Collegienne complains that so many coeds are having sex, their Catholic school must pay for contrace

[Vader]

The bottom line is if you want to have sex you should provide your own birth control and keep your hands out of other people's wallets to support your habit. Male or female.

Your religion isn't the law. Deal with it. Denial of coverage based on religious belief is UNACCEPTABLE.

If you don't like condoms, don't use them, but DO NOT attempt to make that choice for others.

[Vader]

And who gets to choose? As it stands now, if a medical issue arises from obesity, or female problems that can be treated by BC, or heart disease from preventable causes are all covered under insurance, and they should be.
I pay premiums for my health coverage. Quite a nice sum in premiums.
As such, I don't want a "conscience clause" by my employer to all of a sudden decide that I can't get coverage for a condition caused by something "they" think I shouldn't be doing.
What if an employer decides that they don't want to cover pre-natal care for an unmarried woman?
Or heart disease caused by obesity?
Or treatement for liver problems caused by drinking, even if the employee no longer drinks?

The "conscience clause" is a bad idea.
If there is a medical problem that requires treatment, it should be covered under insurance.
(Boob jobs, botox and other elective cosmetic surgery is not a medical need, and I fully support having to pay out of pocket for that stuff)

Oh, and if this happens, and employers are allowed to opt out of covering things, then the final cost will get passed along to the taxpayers via ER treatment, and people relying on Medicaid to pay for what their insurance refuses to cover.

You're arguing with repulican-theocractic asshats. Save your breath. They think their religion should be the law.

They are wrong; we both know this, they are incapable of admitting it.

[DngrMse]

And who gets to choose? As it stands now, if a medical issue arises from obesity, or female problems that can be treated by BC, or heart disease from preventable causes are all covered under insurance, and they should be.
I pay premiums for my health coverage. Quite a nice sum in premiums.
As such, I don't want a "conscience clause" by my employer to all of a sudden decide that I can't get coverage for a condition caused by something "they" think I shouldn't be doing.
What if an employer decides that they don't want to cover pre-natal care for an unmarried woman?
Or heart disease caused by obesity?
Or treatement for liver problems caused by drinking, even if the employee no longer drinks?

The "conscience clause" is a bad idea.
If there is a medical problem that requires treatment, it should be covered under insurance.
(Boob jobs, botox and other elective cosmetic surgery is not a medical need, and I fully support having to pay out of pocket for that stuff)

Oh, and if this happens, and employers are allowed to opt out of covering things, then the final cost will get passed along to the taxpayers via ER treatment, and people relying on Medicaid to pay for what their insurance refuses to cover.

No one here has contested actual actual medical needs. And honey...fucking everyone on your floor is not a good reason to tap the public coffer.

[lily]

Your religion isn't the law. Deal with it. Denial of coverage based on religious belief is UNACCEPTABLE.

If you don't like condoms, don't use them, but DO NOT attempt to make that choice for others.

Where did jwreck mention anything about religion?? He doesn't even have a religion, if I recall correctly. You are the one making the choice for others, not the other way around. You want OTHER PEOPLE to pay for your birth control, that is making the choice for others, let's get back to reality here.

It's not about not liking condoms. Talk about a post chock full of fallacies and false assumptions. It's about believing in being personally responsible for your own actions. I guess you don't believe in that?

[Sparkly Mary]

No one here has contested actual actual medical needs. And honey...fucking everyone on your floor is not a good reason to tap the public coffer.

"I" don't need birth control, and condoms are cheap.

My MAIN and really ONLY beef with this is that women who need contraceptives for actual actual medical needs won't have them covered.
I don't mind buying my own condoms. As it stands now the box of 6 I have will last me for a long, long, long time.
Sadly, there is no one on my floor to fuck. Well there are a couple of cute ones at work, but well we work together so they're off limits.

[hadit]

And who gets to choose? As it stands now, if a medical issue arises from obesity, or female problems that can be treated by BC, or heart disease from preventable causes are all covered under insurance, and they should be.

