Rubio Bill Lets ANY Employer Deny Birth Control Coverage

Sounds like a good bill to me. This would cover the conciences of those of a variety of faiths regardless of where they work.

What's next, littleboyblue? Employers claiming they don't have to hire Jews if Judaism goes against their values?

Sounds like a good bill to me.

Well I live in a secular country called America, and this sounds like a sh*t bill to me.

WOW ! Rubio really DOES want to be the GOP VP nominee doesn't he? This should richly endear him with the Koch brothers and Mitt has got to be thrilled to find someone else who enjoys ripping away common sense things like contraceptives as this would clearly lead to the birth of more workers and poor people to screw over!

This should richly endear him with the Koch brothers and Mitt has got to be thrilled to find someone else who enjoys ripping away common sense things like contraceptives as this would clearly lead to the birth of more workers and poor people to screw over!

Does this mean that the federal program as it's currently constructed is designed to prevent procreation in certain demographic groups?

Birth control is a personal choice, getting an emergency appendectomy isn't, why should somebody's insurance cover something they choose to use?

@ littleboy #1.1,

I think you are missing the point - it's not to protect the faiths of those employed, it's to protect the faiths of the EMPLOYERS - by allowing them to not fund any medical procedure they find objectionable to their beliefs...

If your employer is a Scientologist he can refuse to cover any of your medical coverage because of HIS faith and demand that you pay him $10,000 to be healed...

Someday birth control may not be a personal choice. The day may come when a family's ability to receive public or private benefits is contingent on their willingness to go on birth control.

Amazing that so often the same folks who despise abortion don't want anyone to use birth control either!

Of course, once those little critters are born they could care less if they live or die!

Some body pinch me. All day I feel like I am back in the 60's when "THE PILL" was a huge controversy and women that weren't married that took the pill were whores and married women who did were probably messing around on their husbands.....

I have to be dreaming...

From my perspective, if you want an abortion or you want to use birth control, go ahead, it's your choice.

I think the big difference is the Left want's to force other people to pay for somebody's personal choice while the Right want's people to pay for their own decisions. Birth control is a voluntary, personal decision, so is abortion in most cases.

I dont believe there's anyone who would object to insurance paying for an abortion if the mothers life was in jeopardy.

CC ~~~~~~~~~Pinch~~~~~~~~~~

Bobby G @2.8 Scientology is a fringe religion unlike main-stream Christianity

Crooks @1.10 Your post is one of the most often repeated lies on Newsvine

North Pole @1.7 This board is for adults! If all you can do is hurl insults, I'm telling your mommy.

Bonos@1.2 Your statement is an irrational projection of my position. That the best you can do? You're slipping, babe.

L'EMPEREUR du POLE NORD

Typical Cubano politian.

That's a blatantly racist comment, where's the angry left?

NOT a racial comment, just a comment about Cuban politians.

Looks like another repukian is going to be getting his walking papers as well. Right Scott Walker?

I am beginning to think some of these politicians are making these absurd bills just so they can be tossed out of office by the people. This way they can live the rest of their lives off the backs of the taxpayers that pay for all their pension plans they get for life, and then some.

Throw this dumbazz out the top floor window and see if he can fly.

REVOLUTION 2012

Women, minorities, blacks, and the poor are the main target of the repukians. Remember, there are ore of us than there are of them, and the day is coming when the people need all band together and clean out all these corrupt and crooked politicians and 1%ers that are running and ruining our country.

Birth control is a personal choice,

So is treatment for erectile disfunction. But that's covered.

Marco's runnin' as fast as his little legs can carry him. . . Run, Marco, run!

Birth control is a personal choice, getting an emergency appendectomy isn't, why should somebody's insurance cover something they choose to use?

Yes, empty dick, I mean erectile dysfunction is covered by insurance but that's only so men can knock up women who won't be covered by their insurance to get contraceptives if this nonsense prevails!

Birth control is a personal choice,

So is chemotherapy.

In 2014 will businesses be able to say they believe in power of prayer and not healthcare and be excluded from having to provide health insurance?

Respect for people’s religious beliefs does not mean that your boss gets to decide what kind of health care you get.

Now if an employer is willing to pay 100% of your health premium then they should be able to exclude birth control. If your paying for part of your premium then you should have access to them.

Birth control is a personal choice, getting an emergency appendectomy isn't, why should somebody's insurance cover something they choose to use
Gettin a stint placed in your heart is a personal choice too...so is having half of your skull removed to relieve pressure from a brain tumor...you chose to have the procedure or you don't - or maybe you chose an alternative procedure.

