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 10-07-2017, 08:55 AM
 
4,278 posts, read 5,177,391 times
Reputation: 2375

Advertisements

It will help decrease the cost of medical insurance so it was a good decision.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-07-2017, 09:07 AM
 
17,342 posts, read 11,277,677 times
Reputation: 40973
Quote:
Originally Posted by totsuka View Post
It will help decrease the cost of medical insurance so it was a good decision.
Somehow I doubt that. Medical insurance companies aren't going to give back anything. They will gouge as much as possible every chance they get. And even if they did, it will be something like taking off $2.00 out of a $600 a month insurance premium. Are you joking?
That said, you all need to buy your own birth control. It's no one else's responsibility but yours.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2017, 10:46 AM
Status: "119 N/A" (set 24 days ago)
 
12,962 posts, read 13,673,944 times
Reputation: 9693
I know the right to life movement would like to take this as a win, but insurance companies are not religiously oriented. This is nothing more than a financial win for them. If it suppases all challenges then they will no doubt have a basis for not insuring us against any healthcare resulting from things we do intentionally with our bodies. Why couldn't a smart lawyer argue that birth control is nothing more than "preventive care" so let's deny coverage for anything that fits that description. In the future perhaps we'll just be covered for; life insurance, accidents, major medical, and workmans comp, the big money makers for the industry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2017, 11:19 AM
 
2,212 posts, read 1,073,926 times
Reputation: 1381
Quote:
Originally Posted by thriftylefty View Post
I know the right to life movement would like to take this as a win, but insurance companies are not religiously oriented. This is nothing more than a financial win for them. If it suppases all challenges then they will no doubt have a basis for not insuring us against any healthcare resulting from things we do intentionally with our bodies. Why couldn't a smart lawyer argue that birth control is nothing more than "preventive care" so let's deny coverage for anything that fits that description. In the future perhaps we'll just be covered for; life insurance, accidents, major medical, and workmans comp, the big money makers for the industry.
If birth control was supposed to be covered it would have been in the ACA bill.
But it wasn't. And Obama bypassed Congress and made his own special rule back in 2012.
Trump undid Obama's rule.

Obama bypassed Congress alot during his 8 years and made lots of "rule by EO".
That is now coming back to haunt everyone as Trump can do the very same.."rule by EO".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2017, 11:39 AM
 
Location: TUS/PDX
7,824 posts, read 4,564,588 times
Reputation: 8853
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinytrump View Post

The Pill usually costs between $0–$50 a month, depending on the type. Many health and family planning clinics (such as Planned Parenthood) sell birth control pills for less. And birth control pills and doctor visits are covered by many health insurance plans.


take account now the Dr will not be covered if that's why you are going to see him/her -for a refill.

but that's ok your taxes will just have more kids to feed
Can't count on that Planned Parenthood having the funding in the future thanks to the GOP...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2017, 11:54 AM
 
Location: Native of Any Beach/FL
35,696 posts, read 21,049,622 times
Reputation: 14243
Quote:
Originally Posted by totsuka View Post
It will help decrease the cost of medical insurance so it was a good decision.
so a $50 month pill is less expensive than the birthing of a newborn child??? what universe are we in again?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2017, 11:58 AM
Status: "119 N/A" (set 24 days ago)
 
12,962 posts, read 13,673,944 times
Reputation: 9693
Quote:
Originally Posted by skycaller23 View Post
If birth control was supposed to be covered it would have been in the ACA bill.
But it wasn't. And Obama bypassed Congress and made his own special rule back in 2012.
Trump undid Obama's rule.

Obama bypassed Congress alot during his 8 years and made lots of "rule by EO".
That is now coming back to haunt everyone as Trump can do the very same.."rule by EO".
Birth control is a basic and mundane part of women's health care and it should have been included. By keeping it out it got more people on board who are Catholic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2017, 11:59 AM
 
2,212 posts, read 1,073,926 times
Reputation: 1381
Quote:
Originally Posted by take57 View Post
Can't count on that Planned Parenthood having the funding in the future thanks to the GOP...
PP has said numerous times that it gets the bulk of their money from private donations.

PP says only 40% of their funding is Fed money. And of that 40% 3/4 of it is medicaid money.

So no, PP isn't going to lose their funding.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2017, 12:01 PM
 
2,212 posts, read 1,073,926 times
Reputation: 1381
Quote:
Originally Posted by thriftylefty View Post
Birth control is a basic and mundane part of women's health care and should have been included. By keeping it out it got more people on board who are Catholic.
Honestly I don't care that ACA pays for it. But it should have been an amendment to the ACA bill, sponsored and passed by Congress, NOT an EO signed by Obama.

Now, think of all the other EO's he signed because he bypassed Congress.

I've always thought "rule by EO" was wrong. Presidents don't make laws; Congress does.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2017, 12:01 PM
 
34,053 posts, read 17,064,521 times
Reputation: 17212
Quote:
Originally Posted by take57 View Post
Can't count on that Planned Parenthood having the funding in the future thanks to the GOP...
If you like what they do, donate to them.

No reason government should fund them.
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:49 PM.

© 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