In a free society, an insurance company would be able to offer cheaper plans that don't cover everything.

I pay premiums for my health coverage. Quite a nice sum in premiums.
As such, I don't want a "conscience clause" by my employer to all of a sudden decide that I can't get coverage for a condition caused by something "they" think I shouldn't be doing.

What if they just don't want to have to force all employees to pay more for insurance because the government keeps adding on more and more things that must be covered?

What if an employer decides that they don't want to cover pre-natal care for an unmarried woman?
Or heart disease caused by obesity?
Or treatement for liver problems caused by drinking, even if the employee no longer drinks?

The "conscience clause" is a bad idea.

Is there nothing you have a conscience against that you would protest being forced to directly subsidize? You pay a lot now for insurance. Are you really willing to see your premiums keep going up because your insurer is forced to cover more and more conditions?

If there is a medical problem that requires treatment, it should be covered under insurance.

And in a free society, it is.

(Boob jobs, botox and other elective cosmetic surgery is not a medical need, and I fully support having to pay out of pocket for that stuff)

Well, but that's YOUR opinion. There are those who would disagree with you, just like there are those who disagree with the proposition that condoms are a medical need that society has to pay for.

Oh, and if this happens, and employers are allowed to opt out of covering things, then the final cost will get passed along to the taxpayers via ER treatment, and people relying on Medicaid to pay for what their insurance refuses to cover.

There are always some cases that are truly medical in nature. People demanding that society foot the bill because they want sex without responsibility is not one of them.

[hadit]

Your religion isn't the law. Deal with it. Denial of coverage based on religious belief is UNACCEPTABLE.

If you don't like condoms, don't use them, but DO NOT attempt to make that choice for others.

When are you going to get it through that rock you call a skull that refusing to pay for something =/= making a choice for someone? Forcing someone to pay for someone else's sexual activity IS. Do NOT attempt to make that stupid argument again.

[Lulu]

goddammit . These students are paying for their own health insurance to the tune of $1000-2000 a year. You guys aren't paying for a damn thing. You believe every sound bite the GOP and Rush put out and it's ridiculous.

[lily]

There are always some cases that are truly medical in nature. People demanding that society foot the bill because they want sex without responsibility is not one of them.

Not a popular opinion on a site with many people like Vader, but that pretty much sums it up.

/end thread

[Lulu]

And hadit, please understand the difference between "free" and "not paying a co-pay". These are very different things.

[optimus]

And hadit, please understand the difference between "free" and "not paying a co-pay". These are very different things.

Don't bother. These people are literally retarded.

[hadit]

goddammit . These students are paying for their own health insurance to the tune of $1000-2000 a year. You guys aren't paying for a damn thing. You believe every sound bite the GOP and Rush put out and it's ridiculous.

And they want it for free. That's the problem.

[Lulu]

And they want it for free. That's the problem.

I'm out. You're completely hopeless.

[hadit]

And hadit, please understand the difference between "free" and "not paying a co-pay". These are very different things.

I have no problem with them getting a policy with whatever co-pay they can get. I do have a problem with them testifying before Congress about how they're being made destitute because they want the pill, which in turn leads inevitably to the government handing out yet another freebie and sticking the taxpayer with the bill.

[Sparkly Mary]

I would fully support the idea of an a la carte insurance plan system.

I don't need maternity care, but the rising c-section rate and cost associated with hospital births are pushing up premiums, too. I'd like to be able to get a break since I'm done having kids.

I don't need care for prostate issues, or penile cancer.

Unfortunately, I can't afford a plan outside of what my employer offers, so I either take that or go without.

As far as condoms go, I'd like to see more people insisting on their use, as I think refusing to use them because "it doesn't feel as good" is BS. And as far as I know, condoms aren't a prescription item, and no insurance pays for OTC medications as far as I know.

I guess I just don't see the requirement to cover contraceptives as "people demanding that society foot the bill because they want sex without responsibility". I see it as part of total women's healthcare.