And thank you in advance for coming over to our side!

I think the big difference is the Left want's to force other people to pay for somebody's personal choice while the Right want's people to pay for their own decisions. Birth control is a voluntary, personal decision, so is abortion in most casesv

If you have a heart ailment and the doctor says you can have a stint inserted OR you take this coctail of drugs for the rest of your life is THAT not also a choice?

Do right wingers have have heart problems or only left wingers?

If a woman choses not to have more children because she doesn't want more who are you to deny her medical procedure? It's NO different than any other PERSONAL medical choice.

This right and left nonsense is just that - NONSENSE!

No, the hypocrisy lies in that fact that those who support THIS bill ARE NOT using language that would make limp d-ck meds OPTIONAL as well.

Yes, rightwingers, Viagra is COVERED, 100%, under EVERY SINGLE INSURANCE COMPANY'S POLICIES.

I guess we know what male dominated management at the insurance companies want.

I always laugh about this. It is fine to say that there should be no religion in government, but it is okay to trample the religion of others with laws.

Seriously. The 2nd amendment is clear, the government shall make no law that establishes a religion, or prohibits the free exercise thereof;

The last six lines are the key. Would Obama's law force someone who owned a business to sponsor something that is against their religion, thus inhibiting the free exercise of that religion.

Now, should insurance companies cover Birth Control? I think so. They will save a fortune compared to the Hospital Bills for Babies. I am all for them covering Tubals and Visectimies as well, but not that "ball zapping" thing that came out. We all know a few people that should not breed anyway, and we should be willing to offer them an option on that.

So the husband who can't "get woody up" gets insurance coverage to insure he can get Viagra and his wife pregnant...but the wife can't get insurance coverage to prevent a pregnancy NEITHER of them wants?

That's about as retarded as retarded gets!

TAC,

I'm asking because I'm curious, do all insurance policies cover Viagra? Can't the wife tell hubby to wrap little woody in a raincoat before he sends him out into the bush?

in every instance where healthcare insurance covers viagra and cialis, it should also cover contraceptives

Religiously owned or affiliated organizations that employ people of all faiths and backgrounds ought to play by the same rules as every other employer, including being subject to health, safety, and labor regulations. They provide goods and services to the public and are the beneficiaries of ample taxpayer funded grants and subsidies. Their status as religiously owned or affiliated shouldn't allow them to pick and choose which public regulations they must comply with. SOURCE

Period.

Severed Head in a Jar

Birth control is a personal choice,

So is treatment for erectile disfunction. But that's covered.

That doesn't make it right.

As far as chemo and stEnts, wow, grasping there. Right, not taking birth control is JUST like opting out on a lifesaving treatment, give me a @!$%#ing break, nobody should be comparing birth control to goddamn heart problems or cancer.

As far as chemo and stEnts, wow, grasping there. Right, not taking birth control is JUST like opting out on a lifesaving treatment, give me a @!$%#ing break, nobody should be comparing birth control to goddamn heart problems or cancer.

Getting pregnant is just as serious as any other medical issue. If a woman doesn't WANT to be pregnant that is her right.

You say it doesn't make it right...but I don't see anybody trying to deny men Cialis or Viagra on insurance - do YOU?

Why should women be denied insurance for contraceptives and unwanted babies while men get insurance paid for hard-ons? Please explain this to us...

If it's not right...then end coverage for both OR end this conversation...

As a US Senator, Mr. Rubio certainly knows that employers don't provide birth control coverage anyway. It's health insurers, not employers or churches, that are required to provide birth control coverage. While they've pandered to the right to a point of selling plans omitting coverage, it's actually cheaper to provide birth control than to provide for a baby. I'm not sure how this law would work but it's likely that it wouldn't do anything since employers are required to buy insurance and insurers are required to provide BC coverage.

This is a @!$%#ing war on women, and if the republicans want to wage it on us, BRING IT ON.

I'm asking because I'm curious, do all insurance policies cover Viagra? Can't the wife tell hubby to wrap little woody in a raincoat before he sends him out into the bush?

As far as I can tell the answer is yes! I could be wrong but I know of NO health plan that doesn't!
But if the plan covers Viagra or vasectomy - it should also cover contraceptives for women.

Condoms are the least reliable form of birth control! Everybody knows that.

