The Birth Control Controversy

Originally posted by mastahunta

Originally posted by narwahl

Originally posted by Ahabstar
reply to post by Muttley2012

 

No, but let's say you work for a Catholic Private School that self-insures. You don't have to be Catholic to work there. Can you demand that they provide you with birth control when it counters their religious beliefs?

If they pay me a salary, I can buy birth control with that.
They have no way around providing me with birth control.

Maybe the real point is trying to eliminate it from society all together, because it
will "stop" fornication.

Maybe?
I think a certain Santorum was quite clear on that point...

Considering how hormones ingested through the pill passes through the system and enters our water supply unfiltered, Im pretty sure everyones already getting dosed whether they want it or not :/
Btw you have no entitled right to birth control. Besides that there are already programs in place to help those who are financialy unable to afford their sexual habits, which is an individual problem.
Free clinics, medicare, condoms are cheap, so wth?
Everyone wasting time on this topic should turn around and go back to focusing on something that can help the world. Shouldnt we be more concerned with global human equality? Seriously, we shouldnt be paying for other peoples sexual habits, thats in the realm of pimps, and just a stepping stone for something else if we accept this rule.

Originally posted by ClimaxBesides that there are already programs in place to help those who are financialy unable to afford their sexual habits, which is an individual problem.

But that is the basic principle of insurance:
Some folks have problems (And when it comes to birth control 98% of women have it, and the other 2% are lying when a pollster asks them what they do in their bedroom)
Everybody chips in, only some of them have the problem, everybody pays to solve it.
If you and I have a car, we both pay insurance. Your premiums pay my mechanic repairing my car after my accident.
We all have bodies.

reply to post by Muttley2012


Close...you as an employee have no right to force your self-insured employer to provide what it is religiously against. And furthermore, you cannot have the government step in and force them to provide it to you.

I mean if you could, I would self proclaim Jedi as a religion and have politician after politician placed in prison for failing to provide me with a working lightsaber either directly or through my employer.

Freedom of Religion is limit of the government. It is both an individual and collective right that essentially gives you the right to believe whatever you want to believe. But as you said, your beliefs can not trample the beliefs of others and likewise they on yours.

So if you want employer sponsored insurance or self-insurance to cover birth control, work for an employer that does so. Another option would be to opt out of your employer's policy and purchase your own insurance.

Originally posted by Ahabstar
reply to post by Muttley2012

 

Close...you as an employee have no right to force your self-insured employer to provide what it is religiously against. And furthermore, you cannot have the government step in and force them to provide it to you.

But if he pays you, he provides it anyway.
Also: Scientology is a religion. Christian Scientists are a religion
Both basically do not believe in diseases...
Jehowas Witnesses do not believe in blood transfusions

The list of "If I do work for one of those, should I not get X" is actually pretty long.

Originally posted by WTFover

Originally posted by mastahunta
The 1st amendment is not a tool for religious Fascists to use as a dictating implement.
That is a bologna cover so zealots can inflict morality upon others.

The First Amendment (capitalized to give it the distinction it deserves) is a defense against anti-religion totalitarians, who wish to "inflict" their beliefs upon others.

You can continue to try the straw man tactic, like the rest of the liberals, but I won't play that way. The issue is a religious organization, free to exercise such religion, cannot be forced, by the state to pay for something that violates the basic tenets of such religion. Period. Nothing more. Nothing less.

No one has, is or will be refused the right to obtain contraceptives.

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 mastahunta

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.

When taxpayers are paying for the sex lives of others, it's not a 'personal' matter. It's funny how those who demand others stay out of their bedrooms throw a tantrum when it's suggested that they pay for their own birth control. Along with freedom comes responsibility.

Originally posted by Charmed707

Originally posted by mastahunta

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.

When taxpayers are paying for the sex lives of others, it's not a 'personal' matter. It's funny how those who demand others stay out of their bedrooms throw a tantrum when it's suggested that they pay for their own birth control. Along with freedom comes responsibility.

Again this is the principal concept behind insurance.
You and I share a risk, that could cost X dollars
We both pay X/1.5 dollars to a company, that is happy to get the X/0.5 dollars from each of us to use as they wish.
One of us finds out that the problem actually took place, and the company pays X dollars.
Everybody happy.
Biggest risk pool imaginable: Having a body.

