out of touch to be opposed to the use of tax payer dollars for something like this.
As others have noted, it's free of charge if they are in public housing or get any other form of entitlement.
If they are working, let them pay for the methods themselves.
For the record, I would be opposed to the use of taxpayer dollars to fund viagra or any of those other drugs for those not on public assistance.
If it's free for a certain segment of the female populace, the same rules should apply to that same segment of the male populace.
More information about formatting options
MEMBERS:
Register | Login
How is it
out of touch to be opposed to the use of tax payer dollars for something like this.
As others have noted, it's free of charge if they are in public housing or get any other form of entitlement.
If they are working, let them pay for the methods themselves.
For the record, I would be opposed to the use of taxpayer dollars to fund viagra or any of those other drugs for those not on public assistance.
If it's free for a certain segment of the female populace, the same rules should apply to that same segment of the male populace.