Republicans want to take away your access to Birth Control!

Damocles said:
Utter nonsense. They just don't want to have to pay for your birth control. There is a huge difference between banning something and saying, you can get it if you want just don't make me pay for it. And Catholics are not all republicans. That's silliness.

Interestingly most protestants have no problems with birth control, like a condom or "the pill"... While most have some problem with abortion they certainly aren't against you getting birth control, they are simply against forcing people with religious objections to purchase and provide (thus forcing them to "sin") abortive agents or, in some few cases like the Catholic Church, birth control for others.
Click to expand...

I agree, read the thread!
 
Anyone see anything wrong with the composition of the panel that the House Republicans brought in to discuss whether birth control should be covered by health insurance plans?

bishops-issa-hearing-2-cropped-proto-custom_24.jpg
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
So, let's cut to the heart of it, do you guys support the Blunt Amendment?
Click to expand...
Absolutely I'm opposed to it. It goes way to far. Hell the Blount ammendment isn't even based on a religious opposition. It's based on any moral opposition. that takes this issue far beyond the realm of contraception and impacts virtually all insurance coverage.

At any time an executive of an insurance company could deprive anyone of healthc coverage for virtually anything because that executive claims it's part of their moral code.
 
cawacko said:
What he really means is no liberal leaning women. Putting a Rick Santorum female equivalent on the panel isn't going to make any difference. It's like putting a non black black man on the Supreme Court (Clarence Thomas).
Click to expand...


Cawacko, what's your view on the Blunt Amendment? I'm genuinely curious.
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
Yikes. That's pretty out there, SF. The Blunt Amendment basically says that any health plan can refuse to provide coverage for pretty much anything if it is opposed to the service due to moral or religious convictions. It's not limited to churches or religious institutions. Basically, your boss gets to decide what you get for health insurance so hopefully your boss isn't a Christian Scientist.
Click to expand...

yikes... that is why I asked what it was. I stated specifically that I was referring to birth control. I also thought it was up to the plan provider as to what was universally covered. and no... you still have the option to go out and get health insurance on your own. Yet another reason we need to get away from group plans. This crap is getting fucking absurd.
 
cawacko said:
So we're suppose to see your heading and think "yes Jarod must be making a point about when Al Gore was in the Senate in 1990 about funding for Gulf War I and Republicans made outrageous comments about him."

I'm not sure how that didn't cross my mind.
Click to expand...

It didn't cross your mind because you weren't willing to go full retard like Jarod.
 
Superfreak said:
Is that the one that says it should be up to the individual and the plan provider whether they offer contraception coverage? If so, then absolutely. It should not be a mandated coverage. It is moronic. It is unnecessary.

If it is something regarding free blunts for all... then absolutely.
Click to expand...
No, the Blount ammendment doesn't apply to contraception or religion specifically. It applies to any health care coverage, in any form, in which the provider has any "moral" objection.
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
He should have gone with the SUPERFREAK approach TO DEBATING dropping CAPS all OVER the place, you friggin' MORON hack. But I GUESS his masters didn't GIVE HIM those ORDERS.
Click to expand...

Caps are for emphasis on words. It is similar to using bold or underline or italics. It also happens to be far easier a method than the others. Sorry if you are too fucking RETARDED to comprehend that. Despite the FACT that I have stated it numerous times before. Go join Jarod in the full retard corner.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
No, the Blount ammendment doesn't apply to contraception or religion specifically. It applies to any health care coverage, in any form, in which the provider has any "moral" objection.
Click to expand...

Again... that is why I asked for clarification. Unfortunately Dung was not quite smart enough to comprehend that.
 
Ultimately this is a losing political gambit by Republicans. Reproductive health is very much a legitmate public (and private) health concern. The fact that religious based entity has entered into public business does not give them the right to deny others access to a basic health concern based upon their own personal religious convictions. It's not like the use of contraception is being mandated. That would be a religious violation of peoples right. Mandating public companies provide such forms of public health "coverage" is not.
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
Cawacko, what's your view on the Blunt Amendment? I'm genuinely curious.
Click to expand...

Since I'm not in Congress and don't have to vote on it I'll cop out and say I'm torn. (I've only read the what's in the amendment a couple of times so I could be missing something). I don't have a problem with the church's position but I do have issue when non-church groups say 'moral issue' with it. I'm trying to think how the 'moral issue' could be used in other policy arguments and to me that presents nothing but problems.

My overall feeling on the issue is I respect the church's desire to not be forced to fund birth control in their health care plan. I also completely disagree with Rick Santorum that birth control is somehow bad or women shouldn't be able to receive it.
 
Damocles said:
Utter nonsense. They just don't want to have to pay for your birth control. There is a huge difference between banning something and saying, you can get it if you want just don't make me pay for it. And Catholics are not all republicans. That's silliness.

Interestingly most protestants have no problems with birth control, like a condom or "the pill"... While most have some problem with abortion they certainly aren't against you getting birth control, they are simply against forcing people with religious objections to purchase and provide (thus forcing them to "sin") abortive agents or, in some few cases like the Catholic Church, birth control for others.
Click to expand...
So your answer to Jarods strawman is another strawman? Yea...right.
 
Superfreak said:
yikes... that is why I asked what it was. I stated specifically that I was referring to birth control. I also thought it was up to the plan provider as to what was universally covered. and no... you still have the option to go out and get health insurance on your own. Yet another reason we need to get away from group plans. This crap is getting fucking absurd.
Click to expand...


Group insurance is one thing that helps keep health insurance cost down. Individual insurance for comparable plans is much more expensive, unless you're young and healthy. The only reason older and sicker people can obtain health insurance is through participation in group plans. Getting rid of them is incredibly stupid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top