Ladies; Get Your Birth Control NOW While You Still Can

a reply to: dawnstar

Ma'am, you seem to have misunderstood me..

to certain groups of people, "personal responsibility" is a dirty thing to say...a repugnant concept...an instance of wrongthink

Typically, this group of people can be found when looking at neo-liberal/marxist millennials, and the "Social Justice" community....

Those make up the majority of the "but, muh free stuff" crowd.

People like you and i...we did things the right way, and still get the shaft. THAT is what i gripe about. We paid our taxes, did our best, worked hard, and lived as responsibly as possible, and instead of succeeding, we get f**ked over. It ain't right.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Daedalus

The two are not even close to analogous, and if you think they are, then you are quite delusional. You don't have a line item on your policy that says "knee surgery for Daedalus' drunken dullard of a brother", do you?

Nope. But I have a line item for prescription coverage.

My daughter has had years of problems with contraception, problems, problems, problems. Lots of doctor visits, lot of co-pay money, even with her great corporate insurance policy and the ACA. Married and in her 40s now, she's spent over $3000 (co-pay) in the past 18 months just on IUD care and maintenance. So yeah, I think it's like Uncle Wayde's knee injury.

Again, you're not getting it...

I am a man... i have absolutely no need for BC pills, IUDs, etc. Why do i need to pay for coverage for that, if i don't need it? I mean, if i had a wife, and she needed those things, then yes, i'd be all about having it on my plan.

So no, birth control, and knee surgery are NOT analogous at all, in this context, or any other..

originally posted by: Innocuous
a reply to: dfnj2015
I can't help but laugh when I read your post. You put women on this pedestal... it's a little odd at best.

It's thirst, my friend.....painful, unquenchable, thirst.

a reply to: Daedalus

because, the whole idea of insurance depends on us being willing to cover other peoples medical needs, so we can have our own needs covered also??
I'm not a hemophiliac and I don't suffer from sickle cell anemia, and I might have some strong religious objections to blood transfusions or vaccines... but I have a feeling that most insurance policies cover all of these things.
the insurance scam is barely holding on as it is, and our healthcare system would be close to destroyed without it.
and it won't work if we all are able to just pick and choose what coverage we want to have and what we don't because, we don't foresee a need for it.

you will never have a baby either, so I guess you don't want "to pay for that" through your insurance either??
you are paying to have your own medical needs covered, period!! other people will have different needs that they want covered and be paying into that same pool. and hopefully there will be enough people paying enough into the system that you all can avoid having to pay an insane amount of money when that unexpected and costly health care need pops up.
the middle aged and elderly might not need birth control, but by god, they do tend to have a lot of chronic conditions that cost a heck of a lot more money than birth control does. and I imagine those younger women
would gladly opt for an insurance plan that would cut out the birth control as long as it also cut out the coverage for all that elder care!! heck you cut that out and you'd probably cut the cost of the insurance premium by half!

if, the idea is that because you don't need it, you should be able to opt out of that particular coverage were to extend beyond those needs that you don't need simply because you are a man, it would sink the healthcare system!!!
or our gov't who then would be force to fund the care or subsidize the insurance industry to ensure that enough people were covered by something to keep our healthcare system chugging along.

a reply to: Daedalus

Again, you're not getting it... I am a man... i have absolutely no need for BC pills, IUDs, etc. Why do i need to pay for coverage for that, if i don't need it?

That's ridiculous logic! Bodies are bodies. Everybody has different circumstances, but the same needs. You have a prostate. I have a uterus. Men still get breast cancer.

It's not logical divide up the insurance pool according to sex, having Woman's insurance policies and Men's insurance policies. It is logical to consider the insurance pool to be wholly human.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Daedalus

because, the whole idea of insurance depends on us being willing to cover other peoples medical needs, so we can have our own needs covered also??
I'm not a hemophiliac and I don't suffer from sickle cell anemia, and I might have some strong religious objections to blood transfusions or vaccines... but I have a feeling that most insurance policies cover all of these things.
the insurance scam is barely holding on as it is, and our healthcare system would be close to destroyed without it.
and it won't work if we all are able to just pick and choose what coverage we want to have and what we don't because, we don't foresee a need for it.

