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.
Two things. Obama brought this to the forefront. Forcing a company to have something covered is wrong. Period.
And this college woman is just sad and pathetic. Boo hoo hoo. Im having so much sex that I cant even afford bc anymore! Waa waa waa. What the hell ever happened to personal responsibility?
This is just further intrusion by the government. Do you liberals have ANY limits?
Whats next? What has to be paid for by someone else in the future? Keep happily letting the government over reach. One day YOU WILL regret it.
Have you noticed that these libs can't understand that this young woman who likes sex, maybe a bit too much, was trying to force a Catholic college, Georgetown U. to pay for her birth control? I keep telling them that that was the topic of this thing and they just can't see it as trying to force Catholics to do anything against their beliefs. If they can force the Catholic Church to do this they can then go from church to church forcing people to do things they don't want to do.
What is it about the fact that whether a woman is having sex once a year or once a day, she still has to have, and pay for, hormonal birth control every month?
This whole "**** because she takes the pill" argument just blows my mind. It has been around (and covered by health insurance) for 60 years! And NOW the boys have a problem with it?
I see that you didn't really get the whole story from the link . The woman was trying to get taxpayers to supply her and her friends with condoms more than the other things. Insurance companies have been paying for birth control pills for years and now they have been forced to pay for condoms because the Catholic Church refused to back off from Obama and Sebelius. It seems that no matter who they get to pay for these things the government doesn't have to do it.
This morning I heard Sebelius telling a Congrssional committee that not having those babies would save money for the country, in the long run. That is really far left thinking, IMO. We bring in thousands of illegal aliens each year and have to pay for their health care but don't want natural born citizens to be allowed.
Hey, that term natural born citizen comes up a lot these days, doesn't it?
The problem is that oral contraception isn't just for contraception purposes. It treats multiple health issues. And refusing to cover treatment of those other health issues, issues that affect women primarily, is discriminatory.
And the other problem is that the denial is supposedly based on religious reasons. But a university, a corporation, a business isn't a person. It does not have religious beliefs. The benefits provided by businesses should not discriminate, not for gender, not for religion.
Tell me what other medical issues there are that can ONLY be treated with oral contraceptives?
What is it about the fact that whether a woman is having sex once a year or once a day, she still has to have, and pay for, hormonal birth control every month?
This whole "**** because she takes the pill" argument just blows my mind. It has been around (and covered by health insurance) for 60 years! And NOW the boys have a problem with it?
I can't quite figure out why the liberals insist on misrepresenting the issue. Is your position so weak that you can't defend it with intellectual honesty?
Yes it's been covered for 60 years and NOW we have a problem with it. Because:
A) It wasn't FREE for 60 years.
B) Nonprofits run by religions which consider birth control a sin weren't FEDERALLY MANDATED to provide it for 60 years.
Those things are happening NOW, so NOW we have a problem. So don't act like it's a completely mystifying situation of conservatives declaring war on women out of nowhere for no apparent reason other than misoygny.
You want to disagree, that's cool with me. But do it with legtimate arguments.
Have you noticed that these libs can't understand that this young woman who likes sex, maybe a bit too much, was trying to force a Catholic college, Georgetown U. to pay for her birth control? I keep telling them that that was the topic of this thing and they just can't see it as trying to force Catholics to do anything against their beliefs. If they can force the Catholic Church to do this they can then go from church to church forcing people to do things they don't want to do.
This girl is a tool, plain and simple.
No. she was asking that they INCLUDE birth control as one of the covered medications. Why is this so hard for people to understand?
She was not asking for FREE birth control, only that it be COVERED, as any other medication is COVERED, i.e. paid for and available to her with a co-pay based on the premium she was already paying like any other prescription medication.
Think of it this way: you have employer-sponsored health insurance. You need nitroglycerin for your heart. You get a prescription from the doctor, go to the pharmacy to fill said prescription and the pharmacist tells you 'sorry, that is not covered under your policy.' You will have to pay 100% out-of-pocket.
Now, why isn't it covered? Let's see, your employer doesn't believe in covering illnesses caused by 'lifestyle' choices. You have heart disease because you used to smoke, or ate too much high-fat food so, no nitro for you.
Not clear enough, okay how about this: you have a stroke and need therapy only possible due to stem cell research. You work for a Catholic university and have an employer-sponsored plan. Again, your treatment is not covered because your employer doesn't believe in stem-cell research so, you remain paralyzed and ultimately die. Oh, well.
