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.
I do not want "hurr durr conservatives" or "hurr durr liberals", I'd like some honest responses, please.
The way I see it, is that Obama wasn't specifically targetting businesses that were Catholic (Which seems odd, considering a business isn't exactly capable of having a religion), but all businesses. I may be misinformed on this. I can see why an individual Catholic would have a problem with this, but I also know that 99% of people in any given religion are hypocrites in at least one aspect of it, as stated by or interpreted as in their Holy Book.
As well, if you're hiring people who aren't of your religion, you shouldn't be pressing your beliefs on them. I am of the opinion that you can talk about religion with others, but to limit them because of your personal beliefs is wrong. Again, I'm opininated on this, and feel free to add your opinion.
This is probably in no way an apt analogy, but what about people who pay for TV packages? They may not want the things that come on on certain channels, but they still have to pay for them. Just because you pay for it doesn't mean you have to use it, and birth control will be used by more people than most things covered by Insurance.
Wasn't a big deal until Obamacare preventative healthcare kicked in.
Now it's the #1 issue in America and women's rights are getting set back hundreds of years because of it.
Wasn't a big deal until Obamacare preventative healthcare kicked in.
Now it's the #1 issue in America and women's rights are getting set back hundreds of years because of it.
Care to elaborate a little more on this? I've yet to read up on Obamacare enough to have a stance on it.
Care to elaborate a little more on this? I've yet to read up on Obamacare enough to have a stance on it.
Well covered copays kicked in for many preventative services.
Which means you can go to the doctor as much as you want and get all the preventative tests and not pay any copay. The copays are now covered by increase premiums. Is that fair ? I guess it is if you go to the doctor alot but what if you don't ?
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
All new plans must cover certain preventive services such as mammograms and colonoscopies without charging a deductible, co-pay or coinsurance. Women’s Preventive Services – including well-woman visits, support for breastfeeding equipment, contraception and domestic violence screening – will be covered without cost sharing.
The country has been manipulated into debating a strawman topic.
I don't think he specifically targeted Catholics either, but the complaint was that he didn't make allowances for their religious views. Whether the majority of Catholics agree with the stance on contraception or whether the majority of employees agree does not have any bearing on the rights of the church - which is the essence of religious freedom.
I think there is room for fair debate on the power that is given to government when you take government funds, but that's the real discussion - not contraceptives which are in no danger of being outlawed.
Well covered copays kicked in for many preventative services.
Which means you can go to the doctor as much as you want and get all the preventative tests and not pay any copay. The copays are now covered by increase premiums. Is that fair ? I guess it is if you go to the doctor alot but what if you don't ?
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
All new plans must cover certain preventive services such as mammograms and colonoscopies without charging a deductible, co-pay or coinsurance. Women’s Preventive Services – including well-woman visits, support for breastfeeding equipment, contraception and domestic violence screening – will be covered without cost sharing.
So it's the premiums?
Am I wrong in assuming that they're set by the insurance company, who are already making loads of money?
I can understand where you're coming from, but I'd, not gladly, but acceptingly pay the increase if it meant it saves me more money with a family. And thanks for replying.
The country has been manipulated into debating a strawman topic.
I don't think he specifically targeted Catholics either, but the complaint was that he didn't make allowances for their religious views. Whether the majority of Catholics agree with the stance on contraception or whether the majority of employees agree does not have any bearing on the rights of the church - which is the essence of religious freedom.
I think there is room for fair debate on the power that is given to government when you take government funds, but that's the real discussion - not contraceptives which are in no danger of being outlawed.
Ah. So the women's health issue is really a strawman argument put up to galvanize attention while the real debate is over Federal power? Or am I misunderstanding you?
I'm not worried about them being outlawed, I'm just wondering why it's such a big issue that women could get them covered by insurance.
And what I can't get past is that the Catholic Businesses are exactly that, businesses. Businesses should be secular, but, that also presents a problem of throwing their rights right out the window, but at the same time, they are denying people in their employment to medicine that some of them need, and more of them want. It's a difficult issue.
The Catholic Church as an employer doesn't give a hoot or a holler whether their employees use BC or not. But they draw the line at having to pay for something that violates their tenets. It's the same with the Baptists, who are self-insured. They are fine with BC but are against abortion and Obamacare will require them to directly pay for abortifacients.
I think the main reason this is so controversial, is that most folks think the government has NO BUSINESS in our health...whether reproductive or not. It's simply not the place of the Federal Government to medle in anyone's health choices.
And forcing a group that doesn't believe in contraception to PAY for it, is wrong. And, yes...the taxpayers will be paying for it, one way or another.
The Catholic Church as an employer doesn't give a hoot or a holler whether their employees use BC or not. But they draw the line at having to pay for something that violates their tenets. It's the same with the Baptists, who are self-insured. They are fine with BC but are against abortion and Obamacare will require them to directly pay for abortifacients.
Will it cause them to pay for abortifacients or simply early stage contraceptives and the MAP?
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.