you will never have a baby either, so I guess you don't want "to pay for that" through your insurance either??
you are paying to have your own medical needs covered, period!! other people will have different needs that they want covered and be paying into that same pool. and hopefully there will be enough people paying enough into the system that you all can avoid having to pay an insane amount of money when that unexpected and costly health care need pops up.
the middle aged and elderly might not need birth control, but by god, they do tend to have a lot of chronic conditions that cost a heck of a lot more money than birth control does. and I imagine those younger women
would gladly opt for an insurance plan that would cut out the birth control as long as it also cut out the coverage for all that elder care!! heck you cut that out and you'd probably cut the cost of the insurance premium by half!

if, the idea is that because you don't need it, you should be able to opt out of that particular coverage were to extend beyond those needs that you don't need simply because you are a man, it would sink the healthcare system!!!
or our gov't who then would be force to fund the care or subsidize the insurance industry to ensure that enough people were covered by something to keep our healthcare system chugging along.

i'm honestly not sure if i want to laugh, cry, or experience an aneurysm.

BEFORE this idiotic law was passed, i could tailor a plan to suit my needs. Now, i cannot. I hafta have a ton of extras that i don't need, tacked on, to inflate the price of the thing. This is one of the many problems with the law... The federal government has created a captive userbase, by way of legalized extortion, that forces you to buy a plan from a select group of providers, that meet "minimum care requirements", and you can't change it, or get out of any of it, so these providers can force whatever extras on you they want, and charge you whatever the hell they want.

I know you're not an idiot, so why don't you get the whole bit about opting out of coverage for certain things? I know lots of things come out of the pool, but why do i need to have an artificially inflated premium for a plan that covers a whole bunch of stuff i don't need?

Again, i have no issue with the vast majority of the things that a health insurance plan covers, but why do i need to pay extra for something i will literally NEVER need?

a reply to: windword

You say something like this, and then accuse me of employing ridiculous logic?

That's rich, and HIGHLY entertaining.

Would you have a problem with having an extra charge attached to your policy, for "erectile assistance devices"?

a reply to: Daedalus

Would you have a problem with having an extra charge attached to your policy, for "erectile assistance devices"?

It's already covered! Even Medicare and Medicaid cover it!

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Daedalus

Would you have a problem with having an extra charge attached to your policy, for "erectile assistance devices"?

It's already covered! Even Medicare and Medicaid cover it!

::sigh::

You seem to be missing the part where it's an EXTRA....as in a specialty thing, that costs above and beyond what would normally be covered.

What i'm saying is that it's not right for a single female to hafta pay extra for a specialty item they'll never need, any more than it's right for a single man to hafta pay extra for a specialty item that they'll never need.

Wanna have it just be taken from the pool as a normally covered thing? fine, whatever....but to have it be an extra expense, forced on people....well, that's just plain wrong.

a reply to: Daedalus

Please. There is NOT a line item in your insurance selection where you can check yes or no for erectile dysfunction therapy.

This is silly. All women have uterus's. All men have prostates. All humans need health care.

a reply to: Daedalus

I really wonder if maybe obamacare was just another bailout after the bank bailouts that just occurred after the word "bailout" just wasn't accepted anymore. most insurance companies, just like most retirement plans, and such, gathered up all that money that they brought in and invested what wasn't paid out immediately into securities. I know alot of retirement plans lost a ton of money when they were talked into buying into those AAA rated securities that consisted mainly of sliced and diced mortgages that should have been rate DDD... if not FFF. I also know of a few life insurance companies that went out of business because of them. so, I think obamacare might have been just another form of a bailout. make it mandatory for everyone to get insurance, devise a neat little website that turned out to not work that cost more than it should have, and the people can bailout the insurance industry without knowing...
they just gave the insurance companies a populace that just had to be their consumers, to exploit as much as they needed to to become financially healthy again.

but, you are here talking about having choice in what your healthcare plan covers. did you really have that choice before? I mean most of us were kind of forced by economics to take whatever health plan that our bosses decided on. and, for the most part, by doing so, not only did we lose our choice of what the plan covered but our choice of doctors were restricted by those plans.
I don't know how old you are, but I am old enough to remember the time when not only was birth control of any kind not covered by many health insurance policies, but pregnancy wasn't covered either. I can't help but wonder if the desire to not have to have birth control covered in your plan wouldn't extend outward to people having to accept birth control rarely being covered in plans, and then onto the possibilities that pregnancy wouldn't be covered...
because... their bosses are the ones deciding what is in their plans, NOT THEM!

