Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-07-2013, 11:19 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,861,612 times
Reputation: 14345

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by tamajane View Post
Apples and oranges. The female equivalent of ED is treated with meds that are normally covered. Those are apples and apples.

If there is ever a male BC pill and that is covered under the mandate, then all is equal.

Condoms aren't prescription so they can't apply.

This is all ridiculous anyway, didn't you libs want the government out of your bedroom?
I was under the impression that everyone wants government out of the bedroom.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-07-2013, 11:27 AM
 
4,837 posts, read 4,165,498 times
Reputation: 1848
You people against covering birth control are ridiculous. You hate that idea but boy you sure love the fact that birth control exists, don't you? Thank god for birth control, now you can have all the sex you want & leave all the responsibility on the women. Who cares how much it is, I'm not the one paying for it, I'm just the one benefitting from it, right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2013, 11:42 AM
 
19,603 posts, read 12,206,783 times
Reputation: 26394
Quote:
Originally Posted by northnut View Post
You people against covering birth control are ridiculous. You hate that idea but boy you sure love the fact that birth control exists, don't you? Thank god for birth control, now you can have all the sex you want & leave all the responsibility on the women. Who cares how much it is, I'm not the one paying for it, I'm just the one benefitting from it, right?
Well women are the ones who get pregnant so it's their responsibility. I guess they could have men share in the bc costs or have guys buy condoms. This is all personal choices, shouldn't have anything to do with government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2013, 11:43 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,861,612 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by tamajane View Post
Well women are the ones who get pregnant so it's their responsibility. I guess they could have men share in the bc costs or have guys buy condoms. This is all personal choices, shouldn't have anything to do with government.
And what about when the bc prescription isn't being prescribed for birth control? What about when it's to treat other conditions?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2013, 11:50 AM
 
Location: Texas
1,922 posts, read 2,777,385 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by tazzled View Post
Businesses Sue Government Over Birth Control Mandate

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 nothing is free. At some point people have to pay their own way. Unless BC pills are medically implicated, why shouldn't the woman pay for it?

If I don't have vision insurance, I have to pay full price for my eye glasses.


Is the government going to start supplying women with Tampons too?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2013, 11:56 AM
 
7,359 posts, read 5,460,493 times
Reputation: 3142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
How much do you think ins. premiums went up to pay for this "free" birth control. My guess is probably pennies, if that.
It is immaterial how much they went up. Spreading the cost amongst many people doesn't make the cost itself any different. Even if it is only one cent per person, you're still asking other people to subsidize you. The medication costs more than you are paying. Therefore, other people are subsidizing it for you. The fact that you are paying premiums too doesn't change that.

And while this is true of all prescribed medications, those other medications have copays.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2013, 11:58 AM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,694,120 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidkaos2 View Post
This argument was used a lot during the healthcare debate. Reality doesn't bear it out. If a company wants to do something then you don't need a mandate to make them do it. You can't excuse a law forcing someone to do something by saying they wanted to do it anyway. If they did, they'd already be doing it and you wouldn't need a law.

And the answer comes back, well then why are they supporting the law? Because having the law gives them an excuse they can point to in justifying raising rates, and they'll just raise rates higher than the actual cost of complying with the law. Plus more regulations can give a larger insurance company an advantage over smaller companies since they have the resources to more easily deal with the regulations.
Re: the bold-that's right. And it used to be that insurance companies took your money, let you think you were covered, but then came up with all kinds of reasons not to pay out. Why do you think there are mandates in the first place? This "Econ 101" stuff is just not how it works.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fordlover View Post
Because nothing is free. At some point people have to pay their own way. Unless BC pills are medically implicated, why shouldn't the woman pay for it?

If I don't have vision insurance, I have to pay full price for my eye glasses.


Is the government going to start supplying women with Tampons too?
Apples to airplanes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2013, 12:00 PM
 
7,359 posts, read 5,460,493 times
Reputation: 3142
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
And what about when the bc prescription isn't being prescribed for birth control? What about when it's to treat other conditions?
Then it isn't birth control. At that point preventing pregnancy is just a side effect. Same as how marijuana medically prescribed for a health problem is treated differently than marijuana taken as a recreational drug. A pill prescribed to deal with a medical problem is entirely different than a pill taken as a contraceptive, even if the pill itself is the same substance. We have lots of medications that can be taken for different reasons and are treated differently depending on why they are being taken.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2013, 12:02 PM
 
7,359 posts, read 5,460,493 times
Reputation: 3142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Re: the bold-that's right. And it used to be that insurance companies took your money, let you think you were covered, but then came up with all kinds of reasons not to pay out. Why do you think there are mandates in the first place? This "Econ 101" stuff is just not how it works.
Mandating that birth control come with no copay is unrelated to insurance companies not wanting to pay claims. This isn't about insurance companies not wanting to cover birth control, this is about saying they have to cover it without a copay.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2013, 12:08 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,861,612 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidkaos2 View Post
Then it isn't birth control. At that point preventing pregnancy is just a side effect. Same as how marijuana medically prescribed for a health problem is treated differently than marijuana taken as a recreational drug. A pill prescribed to deal with a medical problem is entirely different than a pill taken as a contraceptive, even if the pill itself is the same substance. We have lots of medications that can be taken for different reasons and are treated differently depending on why they are being taken.
The company isn't asking the insurance company to not pay for birth control. They are asking the insurance company to not cover certain medications. Period. Doesn't matter what the prescription is for, if it is a medication on the list the company doesn't want to cover, then it's not covered.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:32 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top