Furthermore, if a man choses to have a vasectomy it's always covered...so again, why should a woman be denied the same alternative?

Just asking...

It didn't take this weasel long to break out of his "low profile"! I guess this GOPer didn't learn his lesson with what happened with the SGK fiasco. This "twerp" should be concerned with JOB CREATION not this little "side line" diversion that only "tries" to cover up the Republicans INCOMPETENCE!

Birth control is a personal choice

So is having children.

Yes, rightwingers, Viagra is COVERED, 100%, under EVERY SINGLE INSURANCE COMPANY'S POLICIES.

Whell there's as hard and stiff of an assertion as I have ever heard.

HappyToSeeYa,

"in every instance where healthcare insurance covers viagra and cialis, it should also cover contraceptives"

I agree 100% with this statement. I like the fact you are a rational person. I'm guessing we don't necessarily agree politically but I read your posts and find myself thinking, this person get it.

TAC,

"Furthermore, if a man choses to have a vasectomy it's always covered..."

Well then I'm calling my insurance company and demanding repayment because you said so.

Truth is a vasectomy and viagra are not covered in the plan I'm on. My allergy medication isn't even covered and someone wants me to think the pill or a rubber should be? I could have an anaphylactic reaction and die but hey, someone can still get laid. Good on ya.

So no, it's not "always covered" as you stated.

"This is a @!$%#ing war on women"

If we're having a fuc.ing war, I'm in. It sounds like good times and I'm betting Vivid would even film it. In fact I think I saw one of their movies based on just that "Saving Ryan's Privates"

Well when you find any health plan that does NOT cover Viagra OR vasectomy please let us know...

You might find some that don't cover Viagra but I highly doubt you'll find ANY that don't cover vasectomy...and therin lies the problem!

If a man can chose to not impregnate women then women should be able to chose to not be impregnated...it's avery simple proposition, but since the economy is getting better the GOP has fallen of the cliff and here we are discussing issue we thought were solved 40 years ago!

Truth is a vasectomy and viagra are not covered in the plan I'm on. My allergy medication isn't even covered and someone wants me to think the pill or a rubber should be? I could have an anaphylactic reaction and die but hey, someone can still get laid. Good on ya.

The you have one of the worst benefit plans imaginable. Many plans allow you to purchase allergy drugs PRETAX thru a "Flexible Spending Account".

I look forward to the day when people simply accept that you can't control every single aspect of society that you don't like just because -you- are against it.

You don't like birth control being covered? Too bad. It's for the good of society, overall, to have fewer abortions and unwanted births.

Unbelievable that people are even arguing against this...

On a side note,gov. ricky wants to maximize ER visits to folks on Medicaid to 12 visits/year.

They claim just about everything is unconstitutional,yet there is this. Knuckleheads.

If someone has to go to the ER that 13th time,they will probably be labeled as some fraud,abuser,etc.,etc. The list is probably as undefined as scott's personality.

This is simply a non-issue, as I'm a Catholic and 98% of Catholic Families want access to Birth-Control...

Since the economy seem to be on the up swing the Repubs are now going back to the culture war again! They have no new ideas and not answers to anything. Now we are in the 21 century arguing about whether or not to have contraption in insurance plans. It is completely insane

Completely Insane indeed..... Hey Boehner, where are the jobs.............. Oh I forgot, you don't know because you haven't been working that issue, I'll ask the President.....

Yeah! Oh and Boehner since you obviously aren't getting any and therefore don't have to worry about contraception you can option out your own Viagra coverage with your government paid insurance plan. Leave my coverage alone.

I have emailed http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact stating my support for the HHS women's heathcare/contraception proposal.

Have you?

So did I. Thanks for the link

All issues of religious freedom aside, why can't people understand that the more mandates you put on insurance companies, the less affordable insurance is going to be for everybody? Somehow I got through all of my fertile years paying for my OWN birth control, or else the guy paid. What are they trying to do, encourage all women to go on dangerous hormonal birth control just because it's free? Even though barrier methods make far more sense for most women and can prevent STDs as well???? Or do they also give you free condoms, foam, and sponges, as if these weren't available cheaply OTC in every pharmacy and grocery store?