You people thrive on fear and paranoia. Sing it with me now:" All we are saying, is give Trump a chance."

a reply to: Dutchowl

"Having to do with abortion, if it ever were overturned, it would go back to the states,” he said in his first post-election interview, on CBS’ “60 Minutes.”

“Yeah, but then some women won’t be able to get an abortion?” Lesley Stahl asked.

Trump responded: “Yeah, well, they’ll perhaps have to go, they’ll have to go to another state.”

www.huffingtonpost.com...

I've posted the south carolina law a little while ago, of which it's a supreme court ruling that says that spousal consent requirements is unconstitutional....
I'll give you a rundown of it...
in the third trimester of pregnancy, abortion is only allowed if there is at least two doctors willing to testify that it is needed to preserve the life or health of the mother...
but even then, after that is validated.....
she still need her spouse to step up and permit it!!!
so, I guess trump thinks this is all a okay!! ya, the poor lady dying in the er can just pick herself up off that table, hop into her car, and drive to a state where the abortion laws permit her to have the abortion that will save her life!!!

originally posted by: Dutchowl
You people thrive on fear and paranoia. Sing it with me now:" All we are saying, is give Trump a chance."

I have no intention of of "giving" anyone a chance to subvert or deny my constitutional rights.

a reply to: windword

100% pure hyperbole and fear mongering.

I don't like Trump either....but the sky isn't falling.

One thing is for sure: this moderate is being driven further and further right by the behavior of Trumps detractors.

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: windword

Trump/GOP plan:

1. Make it harder to prevent pregnancy

2. Ban abortions

*face palm*

You'd think after 6 billion people they'd feel they satisfied the "Be Fruitful and Multiply" mandate.

I think his long-term goal is to create a horde of low-IQ plebeians. You ever notice how it's usually the poor and unintelligent who are baby factories, while the middle and upper class usually plan a family? (Think of how much people in third-world countries breed unnecessarily.)

Trump wants unplanned births for future slave labor

a reply to: Xaphan

no, he wants them because he hates immigrants, can't wait for there's so many of poor americans that he can have them working for him for the same pay as the immigrants that are now working for him.

Oh quit fear mongering! I actually pay for my doctors visits out of pocket and have no problem getting birth control. It isn't that expensive even without insurance. Not to mention the president does not make laws. Birth control isn't going anywhere, it will still be available.

a reply to: MaMaa

We aren't talking about now, we're talking "what if" Donald Trump and the GOP get their way. Also, if you can afford to pay out of pocket, or can afford your insurance premiums, Planned Parenthood being shuttered won't affect you, so why should you care, right, as long as you get yours?

a reply to: dawnstar

You present an interesting theory....

The law was crafted, in secret, mostly by the Heritage Foundation, a lobby for the insurance industry... We had that addle-minded crook, Nancy Pelosi telling us “we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it”, and then after it's passed, we start to actually learn about what's in it... only by this time, it's too late.

We find that It's a government-mandated purchase of a product, from a private company. We find out that if you don't want to purchase the product, you get fined by the government, in increasing amount, every year that you refuse to purchase. We find that the statement by President Obama: "if you like plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor", was a bald-faced lie. And we find ourselves in a situation where, by way of legalized extortion, and creating a captive customer-base, the federal government has written a blank check to the insurance industry, and forged the signature of the American people on it.

Could it be a bailout, in all but name? This is entirely possible. But on it's face, and in practice, it is a genuinely facist policy, enacted against the protests of the American people, and much to their detriment.

Yes, some people made out pretty well with the ACA, but even more still got a pretty raw deal...and people like me? well, we got a poke in the eye..

You are correct, in that when i was getting an employer-covered benefits package, i did not have as much ability to tailor it, as i would have liked...however, unlike now, i had the option to tell them "cancel it, i'd rather keep my money".

The ACA is a wretched piece of legislation, and it needs to go.