I want to know whether everyone would be so supportive if all companies owned or operated by Jehovah's Witnesses refused to allow any of their employees to receive blood transfusions under their health coverage. Or if someone bought the nation's largest employer and suddenly decided no one could circumcise their babies, or whatever. Who here would defend the "rights" of the employers to impose their religious beliefs on people when it's not "just" women's reproductive rights at stake? Or when they, themselves, suddenly had a major health care need that their employer was exempt from covering, and thereby had to face the real world.
First, let's break down your example. So, you are comparing lack of contraceptives being covered to blood transfusions? Are you even serious? A condom that costs roughly 25 cents, or a pill that costs MAYBE a little north of a $1 each.... to a $10-$100 thousand dollar operation? Seriously?
Second, let me point out something incredibly obvious... there's a distinction between something being permitted, and then being outlawed... and something being outlawed and then permitted. In other words, this is the way the Catholic church has operated (not covering this). Now, because Barry O. instituted a new law, and you and he think the Catholic church should be forced to change their existing approach. Don't confuse the two. Each example you provided was the opposite where someone within the company comes in and changes their own companies approach. Barry O is trying to change the Catholic church's approach. An approach that is not the equivalent of any of the examples you provided.
Third, my final point... he will lose here. This is like awakening a sleeping political giant. He's stupid politically for picking this fight. That was my point. Not only will this be overturned, he's going to be losing folks left and right (who do use contraceptives or don't) due to his infringement upon the private sector. This public tentacle stuff is exactly what people fear about him.
Your argument here is completely illogical & inconsistent with everything you've been saying. Do you or do you not believe that employers should be able to dictate what is covered by their employees' health insurance based upon their own religious beliefs?? If so, you can't just decide when to appl this rule & when not to. My experience is that Jehovah's Witnesses are seriously opposed to blood transfusions, much mre so than Catholics are supposedly opposed to contraception. And if you think it's unjust to impose those religious beliefs on yur employers, you can't seriously say that injustice is acceptable jus because it was already happening. (Wow, that's a new one.)
Again, no one is saying the Catholic church should be forced to change anything. We're talking about employers that are not churches. Don't confuse the two.
I can't say whether he'll lose here or not, but I'm sure he'll get extra votes from people who appreciate that he's putting our healthcare above his desire to win an election. If he does lose on this, it'll be a victory of media spin ove reason.
Obama better be real careful here. The Catholic vote is really important. And despite the fact that plenty of Catholics use contraceptives, they do so under their own power and free will. Although they don't follow this rule, these Catholics respect the church's thoughts on the matter - or most likely, they wouldn't be self-proclaimed "Catholics". I think it's pretty logical to see that this is setting up a framework which would forbid Catholics from following their own beliefs. Catholics who use contraceptives and Catholics who don't won't look fondly upon this... especially as this plays out. They understand the difference.
Obama and Democrats would be best to alter this in any way they can, or they risk losing a ridiculously large demographic.
Afterall, why forbid Catholic institutions from this? What exactly is gained? When you go to a Catholic institution, you do so under your own free will. No one forces you to.
This is a huge threshold that's being crossed that steps well beyond religion.
i don't think obama has to worry about losing the catholic vote from this alone. the church threatened to withold communion from john kerry and catholics still voted for him even though they were warned against it from the catholic church.
I do. This is the President of the United States actively altering private religious enterprise with public tentacles. This is not a random MA senator running for President. This is happening.
My point all along is - for what? Really, is this that important? That's my point. He should just back down here. It's not worth the fight. He will lose this fight and it will provide the religious right with the tools they need to to increase turnout, regardless of the Republican candidate. I keep coming back to... why?
Yes, it really is that important. The United States has THE HIGHEST unintended pregnancy rate in the developed world - and this leads to all kinds of increased negative health outcomes & costs. It's shameful. Conservatives should be happy that this policy will decrease abortion & save money. But instead they'll just spin anything so as to slam Obama. The outrage over this has nothing to do with religion or healthcare; it's purely political partisanship at its worst: Fuck the people as long as I makes the other side look bad. Sad.
All of you libs are nothing but damn hypocrites. You were all up in arms screaming freedom of religion over the mosque at ground zero. But now the gov is forcing catholic churches,hospitals,and colleges to provide contraceptives when in fact Catholics do not believe in contraceptives. This is a complete attack on the constitution and you leftist could care less bcos none of you believe in our constitution unless it supports your beliefs. What next freedom of speech?
This isn't even about healthcare, it's about forever changing the relationship between the federal gov and us. It's about controlling us. Most of you are to damn blind to see it.
No, no, no... This is just straight up NOT TRUE! (Ugh! I swear, people just belief anything they're told; it's so frustrating.) CHURCHES ARE EXEMPT FROM THIS POLICY.