It ought to be possible to purchase insurance that only covers hospitalization, major medical, and catastrophic care. Let people chose the level of insurance they want or need, rather than trying to be all things to all people. They could rate plans at various levels, and when you were job hunting and asked about benefits, they could simply say "we give level 1, but if you contribute X amount you can purchase level 2" etc. The average young, healthy person only needs "level 1" insurance in case they are in an accident or develop a serious illness. They can budget for their annual doctor visit and medications, just as people used to do not so long ago at all. I did it myself. Doctor office visits didn't become expensive UNTIL insurance started covering them. What an amazing coincidence.

If people are so incompetent at budgeting that they now require a third party to pay for their birth control, what's next? Should they also cover toothpaste and toothbrushes (essential to health), sunscreen oil to prevent skin cancer, exercise equipment including bicycles, and fresh produce? Don't forget the Lysol and other cleaning supplies to prevent germs. Come on, worry about the basics, not the frills. (And before anybody askes, no, they shouldn't cover viagra either.)

If a woman and her husband or boyfriend are both so poor they cannot even afford condoms, gee, maybe they should get out of bed, get dressed, and start looking for JOBS.

Theyreallcrooks,

"Well when you find any health plan that does NOT cover Viagra OR vasectomy please let us know..."

I can't have a discussion with you if you will not read. In post 1.42 I explained that my insurance plan did not cover my vasectomy. So now I've let you know twice. The question is, will you ignore it twice?

buckeyenut-2225921

HappyToSeeYa,

"in every instance where healthcare insurance covers viagra and cialis, it should also cover contraceptives"

I agree 100% with this statement. I like the fact you are a rational person. I'm guessing we don't necessarily agree politically but I read your posts and find myself thinking, this person get it.

You are quite correct, we don't always agree. Agreeing to disagree without being rude is always appreciated. ^5

Well when you find any health plan that does NOT cover Viagra OR vasectomy please let us know...

MOST plans do not cover ED treatment. They cover vasectomies the same way they cover tubal ligation.

Wait one minute! The issue isn't whether all health plans should provide coverage for contraception, it's whether, when prescription coverage is provided, that prescription coverage must include contraception. Isn't that a big difference? So, buckeyenut, the lousy plan you have shouldn't be used as a categorical analogy anyway. Even your allergy medication isn't covered, you say? Are any prescriptive medications covered?

If we had government provided universal, single-payer health insurance, this controversy wouldn't exist in the first place, and Republicans wouldn't be able to deflect from the important issues, jobs and the economy. I'm just glad I live in Canada now, where the health issue has been long resolved by civilized thinking.

rescue,

Is 2500 max out of pocket high?

I believe my plan would be considered comprehensive. I have to pay for prescriptions but at a significantly lesser price than without insurance. We have vision and dental included. I had arthroscopic knee surgery twice in 6 months for torn meniscus (same damn knee) and only paid the 2500 out of pocket. So in my opinion that is pretty decent coverage. They just didn't cover the elective surgery of having the berries snipped.

caballojoe,

I don't remember writing that my plan was the norm. I merely stated that not ALL plans cover the things TAC thought they did. IF my plan is lousy I'm pretty sure there are many people who would love to have my "lousy" plan.

Don't direct ignorant blanket statements at me like I made an ignorant blanket statement. I pointed to MY EXPERIENCE. I never said this is how ALL have it.

See the difference?

caballo,

"I'm just glad I live in Canada now, where the health issue has been long resolved by civilized thinking"

I had two knee arthroscopies in 6 months which is two more than one of my business associates got on that wonderful Canadian health plan in a year. That's just what I know to be a fact. I'm not stating it to be this way for every Canadian.

?? How the hell do i attach a disclaimer to my sig line????

Our Jonathan catches this, you'll get a rendition of all his Canadian treatments..lol transplants etc.

American, one of my BFF's went to ER, was diagnosed with a stroke, Family Doctor, (that took 2 weeks) got to see a neurologist 6 weeks then two More months later finally got diagnosed with ....a brain tumor...so for 4 months she was being treated for ....a stroke. The four months lost in diagnosing....she died.

mstanley,

Can't blame the system for that one although it does seem odd they didn't perform a scan to look for abnormalities or potential causes of what appeared to be a stroke. When I had my knee done, I had to have an xray to rule out bone issues and then an MRI to look for tendon/tissue damage. When I saw the MRI I asked the technician, "why the hell did I have an x ray done on my knee??" I saw everything the x ray showed with he MRI plus the tissue.

