This is Why Homosexuality is Wrong. . .

[LittleNipper]

Oooooh, evil socialized medicine. Nope, we definitely can't do with all people receiving proper medical treatment even if they're not rich. Where would we be if we didn't leave those unworthy sloths to wither and die?

(Response: probably a lot closer to other nations of similar economic wealth. As it is, the US look more like a developing nation in terms of health and child mortality. Which only goes to show that "self-help" and charity really do not work as they should in a society that emphasizes egocentrism above all else.)

As far as child mortality goes, why not add ABORTION to the mix.? Why not let everyone pay to murder the unwanted results of permiscuity. Hey, hows about 3000 thousand dollars a murder ------ or is it more? I contibute about $130.00 weekly so that my family has healthcare. To go to the primary is now $20.00 a visit. A visit to the specialist is now $30.00. If I go to the hospital, I must pay $500.00. For outpatient care is $200.00.

 

[LittleNipper]

The costs of supporting someone with HIV are astronomical whether the person in question is homo OR heterosexual... now perhaps you would like to do some research and you will find that there are far more heterosexuals with AIDS than there are homosexuals...

So whats your point?

The point is HOW they got the disease. Was it by an acident or was the person doing drugs, or had to have some form of sex no matter what? Actually, I feel that people who spread diseases they knowingly have are murderers and should be treated as such.

 

[TheManeki]

I've talked to healthcare professionals. I also understand that one outcome of legalizing homosexual civil unions, is to place such "significant others," under private healthcare benifit umbrellas. If someone has AIDs or some other sexually transmitted disease, the costs to keep that individual's immune system running are astronomical.

This statement doesn't make sense to me.

For most insurance plans, if you are already on them and then come down with a serious condition, they cannot suddenly terminate your coverage. Likewise, if you have insurance and then change jobs and insurance plans, you cannot be denied access to the new plan -- because you had insurance before the change.

Furthermore, if someone has HIV/AIDS and is not on an insurance plan, I think it counts as a preexisting condition whether or not they are trying to get insurance on their own or through a spouse/domestic partnership. As a preexisting condition, coverage would probably be denied or at least curtailed.

Finally, many companies and governments have been extending benefits to homosexual "domestic partners" (as I believe the term is called) for some time now, so this isn't exactly new. Some same-sex couples are able to share insurance already.

If I'm wrong about any of the above statements let me know.

 

[Ramona]

Oooooh, evil socialized medicine. Nope, we definitely can't do with all people receiving proper medical treatment even if they're not rich. Where would we be if we didn't leave those unworthy sloths to wither and die?

(Response: probably a lot closer to other nations of similar economic wealth. As it is, the US look more like a developing nation in terms of health and child mortality. Which only goes to show that "self-help" and charity really do not work as they should in a society that emphasizes egocentrism above all else.)

YES! AMEN! Jane_the_Bane for the freaking win.

 

[Ramona]

Oooooh, evil socialized medicine. Nope, we definitely can't do with all people receiving proper medical treatment even if they're not rich. Where would we be if we didn't leave those unworthy sloths to wither and die?

(Response: probably a lot closer to other nations of similar economic wealth. As it is, the US look more like a developing nation in terms of health and child mortality. Which only goes to show that "self-help" and charity really do not work as they should in a society that emphasizes egocentrism above all else.)

THIS.

AGAIN.

You've nailed it.

 

[RealityCheck]

As far as child mortality goes, why not add ABORTION to the mix.? Why not let everyone pay to murder the unwanted results of permiscuity. Hey, hows about 3000 thousand dollars a murder ------ or is it more? I contibute about $130.00 weekly so that my family has healthcare. To go to the primary is now $20.00 a visit. A visit to the specialist is now $30.00. If I go to the hospital, I must pay $500.00. For outpatient care is $200.00.

Oh, big F'n deal. You're not paying any higher premiums than anyone else - if anything, your 130 a week is a freakin' BARGAIN.

Have you ever bothered to LOOK at your actual billing statements to see what you would've been charged if you HAD NOT had coverage? I bet not. If you had you'd be HAPPY to pay that 130 a week, not complaining about it.

