This argument is playing out nationally, where do you stand?
Should comprehensive health insurance include coverage for contraception?
02/14/2012
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
As insurance companies have been pointing out for years, offering coverage nationwide and consistently will reduce the amount of services rendered that go unpaid. A pack of pills, an IUD, a tubal, a vasectomy or even a pack of condoms is by far cheaper than prenatal care and delivery of a child, plus wellness visits and the like.
I think it's an important issue and if any religious organization has an issue with it, that's their own problem. Obama went ahead and gave them an exemption to outright informing workers that it is covered under their health plans and then green-lighted the insurance companies to privately contact women who are elligible to inform them of their options.
When you play games like "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" with a woman's health and her reproductive system, it should really stop at "what's good for the goose". And the gander can go suck a duck.
I think it's an important issue and if any religious organization has an issue with it, that's their own problem. Obama went ahead and gave them an exemption to outright informing workers that it is covered under their health plans and then green-lighted the insurance companies to privately contact women who are elligible to inform them of their options.
When you play games like "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" with a woman's health and her reproductive system, it should really stop at "what's good for the goose". And the gander can go suck a duck.
02/14/2012
Quote:
Yes. This is preventative care, its irresponsible not to offer it.
Originally posted by
Rawhide
This argument is playing out nationally, where do you stand?
02/14/2012
You know, the argument has been centered around First Amendment freedom of religion rights. I'm not religious, so I understand I am a bit biased. In my personal opinion, I do believe it should be offered regardless of the business type, religious or otherwise. It should be the individual's right to choose if they want to take advantage of contraception. If the individual is against it, then they have the freedom to NOT take advantage of contraceptives. But I don't believe the business has a right to make that choice for an individual.
The question that I see here is: Does that First Amendment right belong to the business, or the individual? It's an interesting debate.
I'm curious how others feel?
The question that I see here is: Does that First Amendment right belong to the business, or the individual? It's an interesting debate.
I'm curious how others feel?
02/14/2012
Its so widely used and has so many benefits that it should be offered. I agree with others just because its available doesn't mean you have to take it.
02/14/2012
Quote:
Corporations aren't people in my opinion, so the right belongs to the individual not the company (religious or otherwise).
Originally posted by
Jaimes
You know, the argument has been centered around First Amendment freedom of religion rights. I'm not religious, so I understand I am a bit biased. In my personal opinion, I do believe it should be offered regardless of the business type, religious
...
more
You know, the argument has been centered around First Amendment freedom of religion rights. I'm not religious, so I understand I am a bit biased. In my personal opinion, I do believe it should be offered regardless of the business type, religious or otherwise. It should be the individual's right to choose if they want to take advantage of contraception. If the individual is against it, then they have the freedom to NOT take advantage of contraceptives. But I don't believe the business has a right to make that choice for an individual.
The question that I see here is: Does that First Amendment right belong to the business, or the individual? It's an interesting debate.
I'm curious how others feel? less
The question that I see here is: Does that First Amendment right belong to the business, or the individual? It's an interesting debate.
I'm curious how others feel? less
02/14/2012
I am religious, but do believe that it should be covered. I think we should all be smart about having kids, and that no one should have more kids than they can handle. Contraception in my opinion does not go against religion, and that anyone who wants to be smart about the choice of having sex should be protected from the consequences or blessing that come from it until they are ready and prepared to have kids.
02/14/2012
Quote:
Legally, corporations legally aren't defined as people, they're defined as their own separate legal entity. Sorry, the business minor in me had to point that out.
Originally posted by
Ansley
Corporations aren't people in my opinion, so the right belongs to the individual not the company (religious or otherwise).
I would much rather pay for a pack of pills, then say, the birth of a child or the removal of an ovary (which actually happened to a Georgetown student who was denied the Pill).
It will cut down expenditures drastically, and save Americans billions, which at this point in time, we need to be spending that money on repairing our economy and education system, not on unplanned pregnancies and preventable reproductive system maladies.
02/14/2012
Quote:
We agree on this one Jaimes!
Originally posted by
Jaimes
You know, the argument has been centered around First Amendment freedom of religion rights. I'm not religious, so I understand I am a bit biased. In my personal opinion, I do believe it should be offered regardless of the business type, religious
...
more
You know, the argument has been centered around First Amendment freedom of religion rights. I'm not religious, so I understand I am a bit biased. In my personal opinion, I do believe it should be offered regardless of the business type, religious or otherwise. It should be the individual's right to choose if they want to take advantage of contraception. If the individual is against it, then they have the freedom to NOT take advantage of contraceptives. But I don't believe the business has a right to make that choice for an individual.
The question that I see here is: Does that First Amendment right belong to the business, or the individual? It's an interesting debate.
I'm curious how others feel? less
The question that I see here is: Does that First Amendment right belong to the business, or the individual? It's an interesting debate.
I'm curious how others feel? less
The First Amendment applies to every American human citizen.
Religious institutions not covering birth control methods is akin to imposing their beliefs on their workers. That is something that should never be allowed. I also wish freedom of religion would cover freedom from religion too.
02/14/2012
religion shouldn't enter into it. if you dont want the contraceptive DONT TAKE IT.
dont let the government/church police you
dont let the government/church police you
02/14/2012
If "religious institutions" want to deny birth control, then they can staff all their money making, profit gaining endeavors with priests and nuns, because we all know they never have sex anyway....