Well, if we must tell anecdotal tales, I had to go to ER this week in Canada. I am American and moved to Canada, so I didn't have a regular doctor (until Monday night, now I do) so I didn't have the choice of making an appointment. I had a suspicious looking mole on my arm that I noticed Sunday night. I went to ER Monday at 5:45 pm. I was triaged and told that the doctor would see me at 7:30, so I could leave and come back then. I left the hospital at 6:15, I went home and relaxed, watched Jeopardy and got back to the hospital at 7:30. I left the hospital at 8:15 having been examined and treated. The treatment consisted of the injection of a local anasthetic, and excision of the supicious mole. I'm waiting for the lab results now. What a breeze! I was home by 8:27. I went to ER one other time with similar results, except that time there was no wait and I was in and out in a half hour for a corneal scratch.

But I have to say I have a feeling of wellness just knowing that all my Canadian friends, rich and poor, employed and unemployed, young, old, retired, disabled, whatever, are all covered. It is just so civilized. I almost feel guilty about my US friends and family having to pay so, so much for their health insurance, while I pay nothing. I said almost.

buckeye, not odd at all. That's how the medical care is going. ER, then referred to Family Doctor, then referred to Specialist, then scheduled for CAT scan, then for the MRI. That's when they caught it. It was fast growing by then and practically inoperable. 99% chance she'd be paralyzed and unable to speak.... She opted for 'suck eggs'...and died,

Another one, diagnosed for Years with bronchitis...actual diagnosis....Mesothelioma...Asbestos contamination of the lungs, deadly...she died too. Another one with IBC, one rapid onset breast cancer...small lump, family doctor referral to oncologist, mammogram, CAT scan, chemo...died..

The main problem with medical care in the US....the ability of the AMA to 'control' the number of students in Medical School. Kind of a monopoly deal going on.

She wasn't in an HMO. rural hospital in TN, NP was there. State finally made them get an MD. Still she went to a local doctor and then had to wait for the neurologist in Chattanooga to get an appt. Apparently, neither the local doc or the neurologist thought she needed to be seen sooner. And then the neurologist went with the NP diagnosis, stroke...at least for a couple of weeks. Then he got busy and ordered the MRI.

Yep, know all those too and before that PPO's. I started doing medical insurance billing back in '75 watched it go downhill.

Still, the lack of doctor's and now the substitutes...NP's ...for doctor's in many area's because they're pulling them into the cities. Well, if they don't up the admission's for medical schools what in the world did they expect? They know the population of America is growing. What burns me is that several NP's are allowing people to call them Doctor. They aren't and they aren't suppose too either. Instead of correcting them and getting people use to saying Nurse Practitioner they don't.

So now when I see one, I ask Are you a Medical Doctor or a Nurse Practitioner? No doubt in my mind what the difference is.

My late husband had better care at the Veterans Administration from three American doctors and two from India..... Then from the 'civilian' medical care. The one time his BP shot up,(congestive heart failure due to fluid buildup from cancer) the doctor from India did the massage on the carotid artery and brought it down. My hubby was like amazed that someone could do that.

The 'civilian' doctors when his BP shot up, shot med in his IV and kept an 'eye' on him. Reason his BP shot up with the civilian docs, they put a surgical cover over his face to do a biopsy on the lymph gland in his neck, just forgot to put the oxygen on him too. He couldn't breath after awhile, the cover was too thick. He got mad. BP shot up.

If we had government provided universal, single-payer health insurance, this controversy wouldn't exist in the first place

This is true, but even then, it would be a lot more affordable if it didn't cover the elective things. We all pay, no matter how you look at it. It's ridiculous to pretend that any sort of medical treatment or any medication is free.

Universal Healthcare would be better and should focus on needs and preventive procedures.

Birth Control SAVES money in a Healthcare System, this is BETTER than free.

Soon we will revolt, take "matters" into our own hands, and not need to worry about contraception. (For the many women who rely on hormone therapy for other conditions--you'd best speak up!)

mandate chastity belts

But don't expect health insurance help cover the cost. LOL

I suspect the prescription of the pill for control of my ovarian cysts would continue to be covered, as it is not for contraceptive purposes. But that's not the primary argument to make, 3rdtime. The prescription of birth control should be covered because it should be covered. How is it against the conscience of the church to allow me birth control, but not against the conscience of the church to allow an unmarried man ED medicine? And what if the churches decide it's against their conscience to allow medication for drug or alcohol addicts, or weight control, or depression, or cancer. After all, death is a good thing in the christian church isn't it?

It's time for pharmaceutical companies to rename contraceptives and birth control to something like "hormone regulation" or "hormone therapy".

