Political Discussion - "on-topic & unmoderated"Rated PG13, unmoderated but threads must stay on topic - that means you can flame each other all you want as long as it's legal
It's pretty hard to take the Catholic position seriously, when their priests idea of birth control is diddling little boys.
Talk about failing to exercise a minimal level of discipline. Why people still take those clowns seriously is beyond me.
Well? It isn't. The scientologists couldn't get away with denying psychiatric services, and the JW's bloodwork, becuase these are life saving medical procedures. If someone needs them and doesn't get them, they can die. Thus, the right to free exercise was superseded by a fundamental right to life.
That is much less likely to happen if someone merely has to pay for their own birth control. There is no "right to life" that is interfered with here. That means that the dominant right in play is the Constitutional right to religious exercise.
Quote:
Birth control pills annually save the lives of more than 3,000 women in Europe, protecting them from ovarian cancer. According to studies of Duke University and "British Journal of Cancer" oral contraceptives reduce the ovarian cancer risk by 50%.
By that argument, you could legally mandate force-feeding carrots and broccoli to the entire population.
According to which argument?
I don't see anyone here saying that we're demanding that there be laws mandating every woman take the pill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dojji
At some point you really do need to bend in favor of freedom of choice and the right of free exercise.
Does the freedom of choice to not provide the freedom of choice hold water? I don't think so.
And again, those not wanting to bow to regulations because of their religion are getting money from the government and not paying anything back, and they're in an industry with strict and necessary guidelines. I don't think anyone can legitimately argue that the fact that a religious institution runs a hospital suddenly means that hospital can run by any rules it can find in their religion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dojji
Amazing how quickly the allegedly pro-choice crowd changes their tune when the shoe is on the other foot.
Meh. "Pro-choice" and "pro-life" are both misnomers, as both are only referring to a specifically defined situation. Once again, get your facts straight.
Last edited by Leafsdude7: 03-23-2012 at 09:09 PM.
Reason: Edit for the edit
If you want to show me where I'm wrong, and you want to bring facts and reason, I promise to listen.
OK, this is where you're wrong: no one is forcing the Catholic Church to pay for birth control.
The Church doesn't pay for it. That's not how employer-sponsored insurance works. The employer doesn't pay for health care. The insurance company pays, and the workers are the ones who pay for the insurance (out of premiums deducted from their pay).
OK, this is where you're wrong: no one is forcing the Catholic Church to pay for birth control.
The Church doesn't pay for it. That's not how employer-sponsored insurance works. The employer doesn't pay for health care. The insurance company pays, and the workers are the ones who pay for the insurance (out of premiums deducted from their pay).
It's clear he and his ilk don't have the first clue about this.
As someone who spent a year as the head trustee for an insurance plan covering 1200 people, it's just painful to hear some of the nonsense that's been spewed in this thread and by Republicans in general on the concept of health insurance.
... except for the fact that employers have rights too.
Why should employers have a right to decide what medicines their employees can have paid for out of insurance plans that they pay for out of their own paychecks?
Why should employers have a right to decide what medicines their employees can have paid for out of insurance plans that they pay for out of their own paychecks?
What those employees pay out of their checks is only a fraction of what the company pays per employee in the difference. If you want to get an idea of how much then find more infomation about COBRA.
What those employees pay out of their checks is only a fraction of what the company pays per employee in the difference. If you want to get an idea of how much then find more infomation about COBRA.
Regardless if the employer pays the entire amount, which is rare these days, it is still monetary compensation for the job you are hired to do. It's not a ****ing handout. The employer has no right to even know your medical history, much less the decisions you and your doctor make about your health unless it has impact your ability to do the job you were hired to do.
__________________
History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme.
Regardless if the employer pays the entire amount, which is rare these days, it is still monetary compensation for the job you are hired to do. It's not a ****ing handout. The employer has no right to even know your medical history, much less the decisions you and your doctor make about your health unless it has impact your ability to do the job you were hired to do.
Well this is the heart of what they don't understand...it is all part of the employee compensation package.
And the difference here is, that birth control really isn't that difficult to obtain on your own, and isn't a life-saving procedure. Even psychiatric services are more essential than birth control per se. I don't know of a single life that was saved because "the pill" was available.
As already shown, you are wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dojji
Failing all else, if you really don't want to get pregnant, you could always exercise the minimal level of discipline required to keep your legs together.
Have you seen the effectiveness of abistinance only efforts? Based on this comment, I suspect not.
Bottom line: an employer has absolutely no right to come between a doctor and their patient. Nor are other organizations exempt from covering services against their beliefs. The (tax-free multi-billion dollar annual enterprise) catholic church (once again) is demaning preferential treatment and does not want to comply with the laws of the land.
And the difference here is, that birth control really isn't that difficult to obtain on your own, and isn't a life-saving procedure. Even psychiatric services are more essential than birth control per se. I don't know of a single life that was saved because "the pill" was available.
It can save and/or improve the quality of life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dojji
Failing all else, if you really don't want to get pregnant, you could always exercise the minimal level of discipline required to keep your legs together.
This is a disgusting argument. It also assumes that the world is free of scum-buckets that won't force their legs apart.
Last edited by Daynz: 03-28-2012 at 11:59 PM.
Reason: Changed ***holes to scum-buckets. I try not to curse.
Police say a small, homemade explosive device caused damage Sunday to Planned Parenthood’s Gillett Street clinic.
The Grand Chute Fire Department was called to the clinic at 3800 N. Gillett St. about 7:40 p.m. for a fire alarm.
Police say someone placed the device on an outside windowsill. It later exploded causing damage to the building and a small fire that burned out before the fire department arrived.
Recent polls show women favor Obama over Romney in battleground states by over 18%. In response, Republican strategists urge women to get out of the kitchen and vote.
Obama currently leads Romney among women by 12 points, and among women in swing states by a staggering 18 points (and they're running about even among men). That's landslide territory.
Republicans can't win the culture war. The rest of us have moved on while they're clinging to the irrational and inaccurate pastoral imagery and feelings of our nation's antiquity.
The more they try to mandate religion, the more they try to marginalize women, the more they try to turn back the clock on equal rights, the harder they will fall.
Fiscal conservatism has merit. Political conservatism, in the purest sense (focus on domestic issues, step back a bit from foreign issues, not caring about what happens in the bedroom, yay personal liberty), has merit. Social conservatism has none.
