Ron Paul 2012!!! no other choice is better than paul!!! i will write him in if i have to
And even then he doesn't really.
He keeps saying things like how medicare was a bad idea and how SS was a bad idea and how the CRA was a bad idea etc etc etc
But then he swears he won't actually try to get rid of them.
There's no reason anyone in their right mind would actually trust the guy.
if the Jehovas witnesses ran their own insurance company.. they have the right to not pay for that..
I personally would not work for them..
where is the problem?
the difference is this.. birth control is a convenience medication.. people don't die if they can't have sex.. and seriously.. why is the pill which is less effective covered and condoms not? condoms actually provide a barrier and prevent the transmission of HPV and other STD's as well as preventing pregnancy
*bill is very different than pill
Last edited by ishootblanks; 2012-03-05 at 02:12 AM.
the most beautiful post I have ever read.. thank you Dr-1337 http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...1#post22624432
We're not talking about insurance company's we're talking about employers.if the Jehovas witnesses ran their own insurance company.. they have the right to not pay for that..
They're imposing their personal religious beliefs on your private life? That your employer thinks they have a place between you and your doctor?where is the problem?
So are pain killers. Better not cover those.birth control is a convenience medication
Your understanding of hormonal birth control leaves something to be desired.the difference is this.. birth control is a convenience medication.. people don't die if they can't have sex.. and seriously.. why is the bill which is less effective covered and condoms not? condoms actually provide a barrier and prevent the transmission of HPV and other STD's as well as preventing pregnancy
And who's business is it what its for anyway? Its a valid and legal medical issue and the only people who should be involved in the decision is patient and the doctor.
I don't know how many times people have had to say that birth-control is not JUST for preventing pregnancy. It's also for preventing possibly fatal cysts and regulating incredibly painful menstrual cycles. I've seen women throw up and pass out from pain during their period, I really don't think it's the right of ANYONE to deny them the helpful medicine they need to counteract that.
Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life.
Just, be kind.
yeah at least half of all women who use hormonal birth control use it for reasons beyond just birth control. Shit 14% of the users don't use it for birth control at all.I don't know how many times people have had to say that birth-control is not JUST for preventing pregnancy.
Blanks is just over his head.
I'm just wondering how someone can manage to say birth control is a convenience medication with a straight face.
Unfortunately, I had that conversation with a family member today, and they absolutely insisted that I shouldn't refer to it as health care. I really didn't even know what to say. When someone's being deliberately obtuse, it's hard to do anything other than walk away.
The government should not be interfering so much in our sex lives. Or even our personal lives. gay marriage is not even a real thing to me, it is just marriage. Why do people have to add gay to it? Does it REALLY effect anybody if two men or two women get married? Does it somehow doom us all to some hell? No? Does it somehow make your neighborhood bad if a gay couple move in? No? What the hell does anyone care, and why is the government even involved? There should be no such thing as gay marriage, it is just marriage.
Legalize Marijuana while you are at it. You cannot seriously say it is worse for you then alcohol, you cannot say it impairs you more. Would you rather be driven to the hospital by someone that had five shots of whiskey or someone that had been smoking pot all day? And I do not even use it, I just find it hilarious that people are like "ITS BAD MMMK!" when alcohol is much, much worse.
Seperate church and state more as well. There should be no pandering to church people in elections, it should be about actual issues that decide the country. I would vote for a satanist if they were the right choice for president.
And while I am ranting, end super PAC's. Stop all this ridiculous spending on elections. Stop all donations from any companies. Stop all donations of more then 100 dollars a person.
Oh and stop this ridiculous birth control conversation. Really? You think health insurance covering birth control is bad? Have fun with a bunch of unwanted kids running around, not paying for birth control is not going to stop teens from having sex.
You do not have any right to inflict your personal moral or religious views on others by demanding other people to go against their's! (As long as the moral values of each party are lawful, i.e. no murder)
A muslim employer at a finance firm is not obligated to compensate his employee through debt instruments if he believes interest bearing debt is against his religion. An environmentalist employer is not obligated to provide car benefit to his employees if it goes against his environmentalist views. A financial genius employer is not obligated to provide health insurance for his employers but can instead compensate them through higher wages if he thinks it saves money. A jew is not obligated to provide non-kosher food during the lunch break to his employees. A person who is opposed to contraceptives is not obligated to provide health insurance that pays for contraceptives. All that they're obligated to do is to provide a total compensation that exceeds the minimum wage.
In the above scenarios, no one has their rights infringed upon. Everything stays voluntary.
My position is strictly libertarian. In this case I'm defending the freedom of the employer. The employees freedom is not being harmed here.Originally Posted by Wells
They are not. They are not telling you how to spend your money. They are not telling you what you can and cannot do in your free time. All they're doing is deciding that they're not going to directly give you something that they don't like, regardless of reasoning. They do not even have to explain why they don't like it.Originally Posted by Wells
Sorry Wells, but you're way out on this one.
Last edited by mmoc43ae88f2b9; 2012-03-05 at 09:51 AM.
A thing I never said.You do not have an inherent right to be provided any products by other people.
yeah sorry most of us don't buy into your form of right wing libertarianism. I have a right not to have your religious beliefs forced on my private affairs, which is exactly what this is. You're deciding to restrict my access to birth control in my private life because your god says so.The employer gets to choose what he offers his employees, and they get to choose if they accept of decline.
Except for my right to be free from the religious dictates of others.My position is strictly libertarian. In this case I'm on the side of the freedom of the employer. The employees freedom is not being harmed here.
