No I don't, what a semantical waste of time. I need to prove social propaganda is effective

And I'm saying he needs to answer if STD tests are exclusively for gays

I already did, because there are more gay people

Yes you do need to prove it, if you can't show evidence then you have no argument

Less social consequences for gay people = more people expressing gayness

Where are you hung up on this

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5478215/

That's erroneous thinking

well you're selectively avoiding the STD topic again

He already said he thinks largely that I do

>Brings up irrelevant tanget to topic

Gays are higher risk and thus should pay more if they want coverage for it

>I'm avoiding the topic

See you later nigger, no time for that shit

STDs were literally the initial topic

No time to prove your point? Ok

my goal post hasn't moved. its gathering dust actually

I just proved gays are more susceptible to feels

agreed

If you are of higher risk of something your testing and treatment should cost more than someone of lower risk

Pretty sure Orange and I are on the same page there

All of what I said about homosexuals is extraneous compared to that point ^

So if someone of lower risk wants STD test coverage they have to pay more anyway because fuck em?

You

Cant

Read

Joker

High risk people pay more

Low risk people dont

Fucking christ

I proved young LGBT are more likely to contract stds than the general population

^

You've got nothing now shut the fuck up

And you achieve this one one plan scheme... how?

Spyware

I'm not sure you're in any position to bitch about who does or doesn'y understand how insurance works

Only way i see it working

Sen. Rand Paul Says Federal Officials Wasted $4.6 Million Studying Link Between Booze and ER Visits https://www.theepochtimes.com/sen-rand-paul-says-federal-officials-wasted-4-6-million-studying-link-between-booze-and-er-visits_3156850.html

Lol

Mah boi fighting dumb federal shit

Good ol Pauls