Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The point, however, is, that for whatever reason, the birth rate now is much less than what it historically has been. So, essentially this entire thread is a conservative talking point. And don't conservatives love their talking points. However, given the perception that most conservatives have that we are up to our eyeballs in indigent babies, why are they never in favor of sterilization? Birth control pills are junk. Forty year old technology for something as important as family planning? Condoms are what...3,000 year old technology... ... Doesn't humanity deserve better in the millennium?? Most of you don't think so. That is the problem.
H
Sterilization is not an option.....because we all KNOW that forced or encouraged sterilization will never fly in a country where the majority believe having children is a "God-given" right.....whether they can pay for them or not. In fact, a country where some people believe having children is a DUTY commanded by "God".
Birth control pills are one of the most effective and most widely used methods of birth control available. That is FACT. That is REALITY. So THAT is what we deal with.
If/when, a reliable form of REVERSABLE sterilization becomes available, we could then discuss whether insurance should pay for that procedure.
If an insurance company can avoid paying the medical costs of a childbirth {upwards of $10,000 at least}, it is sound business sense to pay for BC pills that could prevent a lot of those costs. Preventing even one birth, let's say at a cost of $10,000 plus.....would sure pay for a lot of BC pills. Pay a little now vs paying a lot later.
Then why wouldn't discussing the effectiveness of BC pills also tie into the conversation?
Why should insurance pay for a method of BC that some people claim is not effective anyway?
Why should insurance pay for something that does not work? That is their argument AGAINST insurance paying for The Pill.
"Some people", e.g in this thread, a 16 year old know it all. "Some people" don't believe scientific research. That argument is a smoke screen; they don't want BC covered b/c it's too sexual.
"Some people", e.g in this thread, a 16 year old know it all. "Some people" don't believe scientific research. That argument is a smoke screen; they don't want BC covered b/c it's too sexual.
I agree, but the 16 year old isn't the only poster who thinks BC pills don't work.....despite the evidence.
Some people here have a religious agenda for not wanting to cover The Pill.
Why should insurance pay for something that does not work? That is their argument AGAINST insurance paying for The Pill.
Or they don't want government mandating that private insurance has to pay for anything and they are trying to find arguments that are likely to appeal to those who don't share that view, even if those arguments are ludicruous.
I'm not a big fan of government mandating what private insurance has to pay for. However, this is a case where I'm willing to make an exception because I think it's in all our best interest for it to be covered.
I agree, but the 16 year old isn't the only poster who thinks BC pills don't work.....despite the evidence.
Some people here have a religious agenda for not wanting to cover The Pill.
The scientifc evidence speaks for itself. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions; they're not entitled to their own facts.
I believe religious insurance providers are allowed to not cover BCP. My daughter gets her ins. from a Catholic hospital where she works, and I know they don't cover sterilization. I'm not 100% positive about the pill.
However, if you get your ins. through a secular source, it has to cover birth control. I'm with afoigrokerkok, here.
If the law is passed.....you WILL pay for it....whether you like it or not.
What if I felt that my insurance dollars shouldn't go to pay for your childbirth costs? If you want a child.....you pay the doctor bills.....why should I pay them?
See how that works?
Yeah. But I honestly don't think that BCP and abortions should be covered by insurance. I don't think that they have anything to do with healthcare.
"Some people", e.g in this thread, a 16 year old know it all. "Some people" don't believe scientific research. That argument is a smoke screen; they don't want BC covered b/c it's too sexual.
You know, that I'm a know it all just from a few posts? Don't you think that comment is just a tad immature? Whatever.
Yeah. But I honestly don't think that BCP and abortions should be covered by insurance. I don't think that they have anything to do with healthcare.
Following your line of thinking.....insurance should cover you if you get measles, lockjaw, or polio, etc.....but should not cover the cost of vaccinating you to prevent the illness in the first place. That is not cost effective.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Don't you think that comment is just a tad immature? Whatever.
