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.
It seems like every couple weeks, I'm getting an e-mail from Planned Parenthood about the ongoing battle to get birth control covered in health plans. Why? What is the big deal about covering the pill?
Because all of the people who have insurance through that company, through their premiums, PAY FOR the things that insurance covers. Birth control is not a medication. It is a convenience product based upon behavioral lifestyle choices. People who do not wish to fund behavioral lifestyle choices for other people should not be required to do so. Many people equate birth control with Viagra, which is a poor comparison. Men with medical issues that prevent proper erectile functioning have no choice but to seek out medication which alleviates the condition or disease.
When I was on the pill (well, multiple pills because I could never get on the correct one) my libido was zero. I was on BC, I had the ability to have recreation sex and wanted nothing to do with it.
So, there's also that side effect.
I say free birth control for everyone, the less unwanted children the better. How could anyone say this is a bad thing? I don't mind paying a bit more for it out of my taxes or for my insurance premiums and I donate to PP regularly. Who cares who is having 'recreational sex', how is that ANY bit my problem?
Exactly. BC is a preventative measure and it a whole lot cheaper than pregnancy, delivery and then coverage for an infant (and maternity leave). It's cheaper in the long run, results in less unwanted pregnancies and abortions, and less unwanted kids. What's not to support?
That local McDonald's--what church does it go to? The nearby Kohl's/Dillard's/Macy's/Old Navy---what church do these businesses go to? A business is a thing. It doesn't have a religion. It's not against birth control. It's a thing. No religion, no preferences. The owners of these businesses aren't being asked to pay for BC. They are being asked to provide insurance for their employees, insurance that already includes BC. And they are asking to customize that insurance for religious reasons, which the business doesn't have, because the business is a thing and doesn't have a religion.
And everytime someone advocates abstinence, then the implication is that the real desire here is control of others.
The question is what church does the owner go to. It's the owner who is being forced to pay for something against his religion. Employers have religous preferences and they are entitled to them.
The owners ARE being forced to pay for medical insurance that provides BC. That's the problem.
As to abstinence, sex is a choice and BC is not something used to treat a medical condition. It's a personal choice. Personal choice = personal responsiblity. Now if the BC is being used to treat a medical condition, that's different but just like most abortions are not performed to save the life of the mother, most people using BC are just trying to have sex without getting pregnant. While I"m all for that if you don't want kids, I don't think you employer owes it to you to pay for BC any more than he owes you condoms....
Because all of the people who have insurance through that company, through their premiums, PAY FOR the things that insurance covers. Birth control is not a medication. It is a convenience product based upon behavioral lifestyle choices. People who do not wish to fund behavioral lifestyle choices for other people should not be required to do so. Many people equate birth control with Viagra, which is a poor comparison. Men with medical issues that prevent proper erectile functioning have no choice but to seek out medication which alleviates the condition or disease.
20yrsinBranson
Procreation and continuation of the human species is a lifestyle choice? Hmm..
And ED isn't a disease, it's often a natural byproduct of aging so, you know, just stop procreating. Don't fight nature, blablabla.
This whole arguement is STILL a joke. Whatever drug you need a prescription from a Dr for should be covered by Rx insurance that you pay premiums for. Letting other people decide what your premiums pay for is just as rediculous and claiming your premiums are paying for something you don't like. It doesn't work like that with taxes either, it's the same foolish arguement.
Exactly. BC is a preventative measure and it a whole lot cheaper than pregnancy, delivery and then coverage for an infant (and maternity leave). It's cheaper in the long run, results in less unwanted pregnancies and abortions, and less unwanted kids. What's not to support?
Sterilization would be cheaper because it would guarantee there'd never be a pregnancy.
The falicy of your argument is the fact that most people will, eventually, have the number of kids they want and still expect the insurance company to pay the expenses surrounding the births. Paying for BC doesn't, necessarily, get the insurance company out of paying for the births. It just delays the bill.
And condoms are cheaper....
We are talking personal preferences here and medical insurance shouldn't have to pay for preferences.
Sterilization would be cheaper because it would guarantee there'd never be a pregnancy.
The falicy of your argument is the fact that most people will, eventually, have the number of kids they want and still expect the insurance company to pay the expenses surrounding the births. Paying for BC doesn't, necessarily, get the insurance company out of paying for the births. It just delays the bill.
And condoms are cheaper....
We are talking personal preferences here and medical insurance shouldn't have to pay for preferences.
Sure it should, when it works better and you can't get it without an Rx. I suppose to get around it all every woman who wants BCP's to, you know, control birth.. could have bad craps or acne as well, that'll shut em up right? Right? Medical reasons and all.
Procreation of the human species is a lifestyle choice? Hmm..
And ED isn't a disease, it's often a natural byproduct of aging so, you know, just stop procreating.
This whole arguement is STILL a joke. Whatever drug you need a prescription from a Dr for should be covered by Rx insurance that you pay premiums for. Letting other people decide what your premiums pay for is just as rediculous and claiming your premiums are paying for something you don't like. It doesn't work like that with taxes either, it's the same foolish arguement.
No, sex is. So is using a condom. No prescription needed and no one but you pays the bill.
BC is a personal choice. Your choice, your bill.
So your argument is that two wrongs make a right? Because taxes get used for things we don't like, so should our insurance premiums? Sorry, two wrongs have never made a right so you don't have a lieg to stand on.
This is something that is personal choice. I choose not to pay for your BC because that is your choice. It is not something needed to treat a medical condition (most of the time, if it is, there is no issue. It should be covered.). You are choosing BC over condoms. Your choice, your bill. Oh, and the condoms are your bill too.
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.