Let the church try to touch that. Let them try to frigging prove WHY a woman is taking it.

The pro-choice folks should rebrand abortion and call it induced labor.

boons and beebobby: Freaking genius! We need to figure out what we need to do to make that possible

The pro-choice folks should rebrand abortion and call it induced labor.

Santorum and his wife beat you to it. They "induced labor" back in 1997.

And let's not forget that the right wing has already rebranded Sharia and called it Christianity.

I can tell you this. My insurance company would not pay for my father's Hormone Therapy, because He was a man. That is horse @!$%#. Women get it no problem. He had to take them to court. Finally they are covering it.

What I am missing is how the employer is paying for the birth control in the first place. It should be covered by insurance. That has nothing to do with the employer. He is purchasing a plan, what you do with that plan is your business. Now if they want to force Insurance Plans to cover it then I am all for it, but if they are saying it should be handed out at your work place, or that your boss should pay your co-pay to go do it, then I am at a no.

mandate chastity belts

• But don't expect health insurance help cover the cost. LOL

nica....OUCH! (heh heh)

no no we can't have women who are not brood mares....white christian men want to submit us to Christian Sharia Law...

Women get it no problem.

That is horse@!$%#!!!! I have gone without hormonal therapy for my peri-menopuase because my insurance will not pay for it. I have sought other methods, less expensive than the pharma companies. So learn before you speak.

I can't believe what has happened to women's rights in just the last 3 1/2 years...soon they will mandate chastity belts. This is getting to be scary stuff. Maybe this will encourage more women to enter politics.

Guess what, not all women agree with you. I'm a woman and I also think expecting free birth control is like expecting free toothpaste. I always paid for my own birth control my entire fertile years although I've certainly never had a lot of money. Are you seriously unable to distinguish between "this is unavailable" and "I am not going to force a third party to pay for it, especially when it's unconstitiutional?" Who the heck can't afford a can of foam? Who would be desperate enough to date a man who can't even afford condoms?

I have gone without hormonal therapy for my peri-menopuase because my insurance will not pay for it.

And I am right now in a fight to get my psychotic teenager son the meds he desperately needs so he is not a danger to himself and others. I also can't get treatment for my own sleep apnea because even though they discovered I stop breathing several times a night, it isn't "enough" times to pay for CPAP. Noncoverage of actual medical problems is a very different issue from not covering birth control. (Fertility is NOT a disease.) Well actually they're related, but only in the sense that the more mandates you have for silly things you could easily buy on your own, the more the insurance companies will fight you on things you REALLY need for actual health problems. Way to go, Obama, you jerk. The HHS mandate will be overthrown by the courts.

"Guess what, not all women agree with you. I'm a woman and I also think expecting free birth control is like expecting free toothpaste. I always paid for my own birth control my entire fertile years although I've certainly never had a lot of money. Are you seriously unable to distinguish between "this is unavailable" and "I am not going to force a third party to pay for it, especially when it's unconstitiutional?" Who the heck can't afford a can of foam? Who would be desperate enough to date a man who can't even afford condoms?"

Well good for you for paying for your own birth control. Why don't you lay off the judgment of others regarding - who would be desperate enought to date a man who can't even afford condoms?

Bottom line - better to provide birth control than abortion.

Guess what oom yaquib - NOT ALL WOMEN AGREE WITH YOU EITHER

Just as a common sense business policy, I would think companies would want to pay for contraception. I mean, what am I missing here? Paying for that is cheaper than losing employees to maternity leave, or dealing with emotional issues resulting from an employee's abortion.

bonos has a better idea, men keep their sperm outta women, we won't get pregnant

mstanley

And in one generation, the reign of humans will be over. Why do you hate our species mstanley?

"women can push for no coverage for vasectomies"

You mean insurance companies pay for that? WELL FUC.! I have insurance and paid 100% for the procedure out of my pocket. That's what responsible people do.

So why do you bother with insurance if as a responsible person you don't use it? AND since I pay for my insurance through my employer then yes I do expect to be able to have coverage - this does not make me an irresponsible person. Paying for insurance & not using it seems a little moronic to me.

nica,

First, I paid 100% because it's not a covered procedure and should not be.

"since I pay for my insurance through my employer then yes I do expect to be able to have coverage

So you pay 100% of your insurance through your employer?

