No. Birth control should be paid for by the people who believe in it and want to use it, and I am firmly against having my money used for the unholy slaughter of innocent babies.
What you are saying is that you are firmly against having your money used to prevent
the unholy slaughter of innocent babies. (This is a thread about preventing, not having abortions).
What I get from Sahanley's comments in a nutshell (correct me if I'm wrong Sahanley) is that.
S/he's anti abortion.
Has not got a problem with birth control, i.e. a condom.
Is unwilling to part with even one thin dime to provide condoms for anyone else but him/herself
Any pregnancy's that result from not using birth control, either through lack of money, education, access to free/low cost birth control is not shanleys problem. The pregnant woman must now have a baby, which if they cannot afford it, will fall into the welfare roles, which shanely must contribute to.
I vote my $2 go to a rubber, rather than the years of support to mothers and children, paying for their housing, education.
Paying for someone's birth control is a lot cheaper than paying for their mistake.