A gun doesn't protect from danger in any way near the same way the pill protects from pregnancy. You need to know how to use a gun for it to be effective. For that, you need continuous practice. A gun is also dangerous so it needs to be kept in a safe. All these things would also need to be paid for.
The point about cost was nothing to do with the gun analogy, anyway.
One thing is wrong with your argument. It isn't always possible to send your children to another school, especially if you're living in a rural area. Schools should not force children to observe a religion they don't understand or necessarily believe in. (And in the UK children are forced in some schools to sit in assembly and pray. These are state funded schools. I went to one. If the UK, a less religious country, has this problem then it's likely the US does too.)
Ah, do I really have to repeat myself?
I made 2 points.
One is that getting drunk is your own fault.
Another is that the government has the power to mitigate the consequences of getting drunk, or to prevent people from drinking so much they lose control.
These points address your entire argument about any occasion of getting drunk and doing something stupid because they are largely generalised.
I think that dangerous STI's such as AIDS are a million times more worrying than pregnancy. The emotional consequences can also be pretty harsh for some people and there are social consequences to consider also. Some people regard their reputation as more important than anything.
It wasn't a matter of being able to study 'comfortably' it was being able to study at all. I took time off school when I was on my period because of the pain being such a huge distraction that I would not be able to understand what is normally either easy or slightly challenging. It isn't my fault that I'm female or that I had overly painful periods and this clearly put me at a disadvantage for a few years. If not just one, but many, students are incapable of using +/-25% of their government-funded schooling time effectively, is this not a bad thing? For me, it was up to 1 week off school a month incapable of studying when it was at its worst. Painkillers would last up to an hour and then I would have to last another 3 hours before I could take another.
Everybody makes stupid decisions. Some people get drunk. Other people refuse completely to walk the same way back as they came causing them to get hopelessly lost in the middle of the night (that would be me). I don't see how the pill encourages poor decisions. It doesn't remove all the consequences of sleeping with someone without a condom. It only removes 1 possible consequence.
Drunk driving has nothing to do with birth control so I did not address it. I try to keep on track... I try.
Since when did I say that it was not their fault! Read my previous argument because I'm not repeating myself! (Which applies to your entire argument)
I didn't say once that getting drunk wasn't someone's fault. Indeed, I said the exact opposite. What you seem to disagree with is that there are situations that make it more likely for people to drink: like unemployment, poor education etcetera. You seem to like stereotyping and ignore anything that doesn't fit in the little boxes. People are like electrons. They bounce around and do their own thing but they can be directed and controlled. When creating electronic devices, engineers try to make them as efficient as possible by reducing any resistance.
In many parts of the world access to birth control is a barrier. It is a barrier to women's equality and health. It is a barrier to the growth of the country. In developed countries access to birth control is also important. $20 a week is a lot of money. Condoms can be expensive, although if condoms were not available free I think more competition would drive the price down. The economic argument is simple. If free birth control encourages more people to use it, the state does not have to spend as much money and the people also have more disposable income which is good for the economy.
About the whole drunk thing, a lot of people get drunk regularly. The intelligence of their choice is not the subject of this debate. If a woman gets drunk and ends up sleeping with some random guy while on the pill: no pregnancy, no abortion, or no child in care. Or maybe she slept with her boyfriend, or even husband. Whoever it was, if she got pregnant and couldn't afford to keep another child the outcome is the same.
EDIT: Do you care so little for debating that you copy and paste your arguments?
I've been looking at correlations and presidents are kicked out on peaks and troughs of food stamp dependency. Judging by this:
Failures: George H W Bush, George W Bush, Obama
Successes: Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton.
This is just on the data, which is linked: http://www.trivisonno.com/wp-content/
We're having the same problem in the UK and we have a Conservative government, though.
I really did feel bad for laughing at these pictures. One one hand you have the very terrible and real situation of two men who are going to die and on the other you have the most ridiculous photoshops that will raise morale and goes directly against the message ISIL wanted to send. They fought fear with humour, and it works.
Copy-and-paste:
#ISISクソコラグランプリ is the photoshop mockery that is taking place in response to the ISIL hostage threat by Japanese Citizens.
I've never been drunk either. (I've had a small amount of alcohol and suddenly became terrified of all the extra attention I was having to put into walking and started drinking ridiculous amounts of water and eating bitter things (like willow bark, or instant coffee granules))
I just accept that there are some things I don't understand. The desire to be drunk one of them, probably because I'm a control freak. I do know however that 'young' people get drunk and end up doing stupid things like sleeping with other people without contraception. I do know that people can get addicted to alcohol and that addiction is very hard to break. In the UK, when industries like fishing and steel collapse, the rise in unemployment brings a rise in alcoholism as the people turn to drink because their livelihoods have been taken away. I have yet to understand the amount of pain someone must feel in order to give their life away to a drug. Of course this has nothing to do with the party culture (of which my experience is zero) which this is all about, off track, off track. I can only guess at why people start drinking so much informally: thinking that they know better, overestimating their capacity to drink, competition, conformity? Of course it's their fault that they drink too much. But let's face it. They're citizens of a state and the state has to look after its citizens. It can't just say 'ah, do what you want, what do I care anyway?', it has to look at ways to alter culture to ensure safety and reduce expenditure. The citizens are the country.
Personally I'm on the pill because it stops my periods and allows me to concentrate on studying, not being in a ridiculous amount of pain. And yes, I get it for free because contraceptives are free on the NHS and I don't pay for prescription being a full time student.
Talking about people that actually have sex, condoms (which are also birth control) break. People get drunk and forget them, and if a child is produced the state has to pay out for education, child support or quite likely their care home.
The whole gun analogy doesn't work. Burglary is rare, something a person can expect to go their entire lives without experiencing if they live in a safe area. Sex is common, and pregnancy costs the country: especially unwanted pregnancies where a child is given into care.
If you're not an idiot you should know that birth control has other uses. Condoms protect against these sometimes fatal, sometimes irritating things we call STI's. Y'know, like AIDS and syphilis.
Birth control is not cheap. If I had to pay for the pill I would be spending £15/week, which is a lot. More than I spend on food.
