I'm not sure its impact ends
up being the same to both genders.

There has been some controversy about Viagra when newspapers started
reporting that former sexual offenders were getting Viagra and it was
being paid for by Medicaid, and this apparently gave people images of
their own tax dollars being used to create new super-sex-predators who
would brutally rape women and children with the incredible power of
modern pharmaceuticals.
slynne
response 243 of 526: Mark Unseen   Mar 1 12:37 UTC 2006

Now you have piqued my curiosity. I wonder how insurance coverage varies
by state. Is birth control more likely to be covered in "blue" states? 
tod
response 244 of 526: Mark Unseen   Mar 1 13:42 UTC 2006

Psychotherapy doesn't help ED for situations where someone has a disease like
diabetes which causes plaque resulting in ED.  Of course, ED at that point
is more about mental health.
jadecat
response 245 of 526: Mark Unseen   Mar 1 14:23 UTC 2006

Endo isn't helped by psychotherapy, but can be helped by hormonal birth
control.
happyboy
response 246 of 526: Mark Unseen   Mar 1 19:06 UTC 2006

"what th' heck awr wemmen complanin about...thay kin
 git vaslleen otc an thets all th' sexual aid thay need
 fer as im consarned, lynne *slutlover* freemond."
 

 love in christ,
                 james *naked shower with your son* dobson
slynne
response 247 of 526: Mark Unseen   Mar 1 19:20 UTC 2006

:)
happyboy
response 248 of 526: Mark Unseen   Mar 1 19:35 UTC 2006

"so whur 'r yew doin sunday after mornin' worship, miz 
 freemond?"


 love in christ,
                 james *boobs-a-lot* dobson
slynne
response 249 of 526: Mark Unseen   Mar 1 21:27 UTC 2006

Shucks, I dont think that far ahead. 
johnnie
response 250 of 526: Mark Unseen   Mar 1 22:21 UTC 2006

>I wonder how insurance coverage varies by state. Is birth control more
>likely to be covered in "blue" states? 

Along those lines, this: 
http://www.agi-usa.org/media/nr/2006/02/21/index.html

klg
response 251 of 526: Mark Unseen   Mar 2 11:45 UTC 2006

Health insurance mandates by state.  Here's the url for a report with a 
state by state chart.  Someone else can do the counting & analysis.

http://www.cahi.org/cahi_contents/resources/pdf/MandatePubDec2004.pdf
johnnie
response 252 of 526: Mark Unseen   Mar 2 15:01 UTC 2006

Thanks, "klg"--that's a truly handy link.

A quick look would seem to show that mandated contraceptive coverage (29
states) does not seem to follow any predictable red/blue pattern.  Only
21 states mandate maternity coverage.  

Other tidbits:

*45 states mandate alcoholism treatment coverage, only 35 mandate drug
abuse treatment coverage.

*Only one state does not mandate mammogram coverage (Utah); only one
state (Washington) does not mandate coverage for maternity hospitalization.

*9 states (including Michigan) do not require insurance policies to
cover adopted children.

*13 states mandate newborn hearing screening coverage; only 2 states
mandate coverage for newborn sickle-cell testing.  

*47 states mandate that chiropractors be a covered provider; only 11
states do the same for nurses.

*Minnesota mandates the most coverages, Idaho the fewest.  Michigan
ranks near the bottom (somewhere around 43rd)




 0-24   25-49   50-74   75-99   100-124   125-149   150-174   175-199   200-224 
 203-227   228-252   253-277   278-302   303-327   328-352   353-377   378-402   403-427 
 428-452   453-477   478-502   503-526       
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss