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.
But that's not the real issue, is it?
The issue is control of women and our reproductive choices.
I think it all boils down to fear of women controlling the world by their ability to breed.
How many men do we really need to keep the population going?
(if that's what they want, not what I would want)
I honestly think it boils down to that.
We control life.
I agree with this.
I think part of the reason men have oppressed women throughout history, and still do in many parts of the world, is because of women's inherent power.
I'd cover the pill under insurance, but for women who Choose IUD [see the word Choose ?], I'd offer a bonus. For women who choose sterilization, an even bigger bonus.
Though the pill as birth control is ok, it still depends on the woman using it properly, which places too much responsibility on too many women. The IUD, 5, 10 years of virtually no pregnancy risk and no remembering to take the pill. Worth a bonus.
Strong, independent women would never place themselves at the mercy of the rich, white males they contend own the health insurance companies. They would demand the right to purchase BC OTC for less than the cost of a sissy umbrella drink or a caramel mocha Venti triple-shot machiado coffee.
Instead they choose to remain slaves to big pharma and the men who run them. Women are their own worst enemies.
The Pill is 60 years old. Women have menstruated for centuries without estrogen supplements. It's not medically needed, either in 99% of the cases. If there is a medical need we cover it. Seems pretty fair.
Using the pill to prevent having *too many* pregnancies, and to space pregnancies IS women's health.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idon'tdateyou
But the pill isn't women's health, it's a choice some women make. I don't use the pill, never have. In fact I would never recommend it based on the hormones. There are other alternatives to the pill like IUDs.
See above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidkaos2
And you should not be allowed to tell a business owner how to run they company. If you require birth control to be covered, then work somewhere else. Nobody forces you to take a job. You can ask questions about what benefits they offer before you accept a position with a company. If they don't offer a benefit package that you like, you are free to turn down the offer of employment. Or you can take the job and get prophylactics from Walmart. That is not "slighting" you. It's a free country.
So we should not have laws that regulate businesses at all, eh? No minimum wage, no wages and hours act, no safety standards, no nothing. Just leave it up to the "free market" and it will all work out fine, right? Funny it didn't happen that way IRL. That's why we have these laws.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidkaos2
No. It has nothing to do with rathering to pay for one thing or another. It has to do with freedoms and rights. Some people do not feel that the constitution is just an obstacle to get around. If that means society ends up bearing some costs in order to preserve the freedoms in the constitution, then so be it. There are a lot of things that would be nice. It'd be nice if one person wasn't scraping by on minimum wage while another person has a billion dollars sitting in the bank for example. But preserving freedom requires putting up with vast income inequalities. Another thing that it requires is not having a Department of Health & Human Services that micromanages all the insurance policies.
See above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
I agree. Whether a business allows smoking, in the building, should be up to the owner of that business. Some businesses will cater to non smokers and some will cater to smokers. You are free to patronize the establishments that do what you prefer. I do not understand why this was regulated. People should be free to choose.
As a former smoker, I hate having to walk past the smokers out front smoking to get into an extablishment. I'd rather have them seated in the smoking area and go sit in the non smoking area as long as I'm not required to walk past the smoking area to get to the non smoking area.
Please do not turn this into a smoking thread. This thread has gone along reasonably well for a while now. Every smoking thread I've ever been on (I don't do them any more) has gotten closed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzarama
Insurance absolutely should cover IUD's. In fact, I'd offer a bonus to any woman who chooses the IUD over the pill.
So you're making the decision of which BC is best?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
Nope. You're assuming there never will be a child here. I'll buy this argument if you're talking about permanent, irreversible, sterilization. We're not. BC just delays when people have kids. It doesn't prevent the cost. When you have kids is your call not mine. Your sex life is your responsibility not mine. If you wish to pass the cost on to me then you should also allow me to tell you when and if you are allowed to have kids. Are you ready to do that? ... I didn't think so.
If you want your sex life to be my responsibility then I get all the responsibility. I get to tell you whether you're ever allowed to have kids. You cannot maintain that it is your personal choice to have kids, not have kids, have sex, not have sex, and then tell me it's my bill. It's not. It's either your decision and your right AND your bill or it's my decision, my right and my bill. Take your pick. One solution here is to declare that those who cannot afford kids cannot have kids.
Oh, get off the high horse.
98% of women use birth control. You're trying to give some argument that just doesn't hold water. BC is not just a delaying method; people use it when they're done with their families as well, to pick just one hole in your argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzarama
IUD is far, far more effective than the pill. You should know that.
I'd cover the pill under insurance, but for women who Choose IUD [see the word Choose ?], I'd offer a bonus. For women who choose sterilization, an even bigger bonus.
Though the pill as birth control is ok, it still depends on the woman using it properly, which places too much responsibility on too many women. The IUD, 5, 10 years of virtually no pregnancy risk and no remembering to take the pill. Worth a bonus.
Well, good for you! I'm glad you're not writing the policies.
Strong, independent women would never place themselves at the mercy of the rich, white males they contend own the health insurance companies. They would demand the right to purchase BC OTC for less than the cost of a sissy umbrella drink or a caramel mocha Venti triple-shot machiado coffee.
Instead they choose to remain slaves to big pharma and the men who run them. Women are their own worst enemies.
Sebelius blocked OTC in her vendetta against the Catholic Church.
This thread cracks me up. IF men could get pregnant - birth control pills would be fully covered with no questions asked and there would be some type of abortion clinic on every street corner.
Can a man die from ED? A woman CAN die from a pregnancy. Difference.
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.
