Quote:I was under the impression it was about *pooling* risk. I have yet toSimply put. People like sex. People have sex Insurance is about pooling risk - true - but part of that is mitigation of risk. There are multiple risks associated with sex; disease, smoking, desire to raid the fridge afterwards, and pregnancy. If you do not live in a civilized country with health care, then pregnancy costs money. It costs a lot of money. It is cheaper and more effective to pay out for contraceptive services for women than it is to pay for pregnancy. The pooled risk is reduced.
see an explanation as to why this approach makes sense for what are
relatively predictable sets of act and outcome.
Where the Georgetown twits drool and gibber is that they do not want to provide it for religious reasons. Not for costs. Not for health concerns. This is about institutionalized, religious, misogyny.
Perhaps only in America - An educated woman who bravely stands up to speak on the need for contraception and a responsible sex life is branded a 'slut' and decried by right wing pigs; while an uneducated, Alaskan bint who practices unsafe sex with no contraception and then fucks off to do 'dancing with the stars' is a role model.