When I was on DepoProvera, it wasn't covered by insurance, so I paid out of pocket 150.00 every 13 weeks. If I had to do that now, I couldn't afford it. Depo allowed me to keep my fertility long enough to have my youngest 2 kids.

I have a suggestion, make oral contraceptives OTC and the problem will be solved. But that won't (and really shouldn't) happen, but it would be a way around the whole damned issue.

[hadit]

I would fully support the idea of an a la carte insurance plan system.

I don't need maternity care, but the rising c-section rate and cost associated with hospital births are pushing up premiums, too. I'd like to be able to get a break since I'm done having kids.

I don't need care for prostate issues, or penile cancer.

Unfortunately, I can't afford a plan outside of what my employer offers, so I either take that or go without.

As far as condoms go, I'd like to see more people insisting on their use, as I think refusing to use them because "it doesn't feel as good" is BS. And as far as I know, condoms aren't a prescription item, and no insurance pays for OTC medications as far as I know.

I guess I just don't see the requirement to cover contraceptives as "people demanding that society foot the bill because they want sex without responsibility". I see it as part of total women's healthcare.

When I was on DepoProvera, it wasn't covered by insurance, so I paid out of pocket 150.00 every 13 weeks. If I had to do that now, I couldn't afford it. Depo allowed me to keep my fertility long enough to have my youngest 2 kids.

I have a suggestion, make oral contraceptives OTC and the problem will be solved. But that won't (and really shouldn't) happen, but it would be a way around the whole damned issue.

We're really not very far apart on this issue at all. We both agree that there needs to be a better way to deliver medical care and keep costs as low as possible.

[Lulu]

I have no problem with them getting a policy with whatever co-pay they can get. I do have a problem with them testifying before Congress about how they're being made destitute because they want the pill, which in turn leads inevitably to the government handing out yet another freebie and sticking the taxpayer with the bill.

Read my posts on this thread or educate yourself since I'm not repeating myself. Students are mandated to pay for insurance which is useless to them. Who's paying for what? You don't pay for anything and the colleges make a huge profit per student.

http://www.discussanything.com/forum...ves-prostitute.

[Sparkly Mary]

We're really not very far apart on this issue at all. We both agree that there needs to be a better way to deliver medical care and keep costs as low as possible.

And covering contraceptives allows women to address medical issues in a much more cost-effective manner as recommended by their doctors, as well as allowing them to plan their families better, thereby reducing the cost to the tax payer for unintended pregnancies, reduces welfare costs and can help ensure a better quality of life for the woman and her future children.

BUT we have religious groups who want to put up roadblocks to that cost-effective access. "I" pay premiums. Nothing is "free", but there's a difference between "free" and no co-pay for a drug. "I" pay for it via my premiums. No one is out money. Not you, not the insurance company, not my employer.

I was able to pay for my Depo for 5 years. I couldn't do it now. I couldn't pay an extra 35 per month, every month right now. There are so many in this economy who that 35 dollars could mean the difference between not having to endure endometriosis and the near constant bleeding and pain it can cause or buying groceries for the week or gas to get to work.

[Lulu]

I don't even care why a woman is taking birth control pills. I love having a 2-day period. I was on the pill for a long time when I wasn't having sex because I knew I wouldn't be inconvenienced with my period on a trip or whatever else I had planned. And since I'm not 16 anymore and I'm an adult, it is wonderful to make decisions for myself like that. Of course others would think that's a bad thing.

If I am paying for something (my premium), I better damn well get what I paid for. The real issue is these women are paying for something that doesn't take care of them or their needs.

What I cannot wrap my head around is birth control is the answer to zero abortions. If birth control is affordable, there is literally no reason why there ever needs to be another abortion. I'll even go so far as to say, if my premiums were to go up $200/year to make BC free and available to every woman, I'd happily pay it. It is simply the right thing to do.

[Sparkly Mary]

Hmmmmmmmm, I wonder if the same people in Congress who are railing over the contraception mandate get contraception covered for their wives and/or daughters in their health care plan...