 

[RealityCheck]

The point is HOW they got the disease. Was it by an acident or was the person doing drugs, or had to have some form of sex no matter what? Actually, I feel that people who spread diseases they knowingly have are murderers and should be treated as such.

Yeah that'll work. We'll execute every child that goes to day-care with a cold. [/snarkiness]

 

[naotmaa]

The point is HOW they got the disease. Was it by an acident or was the person doing drugs, or had to have some form of sex no matter what? Actually, I feel that people who spread diseases they knowingly have are murderers and should be treated as such.

Still, why does that matter? If they're sick, they're sick and should not be refused healthcare or treatment.

 

[LittleNipper]

In what possible way do you see consentual adult sexual relationships as leading to child abuse???

And as for socialised medicine... what the heck is wrong with that? Only the wealthy deserve healthcare? Or is it only diseases acquired "morally" that you think should be treated with public funds?

Children are being forced to talk and act the "adult," younger and younger. There are growing numbers of men who prey on children through Internet contacts. Some of those children are already more aware of body functions than their parents were at the same age. Now, they are being encouraged to practice and experiment. Once someone gets a disease, he/she my have it for life. Some cancers are now being recognized as being the result of viruses acquired during "casual" sex. When I was 18 I didn't even know what oral sex was. I never even imagined anyone would want to do such things. Today, young children are encouraged to be preoccupied with sex through ads, the Internet, older kids, relaxing of social mores. Kids know more today; however, they are not either more intelligent nor less hormonal. A very bad combination.

 

[LittleNipper]

Still, why does that matter? If they're sick, they're sick and should not be refused healthcare or treatment.

They are sick because they would not listen. They are dying because they thought they were immune and invincible. You expect me to fork over more and more of my money to help strangers who thumb their noses at my warnings. Sorry, but even Noah didn't offer to open the door to the ark, once the rain started to fall ----- or does your interpretation of even that Bible story read differently as usual.

 

[LittleNipper]

Oh, big F'n deal. You're not paying any higher premiums than anyone else - if anything, your 130 a week is a freakin' BARGAIN.

Have you ever bothered to LOOK at your actual billing statements to see what you would've been charged if you HAD NOT had coverage? I bet not. If you had you'd be HAPPY to pay that 130 a week, not complaining about it.

I started with paying only $1.00 a week , $5.00 a doctor's visit,and NOTHING for hospitalization. That was back in 1986. I hope you pay through the nose....... See how you like it. I'm sorry, I didn't mean that, but we have no one but ourselves to blame.

 

[RealityCheck]

Children are being forced to talk and act the "adult," younger and younger. There are growing numbers of men who prey on children through Internet contacts.

This is clearly defined as criminal behavior, not as acceptable practice.

Some of those children are already more aware of body functions than their parents were at the same age.

What's funny about your complaint is that if you have little Johnny shut his eyes and ears and only read the Bible, he'll be exposed to worse than mere clinical information about "bodily functions".

Now, they are being encouraged to practice and experiment.

WHO, exactly, is encouraging practice and experimentation? You're being purposely vague in this statement.

When I was 18 I didn't even know what oral sex was. I never even imagined anyone would want to do such things.

I cannot, for the life of me, stop laughing over this one. Sorry, LN, I just can't.

Today, young children are encouraged to be preoccupied with sex through ads, the Internet, older kids, relaxing of social mores.

Funny how those are exactly the kinds of consequences of having a market-based economy.

Kids know more today; however, they are not either more intelligent nor less hormonal. A very bad combination.

Knowing more = ability to make better informed decisions.

Knowing less = less ability to make good decisions.

 

[RealityCheck]

I started with paying only $1.00 a week , $5.00 a doctor's visit,and NOTHING for hospitalization. That was back in 1986. I hope you pay through the nose....... See how you like it. I'm sorry, I didn't mean that, but we have no one but ourselves to blame.

I'm not going to report this (even though I could) just because I'm enjoying how snarky this whole issue is making you.

 

[TheManeki]

Gee. And all this time I thought the increasing cost of healthcare was from a variety of causes like inflation, administrative bloat, using expensive tests as the first line of diagnosis, drug R&D, pharma profits, etc.

