In today's news, there was a headline about Sen. McCain's stance on insurance policy. Apparently he thinks that insurance should cover Viagra but not birth control. I'm not sure of the validity of this claim, since, when asked for comment, he didn't seem to even know what his stance was, but he did promise to "look into it".
No matter what he thinks, it got me thinking. My first thought was that such a policy sounds reasonable to me, since erectile dysfunction is actually a medical disorder, whereas fertility isn't. Then I thought, "Holy crap! I almost agreed with a socialist policy to a certain degree! That was a close one."
After that, though, I got to thinking about teen pregnancies (because the next headline was about the increasing trend), and I got to thinking about how giving birth control to everyone might not be such a bad idea. I don't have a problem with teen mothers, but I do have a problem with them if they think they can relegate the consequences of their actions by living on government cheese.
We all know that overpopulation is becoming a problem in some parts of the world.
I suggest we do something about it. One possible solution is to have a lottery, but I don't think that would fly. The better solution is to only let rich people have kids; yes, mandatory contraception for everyone is the next up-and-coming trend. You may say, "That's not fair!" In fact, you most likely are saying that. But is it fair to be brought up by parents who can't support you? Is it fair to fellow taxpayers for some to ride on the coat tails of others by living on government cheese?
Now notice that I said, "mandatory contraception for everyone". That includes the rich. There will surely be enough babies born illegally to fill demand... well, that and picking up the slack for other countries.
If we just follow the lead of certain celebrities, it will benefit everyone; kids in need get homes, overpopulation is relieved, and diversity flourishes.
Now that I've saved the world, I bid you good day.
Chatboard (4)