Republican candidates and birth control... (financial, governor, inventor, Florida)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
By the time the next election rolls around, the Repubs and the Dems will offer the SAME lunatic liberal candidate, instead of the two identical clones. And even then, most voters won't catch on.
so you go from 4 republicans talking about birth control, and falsely contending that they all want to ban birth control, to talking about a group of extremists in your state that want to ban birth control.
how about you try to stop buying into the liberal talking points that have gone from people who want birth control should pay for it themselves, to the republicans are in a war against women.
i dont want anyone to take away your ability to get birth control either, i just think that since you are using it ONLY to prevent pregnancy that you pay for it yourself, and not have your insurance company pay for it.
then work to prevent this group from getting their petition on the ballot. write to your state representatives and tell them you dont want birth control banned in your state. and if somehow this group manages to get their initiative on the ballot, and it passes into law, then sue the state to prevent the law from going into effect.
wait, you are an avowed atheist and you are claiming that what some extremist group is doing would violate your freedom of religion? what kind of bravo sierra is that? you HAVE NO religion by YOUR OWN ADMISSION.
But we have the freedom of religion in the USA, meaning we have the right to believe and not believe, if this bill passed it would FORCE me to go by religious standards I didn't believe in violating my rights.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vejadu
Can we please stop talking about birth control? It will never become illegal in this country; the whole recent issue is being perpetrated by idiotic Republicans who're scraping for fringe right wing votes and Democrats trying to make this the big issue of 2012.
Birth control, Rush Limbaugh, etc, are nothing but a smokescreen distracting us the discussions about far more serious issues like Israel, Iran, gas prices, the floundering economy, etc.
It is MY thread, so I can say what I want it to be about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DewDropInn
Can you please put up a link to the proposed bill or proposition or amendment or whatever it is?
I'd like to read it. I think many of us would.
Who is this "group"? Do they have a web site you can link us to?
Are they trying to ban ALL forms of birth control or just SOME?
Are condoms included?
Because you're Dewwwwww I won't tell you to scroll back because I have already posted it.
Personhood USA is the group.
Amendment I think 68 in Colorado.
They have been trying in a few other states.
One side wants coverage mandated.
The other side does not.
2 sides of the same coin here...
It's cheap enough without coverage and even cheaper/free for the poor.
I just don't see this as the national hot button issue it has become.
I'm saying mandating coverage does not mandate use. No one has to use birth control.
I think this has become a hot-button issue among women of childbearing age, and women's advocates, b/c some see it as taking away some of their hard won gains. My state, Colorado, is one of the 28 states that currently has such a mandate. My daughter works in a Catholic hospital and she says they pay for birth control b/c they decided it's too hard to differentiate between medical use and strictly birth control use. To be sure, a lot of women have a primary use, e.g. birth control, and one or more secondary uses such as acne control, bleeding control, cramp control, period regualtion, etc.
This is not the problem although the administration wants you to believe it is. This is about religious freedom. Those who are against BC for moral reasons do not want to be mandated to supply it. Simple really, plus this would not make BC illegal at all. Women can still get it and that will not stop.
You don't like the health insurance one employer supplies for you then don't work for that employer, work for another. There are several out there.
Right, the Virginia "VIP" (Vaginal Inspection Patrol) is all about religious freedom.
I'm saying mandating coverage does not mandate use. No one has to use birth control.
I think this has become a hot-button issue among women of childbearing age, and women's advocates, b/c some see it as taking away some of their hard won gains. My state, Colorado, is one of the 28 states that currently has such a mandate. My daughter works in a Catholic hospital and she says they pay for birth control b/c they decided it's too hard to differentiate between medical use and strictly birth control use. To be sure, a lot of women have a primary use, e.g. birth control, and one or more secondary uses such as acne control, bleeding control, cramp control, period regualtion, etc.
What gains is this taking away ?
Those that had it still have it.
Those that didn't were still able to get it outside of insurance.
I don't see that anything is being taken away here. Am I missing something ?
But mandated coverage with no co-pay means people will pay for it indirectly via higher premiums.
Drug companies don't give away their stuff for free..someone has to pay the drug companies so it will come out of the pool that insurance companies collect via premiums.
What gains is this taking away ?
Those that had it still have it.
Those that didn't were still able to get it outside of insurance.
I don't see that anything is being taken away here. Am I missing something ?
But mandated coverage with no co-pay means people will pay for it indirectly via higher premiums.
Drug companies don't give away their stuff for free..someone has to pay the drug companies so it will come out of the pool that insurance companies collect via premiums.
As you say, the drug companies will get paid. But, the Ins Co saves money with BC pills. The pills are cheaper than the medical care needed if the pills are not available. And that is not just pregnancy care but includes a few other medical needs as well.
As you say, the drug companies will get paid. But, the Ins Co saves money with BC pills. The pills are cheaper than the medical care needed if the pills are not available. And that is not just pregnancy care but includes a few other medical needs as well.
Saving money over what ? The insurance company isn't saving or spending any extra money. They are in it for a profit and any cost is passed on to consumers, probably several times over since they need that profit.
Remember, costs were never reigned in. Only accessibility was addressed.
What gains is this taking away ?
Those that had it still have it.
Those that didn't were still able to get it outside of insurance.
I don't see that anything is being taken away here. Am I missing something ?
But mandated coverage with no co-pay means people will pay for it indirectly via higher premiums. Drug companies don't give away their stuff for free..someone has to pay the drug companies so it will come out of the pool that insurance companies collect via premiums.
That is my concern. Everytime something is added the premiums go up for everyone whether they need that coverage or not. If premiums were reasonable it wouldn't be such an issue but premiums have gotten out of control. It costs "x" to buy birth control but the insurance companies will charge "xx" because they need to make a little on that extra benefit.
Most people can afford to pay for their birth control or at least a co-pay When President Obama added children up to 26 to insurance I was charged an extra premium even though I don't have any children. My concern is that with another increase in premiums people will not be able to afford their insurance policy.... so others can have birth control this person who just wants to be sure if they have a heart attack they have insurance will no longer have insurance because they can no longer afford the premiums.
Of course I'm hoping Obamacare takes care of that problem but that is two years away.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