Umm... condoms are cheap as shit. And birth control (without coverage) is roughly $30 a month. Don't exaggerate.
I'm not exaggerating. This is my field of expertise; I know what I'm talking about. Educate yourself. There are mountains of data to support my claim.
Prices are your field of expertise? Are you an economist?
Condoms are max twenty-five cents and birth control (without coverage) is roughly $30 a month. As I said. You don't need to be an economist to figure that out.
I can see you're passionate about this issue, but no offense... you're coming across as a hot head in this thread.
Umm... condoms are cheap as shit. And birth control (without coverage) is roughly $30 a month. Don't exaggerate.
I'm not exaggerating. This is my field of expertise; I know what I'm talking about. Educate yourself. There are mountains of data to support my claim.
Prices are your field of expertise? Are you an economist?
Condoms are max twenty-five cents and birth control (without coverage) is roughly $30 a month. As I said. You don't need to be an economist to figure that out.
I can see you're passionate about this issue, but no offense... you're coming across as a hot head in this thread.
No he's not, dude. I actually think you are both presenting good arguments. I think this is a good conversation to follow.
it just reinforces my position that religion has no business in any policies, business or political, or otherwise...
From what you wrote here, you probably have a big problem with the first amendment.
no, but keep it the fuck out of public policy and keep it out of business.
do you have a problem with my using my first amendment right to say that? :? :?
are you saying the first amendment shouldnt be considered when making public policy?
RC, SoDak 1998 - KC 2000 - Council Bluffs IA 2003 - Fargo ND 2003 - St. Paul MN 2003 - Alpine Valley 2003 - St Louis MO 2004 - Kissimmee FLA 2004 - Winnipeg 2005 - Thunder Bay 2005 - Chicago 2006 - Grand Rapids MI 2006 - Denver CO 2006 - Lollapalooza 2007 - Bonnaroo 2008 - Austin City Limits 2009 - Los Angeles 2009 - KC 2010 - St Louis MO 2010 - PJ20 Night 1 - PJ20 Night 2
Umm... condoms are cheap as shit. And birth control (without coverage) is roughly $30 a month. Don't exaggerate.
I'm not exaggerating. This is my field of expertise; I know what I'm talking about. Educate yourself. There are mountains of data to support my claim.
Prices are your field of expertise? Are you an economist?
Condoms are max twenty-five cents and birth control (without coverage) is roughly $30 a month. As I said. You don't need to be an economist to figure that out.
I can see you're passionate about this issue, but no offense... you're coming across as a hot head in this thread.
My field is reproductive health, including access to birth control and how financial barriers affect use (and also including which methods are more effective, and condoms aren't one of them).
Thanks for you perspective on how I'm coming across.
RC, SoDak 1998 - KC 2000 - Council Bluffs IA 2003 - Fargo ND 2003 - St. Paul MN 2003 - Alpine Valley 2003 - St Louis MO 2004 - Kissimmee FLA 2004 - Winnipeg 2005 - Thunder Bay 2005 - Chicago 2006 - Grand Rapids MI 2006 - Denver CO 2006 - Lollapalooza 2007 - Bonnaroo 2008 - Austin City Limits 2009 - Los Angeles 2009 - KC 2010 - St Louis MO 2010 - PJ20 Night 1 - PJ20 Night 2
are you saying the first amendment shouldnt be considered when making public policy?
if religion is involved and it is forcing religious doctrine onto a secular society in that public policy then yes absolutely.
and i was just starting to think you were a man of integrity.
RC, SoDak 1998 - KC 2000 - Council Bluffs IA 2003 - Fargo ND 2003 - St. Paul MN 2003 - Alpine Valley 2003 - St Louis MO 2004 - Kissimmee FLA 2004 - Winnipeg 2005 - Thunder Bay 2005 - Chicago 2006 - Grand Rapids MI 2006 - Denver CO 2006 - Lollapalooza 2007 - Bonnaroo 2008 - Austin City Limits 2009 - Los Angeles 2009 - KC 2010 - St Louis MO 2010 - PJ20 Night 1 - PJ20 Night 2
I would have to say her profession gives her argument validity.
Just a question for those of you saying that contraception without insurance costs as little as $30 a month...do you pay for birth control such as the pill, IUD, or any other form out of pocket without insurance? I pay an average of $25 a month WITH insurance.