Why don't you get in the real world where when an employer decides they find birth control amoral and won't cover it that means the employee in many cases won't have access to it.They are not. They are not telling you how to spend your money. They are not telling you what you can and cannot do in your free time. All they're doing is deciding that they're not going to directly give you something that they don't like, regardless of reasoning. They do not even have to explain why they don't like it.
What space fairy my boss believes in should have zero influence on what treatment I can get from my doctor. There's no excuse for forcing others to live by your religious laws.
Is a muslim meat vendor that does not sell pork for religious reasons restricting your access to pork meat in your private life because his god said so?
You're assuming that you have a right to birth control insurance from your employer. But you don't, it's the employer that gets to choose what and how much he is willing to offer compensation for your labour. He also has the right to decide in what form he will compensate, hard cash, different benefits like health insurance, car or housing. The employee then accepts or declines, and they adjust acordingly.
If an employer does not cover birth control insurance, the total compensation to the employee will go down, which means due to market forces he will have to make up for the compensation in other ways. Most probably through a higher cash wage. This wage can be spent any way you please.Originally Posted by Wells
Your boss should have influence over how he compensates you. Whether he includes moral values to his reasoning, such as not providing environmentally harmful cars, contraceptives, lunch tickets that buy pork meat etc, is up to him.
None of this forces you to live by his laws. However, you can't force him to live by your's either.
Also stop with the religious hating remarks of calling god a "space fairy". Just use a lower case 'g' to note that you're atheist instead of stirring trouble.
Last edited by mmoc43ae88f2b9; 2012-03-05 at 10:06 AM.
This analogy is so fail. I have no relationship with the pork vendor. My livelihood is not tied to the pork vendor. The pork vendor is not my sole portal to health care as employers so often are.Is a muslim meat vendor that does not sell pork for religious reasons restricting your access to pork meat in your private life because his god said so?
No. I have a right to not have their faith meddle in my medical treatment. If they for financial reasons choose not to offer care that is one thing, but to decline to offer birth control coverage because jesus says the pill makes angels cry is not acceptable.You're assuming that you have a right to birth control insurance from your employer.
Or in the real world, he won't raise your wages at all because you're still getting medical coverage for most things.If an employer does not cover birth control insurance, the total compensation to the employee will go down, which means due to market forces he will have to make up for the compensation in other ways. Most probably through a higher cash wage. This wage can be spent any way you please.
Of course he should. But that doesn't mean he should be able to inflict his religious views on you.Your boss should have influence over how he compensates you
No one is forcing him to use birth control. Freedom of religion doesn't mean the freedom to force other's to follow your religious law, which is exactly what you want to let him do. Freedom of Religion for the businesses and whatever they want to throw to everyone else! Sounds like a lot of libertarian social policy really.None of this forces you to live by his laws. However, you can't force him to live by your's either.
---------- Post added 2012-03-05 at 10:27 AM ----------
Its pretty ludicrous to claim they're not forcing their religion on people when the literally thing that is being said is "we are providing health care coverage except for this one treatment we refuse to cover because it violates our religious beliefs".
I still do not understand why people are so obsessed with other peoples bodies and what they do in bed. Birth control is related to health care, and should be offered through insurance if the person so desires it. You cannot say "Birth control is not related to health" that would be completely asinine.
"No one is forcing him to use birth control. Freedom of religion doesn't mean the freedom to force other's to follow your religious law, which is exactly what you want to let him do. Freedom of Religion for the businesses and whatever they want to throw to everyone else! Sounds like a lot of libertarian social policy really. "
Exactly. If something is related to health, why would it NOT be covered by a health care plan? Just because you do not believe in something/think it is wrong, does not mean you have the right to tell others it is wrong, and they are wrong for using it.
The employer isn't even obligated to provide you with health insurance in the first place. Just because healthcare is more important than pork meat doesn't change this at all. But if you want an even closer analogy:
Is an environmentalist employer that does not want to compensate you with a company car benefit because of his moral views, an act of restricting your access to cars?
So in other words, your saying that employers can only make decisions based on financial reason, but not on moral grounds?Originally Posted by Wells
The aforementioned environmentalist employer should be forced to offer you a company car as compensation as his only objection is his environmentalism based morals?
Your job will become less attractive due to weaker compensation which will put pressures to raise compensations in other ways. You can't deny this.Originally Posted by Wells
He is not. He's not telling you how to spend your wage. All he is doing is spending the money he is in posession of according to his own beliefs.Originally Posted by Wells
The employer is not forcing you to follow his religious law. You're however trying to force him to stop following his own.Originally Posted by Wells
Last edited by mmoc43ae88f2b9; 2012-03-05 at 10:38 AM.
Of course he isn't. but if he chooses to do so then he shouldn't be allowed to use it as a vector to force religious beliefs on others.The employer isn't even obligated to provide you with health insurance in the first place.
I have no right to a car. I have a right to freedom from the dictates of another's religion.Is an environmentalist employer that does not want to compensate you with a company car benefit because of his moral views, an act of restricting your access to cars?
We'll restrict my claims to financial grounds not religious grounds for the sake of keeping the argument concise.So in other words, your saying that employers can only make decisions based on financial reason, but not on moral grounds?
Not really. The demand for jobs that offer health care is so high right now that there is going to be little to no pressure to raise wages to compensate.Your job will become less attractive due to weaker compensation which will put pressures to raise compensations in other ways. You can't deny this.
If his religious laws constitute forcing others to follow them then he's in the wrong and can shove off.The employer is not forcing you to follow his religious law. You're however trying to force him to stop following his own.
He's curtailing my benefits to fit his religious beliefs. I'd say you're being obtuse here but apparently that's infractable.He is not. He's not telling you how to spend your wage. All he is doing is spending the money he is in posession of according to his own beliefs.