02/14/2012
sorry double post, new lap top and I'm not good at the keyboard yet
02/14/2012
Great responses in this thread! Thank you everyone for sharing your opinions, keep 'em coming!
02/15/2012
Of course, regardless of religious affiliation.
02/15/2012
Quote:
I agree, for everyone.
Originally posted by
Nazaress
Of course, regardless of religious affiliation.
02/15/2012
Yes, for everyone.
02/16/2012
It's also ridiculous to pretend that "contraceptive devices" are only used by people trying to prevent pregnancy.
They have many uses and non-baby-related health benefits.
They have many uses and non-baby-related health benefits.
02/17/2012
Yes!
02/18/2012
Everyone.
02/18/2012
Quote:
Yep, I totally agree. Each person has the right to decide on birth control for themselves.
Originally posted by
Ansley
Corporations aren't people in my opinion, so the right belongs to the individual not the company (religious or otherwise).
And in the long run, offering BC coverage will reduce costs in general. It just doesn't make sense not to offer it.
02/18/2012
I think that its ridiculous that they would even consider NOT offering it. Preventative care would be way cheaper in the long run, than having to pay out for hospital care/birth and the next 18 years of a child's need for their parents coverage.
02/18/2012
Quote:
THIS. Jeepers. There are a number of conditions that are treated with this kind of *medication.*
Originally posted by
Chirple
It's also ridiculous to pretend that "contraceptive devices" are only used by people trying to prevent pregnancy.
They have many uses and non-baby-related health benefits.
They have many uses and non-baby-related health benefits.
02/18/2012
"an once of prevention is worth millions"
I thought that god/God and State separated years ago so shouldn't this be a non-issue altogether??? But I am not up-to-date on American politics and how they currently work so maybe God/god is now back in the running of the country.
In my opinion as a teacher, I have taught my students right and wrong and how to be a good person by instructing them to look at the pro's and con's of making a choice. And letting them make it. I have done my job.
So. Religious institutions and cooperation's have not done their job because they are afraid that their 'flock' may not be able to avoid the temptation???
Come on really. That is exactly what it sounds like.
Is not the idea of religious institutions to raise their children to make good decisions? It kind of sounds like they have forgotten to cut the strings. And are afraid of letting people make their own decisions.
I would love to see a poll done of single women who take some form of contraceptive and see if preventing pregnancy is the number one reason they've made the decision to be on it. Then another poll done with women in long term relationships and compare the results.
I thought that god/God and State separated years ago so shouldn't this be a non-issue altogether??? But I am not up-to-date on American politics and how they currently work so maybe God/god is now back in the running of the country.
In my opinion as a teacher, I have taught my students right and wrong and how to be a good person by instructing them to look at the pro's and con's of making a choice. And letting them make it. I have done my job.
So. Religious institutions and cooperation's have not done their job because they are afraid that their 'flock' may not be able to avoid the temptation???
Come on really. That is exactly what it sounds like.
Is not the idea of religious institutions to raise their children to make good decisions? It kind of sounds like they have forgotten to cut the strings. And are afraid of letting people make their own decisions.
I would love to see a poll done of single women who take some form of contraceptive and see if preventing pregnancy is the number one reason they've made the decision to be on it. Then another poll done with women in long term relationships and compare the results.
02/23/2012
Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes again. Also yes.
02/24/2012
Quote:
Thank you! There need to be more religious people like you. Are there? Am I just unlucky being around a bunch of crazy fundies?
Originally posted by
I'mNotYourToy
I am religious, but do believe that it should be covered. I think we should all be smart about having kids, and that no one should have more kids than they can handle. Contraception in my opinion does not go against religion, and that anyone who
...
more
I am religious, but do believe that it should be covered. I think we should all be smart about having kids, and that no one should have more kids than they can handle. Contraception in my opinion does not go against religion, and that anyone who wants to be smart about the choice of having sex should be protected from the consequences or blessing that come from it until they are ready and prepared to have kids.
less
02/25/2012
Quote:
Yes, for all employers who offer health insurance
Originally posted by
Rawhide
This argument is playing out nationally, where do you stand?
02/27/2012
Quote:
It is not only irresponsible, it is also immoral. These same institutions cover the cost of Viagra for men through insurance offered, and this is equally likely to be used in a way counter to their belief structure.
Originally posted by
biancajames
Yes. This is preventative care, its irresponsible not to offer it.
02/28/2012
Quote:
I only say yes becausse I read a book where a girl was raped, yet she was affiliated with a church, and they did not allow her to get an abortion no matter how much she wanted it.
Originally posted by
Rawhide
This argument is playing out nationally, where do you stand?
And in a case of rape, thats just cruel.
Also what if you are protected, condom, pill, or any other sort of prevention? What if the condom breaks? Oops.
NOW! A woman should not go and say "UHP! had sex again, I am pregnant AGAIN! Time for an abortion" No. It should be used when needed, such as people are SERIOUSLY not ready for a child, or rape, or situations such as that. NOT used as a regular contraceptive
02/29/2012
Family planning is the best way to go. People who plan the birth of their children are wiser, because they plan for their future.
03/03/2012
Yep.
03/23/2012