The issue is presumably one relating to religious "conscience" because some people think birth control is in someway immoral. My main problem with this is that no one seems to be explaining to the Catholic church how incredibly wrong they are to take that stance toward birth control.

I don't think the majority of Catholics, or the majority of Christians, are against birth control, in fact I think the position of being against birth control is indefensible. This idea that married people somehow have an obligation to have children and that unmarried people are forbidden from having sex altogether, is as painfully antiquated and unrealistic as the idea that people of different races shouldn't intermarry.

My problem goes farther than just how demonstrably stupid the Catholic position is here, it's also about them potentially becoming EXEMPT from a portion of a law. Congress is meant to make no law RESPECTING an establishment of religion, in other words we're meant to be EQUAL under the law, now suddenly religious institutions are going to be EXEMPT from a law? It's not like the Catholic Institutions are going to be directly handing out condoms and the pill, they're merely helping people have access to that stuff if they choose to have access to it. The fact that there has to be a debate on this issue, or on the usefulness and necessity of birth control at all, in the 21st Century, astounds me.

reply to post by narwahl


No, not everyone one is happy to be forced to pay for something that may or may not happen. Everyone needs to stand on their own two feet and not rely on the rest of society and pander to greedy insurance companies.

People should be treated as individuals, not as a collective organism.

Originally posted by Charmed707
reply to post by narwahl

 

No, not everyone one is happy to be forced to pay for something that may or may not happen. Everyone needs to stand on their own two feet and not rely on the rest of society and pander to greedy insurance companies.

People should be treated as individuals, not as a collective organism.

So you want to abolish the insurance industry?
Edit to add:
There is no doubt that the insurance industry needs to be watched closely. But the basic principle is sound. And there is no bigger risk pool than having a body, so every body (*chuckle*) should chip in for ordinary and extraordinary maintenance of said body.A fact every country outside the united states has realized.

reply to post by Titen-Sxull


Once again, most people who don't support handouts have no problem with birth control. They have a problem with being forced to pay for other people's lifestyle.

Originally posted by Charmed707
reply to post by Titen-Sxull

 

Once again, most people who don't support handouts have no problem with birth control. They have a problem with being forced to pay for other people's lifestyle.

According to polls 98% of women are in that lifestyle. And I do not believe that a full 2% of americas women are in the quiverfull movement, so I guess some of them lie when a pollster asks them such personal stuff.

reply to post by narwahl


Everyone has their OWN body that only they should be responsible for. I really don't care how other countries function.

reply to post by narwahl


...but not all of them expect handouts. Everyone needs to pay for their own birth control and stop behaving like moochers.

Originally posted by Charmed707
reply to post by Titen-Sxull

 

Once again, most people who don't support handouts have no problem with birth control. They have a problem with being forced to pay for other people's lifestyle.

It's insurance. If you pay into one then you are paying for other peoples lifestyle and if/when your turn comes others pay for yours. That's the whole point of it, so how can you be against it?

Originally posted by mastahunta
The reason that insurance cover birth control is many fold.

But one key economic factor is that Pregnancy, Prenatal Care,
Birth and complicated pregnancy + delivery, post natal complications are more
expensive for Insurance companies than most contraception methods.
The is 100% true when you examine the total expense of both -

For those of you who are all about the freedom of business and the free market,
this is a case where attacking the role of birth control in society is in effect,
regulating the insurance companies and inflicting economic burden upon them.

It has nothing to do with Birth Control and birth control companies...

It has to do with IMPOSING birth control, and mandating tax payers pay for it......

That in turn has absolutely NOTHING to do with the free market.....

Nice job confusing the issue tho

reply to post by daskakik


Are you kidding me? The government needs to keep their hands out of people's pockets. It is completely immoral for people to be forced to pay for other people. People are individuals who should stand on their own two feet and pay for whatever they want themselves.

Originally posted by Charmed707
reply to post by narwahl

 

Everyone has their OWN body that only they should be responsible for. I really don't care how other countries function.

And you just destroyed your own weak argument...
Yes, I am responsible for my body.
My employer has no say on how I use or maintain my body.

Originally posted by mastahunta
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.

Jesus Christ on a pony

No one has said "employees" can't use birth control. They just have to pay for it themselves. Religious organizations cannot and should not be forced by the state to fund it. I'm finished here, since you continue to ignore that simple, but defining fact.