Use A Condom -- Go To Hell

$150 might be lowballing. Last time I had to pay out of pocket, it was closer to $200 (at a Planned Parenthood no less, and I had to dodge abortion protestors), plus the cost of my pills. The kid I was dating at the time about died when he tried to bum money for beer that night and I went off on him about it.

 

No rubbers. Why? Because we need lots and lots of bodies for the coming draft. How can we invade more countries without more soldiers?

 

I'm going to wade into this gently, but isn't asking to split the cost of a pelvic exam a little far-fetched? It's something a woman is supposed to get annually anyway, whether or not she has sexual partners. And who's to say wicked is her only sexual partner? Does that mean wicked should split costs with the woman's two or three or 20 (not commenting one way or another on the number of partners; simply presenting it as a possibility since we're playing the hypothetical game) other partners?

 

Quality.

 

Cadet, I'm sorry but a box of 40 condoms is not going to run $15. Hell, a box of 3 at the local CVS is going to run over $5 currently. A box of 10 runs about $13. Yes, buying a box of 40 is going to save money but it is still around $25.

As for Wicked, sorry bro, if the girl goes on the pill that is added protection for you. You should be splitting that bill. The pill plus condoms means that things will be okay. Condoms break and accidents happen. If you aren't willing to pay for the pill then you better be willing to pay for the child.

 

Today's contribution from the NYT OpEd page:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/18/opinion/18robb.html


To entice Republicans to support the bill, the House of Representatives agreed to increase money for abstinence-only sex education by $28 million, to a total of about $200 million a year. Abstinence-only courses, the only form of federally financed sex ed, teach that sexual activity outside of marriage is likely to cause psychological and physical harm.

If that were true, our health care system would be not only broken, but besieged. A 2002 survey found that 93 percent of American adults had had premarital sex by the age of 30.

In addition to provoking shame about a nearly universal activity, abstinence-only sex education is ineffective and dangerous. Last April, a 10-year study found that students who took abstinence-only courses were no more likely to abstain from sex than other students. Previous studies revealed that abstinence-only students avoid using contraception.

 

I would ask how you know that but then I think that I might not want to know.

 

Good thing your name isn't "Priest."

 

A sexual partner offering to split the bill on her pelvic exam....

Chivalry *isn't* dead.

 

One might call it a "co-pay"