Here is a cost comparison of contracptive methods on total cost and monthly. Yes, some may be as little as $30 a month, but methods such as the pill are less effective and still lead to unplanned pregnancies compared to more effective methods such as an IUD.
the government should protect religious freedom, not oppress it.
thats the one part of the healthcare bill i cant defend.
ill leave it at that.
umm, it still does protect religious fredom. But as an employer there shouldn't be a different standard.
im not clear as to what you mean.... sincerely. Are you meaning that the government and employers should be held to the same standard?
what this provision is stating is that a church as AN EMPLOYER must offer/cover BC in its insurance package.IS it not? Same as any other business entity. THATS what I was refering to. IT has nothing to do with exercising ones religious freedom. Should the employee chose to not excercise that provision based on ther beliefs, so be it. In my view it should be offered as a possibility.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
what this provision is stating is that a church as AN EMPLOYER must offer/cover BC in its insurance package.IS it not? Same as any other business entity. THATS what I was refering to. IT has nothing to do with exercising ones religious freedom. Should the employee chose to not excercise that provision based on ther beliefs, so be it. In my view it should be offered as a possibility.
Quick point of clarification: Actual churches are exempt.
An person has a right to refuse that particular service. But denying those their right based solely on your belief is not your problem nor for you to judge. Religious groups limiting someone on their choice is still oppression but you still have to give people choice to use the option. It is not up to a person to decide what another does with his or her life unless it is directly effecting your life in a serious negative manner. Even at that, the choice they make can still be out of your control.
Thats the magic term "control"...
If you are not using birth control then why worry if others do and are adverse to them using it. You cannot prevent a person's personal choice. Are you prepared to take care of the all children whom are unwanted? I would say no you are not, high rates of child abuse and lack of foster homes tells me you cannot have a say for other people on what should be allowed in bringing more children into this world with or without use birth control.
How is this requirement any different than any other requirements placed on employers for the welfare of their staff? Are all those other requirements unconstitutional too? Perhaps the whole labor movement is unconstitutional.
"Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself." – Milton Friedman
RC, SoDak 1998 - KC 2000 - Council Bluffs IA 2003 - Fargo ND 2003 - St. Paul MN 2003 - Alpine Valley 2003 - St Louis MO 2004 - Kissimmee FLA 2004 - Winnipeg 2005 - Thunder Bay 2005 - Chicago 2006 - Grand Rapids MI 2006 - Denver CO 2006 - Lollapalooza 2007 - Bonnaroo 2008 - Austin City Limits 2009 - Los Angeles 2009 - KC 2010 - St Louis MO 2010 - PJ20 Night 1 - PJ20 Night 2
I was watching coverage of this issue on the news last night. After about ten minutes, I had to get up and check my calendar to confirm it was indeed the year 2012.
I was watching coverage of this issue on the news last night. After about ten minutes, I had to get up and check my calendar to confirm it was indeed the year 2012.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
RC, SoDak 1998 - KC 2000 - Council Bluffs IA 2003 - Fargo ND 2003 - St. Paul MN 2003 - Alpine Valley 2003 - St Louis MO 2004 - Kissimmee FLA 2004 - Winnipeg 2005 - Thunder Bay 2005 - Chicago 2006 - Grand Rapids MI 2006 - Denver CO 2006 - Lollapalooza 2007 - Bonnaroo 2008 - Austin City Limits 2009 - Los Angeles 2009 - KC 2010 - St Louis MO 2010 - PJ20 Night 1 - PJ20 Night 2
"In general, the art of government consists in taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other." – Voltaire
RC, SoDak 1998 - KC 2000 - Council Bluffs IA 2003 - Fargo ND 2003 - St. Paul MN 2003 - Alpine Valley 2003 - St Louis MO 2004 - Kissimmee FLA 2004 - Winnipeg 2005 - Thunder Bay 2005 - Chicago 2006 - Grand Rapids MI 2006 - Denver CO 2006 - Lollapalooza 2007 - Bonnaroo 2008 - Austin City Limits 2009 - Los Angeles 2009 - KC 2010 - St Louis MO 2010 - PJ20 Night 1 - PJ20 Night 2
Umm... condoms are cheap as shit. And birth control (without coverage) is roughly $30 a month. Don't exaggerate.
Sorry, I have to respond to this one, I'm not sure where you're getting your figures from, but around here, packs of some birth control pills can run anywhere from $50-80 a month, depending on what kind you're getting. They're not that cheap.
Chicago 2000 : Chicago 2003 : Chicago 2006 : Summerfest 2006 : Lollapalooza 2007 : Chicago 2009 : Noblesville (Indy) 2010 : PJ20 (East Troy) 2011 : Wrigley Field 2013 : Milwaukee (Yield) 2014 : Wrigley Field 2016
Umm... condoms are cheap as shit. And birth control (without coverage) is roughly $30 a month. Don't exaggerate.
Sorry, I have to respond to this one, I'm not sure where you're getting your figures from, but around here, packs of some birth control pills can run anywhere from $50-80 a month, depending on what kind you're getting. They're not that cheap.
I think your signature (the first part) is quite relevant to your post.
New Polls Show Catholic Support for Contraceptive coverage
Dumb is as Dumb gets further on the same page RWNJ "Comparing forcing Jews to Eat Pork."
