It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by mastahunta
The organization is not an individual. Each person in that organization is free to use
or not use what ever they would like in their personal lives. But for some reason
organizations think they can pick and chose which morality employees have to
adopt. I am with the side of personal freedom.
Originally posted by nenothtu
Originally posted by mastahunta
The organization is not an individual. Each person in that organization is free to use
or not use what ever they would like in their personal lives. But for some reason
organizations think they can pick and chose which morality employees have to
adopt. I am with the side of personal freedom.
You are on the side of government coercion. Individual freedom appears to mean nothing at all to you. If you get your way, governmental coercion will eventually eliminate your individual freedom. It has to start somewhere, and it appears that you prefer it start with your "enemies", and you appear to fail to realize (or perhaps don't care) that it will eventually work it's way down to YOU.
Originally posted by MountainLaurel
Many employers and insurance companies do see the wisdom in offering "well-care visits, breast and prostrate exams, etc. as part of a person's health coverage. It makes sense and in the long run is cost effective if it prevents catastrophic medical problems by catching them earlier. Birth control does reguire some monitering of a women's health by a doctor, and I think that's why is not just simply a "routine maintenace"edit on 5-3-2012 by MountainLaurel because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by dawnstar
reply to post by nenothtu
most insurance coverages cover "routine maintenaince?"!!!
mine will cover anything from the common cold or flu to tumors and cancer!!
and well, if it's against the constitution for them to mandate that the insurance religious based companies provide insurance that include coverage for birth control, well, wouldn't th at same constitutional protection carry over to the people???
so, one would assume that if this battle is won, the next battle would be for people to start complaining that the insurance policy that my company is offering is in conflict with the constitution because is covers birth control and is forcing you to pay for my birth control...
which like I pointed out before, is totally false since I am old enough that I don't need the danged birth control!
add to that the other bills that run through congress....wanting to intrude into a women's body with cameras, declaring a few cells within one's body as equally protected by the constitution as the body that carries them...
well, sorry, but having lots of babies in one's lifetime is dangerous to the women!!! eliminating medical care that treats real medical problems in women is dangerous to women!
and, religion or not, the constitution does not allow you to threaten the well being of any one person, let alone the female half of the population!
medicare, medicaid, insurance is by nature people pooling money together, for use by any member who happens to need medical care!!! like it or not.....birth control is part of that medical care for women and used by more than just those who don't want to get pregnant!! I've known people past menopause taking estrogen for other problems!
personally, I think the mandate itself is unconstitutional....but that is not the argument here....
here, we are just picking and choosing just what that mandated insurance should include.
what you and me want to spend our money on!! well, it's simple what we are spending our money on, we are spending on a crappy insurance plan that is gonna balk at paying any amount of money for any care, which won't pay a dime until you rack up an annoying amount of money in medical bills!!
that is what we are mandated to buy!!
what that insurance covers is another story and obviously we don't have much say in what is included within it or it wouldn't be so crappy to begin with!!!
but your religious rights do not trump any women's right to a healthy life!! so get that one out of your head right now!
Your right but you have the right at present not to purchase health insurance
edit on 5-3-2012 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
Originally posted by Believer101
So, you know a majority of women in this country and their use of birth control then, eh?
I'm a woman and I definitely agree with Flyers Fan's statement.
Originally posted by mastahunta
See if they can reach a compromise,
Originally posted by MountainLaurel
It seems to me once a religious group becomes an employer they should be bound to the laws already in place to not "discriminate" based on age, religion, race, sex, etc. , so I would say they no longer can impose religious beliefs in the context of "employer"
Originally posted by mastahunta
In fact because the catholic church has done so much controlling I suppose I was quick on wanting to
give them a taste back. .
Originally posted by FlyersFan
1 - You finally admit your agenda is unconstitutional and just an emotional rant on your part.
2 - The Catholic church has rules for it's members. Members are free to leave if they dont' like them.
Others are free not to worship with the Catholics or take part in their outreaches (hospitals, schools).
So where is it that the Catholic church is 'so much controlling' in your life? Good luck answering that.
Originally posted by FlyersFan
that's just spin by the far left to cover the fact that they stepped in dog poop with this. There can be no 'compromise' ... either you follow the Constitution or you don't. It's just that simple.
'Compromise' ...
Originally posted by nenothtu
Originally posted by MountainLaurel
We pay for people's "vices" all the time, obesity, drinking, smoking, etc. are all factored into insurance rates wether you do them or not, and most don't consider sex a "vice" but a normal and important part of a healthy persons life. This is just silliness and lacks commen sense.
