Why Should A Planned Recreational Activity Be Covered By Health Insurance.... (employment, slavery)

[Toyman at Jewel Lake]

Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost

Mandate for something being covered is not the same thing as mandate for someone to buy it. Being a tax payer doesn't make for an excuse to trample on personal rights. Shouldn't the person with benefits be free to choose whether he/she wants to use the benefits or not?

What in the heck are you trying to say here?

Mandate for something being covered is not the same thing as mandate for someone to buy it.

In this case that's exactly what it means. The feds mandate that BC is covered, and mandates that the employer buy it....try to keep up

Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost

BTW, don't make it sound like Churchists are simply being used and abused for political purposes. It sounds worse.

Honestly, I don't care if we're talking religious organizations or any other employer. Neither should be forced to pay for their employees recreational activities.

[roysoldboy]

Originally Posted by tluv00

But if the entire world gets ED then how will the species survive

I got my ED problems about a year after my youngest son was born. Now I know that few progs would accept the fact that that could have been a notice from God that we had two and that was enough. I was through, anyway, because my wife had her tubes tied before she left the hospital after the birth.

I don't think enough young men suffer from that problem to take away from the trade of girls like Fluke.

[SourD]

Originally Posted by skyegirl

Yep. You answered any question I may have had about you being a decent human being. I am glad you're okay with our country returning to 1950, but I promise you, I will fight this right wing BS until my dying breath.

Have fun ripping your hair out. It's none of your business in the big picture unless you get your HC from a religious org.

[nononsenseguy]

Originally Posted by ChristineVA

Good question.

And let's be clear too (as on another thread), this is not about FREE birth control. This is about providing coverage AT ALL.

I didn't know anyone coverd Viagra, but that would be a health issue based on a physical condition. Birth control is not a health issue.

Just guessing. Makes sense to me.

[Marlow]

Originally Posted by SourD

Are you trying to say that BC pills are the ONLY thing that works for these women with these conditions? I don't believe that for a second.

Are you an Ob-Gyn? Have you ever been to one? Do you know anyone who has ever been treated for PCOS? Or menorraghia? Or an ovarian cyst?

Please don't embarrass yourself any further.

[Annie53]

Originally Posted by SourD

and women won't die from NOT taking BC pills either. Get it? Viagra fixes a physical problem, BC pills are so women can **** whoever and whenever they want.

Let's get this straight......Viagra enables a man to get an erection.....it does not cure the medical problem that is preventing him from getting an erection in the first place.

Erectile dysfunction: Causes - MayoClinic.com

Heart disease
Clogged blood vessels (atherosclerosis)
High cholesterol
High blood pressure
Diabetes
Obesity
Metabolic syndrome, a condition involving increased blood pressure, high insulin levels, body fat around the waist and high cholesterol
Parkinson's disease
Multiple sclerosis
Low testosterone
Peyronie's disease, development of scar tissue inside the penis
Certain prescription medications
Tobacco use
Alcoholism and other forms of substance abuse
Treatments for prostate cancer or enlarged prostate
Surgeries or injuries that affect the pelvic area or spinal cord

Viagra does not cure or treat heart disease, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, etc.

So......Viagra is used purely for recreational purposes.....a man is not going to die or get sick from not getting an erection.....he may, however, die from the physical condition that is preventing him from getting an erection.

Viagra does not fix a medical problem, Viagra pills are so men can **** whoever and whenever they want.

[skyegirl]

Originally Posted by theroc5156

Then buy the birth control yourself.

WHY? That's what insurance coverage is for. Maybe people should start paying cash for having babies, why should that be covered, but avoiding pregnancy is not?

[shorebaby]

Ok, I assume you are talking about the church, the reason is, the church teaches that sex without the possibility of procreation is immoral. Oral contraceptives prevent procreation, Viagra, does not. It is fairly straight forward.

[eevee]

Originally Posted by SourD

Read my last post.

Your last post doesn't answer my question. Could you clearly reiterate your answer or link to it if you have already done in this thread so please?

[tluv00]

Originally Posted by Marlow

If a church doesn't have to pay for coverage of BC for women, then it should only pay for Viagra for married men whose wives are of childbearing age.

So ages 16-70 since 16 is usually the youngest age a person can get married (with parental consent) and 70 because a woman got pregnant at age 70 in 2008?

Again.....for all of those people who are saying that this is a 1st amendment issue you are right. On both sides. An amendment forcing all employers except churches is a violation because of the church exemption and an amendment exempting all Churches, Church Orgs and similar is as well. Any amendment that gives an exemption to the church is a violation.

They never should have excluded churches in the first place. If you are an employer you have to pay. That's it. I don't care who you are. Over reaching yes but not a violation of the 1st amendment.