C'mon. nobody is forcing the pills down your throat. If I am covered by insurance and refuse treatment for my cancer, I reserve that right to refuse that part of my service from my healthcare provider.
Propaganda scam. Wish this over blown delusional Right wing fucking nightmare would stop.
New Polls Show Catholic Support for Contraceptive coverage
Dumb is as Dumb gets further on the same page RWNJ "Comparing forcing Jews to Eat Pork."
C'mon. nobody is forcing the pills down your throat. If I am covered by insurance and refuse treatment for my cancer, I reserve that right to refuse that part of my service from my healthcare provider.
Propaganda scam. Wish this over blown delusional Right wing fucking nightmare would stop.
I think a better analogy would be if Jewish employers forbid their employees from using their paychecks to buy pork.
Comments
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Your argument here is completely illogical & inconsistent with everything you've been saying. Do you or do you not believe that employers should be able to dictate what is covered by their employees' health insurance based upon their own religious beliefs?? If so, you can't just decide when to appl this rule & when not to. My experience is that Jehovah's Witnesses are seriously opposed to blood transfusions, much mre so than Catholics are supposedly opposed to contraception. And if you think it's unjust to impose those religious beliefs on yur employers, you can't seriously say that injustice is acceptable jus because it was already happening. (Wow, that's a new one.)
Again, no one is saying the Catholic church should be forced to change anything. We're talking about employers that are not churches. Don't confuse the two.
I can't say whether he'll lose here or not, but I'm sure he'll get extra votes from people who appreciate that he's putting our healthcare above his desire to win an election. If he does lose on this, it'll be a victory of media spin ove reason.
Yes, it really is that important. The United States has THE HIGHEST unintended pregnancy rate in the developed world - and this leads to all kinds of increased negative health outcomes & costs. It's shameful. Conservatives should be happy that this policy will decrease abortion & save money. But instead they'll just spin anything so as to slam Obama. The outrage over this has nothing to do with religion or healthcare; it's purely political partisanship at its worst: Fuck the people as long as I makes the other side look bad. Sad.
No, no, no... This is just straight up NOT TRUE! (Ugh! I swear, people just belief anything they're told; it's so frustrating.) CHURCHES ARE EXEMPT FROM THIS POLICY.
Prices are your field of expertise? Are you an economist?
Condoms are max twenty-five cents and birth control (without coverage) is roughly $30 a month. As I said. You don't need to be an economist to figure that out.
I can see you're passionate about this issue, but no offense... you're coming across as a hot head in this thread.
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
No he's not, dude. I actually think you are both presenting good arguments. I think this is a good conversation to follow.
are you saying the first amendment shouldnt be considered when making public policy?
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
My field is reproductive health, including access to birth control and how financial barriers affect use (and also including which methods are more effective, and condoms aren't one of them).
Thanks for you perspective on how I'm coming across.
I would have to say her profession gives her argument validity.
Just a question for those of you saying that contraception without insurance costs as little as $30 a month...do you pay for birth control such as the pill, IUD, or any other form out of pocket without insurance? I pay an average of $25 a month WITH insurance.
Here is a cost comparison of contracptive methods on total cost and monthly. Yes, some may be as little as $30 a month, but methods such as the pill are less effective and still lead to unplanned pregnancies compared to more effective methods such as an IUD.
http://avoidthestork.com/get-a-quote/cost-comparison/
:?
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Quick point of clarification: Actual churches are exempt.
Thats the magic term "control"...
If you are not using birth control then why worry if others do and are adverse to them using it. You cannot prevent a person's personal choice. Are you prepared to take care of the all children whom are unwanted? I would say no you are not, high rates of child abuse and lack of foster homes tells me you cannot have a say for other people on what should be allowed in bringing more children into this world with or without use birth control.
Teaching responsibility is key.
Also demanding abstinence is failure.
"I like nonsense, it wakes up the brain cells."
- Dr. Seuss
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Now here is a great topic. Start the thread, I'm in.
apparently you dont know anyone IN the White House.
http://news.yahoo.com/policy-politics-c ... -news.html
Sorry, I have to respond to this one, I'm not sure where you're getting your figures from, but around here, packs of some birth control pills can run anywhere from $50-80 a month, depending on what kind you're getting. They're not that cheap.
I think your signature (the first part) is quite relevant to your post.
New Polls Show Catholic Support for Contraceptive coverage
Dumb is as Dumb gets further on the same page RWNJ "Comparing forcing Jews to Eat Pork."
C'mon. nobody is forcing the pills down your throat. If I am covered by insurance and refuse treatment for my cancer, I reserve that right to refuse that part of my service from my healthcare provider.
Propaganda scam. Wish this over blown delusional Right wing fucking nightmare would stop.
I think a better analogy would be if Jewish employers forbid their employees from using their paychecks to buy pork.