So their underlying premise is morality, the sanctity of sex and reproduction, etc.
Let's see who among single, unattached women would really benefit economically from covering prescription birth control pills?
Promiscuous woman, those scourge liberal types that will screw anything with two legs... has sex every night. Cost on condoms = $2 per copulation. Cost on birth control pill, at say $50 per pack (uninsured), which is about $2 per pill. At 1/day, the cost is about the same.
Now here is good upstanding moral Christian. She only hooks up once in a while, for example after some clean cut, conservative, responsible type who will still be there the next morning comes along. Let's say that happens about once a month. Cost of condoms still about $2 per "event". Failure rate for condoms, anywhere from 12% for Mr.-it's-been-so-long-I-forgot-how-to-put-it-on, down to 2% when that confounded latex just up and breaks. Cost of a monthly birth control pill regimen: still $50. That's a lot of money to spend. I mean, honestly, how many guys like a woman to split the cost of the date simply because dinner and a movie is now $50 even for a so-so restaurant. Think of this woman? At least the dinner and the movie lasted a couple of hours. She is out $50 bucks for 15-20 minutes that, like the movie, may or may not have a satisfying ending!
What's the matter Rush, never hear of unit cost? These guys have about a much sense on reproductive economics as a dog sniffing around another dog's tail.
= new reply since forum marked as read