Littleboyblue, there are condoms.....easily found everywhere.

buckeyenut: the Fatal Flaw in Employer sponsered Health insurance: a worker gets paid less because of the percentage hat the employer pays and Still has to pay a percentage of the policy...Sucks doesn't it?

So to add insult to injury, the employer and the private health insurance company get to Choose the policy coverage For the employee...beautiful arrangement ....for the employer and the health insurance company

Why shouldn't it be covered? Is it a medical procedure? Does it affect your health? Does Birth Control affect a woman's health? Health insurance is for covering health related issues. If you don't want that coverage then fine, but to think that you have the right to deny it to others is a delusion of grandeur on your part. To think YOU should decide what is medically important for others.

So buckeyenut, you are saying you would rather pay for pregnancy, delivery, and then the health care for a new person for the next 60-70 yrs... rather than allow birth control coverage. That makes ALOT of sense - NOT.

Well first of all birth control needs to be accessible. The insurance companies are not concerned with policy.

They are are concerned with control. Offering anything from cancer to emergency care is all calculated to create maximum profit. That is why we need to have a healthcare program in our country that is single payer system.

I resent wars being fought with my tax money. But I do believe that americans, all of us should have access to a fair healthcare system.

The republicans and the insurance companies are shameless for calling out the religious folk in America about a issue that really does not effect them financially or morally. This is a big media being deployed against all Americans for the sole reason of guaranteeing profits....

Mstanley,

"So to add insult to injury, the employer and the private health insurance company get to Choose the policy coverage For the employee...beautiful arrangement ....for the employer and the health insurance company"

Don't like the arrangement, start your own business and negotiate your own health care with the insurer or ask your employer if you can opt out of their plan and have a pay increase to get your own insurance.

Nica,

"you are saying you would rather pay for pregnancy, delivery, and then the health care for a new person for the next 60-70 yrs"

No, I'm telling you if you can't afford birth control, birth control isn't your greatest concern. You've got much bigger life problems.

Also why should an insurance company pay for a procedure like a vasectomy that is not health related. If I don't have a vasectomy, I'm not going to die, I'm just not going to get laid as often.

I see..... leave out the part about a lower wage for the employee ...and then stiff them on the health care coverage...interesting....

How about I don't need to start my own business, when there are plenty of business's that are offering health insurance coverage, they don't tell the employee that they are going to get a lower wage Because of the health insurance coverage, they don't tell the employee that the coverage doesn't pay for many medical care issues, they don't tell the employee that the employee's part of the health insurance coverage is going to cost them plus the deductibles and copays. And the best one of all....preexisting ...gotta work for x number of months or years before the health insurance pays.

Oh and another one, even if you do work and have coverage, the business and the health insurance company Can and Have, changed not only what the policy will pay for but also upped the cost of the policy ....to the employee.

Now just how many employees are going to have to Start their own business simply due to the fact that they would like to have Health Insurance Coverage? All of them?

bonos has a better idea, men keep their sperm outta women, we won't get pregnant

Yep, it's called a "condom" and they've been available over the counter for a long, long time. They are fairly effective, especially when combined with another barrier method, and I have yet to meet anyone who said he couldn't afford them.

They are fairly effective

Except when they aren't.

Except condoms are not health care in the first place. Health care is treatment for disease or trauma.

Recreational sex is neither of these.

I agree rd62.

But pregnancy is not a disease. It is a natural function of most of the organisms of this planet.

And if you are going to argue that pregnancy IS a disease, preventable by birth control devices, then I'll ask you to pay for my treadmill, needed to prevent heart disease. You wanna?

Apples and oranges.

littleboyblue....childbirth isn't a disease either but insurance pays for that, and it costs far more. Also maybe you don't know this, but the pill treats all sorts of medical issues, it is used for hormonal imbalances, skin disorders, PMS, endometrosis, excessive bleeding, absent periods, etc. I know women who cannot get pregnant ( had tubals) who are on the pill for medical reasons alone. Explain to me why those women should not be able to treat medical conditions.

Oh yeah you are a man and you have no idea about what it feels like to bleed excessively and need something like a tiny pill that someone has a "moral" issue with, a pill that would make your life more or less normal. But hey a treadmill is just as good a treatment for real medical issues huh?

"People CHOOSE to take their medication for diabetes, seizures, hypertension, dementia, heart arrythmias, anti coagulants, and on and on and on...."

This might just win the prize for the most piss poor analogy I've had the pleasure of reading all day. Possibly piss poor analogy of the year. But the year is young.