People can continue to remain willfully ignorant to the fact that there are life-threatening diseases that are only helped by hormonal therapy i.e. birth control pills and that by refusing to offer this treatment employers are likely sentencing people to future extreme medical treatment and/or even death and chose to believe that one is obeying God by doing so, but, as far as I'm concerned they are only obeying a misogynistic life view that chooses to treat women's health as unimportant and women themselves as expendable.
All I can say is I am so glad I now know how many people there are in this country who truly have so little respect for women.
I see that you didn't really get the whole story from the link . The woman was trying to get taxpayers to supply her and her friends with condoms more than the other things. Insurance companies have been paying for birth control pills for years and now they have been forced to pay for condoms because the Catholic Church refused to back off from Obama and Sebelius. It seems that no matter who they get to pay for these things the government doesn't have to do it.
This morning I heard Sebelius telling a Congrssional committee that not having those babies would save money for the country, in the long run. That is really far left thinking, IMO. We bring in thousands of illegal aliens each year and have to pay for their health care but don't want natural born citizens to be allowed.
Hey, that term natural born citizen comes up a lot these days, doesn't it?
Did you even consider reading what the woman testified about, when finally given the opportunity? Not what Rush wants you to believe, but what she actually said. Try it, assuming you are willing, you may even learn something. There is a link to her testimony above.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We are talking specifically about the primary use of birth control! THis college kid, wants to have so much sex that she cant afford the personal responsibility aspect of it! And we are suppose to pay for that?!
I guess the next time someone wants to have sex and cant afford condoms or the pill, I can send them over to your house and youll gladly pay for it?
What the hell is wrong with you people?! PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY!
Sorry son, but as a penis holder you absolutely DO NOT get the right to judge a woman for her reproductive health choices.
Do you even know how BC works? Pills aren't like viagra or condoms for christ's sake!!!!
You take 1 (ONE) pill a day whether you are getting laid or NOT. The more you take, doesn't mean the more it works.
Personal responsibility huh? If women have to pay for their pills, then I fully believe that ALL women (married or not, fertile or not, ALL WOMEN!) should protest sex with men and strike.
If you misogynist humans can't understand primary vs secondary uses for hormonal medicine, then maybe some time w/o women and with "rosie" might do you some good.
I just thank the heavens that my husband is not this obtuse or ignorant or simpleminded to think being on bc=being a loose ***** who likes to f**k.
And as for someone who can't afford bc sending them to my house; eh, if I could afford more be my guest; I would rather pay for bc than for viagra or unwanted pregnancies and ruined dreams.
Sorry son, but as a penis holder you absolutely DO NOT get the right to judge a woman for her reproductive health choices.
Do you even know how BC works? Pills aren't like viagra or condoms for christ's sake!!!!
You take 1 (ONE) pill a day whether you are getting laid or NOT. The more you take, doesn't mean the more it works.
Personal responsibility huh? If women have to pay for their pills, then I fully believe that ALL women (married or not, fertile or not, ALL WOMEN!) should protest sex with men and strike.
If you misogynist humans can't understand primary vs secondary uses for hormonal medicine, then maybe some time w/o women and with "rosie" might do you some good.
I just thank the heavens that my husband is not this obtuse or ignorant or simpleminded to think being on bc=being a loose ***** who likes to f**k.
And as for someone who can't afford bc sending them to my house; eh, if I could afford more be my guest; I would rather pay for bc than for viagra or unwanted pregnancies and ruined dreams.
Sorry son, but as a penis holder you absolutely DO NOT get the right to judge a woman for her reproductive health choices.
Do you even know how BC works? Pills aren't like viagra or condoms for christ's sake!!!!
You take 1 (ONE) pill a day whether you are getting laid or NOT. The more you take, doesn't mean the more it works.
Personal responsibility huh? If women have to pay for their pills, then I fully believe that ALL women (married or not, fertile or not, ALL WOMEN!) should protest sex with men and strike.
If you misogynist humans can't understand primary vs secondary uses for hormonal medicine, then maybe some time w/o women and with "rosie" might do you some good.
I just thank the heavens that my husband is not this obtuse or ignorant or simpleminded to think being on bc=being a loose ***** who likes to f**k.
And as for someone who can't afford bc sending them to my house; eh, if I could afford more be my guest; I would rather pay for bc than for viagra or unwanted pregnancies and ruined dreams.
You listen here. You say I dont have the right to say this or say that. Well, when I have to pay for this and the federal government mandates that its paid for, then sorry but we do have the right to speak up.
PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. Yes, look it up. Fine protest, but in todays society women are as bad as men and cant stand to keep their legs closed anymore than a man keep keep his pants on. Take a look at this college chick for example
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.