I don't pay for other people's vices, and I'm mildly curious as to why you do. If you just want to, that's fine by me, but I don't. I have my own vices to shoulder the bill for. No one else is paying for mine, nor would I expect them to.
Anything becomes a vice when taken to excess - and doing more than you can pay for on your own qualifies.
Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by WTFover
But birth control has other uses. It is a hormone, it is used just as much to fix problems as it is used for birth control.
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Originally posted by mastahunta
In fact because the catholic church has done so much controlling I suppose I was quick on wanting to
give them a taste back. .
1 - You finally admit your agenda is unconstitutional and just an emotional rant on your part.
Originally posted by mastahunta
I do not think it has be a manifestation of evil. Seniors have lived and died, while
having benefited greatly from Social Security or Medicare. These programs did not,
and do not have an official method of aversion associated with them.
Saying that I am against individual freedom is a very large stretch.
Of the Trillions of combinations one can come up with, I struggle to think of many things I support that infringe choice. In fact because the catholic church has done so much controlling I suppose I was quick on wanting to
give them a taste back. I am going to wait and see how this pans out.
Originally posted by MountainLaurel
Many employers and insurance companies do see the wisdom in offering "well-care visits, breast and prostrate exams, etc. as part of a person's health coverage. It makes sense and in the long run is cost effective if it prevents catastrophic medical problems by catching them earlier. Birth control does reguire some monitering of a women's health by a doctor, and I think that's why is not just simply a "routine maintenace"edit on 5-3-2012 by MountainLaurel because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Originally posted by Believer101
Care to provide proof of this statement that "most women use birth control not to get pregnant"?
You didn't just say that ... did you?
Originally posted by dawnstar
reply to post by nenothtu
most insurance coverages cover "routine maintenaince?"!!!
mine will cover anything from the common cold or flu to tumors and cancer!!
and well, if it's against the constitution for them to mandate that the insurance religious based companies provide insurance that include coverage for birth control, well, wouldn't th at same constitutional protection carry over to the people???
so, one would assume that if this battle is won, the next battle would be for people to start complaining that the insurance policy that my company is offering is in conflict with the constitution because is covers birth control and is forcing you to pay for my birth control...
which like I pointed out before, is totally false since I am old enough that I don't need the danged birth control!
add to that the other bills that run through congress....wanting to intrude into a women's body with cameras,
declaring a few cells within one's body as equally protected by the constitution as the body that carries them...
well, sorry, but having lots of babies in one's lifetime is dangerous to the women!!! eliminating medical care that treats real medical problems in women is dangerous to women!
and, religion or not, the constitution does not allow you to threaten the well being of any one person, let alone the female half of the population!
medicare, medicaid, insurance is by nature people pooling money together, for use by any member who happens to need medical care!!!
like it or not.....birth control is part of that medical care for women and used by more than just those who don't want to get pregnant!! I've known people past menopause taking estrogen for other problems!
personally, I think the mandate itself is unconstitutional....but that is not the argument here....
here, we are just picking and choosing just what that mandated insurance should include.
what you and me want to spend our money on!!
well, it's simple what we are spending our money on, we are spending on a crappy insurance plan that is gonna balk at paying any amount of money for any care, which won't pay a dime until you rack up an annoying amount of money in medical bills!!
what that insurance covers is another story and obviously we don't have much say in what is included within it or it wouldn't be so crappy to begin with!!!
but your religious rights do not trump any women's right to a healthy life!! so get that one out of your head right now!
Originally posted by nenothtu
Any maintenance requires monitoring - otherwise, you don't know what to maintain or how to maintain it. There are occasions when birth control pills are used to regulate hormonal imbalances, which would be a "medical necessity" rather than "routine maintenance" or "recreational activity". In those cases of "hormonal therapy" as opposed to "birth control", I could see insurance coverage.
Birth control, not so much. That's like requiring insurance to foot the bill for helmets and pads for bike riders or football players. They prevent unwanted medical things from happening pursuant to recreational activity too.
Originally posted by daskakik
I see the constitution being brought out to defend the church at the cost of the individual's rights. While I believe that the individuals of the church are protected by the Bill of Rights I don't think it should extend to the church as an organization.
The church has rules for it's members but not all of those that are employed by it are part of the church and therefore not subject to their rules. That is why the church should offer whatever every other employee is mandated to offer and the individual should have the final word. Isn't that more consistent with conservative ideology or is having an organization decide for an individual now OK with conservatives?