Now, thanks to Little Nipper, I know that it was only because of gays! I am enlightened!

 

[LittleNipper]

This is clearly defined as criminal behavior, not as acceptable practice.



What's funny about your complaint is that if you have little Johnny shut his eyes and ears and only read the Bible, he'll be exposed to worse than mere clinical information about "bodily functions".



WHO, exactly, is encouraging practice and experimentation? You're being purposely vague in this statement.



I cannot, for the life of me, stop laughing over this one. Sorry, LN, I just can't.



Funny how those are exactly the kinds of consequences of having a market-based economy.



Knowing more = ability to make better informed decisions.

Knowing less = less ability to make good decisions.

How about, "Idle time is the devil's playground." and "Knowing more is not the same as understanding more."

 

[naotmaa]

They are sick because they would not listen. They are dying because they thought they were immune and invincible. You expect me to fork over more and more of my money to help strangers who thumb their noses at my warnings. Sorry, but even Noah didn't offer to open the door to the ark, once the rain started to fall ----- or does your interpretation of even that Bible story read differently as usual.

You don't know why some of these people are sick and further more its simply none of your business. Many illnesses today are caused because some one didn't listen. Heart attacks, cancer, etc. Are you going to punish some of those hwo suffered from these dieseases because them because they did not eat healthy enough? Did not stop smoking on time? missed doctor appointments?

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

What's it with you American fundamentalists and sexuality?

Did anybody ever notice how the most sexually neurotic societies also breed the greatest amount of "immoral" sexual outlets?
The Victorian age witnessed the greatest amount of prostitution ever, while being so uptight that even table legs were covered at all times in order to preserve decency.

Contemporary Japan considers public displays of affection to be a major outrage, while at the same time selling used (and unwashed) schoolgirl panties at vendor machines.

And the US, land of arrested breast-feeding mothers and "sex-offender" kindergarten kids (the latter being a 4-year-old hugging a big-breasted teacher's aide, who obviously was neurotic enough to consider it a sexual advance) features the biggest porn industry (and the greatest amount of consumers) in the whole *CENSORED* world. (see? That's another example! You worry so much about verbal hygiene while letting your kids watch splatter movies.)

That's not happening in spite of (religiously motivated) prudery. It happens because of it, since people are no longer capable of relating to their sexuality in a normal fashion.

I mean, come on: just look how the average American reacts to nudity. It's instantly associated with sexuality (as in the case of the breast-feeding woman), and treated in a way that you'd expect from a teenaged boy below the age of sixteen.
And as for sexuality: why on earth do you think that you must treat it as if it was a dark and shameful secret in front of your kids? That's just ridiculous! How shall they ever grow up to have a normal relation to their own body and sexuality if their parents suggest to them from an early age that it is the most shameful aspect of human life imaginably?
Guns and violence= wonderful.
Nudity and sexuality= HORROR.

Something's seriously wrong with that picture.

 

[OllieFranz]

How about, "Idol time is the devil's playground."

So you are saying that the false gods of idol worshippers are really the devil in disguise? That is in direct contradiction to Paul, who says that idols are nothing:[BIBLE]1 Corinthians 8:4-6[/BIBLE]

The aphorism that you are mangling reads: "Idle hands are the devil's workshop."

 

[RealityCheck]

How about, "Idol time is the devil's playground." and "Knowing more is not the same as understanding more."

This is the only answer you have for me?

Not surprising.

 

[LittleNipper]

You don't know why some of these people are sick and further more its simply none of your business. Many illnesses today are caused because some one didn't listen. Heart attacks, cancer, etc. Are you going to punish some of those hwo suffered from these dieseases because them because they did not eat healthy enough? Did not stop smoking on time? missed doctor appointments?

Well, I'm so very glad you said that. It was just in the news that companies, in an attempt to curb the raising costs of healthcare insuranse, are either lumping high risk employees together, so that they pay higher premiums or setting weight and cholesterol limits that if not met can mean that an employee gets let go. Can you imagine if that was applied to employees involved in risky sex! Well, someday it may happen. And than I cannot imagine that a few would be rather insulted by, but deserving of the consequences.